Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

President Donald Trump - Formal Impeachment Inquiry Announced

Options
1…4950525455…173

Comments

  • Options
    #1532
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    MadYaker wrote: »
    I still can’t get an answer from any of you as to why, in your own opinion, the republicans who control the senate have absolutely no interest in investigating any of this democrats corruption?

    Who do you think has triggered all these investigations into the democrats if not the republicans in congress?
    The Horowitz report might be interesting but Horowitz himself can’t do much with it.

    Which is why Durham-Barr are investigating and also why, most likely, Trump was keen to ask the Ukraine to do what they can their side re Biden as very little information to be had in the States I would suggest, aside from the quid-pro-quo bragging video itself that is.
    Also, is nobody bothered by the fact that trump is involving his own personal lawyer in government business? Could you imagine the howling of Obama had done something like that.

    Not a fan of Rudy myself but he came on board when Trump was being accused of a crime and would think it's stanard to have your own lawyer investigate such things. That he came across the Biden stuff could not have been predicted.

    Sure democrats are even suggesting AG Barr should not be indulging the president in these "conspiracy theories" - they appear blind to the fact that there is a lot of evidence that crimes were committed, but then they are in good company as even Brennan is incredulous at the very fact there is an investigation at all.

    Course if Hillary had won, there wouldn't be - which is of course, what they all were banking on.


  • Options
    #1533
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    MadYaker wrote: »
    I still can’t get an answer from any of you as to why, in your own opinion, the republicans who control the senate have absolutely no interest in investigating any of this democrats corruption?

    The Horowitz report might be interesting but Horowitz himself can’t do much with it.

    Also, is nobody bothered by the fact that trump is involving his own personal lawyer in government business? Could you imagine the howling of Obama had done something like that.
    I believe the GOP Senate are waiting for some concrete evidence before undertaking a Senate inquiry, unlike Democrats in the House who have launched several investigations based on hearsay, rumors and fake news. If damning reports come out from Barr and Durham I think you will see the Senate push to have the DOJ do his job, first, before launching into investigations. Remember, the GOP does not have the majority of the media act as scribes so they need more substantial evidence before undertaking an investigation into real collusion, corruption and a possible coup. Because we all know the media will damn Senate Republicans if THEY launch into an investigation, and try to turn public opinion against the GOP

    As Trump's personal lawyer it is his to duty to protect his client and find out the truth, if authorities are targeting his client instead of the real of purveyors of corruption.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #1534
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    MadYaker wrote: »
    Any grown ups have an answer?

    Unlikely. The top minds of the_donald haven't come up with anything for that.

    What you need to understand is that these talking points aren't for grown ups. Trump and co know well that these points are nonsense but they also know that Trump's base will lap them up and repeat them without any scrutiny. It's always been like this.


  • Options
    #1535
    MadYaker
    Registered Users Posts: 12,150 ✭✭✭✭MadYaker


    I wasn’t talking about Congress, the gop don’t control that. Individuals can do some digging as you have claimed though I can find no evidence of it, the Horowitz investigation was separate.

    The gop control the senate which has many powers of investigation which for some reason they aren’t using to look into the Biden’s or anyone else, it doesn’t make any sense


  • Options
    #1536
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    notobtuse wrote: »
    I believe the GOP Senate are waiting for some concrete evidence before undertaking a Senate inquiry, unlike Democrats in the House who have launched several investigations based on hearsay, rumors and fake news. If damning reports come out from Barr and Durham I think you will see the Senate push to have the DOJ do his job, first, before launching into investigations. Remember, the GOP does not have the majority of the media act as scribes so they need more substantial evidence before undertaking an investigation into real collusion, corruption and a possible coup. Because we all know the media will damn Senate Republicans if THEY launch into an investigation, and try to turn public opinion against the GOP

    As Trump's personal lawyer it is his to duty to protect his client and find out the truth, if authorities are targeting his client instead of the real of purveyors of corruption.

    Leaving aside the remainder of this spectacular gish-gallop of horse-shít, care to name a Democrat led house investigation that started based on hearsay, rumours and fake news?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1537
    MadYaker
    Registered Users Posts: 12,150 ✭✭✭✭MadYaker


    notobtuse wrote: »
    I believe the GOP Senate are waiting for some concrete evidence before undertaking a Senate inquiry, unlike Democrats in the House who have launched several investigations based on hearsay, rumors and fake news. If damning reports come out from Barr and Durham I think you will see the Senate push to have the DOJ do his job, first, before launching into investigations. Remember, the GOP does not have the majority of the media act as scribes so they need more substantial evidence before undertaking an investigation into real collusion, corruption and a possible coup. Because we all know the media will damn Senate Republicans if THEY launch into an investigation, and try to turn public opinion against the GOP

    As Trump's personal lawyer it is his to duty to protect his client and find out the truth, if authorities are targeting his client instead of the real of purveyors of corruption.

    You’ve no idea what you’re talking about. The purpose of any investigation is to collect evidence. Once the evidence is collected the investigation is over. Then a trial begins to decide whether or not the evidence is enough to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The democrats have begun the evidence collecting by launching the investigation in congress. Then it’ll go to the senate for a trial and some GOP senators will have to turn on trump if he’s to be impeached (unlikely imo) that’s where we’re at.


  • Options
    #1538
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    MadYaker wrote: »
    You’ve no idea what you’re talking about. The purpose of any investigation is to collect evidence. Once the evidence is collected the investigation is over. Then a trial begins to decide whether or not the evidence is enough to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The democrats have begun the evidence collecting by launching the investigation in congress. Then it’ll go to the senate for a trial and some GOP senators will have to turn on trump if he’s to be impeached (unlikely imo) that’s where we’re at.
    Okay, so I see you've decided not to go with the grown-ups answer.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #1539
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    Leaving aside the remainder of this spectacular gish-gallop of horse-shít, care to name a Democrat led house investigation that started based on hearsay, rumours and fake news?
    Three different Democrat House committees are currently investigating the trumped up Trump charges.

    New News… Project Veritas strikes again. Leaked audio of Zucker, president of CNN, directing his employees to push impeachment and that all of CNN's stories should be about moves towards impeachment. In addition, one of CNN's employees claims Zucker had a personal vendetta against Trump.

    Is anyone really shocked that CNN is completely biased against Trump and journalistic integrity be damned?

    https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1183780647522856960?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1183780647522856960&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fsamj-3930%2F2019%2F10%2F14%2Fproject-veritas-bombshell-nothing-to-see-here-just-cnns-jeff-zucker-directing-employees-to-push-impeachment%2F

    Even Shiff seems now to believe there was no quid pro quo, as he recently stated "Well, first of all, there doesn't need to be a quid pro quo. But it is clear already, I think, from the text messages that this meeting that the Ukrainian president sought was being conditioned on their willingness to intervene in the U.S. election to help the president…” I guess Trumps real crime is now being an evil genius, or something. :rolleyes:

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #1540
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Man, Trump is gonna love this, totally vindicates him calling them fake news (just as this did re: the NYT)


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7XZmugtLv4


  • Options
    #1541
    mad muffin
    Registered Users Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭mad muffin


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Three different Democrat House committees are currently investigating the trumped up Trump charges.

    New News… Project Veritas strikes again. Leaked audio of Zucker, president of CNN, directing his employees to push impeachment and that all of CNN's stories should be about moves towards impeachment. In addition, one of CNN's employees claims Zucker had a personal vendetta against Trump.

    Is anyone really shocked that CNN is completely biased against Trump and journalistic integrity be damned?

    https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1183780647522856960?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1183780647522856960&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fsamj-3930%2F2019%2F10%2F14%2Fproject-veritas-bombshell-nothing-to-see-here-just-cnns-jeff-zucker-directing-employees-to-push-impeachment%2F

    Even Shiff seems now to believe there was no quid pro quo, as he recently stated "Well, first of all, there doesn't need to be a quid pro quo. But it is clear already, I think, from the text messages that this meeting that the Ukrainian president sought was being conditioned on their willingness to intervene in the U.S. election to help the president…” I guess Trumps real crime is now being an evil genius, or something. :rolleyes:
    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Man, Trump is gonna love this, totally vindicates him calling them fake news (just as this did re: the NYT)


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7XZmugtLv4

    Yeah this doesn’t shock me at all. It’s really well known what’s going on, if you care to look beyond MSM and it’s satellites.

    Whilst those still playing in the sand box eating the sand and yelling IMPEACH!! Will know nothing but the MSM sand they are eating.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1542
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    mad muffin wrote: »
    Yeah this doesn’t shock me at all. It’s really well known what’s going on, if you care to look beyond MSM and it’s satellites.

    Whilst those still playing in the sand box eating the sand and yelling IMPEACH!! Will know nothing but the MSM sand they are eating.
    I’m surprised the usual suspects here haven’t chimed in yet with…
    NOTHING TO SEE HERE... PLEASE MOVE ALONG!

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #1543
    mad muffin
    Registered Users Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭mad muffin


    notobtuse wrote: »
    I’m surprised the usual suspects here haven’t chimed in yet with…
    NOTHING TO SEE HERE... PLEASE MOVE ALONG!

    Pre school isn’t finished yet. They’re still playing in the sand box.


  • Options
    #1544
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    notobtuse wrote: »
    I’m surprised the usual suspects here haven’t chimed in yet with…

    Oh, they have .. just in the more safer of spaces ;)


  • Options
    #1545
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,691 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Man, Trump is gonna love this, totally vindicates him calling them fake news (just as this did re: the NYT)


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7XZmugtLv4

    A project Veritas video will never vindicate (or incriminate) anyone of anything. Very telling you choke on this hogwash.

    Can someone tell the Trump campaign manager that impeachment isn’t sedition nor is it the overthrow of the Republic? The founders didn’t sneak impeachment into the constitution as the mechanism for destroying the country.

    https://twitter.com/parscale/status/1183779036218216448?s=21


  • Options
    #1546
    mad muffin
    Registered Users Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭mad muffin


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Oh, they have .. just in the more safer of spaces ;)

    Mmm… indeed ;)


  • Options
    #1547
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,691 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Okay, so I see you've decided not to go with the grown-ups answer.

    I’m flummoxed that is your response to the bonafide adult answer. You still don’t know how impeachment works? It’s been 3 weeks man. Google it.


  • Options
    #1548
    mad muffin
    Registered Users Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭mad muffin


    How is everyone enjoying the narrative pivot? Now we don’t need the whistleblower (cause they are now found to be tainted) and we don’t need quid pro quo (since we have the call).

    Now it’s about the set up to accepting a call between Trump and Zelensky.

    I wonder what it will be next week?

    The spaghetti fauxpeachment continues…


  • Options
    #1549
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    mad muffin wrote: »
    How is everyone enjoying the narrative pivot? Now we don’t need the whistleblower (cause they are now found to be tainted) and we don’t need quid pro quo (since we have the call).

    Now it’s about the set up to accepting a call between Trump and Zelensky.

    I wonder what it will be next week?

    The spaghetti fauxpeachment continues…
    Well, you know it's eventually gonna be blamed on this...

    alens.jpg

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #1550
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Three different Democrat House committees are currently investigating the trumped up Trump charges.


    That's just you repeating your assertion. It doesn't in the slightest way answer the question but as I keep saying, when you place Trump talking points under any scrutiny, they fall apart. Those talking points aren't there to convince grown ups of anything - they are for you to swallow and repeat without understanding what you're saying.


  • Options
    #1551
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    mad muffin wrote: »
    How is everyone enjoying the narrative pivot? Now we don’t need the whistleblower (cause they are now found to be tainted) and we don’t need quid pro quo (since we have the call).

    Now it’s about the set up to accepting a call between Trump and Zelensky.

    I wonder what it will be next week?

    The spaghetti fauxpeachment continues…


    The impeachment has been ongoing for a few weeks and it will continue for a while too. During that time, things will happen, people will say things and there will be different stuff that people will be talking about. And the impeachment inquiry will continue.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1552
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    That's just you repeating your assertion. It doesn't in the slightest way answer the question but as I keep saying, when you place Trump talking points under any scrutiny, they fall apart. Those talking points aren't there to convince grown ups of anything - they are for you to swallow and repeat without understanding what you're saying.
    Thank you for bringing my posting error to my attention. I was wrong... It isn't 3 House committees investigating Trump, but rather 6 House committees including the Judiciary and Oversight panels. I guess all these Democrat controlled House committees have nothing else to do.

    https://www.vox.com/2019/9/25/20882860/house-democrats-impeachment-inquiry-donald-trump-nancy-pelosi

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #1553
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Thank you for bringing my posting error to my attention. I was wrong... It isn't 3 House committees investigating Trump, but rather 6 House committees including the Judiciary and Oversight panels. I guess all these Democrat controlled House committees have nothing else to do.

    https://www.vox.com/2019/9/25/20882860/house-democrats-impeachment-inquiry-donald-trump-nancy-pelosi


    That they have launched inquiries is not in dispute.


    You said:

    unlike Democrats in the House who have launched several investigations based on hearsay, rumors and fake news


    I think that this is horse-sh!t and I said so earlier. If you can't demonstrate even one inquiry that was launched based on "hearsay, rumours and fake news", it sounds like you just wrote some crap that you didn't understand.


  • Options
    #1554
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    That they have launched inquiries is not in dispute.


    You said:





    I think that this is horse-sh!t and I said so earlier. If you can't demonstrate even one inquiry that was launched based on "hearsay, rumours and fake news", it sounds like you just wrote some crap that you didn't understand.
    That's my opinion and please show me anything that warrants an impeachment inquiry. Don't say quid pro quo because it looks like even Shifty Shiff is moving away from that charge which was based on hearsay, rumors and fake news.

    Seems Representative Matt Gaetz (R) got kicked out of the Democrats double secret investigation hearing. Gaetz sits on the Judiciary Committee, which is part of the half dozen Democrat controlled committees overseeing the witch-hunt. He was told he had to leave because he was not a member of the House Intelligence, Oversight and Foreign Affairs committee that is conducting the impeachment inquiry into Trump. What have Democrats got to hide? Aliens?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #1555
    mad muffin
    Registered Users Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭mad muffin


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    The impeachment has been ongoing for a few weeks and it will continue for a while too. During that time, things will happen, people will say things and there will be different stuff that people will be talking about. And the impeachment inquiry will continue.


    Yep your 100 percent right. The longer it goes the more that comes out the faster the narrative pivots.

    That’s why they want to get this over and done with as quickly as possible. That way they are hoping to get ahead of the eventual lies that are exposed on Schiff and the fauxpeachment.


  • Options
    #1556
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    notobtuse wrote: »
    That's my opinion and please show me anything that warrants an impeachment inquiry. Don't say quid pro quo because it looks like even Shifty Shiff is moving away from that charge which was based on hearsay, rumors and fake news.


    So you can't name one. That's fine and I know that this isn't a fact based thread but it's obviously not great to be making stuff up.

    notobtuse wrote: »
    Seems Representative Matt Gaetz (R) got kicked out of the Democrats double secret investigation hearing. Gaetz sits on the Judiciary Committee, which is part of the half dozen Democrat controlled committees overseeing the witch-hunt. He was told he had to leave because he was not a member of the House Intelligence, Oversight and Foreign Affairs committee that is conducting the impeachment inquiry into Trump. What have Democrats got to hide? Aliens?


    It's how closed hearings work. Trey Gowdy kicked Darrell Issa out of a Benghazi hearing for the same reason. Gaetz, you may remember is under investigation for threatening a witness.


  • Options
    #1557
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,357 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    notobtuse wrote: »
    I’m surprised the usual suspects here haven’t chimed in yet with…
    NOTHING TO SEE HERE... PLEASE MOVE ALONG!
    mad muffin wrote: »
    Pre school isn’t finished yet. They’re still playing in the sand box.

    Guys

    This is a discussion site and this forum allows you to express your opinions. Please interact civilly - these sorts of comments make you look far more childish than the people you are commenting about

    Any questions, PM me


  • Options
    #1558
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    So you can't name one. That's fine and I know that this isn't a fact based thread but it's obviously not great to be making stuff up.

    Because there no reason to hold an impeachment inquiry. There is good reason to believe Joe Biden partook an illegal quid pro quo in demanding Ukraine fire the prosecutor who was looking into the company that Biden’s son been sitting on the board. I think Joe gave them all of six hours to accomplish the firing or they wouldn’t get the billions in US taxpayer money. Just because someone is running for POTUS doesn’t give them a free pass to involve themselves in criminal activity and not worry about being investigated. And Ukraine and the US have an agreement to help each other in the matter of a potential crime that involves both countries. So you can throw the Ukraine reasoning out the window. Then what have you got... nothing!

    Or is it simply Orange Man Bad as bases enough for the impeachment nonsense?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #1559
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    If you can't demonstrate even one inquiry that was launched based on "hearsay, rumours and fake news", it sounds like you just wrote some crap that you didn't understand.

    Oh please, the whole of Russia-Gate was based on Heresay. Downer SAID that Papa SAID that Mifsud SAID that Russians SAID they have Hilary's emails. The New York Times and the Washington Post ran stories in the months leading up to the election based on nothing but heresay too.

    Also, the current investigation was launched on heresay as Pelosi admitted she hadn't yet read the transcript of the call.


  • Options
    #1560
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Oh please, the whole of Russia-Gate was based on Heresay. Downer SAID that Papa SAID that Mifsud SAID that Russians SAID they have Hilary's emails. The New York Times and the Washington Post ran stories in the months leading up to the election based on nothing but heresay too.

    Also, the current investigation was launched on heresay as Pelosi admitted she hadn't yet read the transcript of the call.


    She has aides.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1561
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,691 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Because there no reason to hold an impeachment inquiry. There is good reason to believe Joe Biden partook an illegal quid pro quo in demanding Ukraine fire the prosecutor who was looking into the company that Biden’s son been sitting on the board. I think Joe gave them all of six hours to accomplish the firing or they wouldn’t get the billions in US taxpayer money. Just because someone is running for POTUS doesn’t give them a free pass to involve themselves in criminal activity and not worry about being investigated. And Ukraine and the US have an agreement to help each other in the matter of a potential crime that involves both countries. So you can throw the Ukraine reasoning out the window. Then what have you got... nothing!

    Or is it simply Orange Man Bad as bases enough for the impeachment nonsense?

    Sorry but if what Biden did was illegal where is the indictment? If it’s so obvious to you why the need to investigate if what he said is a confession of malfeasance? :rolleyes:

    This was known by the GOP, EU, IMF and State Department I don’t mind reminding you.


Advertisement