5 hours ago, mogandave said:

How many more journalists did the last administration investigate and subsequently incarcerate compared to the current administration? 

So far as i know there were no journalists jailed by the Obama Administration, but there were some investigations under the Espionage Act for 'leakers'. In any case Obama Admin backed off in his second term. trump gives no indication of backing off, indeed has claimed we wants to jail journalists for 'fake news'; in other words those who disagree with him. Why a staff member would be fired for witness testimony, no perjury involved, to a Congressional enquiry I do not know. To me it is petty vindictiveness, a character flaw of trump that has manifested on numerous occasions.

6 hours ago, mogandave said:

How many more journalists did the last administration investigate and subsequently incarcerate compared to the current administration? 
 

It’s always the left trying to stifle free speech, not the right, just look at the universities. 
 

The President has a right to have people he can trust around him, and the “witness” was just reassigned to the Pentagon.

Why don't you tell us? 

Edited February 8, 20206 yr by metisdead
Please do not modify someone else's post in your quoted reply, either with font or color changes or wording.

6 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

Only Republicans are capable of stifling free speech. Obama's spying on jorunalists didn't stifle free speech. When Obama shut out Fox News, that didn't stifle free speech. But when Trump shuts out CNN, that stifles free speech. Just ask any Democrat!

 

2 hours ago, Ricohoc said:

You can't be a Democrat without being a hypocrite.

 

They always accuse their opponents of doing exactly what THEY have done / are doing.

 

2 hours ago, Ricohoc said:

Not at all.

 

Perfectly descriptive of Democrat outrage over free speech and politicians controlling which media travels with them or is invited to private dinners or press pools. 

 

JT, you're way too dramatic about everything.  I'm not here to get personal with anyone.  I'm here to discuss issues and provide information.  I'll try to refrain from responding to you in the future.  Have a great day.  ????

You frequently tell us what you think Democrats are saying and doing, but you rarely give examples of Democrats saying and doing these things.

7 minutes ago, Ramen087 said:

Nice try, but you need to crack open a window in your mom’s basement and get more oxygen to your brain...Goodbye.  

 

ps. Repeat after me:  FOUR MORE YEARS!  FOUR MORE YEARS!

Are you the one suffocating. Dems have passed 400 bills that range from minimum wage to health and sitting with Moscow Mitch. Good lord, Congress will soon be Dems with a new President. No more years for the unproductive GOP and their unfit for office President. The world be a happier place.

https://www.vox.com/2019/11/29/20977735/how-many-bills-passed-house-democrats-trump

3 hours ago, Ricohoc said:

You can't be a Democrat without being a hypocrite.

 

They always accuse their opponents of doing exactly what THEY have done / are doing.

as the old saying goes..... It takes one to know one

23 minutes ago, heybruce said:

 

 

You frequently tell us what you think Democrats are saying and doing, but you rarely give examples of Democrats saying and doing these things.

Standard Trumpers's m.o.

An inflammatory post has been removed. 

Yes, definitely acquitted.  Exonerated as well, IMO.

Edited February 19, 20206 yr by Kelsall

On 2/8/2020 at 12:50 PM, Eric Loh said:

Are you the one suffocating. Dems have passed 400 bills that range from minimum wage to health and sitting with Moscow Mitch. Good lord, Congress will soon be Dems with a new President. No more years for the unproductive GOP and their unfit for office President. The world be a happier place.

https://www.vox.com/2019/11/29/20977735/how-many-bills-passed-house-democrats-trump

Passing a bill in the house, that does not have any bipartisan support, and is known in advance will die in the senate, is NOT passing legislation.

 

Passing legislation is crafting a bill with bipartisan support, that can pass the Senate, AND not be vetoed by the President.

 

Please note that this response does not need to discuss who the President is, or what party is in power in either chamber.

 

Many bills are written that simply die. There are congresses, and president's that found a way to work with one another, and others that have been less productive.

 

The point I am making is that productivity is not measured in writing partisan bills that have no chance of moving forward. If there was bipartisan support then McConnell would either put such bills to a vote or submit them to conference committee.

 

A bill, written in the house, that has no chance of passing the Senate, even in conference in the case of a Senate bill on same subject, is NOT productivity. History is filled with bills that went nowhere.

 

Productivity is signed by the President, and inacted into law. That is how it always will be.

 

 

25 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Yes, definitely acquitted.  Exonerated as well, IMO.

How can you belive that when no evidence or witnesses were allowed?exonerated??naaa we all know the fix was and is in that sir is a coverup 

On 2/8/2020 at 5:13 AM, simple1 said:

Disagree. Concerted effort by the trump administration to suppress Free Speech. BTW the fact check count of trump's SOTU speech is 32 false / misleading statements. Again how anyone can support a president who doesn't fulfil his Constitutional oath is beyond me.  trump has now fired a witness to his impeachment, the guy hasn't been convicted of perjury, so again censorship / suppression by trump.

Not Guilty. Aquitted.

 

The Democrats decided not to subpoena John Bolton in the House. That was their decision. They then tried to bypass the supreme Court, and have one man, the Chief Justice, make decisions on witnesses, subpoenas etc. That ploy failed.

 

As far as what Bolton could testify to, at best he would have added testimony to embarrass the President, but he would not have made the Democrats case.

 

It was an obvious distasteful attempt to remove a President that failed. We know this because....it failed.

8 minutes ago, Tug said:

How can you belive that when no evidence or witnesses were allowed?exonerated??naaa we all know the fix was and is in that sir is a coverup 

Believe, because a vote was held, and the result was Not Guilty on both counts. Held IAW the Constitution of the United States of America. The "fix" failed. Again. 

On 2/8/2020 at 5:13 AM, simple1 said:

Disagree. Concerted effort by the trump administration to suppress Free Speech. BTW the fact check count of trump's SOTU speech is 32 false / misleading statements. Again how anyone can support a president who doesn't fulfil his Constitutional oath is beyond me.  trump has now fired a witness to his impeachment, the guy hasn't been convicted of perjury, so again censorship / suppression by trump.

There is no suppression of free speech by President Trump and you give no examples to support your claim. The Senate voted against calling additional witnesses IAW the Constitution of the United States.

 

On 2/8/2020 at 3:59 AM, Jingthing said:

The reason the complicit republican senators acquitted 45 -- fear.

 

 

Complicit? They did their job which was to vote, in accordance with their oath. Which they did. That is how the system works. Not Guilty!

4 hours ago, WalkingOrders said:

There is no suppression of free speech by President Trump and you give no examples to support your claim. The Senate voted against calling additional witnesses IAW the Constitution of the United States.

 

really? refusal to respond to Congressional requests / not permitting administration members to testify  is not suppression of free Speech - LOL

On 2/8/2020 at 12:40 PM, simple1 said:

So far as i know there were no journalists jailed by the Obama Administration, but there were some investigations under the Espionage Act for 'leakers'. In any case Obama Admin backed off in his second term. trump gives no indication of backing off, indeed has claimed we wants to jail journalists for 'fake news'; in other words those who disagree with him. Why a staff member would be fired for witness testimony, no perjury involved, to a Congressional enquiry I do not know. To me it is petty vindictiveness, a character flaw of trump that has manifested on numerous occasions.

Actually there were more investigations of individual journalists during the Obama administration than all other previous administrations combined... but it’s really not a big deal...the inquiries were undertaken to deter investigative journalism, not to incarcerate the journalists themselves...it’s just politics as usual

On 2/20/2020 at 8:01 AM, WalkingOrders said:

Not Guilty. Aquitted.

 

The Democrats decided not to subpoena John Bolton in the House. That was their decision. They then tried to bypass the supreme Court, and have one man, the Chief Justice, make decisions on witnesses, subpoenas etc. That ploy failed.

 

As far as what Bolton could testify to, at best he would have added testimony to embarrass the President, but he would not have made the Democrats case.

 

It was an obvious distasteful attempt to remove a President that failed. We know this because....it failed.

You make so many posts factually wrong in duch a short space of time its quite difficult to keep up. But refuted before on other threads.

 

That you refuse to believe facts and rely on conspiracy i will put you on ignore as your posts are insignificant and based on alternative facts.

8 hours ago, Ramen087 said:

Actually there were more investigations of individual journalists during the Obama administration than all other previous administrations combined... but it’s really not a big deal...the inquiries were undertaken to deter investigative journalism, not to incarcerate the journalists themselves...it’s just politics as usual

That's fascinating.  Please provide your sources for such interesting information.

 

BTW, did Obama ever call the press the "enemy of the people"?