Igotadose wrote: » lol. What utter garbage. The President colluded with foreign adversaries. It didn't meet the standard of prosecution but was deferred to Congress to determine whether it's chargeable. While investigating this, another attempt at collusion with a foreign power was dropped into Congress' lap by this same, compromised President. His defenders like yourself have nothing other than screeching about farcical conspiracies and the 'deep state' to defend this due process that Congress is following under the Constitution. And, for extra credit, here's a timeline of the President colluding with yet another foreign power, in this case Turkey. Do recall that the President's NSA chief went to jail as part of his corrupt lying about being a paid lobbyist for Turkey. This administration, with it's 80+ indictments, hordes of resignations from every level of government up to the Cabinet and convictions, is by far the most criminal in modern US history.
Ihatewhahabies wrote: » Please see turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/larry-johnson-1/ The central contention of article is that the "US goverment did not believe that Flynn lied. He was prosecuted in a deliberate frame up
Penn wrote: » So you'd agree that the Trump administration should not be ignoring subpeonas or refusing to allow people to testify in front of Congress who are acting in their duties as a co-equal branch of government in enforcing those checks and balances, given the accusations and evidence of potential illegalities of the actions of the Trump administration?
mcmoustache wrote: » No you're wrong. Here's a more credible link than the one you provided.http://www.superchristianpatriotmaga.news.me/blogs/someconspiracynut/obummer-aids-monkey-steals-your-guns.htm
notobtuse wrote: » You link does not work... which isn't surprising.
mcmoustache wrote: » That's how the whole US system has been set up. It's always been like that and nobody gets to be a whiny little bítch complaining about how unfair it is.
mcmoustache wrote: » No you're wrong. Here's a more credible link than the one you provided. [/QUOTE Sic semper tyranis is Pat Lang's site and Larry Johnston is the author of the article Both very credible people.
notobtuse wrote: » A president is allowed to ask for help from a foreign country if there is reason to believe crimes were committed. Biden running for president doesn't exempt him from the process if he participated in the apparent quid pro quo while he was VP. If it does then I guess I could rob a bank, run for president, then nobody can investigate me... right? If I would support Trump being impeached based on such flimsy evidence I would also have to support Hillary being impeached on day one if she became president... and have supported a Barack Obama impeachment, same with GW BUsh, and if Biden wins, his impeachment on day one. And if anything comes up on Warren if she wins I would have to support her impeachment because impeachable offenses seems to be anything Congress says they are.
Igotadose wrote: » Uhh... did you think it was a serious link?
notobtuse wrote: » No, apparently Congress can impeach a ham sandwich for anything they come up with in their little minds, and due process be damned. Which is now the case with Democrats in Congress. Apparently a president in this matter is provided less rights than every other US citizen has in normal circumstances. If such abuses are allowed why not allow Trump to fight back with everything available in his arsenal?
notobtuse wrote: » Nonsense. Sure they can complain about how unfair it is... that's how the system has been set up... free speech and all.
Trump said his refusal to answer House Democrats’ requests during the impeachment inquiry “probably ends up being a big Supreme Court case.” But he also said he was open to cooperating with House Democrats if they meet certain conditions. “We would, if they give us our rights,” he said. Trump and Republicans have criticized Democrats for not holding a vote to formally open their impeachment inquiry. Trump also wants Republicans the ability to ALSO question witnesses... not just Democrats. Democrats are making up the rules as they go along. Democrats have now started witness testimony behind closed doors, even though some... like acting director of national intelligence Joseph Maguire have testified publicly. And the reason is clear, and it stinks to high heaven... Democrats (and their media handmaidens) want to have absolute control of the dialog. In the case of Volker’s testimony the Democrats have released selective, biased and misleading testimony. Aren’t YOU pissed that the Democrats refuse to release the full transcript of Volker testimony? Republicans are calling for it as they feel this travesty of justice must stop. Senator Graham said “If this continues, I will call Volker before the Senate Judiciary Committee to testify publicly to ensure the full story is told.” Trump's demands are not unreasonable!
Overheal wrote: » 2 ex-soviets who were instrumental in arranging the meeting between Rudy and fmr. prosecutor Yuri Lutsenko. Illegal donations to the Trump campaign. How about that! Follow the money!
notobtuse wrote: » That doesn't stop me from reading them, though.
mcmoustache wrote: » Always, always, check the destination of a link. Especially if you're using Windows or a smartphone. I'm not joking here.
Matt Barrett wrote: » Dismiss the press, dismiss congress members as anti-american, go to foreign states to get dirt on rivals, (for deals) and dismiss congress as regards impeachment as it acts on whims seemingly. Sounds like you're supporting the birth of a dictatorship comrade. So Trump can do what he likes based on the actions of others in a rival party. Nice. Great system of government you support there
notobtuse wrote: » Wouldn't it make more sense to condemn the actions being committed now that might be copied later?
Matt Barrett wrote: » The Trump administration is moving the goalposts and justifying taking apart piece by piece what constitutes the U.S.
notobtuse wrote: » The courts would determine if this is the case. ... If Democrats think impeaching Trump and getting him removed from office will save their sorry asses from arrests they better think again. If they do impeach Trump and it turns out there was a coup plot or something close involving the CIA, the previous administration and other high ranking Democratic officials there will be hell to pay in this country. It will make what happened in the 1860s seem like child’s play.
notobtuse wrote: » Fancy that… apparently Ukraine reopened the Burisma probe months before the Trump-Zelensky phone call, and that the Trump administration was already aware of it. Reportedly the probe into Burisma also involved "unusual transactions" in the natural gas giant's accounts and alleged "illicit funds" coincided in part with the time Hunter Biden held a place on the firm's board... and that investigators in Ukraine filed a 15-page "notice of suspicion" indicating they were "looking at the possibility that the $3.4 million paid to Hunter Biden's firm may have been part of the illicit funds that were moving through the company." And apparently, according to Joe Biden’s spokesperson, Hunter Biden’s position on the board of Burisma was approved by Barack Obama in 2014. So Joe is now dragging Barack into this mess. I bet Obama appreciates it. I guess there can be no quid pro quo if Ukraine had already started an investigation and Trump already knew about it, right? This situation is looking mighty bad for Joe Biden and the Democrat members of Congress rush to impeach.
Matt Barrett wrote: » So Trump didn't ask them to do him a favour and look into Biden? All you are saying here is they were likely going to look into it, before Trump called asking them to look into it. Asked, even though he knew they were going to any way...sounds legit. Fair play, you really try.
mcmoustache wrote: » Who's reporting that?
notobtuse wrote: » Well you certainly won't find any reporting on it from the Democrat's media handmaidens. John Solomon, investigative reporter, who won a number of prestigious awards for his investigative journalism.
notobtuse wrote: » How in the world did you get ‘they were likely going to look into it’ out of ‘Ukraine reopened the Burisma probe months before the Trump-Zelensky phone call?’
apparently Ukraine reopened the Burisma probe months before the Trump-Zelensky phone call, and that the Trump administration was already aware of it
