https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/how-the-world-has-reacted-to-the-nsw-qld-bushfires/news-story/bc6a100d85bb3cc942991f80bb626b1d

There are fires in eastern Australia, there are fires in California, and there have been fires in various other places for various reasons but is it climate change or stupidity? People build houses surrounded by combustible material, they live in places that cannot be defended if fire erupts and then there are those who defend their property instead of leaving. I have a unique perspective on this having had a bush fire crown over the top of me in 1975 while working to stop a fire. Very unpleasant experience..

Recently Trump decided that in the US he wasn't going to help California, we haven't become so insulated from human suffering that we would take such a step but realism has to kick in. Regulation that prevents clearing of vegetation must be over hauled, we cannot afford tree preservation orders in residential areas any more, property protection has to become a priority, or we retreat

After this fire season I think we should consider the wisdom of how much of the country is locked up in national parks which are really tinder boxes full of combustible material in inaccessible areas

Paraclete: Like the old saying, "If you are going to be stupid, you got to be tough!" Climate has been changing and will be changing from now on, whether or not man exists or not.....I don't know how much influence we humans have on it and, if we do, what degree that influence is, really. But, I am with you: California is a special case of stupid: I mean they are ""out there" on everything from legalized dope, Sanctuary Cities out the arse, race problems, horrible politicians of ALL descriptions and parties, seismic conditions abounding, a fleeing population trying to escape out while another population tries to "escape in", and big time geographical differences, tremendous industrial output, and a huge population......and, all the while enacting the law/provisions you site: Not being able to clear vegetation and endangering homes.

Paraclete: Like the old saying, "If you are going to be stupid, you got to be tough!" Climate has been changing and will be changing from now on, whether or not man exists or not.....I don't know how much influence we humans have on it and, if we do, what degree that influence is, really. But, I am with you: California is a special case of stupid: I mean they are ""out there" on everything from legalized dope, Sanctuary Cities out the arse, race problems, horrible politicians of ALL descriptions and parties, seismic conditions abounding, a fleeing population trying to escape out while another population tries to "escape in", and big time geographical differences, tremendous industrial output, and a huge population......and, all the while enacting the law/provisions you site: Not being able to clear vegetation and endangering homes.

Yes Vac, the same here. I don't know who borrowed these ideas from whom, but, it is time to say; we have heard you and it is B/S. You want to tell someoneelse what to do, go and live as they do. We have the rediculous situation here where, in my district, you cannot collect rainwater to alleviate your water costs, where elsewhere you are forced to install water tanks in new houses, and we have water restrictions, but universally you cannot remove trees without permission, no matter they dump leaves and bark creating a fire hazard. These fires are a case in point, some originating in national parks and reserves, where hazard reduction isn't allowed and what have they done, created fire storms and destroyed towns and I have heard the news, I know similar things happen in other countries. time to kick the do gooders and dills out of office

https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/rural-firefighters-heartbreaking-plea/news-story/602b8b84c7092a232fd6fdceecb37f86

My thoughts have been echoed by a firefighter who clearly blames environmental policy and not climate change for the disastrous bush fires in Australia, and should you be unaware, tomorrow will be another day of catastrophy with communities being told not to expect help and to leave now

There has been one plus from this Trump has been kicked off the news

Paraclete: Again, perfect example of man resisting The Laws Of Nature....and getting his arse kicked up one side and down the other! Nature has a very good winning record against man.....and I don't think that will change any time soon.

Vac, I don't think we know the laws of nature, the rule is everything changes, tomorrow will not be the same as today

I guess it's to much to ask humans to adapt to the conditions they face in a practical way. If I had to choose between climate change and stupidity, I would certainly not discount human stupidity even if it could well be a combination of both. Humans are helpless to nature.

It's like falling asleep in bed while smoking. You going to blame the bed for burning or the cigarette for igniting the bed? No blame the stupid human that lit the cigarette and fell asleep in the bed.

Talaniman: I often wonder if my dog looks at me, his master, and other humans, and thinks that we are entirely stupid! Man is such a waste: I think we are truly efficient, truly effective for a miserable amount of time that we suck oxygen in....my estimation: maybe 20%, tops, of our time alive!

Talaniman: I often wonder if my dog looks at me, his master, and other humans, and thinks that we are entirely stupid! Man is such a waste: I think we are truly efficient, truly effective for a miserable amount of time that we suck oxygen in....my estimation: maybe 20%, tops, of our time alive!

Vac, your dog looks at you as his god, he thinks you are wonderful, you have much, he has nothing but you. You have a purpose, making your dog's life worthwhile

Paraclete: Never thought about it from that viewpoint.....great perspective!

I would agree with many liberals (gasp!) that increasing the CO2 content of the atmosphere is not a great idea. To say that it has caused a marginal increase in the surface temp of the earth is probably accurate. The big problem is what to do about it. The dem's crazy idea of the Green New Deal is DOA, so how can we get away from carbon fuel usage? It's a tough question. It might very well end up being a whole lot cheaper and more practical to adapt to the changes. We'll see.

Ideas???

BTW, this was good. "You want to tell someoneelse what to do, go and live as they do. We have the rediculous situation here where, in my district, you cannot collect rainwater to alleviate your water costs, where elsewhere you are forced to install water tanks in new houses, and we have water restrictions, but universally you cannot remove trees without permission, no matter they dump leaves and bark creating a fire hazard. These fires are a case in point, some originating in national parks and reserves, where hazard reduction isn't allowed and what have they done, created fire storms and destroyed towns and I have heard the news, I know similar things happen in other countries. time to kick the do gooders and dills out of office."

We aren't changing anything: Even now, record low temperatures are striking various parts of the U.S..….weather/weather patterns are cyclical.....Plants love CO2......The U.S. isn't going to or, should say, the U.S. ought not put itself at a disadvantage against foreign adversaries by relegating itself to the stone ages to accommodate an untenable situation in terms of reduced industrial capacity in order to fulfil the wants of a pseudo religion called Global Warming. If Global Warming is real, then we should seek REAL solutions: Adopt Nuclear Power! We just aren't taking charge of this like we should....too much in the way of emotions and not enough in the way of answers.

The problem with nuclear has always been waste. I supplied links to that mess in an earler post, and it details how cost extensive and time consuming it is to clean up. Sometimes decades.

The problem with nuclear has always been waste. I supplied links to that mess in an earler post, and it details how cost extensive and time consuming it is to clean up. Sometimes decades.

Tal this is not the big problem it used to be, still the waste has to be dealt with and using spent uranium in weapons is a bad idea. We have to be smarter and not build reactors in earthquake zones. Renewables isn't the answer either, a stopgap at best, and we have to be resigned to the fact that coal and oil won't last forever. The answer is unpalatable, population reduction and limits. It doesn't matter that we are reducing CO2 per capita while ever population increases, emissions increase and however much this contributes to climate change it is unsustainable. The facts are that longterm climate change has been with us for a very long time, so I think we stop this nonsense about CO2 and put our research into solving the problem. Ours is a very wasteful society anyway enough rant for now

The problem with nuclear has always been waste. I supplied links to that mess in an earler post, and it details how cost extensive and time consuming it is to clean up. Sometimes decades.

To clean up what? As I understand it, and who knows if I do or not, when nuke plants are run properly, the nuclear waste needs a place to go, but beyond that there is nothing to clean up.

To clean up what? As I understand it, and who knows if I do or not, when nuke plants are run properly, the nuclear waste needs a place to go, but beyond that there is nothing to clean up.

Check this out. (https://ecology.wa.gov/Waste-Toxics/Nuclear-waste/Hanford-cleanup)

Hansford was not simply a reactor site. It was a nuke weapons production site where they were learning as they went along. They made a lot of mistakes. You can't apply that model to the typical nuke plant that exists now. Not even close.

Wind and solar are too unreliable. Hydro is already about tapped out. If you don't want fossil fuels, then what's left other than nuke?

It's an all sources on deck approach, as grid technology and best practice methods are developed. (https://nei.org/fundamentals/nuclear-waste) Still we are talking decades. (https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/fuel-recycling/processing-of-used-nuclear-fuel.aspx)

It's an all sources on deck approach, as grid technology and best practice methods are developed. (https://nei.org/fundamentals/nuclear-waste) Still we are talking decades. (https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/fuel-recycling/processing-of-used-nuclear-fuel.aspx)

yes whatever happened to cold fusion I guess you have to put in more than you get out but there is still he3 so back to the Moon

Darn it all! If FRANCE can do, why can't we (Nuclear Power, I mean).

Darn it all! If FRANCE can do, why can't we (Nuclear Power, I mean).

First, you have to become a socialist country, then you have to squash dissension, and convince the population you really want to have clean power. It helps if you are a true democracy and not a loose collection of self governing states and an even bigger collection of loose cannons

Paraclete: WOW! You mean the U.S. has to become a SOCIALIST country to have nuclear power? And squash dissention? I guess that mean that we also have to adopt the policy of taking in millions of M.E. and African aliens, too, if we have to "be like France". Darn!!! O.K., if that is what it takes to have nuclear power, I don't want nuclear power: I will suffer with the heat and chill in the cold, instead.

No Vac you are already a nuclear country, but if you want to remain so you need to change your ways

Some point we point humans have decided that we can control the weather and climate, I'm not even convinced of the efficacy of co2 as a green house gas (https://towerofreason.blogspot.com/2018/04/co2-is-not-driving-global-warming.html?m=1).

It must also be pointed out that nuclear is far cleaner than any type of combustion, in the sense that the wastes are captured, while all combustion generally escapes into the atmosphere.

As far as fires go, better management could help a lot, here in Florida we burn our conservations in a controlled manner to alleviate massive fires and to allow certain plants to remain that would otherwise die without fire.

Maybe people will soon see the tools at the top using all sorts of fear mongering to grab every element of power they can.

here in Florida we burn our conversations

What?

Sorry, typo. Edited.

No problem. I've done it myself. Your comments are certainly valid.

Some point we point humans have decided that we can control the weather and climate, I'm not even convinced of the efficacy of co2 as a green house gas (https://towerofreason.blogspot.com/2018/04/co2-is-not-driving-global-warming.html?m=1).

AGW is a scam, first begun by Margaret Thatcher to justify nuclear power, we cannot control the climate, any attempts are futile such we cannot control the sun and volcanos


It must also be pointed out that nuclear is far cleaner than any type of combustion, in the sense that the wastes are captured, while all combustion generally escapes into the atmosphere.

Yes I wonder how that has been missed by those who want a cleaner environment


As far as fires go, better management could help a lot, here in Florida we burn our conservations in a controlled manner to alleviate massive fires and to allow certain plants to remain that would otherwise die without fire.

please don't think we are unaware of this since such methods have been used here for 40,000 years, however, the educated among us are worried about a little smoke getting up their noses, strange since they seem to have no objection to smoking dope


Maybe people will soon see the tools at the top using all sorts of fear mongering to grab every element of power they can.

This is a forlorn hope

Paraclete, InfoJunkie4Life, & jlisenbe: Got to say, you guys have it right: The U.S., as well as any other "developed" nation in this world, have been shafted out of millions upon millions of manufacturing jobs by those "Money Managers know as Globalist" who are into the work of WEALTH TRANSFER (i.e. can you say George Soros?).....these arse wipes have put out the Religion Of Global Warming as a means to get those amongst us who will drink their vile brew to vote for measures which handicap our economies while empowering our adversaries.....These are truly despicable people who earn nothing from us but contempt.

Don't limit yourself to so called liberals while you throw that globalist stuff around. Plenty of conservatives like making and taking MO'MONEY. Unfortunately though technology has not met up with situations and conditions or grand ideas yet, even in the economics of it.

Mother Nature sure ain't going no where so keep figuring it out and trying stuff. Or move to France (Or Australia and keep Clete company...take a bucket).

Talaniman: I don't exclude those on the Right from the wrath of Globalism: You know I can't stand NeoCons, either! Its these people that seek out virtual slave labor all around the world, find any excuse they can to move U.S. or any industrialized nation's jobs to the slave labor source (OR IMPORT THE SLAVE LABOR...and, no, Construction outfits, chicken processing plant, and Golf Course types, and the like don't get a pass either!) and proceed to DODGE PAYING TAXES here at home while enjoying the freedoms of the country has to offer. No, none get a pass!

No, none get a pass!

Find that video yet?

There is no such video and Biden was just the point man for Obama and the other entities that the Ukraine wanted funding support from. A simple Google search tells the WHOLE story.

Nobody reads my links BWHAAAA!

There is no such video and Biden was just the point man for Obama and the other entities that the Ukraine wanted funding support from. A simple Google search tells the WHOLE story.

Nobody reads my links BWHAAAA!

Tom, time is important and although we live in an age when everyone must justify everything they say, I believe you, afterall how could Joe sink so low? It has apparently become time for change and younger heads are needed. By the way, you will like this, do you know Trump's degree is a BS, always thought he was strong in BS, but didn't think he had a lesser degree in it, I thought he must be a Phd

Athos: What I said would hold up in a Court Of Law: Biden doesn't have to say anything with his son's name to be implicit that he was protecting his son by getting someone fired: aNY JURY WOULD SEE IT MY WAY. Biden did dirty deeds....he is very dirty. When a company is being investigated, ALL management is considered "suspect"...so Hunter was suspect and, according, not exempt from investigation....OLD JOE made Hunter exempt by getting the prosecutor who was introducing the investigation fired. No think person, no honest person can see this whole affair as anything but a Quid Pro Quo as Biden bragged about holding up funding and getting the prosecutor fired through coercion.

However, it doesn't matter if you believe it or not: Trump is getting reelected in 2020....might not be what you want but its the reality. And I can only blame Democrat Party "Management" for the debacle that will befall them in Nov., 2020: How in the name of the Lord do you let little Adam Schiff lead the charge on the IMPEACHMENT? The guy could lead flies to fresh dog sh&$!

Are you implying old Joe is dirty, and the dufus ain't? The right hounded Hillary for decades and look at her now free as a bird, not the prez but FREE! Hope the dufus is so fortunate. You also think the south will rise again against northern aggression too, right?

Better not try that in Florida.

Now Tal, don't let the bastards get to you. Perhaps Trump will be elected, perhaps the mood of the nation will change. It is a pity the votes don't matter as much as the states, but then who knows. If you were able to see the view of all the people, not just the less shiftless, it might be interesting

No worries Clete, if they had something on the Bidens then DOJ would have filed a formal inquiry with the Ukraine, not a phone call from the dufus and not this convoluted failed extortion scheme. Looks like a nasty election winter starting last summer.

Talaniman: Biden comes across as greasy. The whole lot of the Democrat POTUS candidates, spare Tulsi, are really weak: You have to know that Trump is going to trounce any of them.

But, after the Mueller debacle, it would have seemed that the Demos would not have put Schiff in charge: He is TERRIBLE!

Talaniman: Biden comes across as greasy. The whole lot of the Democrat POTUS candidates, spare Tulsi, are really weak: You have to know that Trump is going to trounce any of them.

But, after the Mueller debacle, it would have seemed that the Demos would not have put Schiff in charge: He is TERRIBLE! I think A.O.C. would do a better job than Little Adam: I might even watch it if the beautiful A.O.C. was running the thing!

No, I don't think the South Will Rise Again: The right side won the Civil War....and succession nor slavery was to be allowed.

He did a great job the other day dude, did you read the report or just saw the movie? We will see. What's your theory on the dufus wanting Ukraine to investigate itself for interfering in our 2016 elections in collusion with the dems? How about Erdogan coming to Washington the other day? Talk about greasy!

Athos: What I said would hold up in a Court Of Law: Biden doesn't have to say anything with his son's name to be implicit that he was protecting his son by getting someone fired: aNY JURY WOULD SEE IT MY WAY. Biden did dirty deeds....he is very dirty.................... [blah, blah, blah]..................................ot exempt from investigation....OLD JOE made Hunter exempt by getting the prosecutor who was introducing the investigation fired. No think person, no honest person can see this whole affair as anything but a Quid Pro Quo as Biden.............ad flies to fresh dog sh&$!

V7 - You said you wanted to be with the big boys, the smart guys that you couldn't find on the internet. You're acting like those you denigrated.

Be a man and admit there is no video showing Biden bragging he fired the prosecutor who was investigating his son.

Stop evading the question by posting a lot of nonsense. It's not doing you any good.

If I'm wrong, THEN SHOW THE VIDEO!!

Talaniman: It appears that the Repubs are circling their wagons much better than the Demos.....and the Repubs are much more feisty, like they have more fire in the belly: Emotion, at least the show of it, is a powerful convincer to the general public....Trump might lose the "inning" but he is looking at the entirety of the game.

Heard that the Ukrainians may have had some sort of relationship with the Demos back in 2016 to get Trump: May be one of those "Winger" things you talk about, but did hear it.

No, if the REALLY FILTHY Erdogan NEVER stepped foot in the U.S., ever again, it would be too soon: He makes Biden and Trump, maybe even Little Kim Jung Il, even, look like saints. Don't like to see POTUS with him (not just Trump, either), any POTUS. Erdogan is not to be trusted.

Athos: Here is one of the MANY videos on YouTube showing what I have been talking about: Guy is such a pompous arse.

49252

Vac, that's not a video. It's a pdf file.

/ (https://www.facebook.com/nswrfs/videos/667473703780929/)Once again an OP has been hijacked, you want to talk about something else, start a thread

https://www.facebook.com/nswrfs/videos/667473703780929/

Athos: Here is one of the MANY videos on YouTube showing what I have been talking about: Guy is such a pompous arse.

V7, a VIDEO is a screen-thing with people moving. They've been doing that since (I think) Thomas Edison. Around the late 1920s they added sound so now a video had BOTH movement AND dialogue. Got it?

So a still picture of some guy with text only is NOT a video! You still with me?

Study this for a week or so, then get back to us with a VIDEO of Biden bragging about stopping the prosecutor investigating Biden's son. There'll be a quiz.

Athos: You are something else! I know its not a video: I can't upload videos from YouTube: That is the YouTube video title.....if you listen to it, Biden incriminates himself......he did a Quid Pro Quo where he strong-armed the Ukraine to fire the prosecuter to get his son off the hook. Its straight-forward.

Athos: You are something else! I know its not a video: I can't upload videos from YouTube: That is the YouTube video title.....if you listen to it, Biden incriminates himself......he did a Quid Pro Quo where he strong-armed the Ukraine to fire the prosecuter to get his son off the hook. Its straight-forward.

Vac, when you find the YT video you like, then just copy the URL and paste it like this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXA--dj2-CY

In the video there is a clear quid pro quo involving money appropriated to Ukraine and the condition of the prosecutor being fired before it will be delivered. It certainly has elements of bribery in it. There is, however, no mention of Biden's son, so that much must be implied.

Athos: You are something else! I know its not a video

If you KNOW it's not a video, why did you say it IS a video? And why did you say there are many more videos?


That is the YouTube video title.....if you listen to it, Biden incriminates himself

The whole world has heard that video over the last few weeks and Biden isn't incriminating himself. He's declaring out loud that he will hold money (loans) to Ukraine until they fire the prosecutor. Nowhere in the video does Biden say to stop investigating his son. Why do you say he is, when it's perfectly obvious he is NOT? Can you see all right? As I've told you, when you claim what can be easily disproven, you lose all credibility.


he did a Quid Pro Quo

Yes, he most certainly did. So what? You seem to be equating Biden's quid pro quo to Trump's quid pro quo. They are TOTALLY different. Biden did it in the national interest - perfectly ok. Trump did it in his personal interest (get dirt on his political opponent) - totally not ok.


he strong-armed the Ukraine to fire the prosecuter to get his son off the hook. Its straight-forward.

As I wrote above, NOWHERE in the video does it say that! NOWHERE! When you say it's straight-forward, I'm sorry, V7, but I have to worry about your sanity.

Yes, he most certainly did. So what? You seem to be equating Biden's quid pro quo to Trump's quid pro quo. They are TOTALLY different. Biden did it in the national interest - perfectly ok

So it says on the video that Biden did it "in the national interest"? Strange. I didn't hear that. As to Trump, you have no idea what Trump was speaking about. Neither do the dems. If they did, we would have heard it by now. But then he's a repub, so he must surely be guilty, and Biden, a liberal dem, must surely be innocent.

Athos: You are definitely a Little Adam Schiff Mini-Me: You insist that Biden didn't want the prosecutor fired to protect his son when his son WORKED FOR THE FIRM THE PROSECUTOR WAS GOING TO INVESTIGATE: Damn thing doesn't have to be verbatim to mean the same thing: YOU KNOW THE INFERENCE HERE! Out of Biden's own mouth! Hell you want to throw Trump out based off of 3rd hand information but BIDEN HAS TO SAY SOMETHING WORD FOR WORD OR IT DOESN'T COUNT? Come on, you know that is disingenuous: BIDEN IS FILTHY! The whole damn lot of them is filthy!

THIS IS WHAT YOU GET WHEN YOU SQUASH EVERY 3RD PARTY ATTEMPT TO ENTER THE "RULING ELITE" AND HAVE A MONOPOLY SETUP FOR ONLY 2 RULING PARTIES! DEMS AND REPUBS NEARLY THE SAME SMELL!

So it says on the video that Biden did it "in the national interest"? Strange. I didn't hear that.

If you knew the first thing about why Biden was there insisting the prosecutor be fired, you wouldn't be saying something so egregiously dopey like "Strange, I didn't hear that". It's hard to know just how to deal with you people. Try reading a newspaper in the last month. Even easier, search the net to get brought up to date.


You have no idea what Trump was speaking about.

Good lord! Most of the planet knows what Trump said. We know it from Trump himself because TRUMP PUBLISHED WHAT HE SAID! Where have you been? In case that wasn't enough, there are 5 people from Trump's own administration who have testified that Trump was offering a bribe to the Ukraine president.

You insist that Biden didn't want the prosecutor fired to protect his son when his son WORKED FOR THE FIRM THE PROSECUTOR WAS GOING TO INVESTIGATE. : Damn thing doesn't have to be verbatim to mean the same thing:

Read my lips. Your claim was that the video SHOWED Biden doing what you say. Now, having shown to be a liar, you're walking it back to say it was INFERRED! Trump however IS shown saying what he said on twitters, videos and and his impromptu press conferences. What the hell is wrong with you guys? You can't possibly be that obtuse. Or maybe you can.


you want to throw Trump out based off of 3rd hand information

No, not 3rd hand. But from the sworn testimony of FIVE members of Trump's own administration. Get real.

Good lord! Most of the planet knows what Trump said. We know it from Trump himself because TRUMP PUBLISHED WHAT HE SAID! Where have you been? In case that wasn't enough, there are 5 people from Trump's own administration who have testified that Trump was offering a bribe to the Ukraine president.

Once again, your unspeakably poor reading skills have failed you. I would really hope that you would learn to do better. I did not say we didn't know what Trump said, but rather that we don't know what he speaking ABOUT. In other words, you and everyone else are reading between the lines, which is precisely what you are criticizing VAC for. As for those supposed five people who have testified he tried to bribe someone (and I'd like to know those names because I don't believe you), how many were actually there and heard those words spoken? I would venture a guess that the answer is zero.

Once again, your unspeakably poor reading skills have failed you. I would really hope that you would learn to do better. I did not say we didn't know what Trump said, but rather that we don't know what he speaking ABOUT. In other words, you and everyone else are reading between the lines, which is precisely what you are criticizing VAC for. As for those supposed five people who have testified he tried to bribe someone (and I'd like to know those names because I don't believe you), how many were actually there and heard those words spoken? I would venture a guess that the answer is zero.

You know? I don't think you have been told today, so on behalf of all those you continually put down, consider yourself told

Athos: Doesn't matter what Schiff does or doesn't do....doesn't matter what the Demos do or don't do: THE DOW CRESTED 28,000 ON FRIDAY: COME NOV., 2020, TRUMP WILL HAVE WON HIS 2ND TERM.

Athos: Doesn't matter what Schiff does or doesn't do....doesn't matter what the Demos do or don't do:

It matters what Trump does. He's getting more and more frantic as the truth about his offering a bribe to Pres Z to damage his political opponent becomes common knowledge.

If you're saying the DOW determines the election, you're wrong.

Come January 2020, I believe Trump will be on the road to prison as all those indictments catch up with him.

We patiently await those five names who have first hand knowledge that Trump was offering a bribe to the Ukraine president.

I will give you the FIRST name and that's Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, you can read the transcript of his opening statement here (https://static.politico.com/69/13/cdffb8a4420a8a4d8a65439570f2/vindman-statement-final.pdf) ahead of his public testimony this week. He heard the call first hand and acted accordingly.

Now do I need to point out the relevant first hand accounts and subsequent actions of Lt. Col. Vindman and why he took them? I await your reply after you read this account. It's pretty self apparent, and no need to fiddle around while others do your homework for you.

BENEDICT ARNOLD WAS THE GREATEST SOLDIER EVER IN OUR HISTORY AND HE WAS OUR GREATEST TRAITOR! SOB GAVE HIS LEG TO THE REVOLUTION! Vindman's metals mean nothing to support his honesty.

Like THE LITTLE RAT ON ACID, JAMES CARVILLE, SAID ABOUT BILL CLINTON: "NOBODY CARES ABOUT THIS IMPEACHMENT STUFF! ITS THE ECONOMY, STUPID!" Same goes here with Trump: ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID! People are as ideaologically driven as you think, Athos: PEOPLE ARE MONEY DRIVEN! All those old, unwashed hippies from the '60's, who were little Karl Marx Mini-Me's, grew up to LOVE MONEY....AND WALLSTREET! DOW @ 28,000 MEANS EVERYTHING!

In what insane world would you question Vindman's word, and believe a lying cheating dufus? Yeah the Dow at 28,000 means a lot to the half the country with a vested interest in it, but the rest of the country...not so much.

Talaniman: All I am saying is "Look before you leap!"....What makes Vinmans's word pure as the wind driven snow? He is a known Biden supporter, to boot, so he "COULD" be prejudiced (we don't know that he is, however)…….But, we should not just take anyone's word on anything.

Bill Clinton was a convicted LIAR IN CHIEF: CONVICTED! But many people hang onto all words he spews forth...they say his lying in that instance doesn't count.....This stuff is tricky: If YOUR HORSE LIES, it might be O.K. with you....if the other guy's horse lies, ITS HORRIBLE!

It does appear that LIES are becoming more accepted in the U.S.....this has been widely accepted in the rest of the world for some time....looks like the U.S. is catching up to the rest of the world....and catching up in a way that is A NEGATIVE, NOT A POSITIVE!

Like I said before: IF TRUMP CAN BE PROVEN TO LIE, THAT HE DID THE THINGS HE IS ACCUSED OF, WITHOUT A SHADOW OF A DOUBT, HIS ARSE SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE!

I agree and that's the point of this whole exercise, for the House to determine if there is a case to be made to the Senate. Frankly I read the Mueller Report, and saw his testimony and his case was made in my opinion, despite popular opinion that it was not, but we'll see.

You have to admit Muller caught a lot of the dufus campaign folks dirty. Possibly more to come.

This is the only really pertinent paragraph of his testimony.


I was concerned by the call. I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign
government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for
6
the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine. I realized that if Ukraine pursued an
investigation into the Bidens and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a
partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan
support it has thus far maintained. This would all undermine U.S. national security.
Following the call, I again reported my concerns to NSC’s lead counsel.

Now first of all, no one needs his testimony since the President has released the transcript of the phone call he refers to. Also note that there is not so much as a slight suggestion that a crime had been committed. No suggestion of bribery, extortion, or the famous "quid pro quo" was even hinted at.

So you still need five names.

You can pull up testimonies of ALL the witnesses so far just as I did, and critique them all you want, since that's what you intend to do any way. To your critique at hand though, Vindman saw something of credible concern and reported it as is his job, and he was a first hand witness. I will also submit that the released transcript of that call was suspicious (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-transcript-read-ukraine-president-phone-call-transcript-pdf-released-today-joe-biden-crowdstrike-2019-09-25/)since he did reference an action that could be construed as totally inappropriate without the formal process of going through the DOJ instead, which was the case with all the witnesses.

Of course you can ignore the implications of calling on a foreign nation to investigate an American, and a possible political opponent, and calling for an investigation that implicates the opposing party, and clears Russia of interference after EVERYBODY has pegged them as behind a cyber attack to aid the dufus, even after the conviction of Roger Stone by Mueller's team drawing a direct line to those same Russian hacks through wiki leaks.

Then we have Rudy and his boys and a case is forming there too, so while we haven't yet arrived at formal charges against the dufus, a case is certainly building after one week and three witnesses, which they all have agreed there is some highly irregular and suspicious behavior going on, and quite possibly criminal. That's the whole point of the inquiry. Of course you think you can judge the outcome before we arrive at a conclusion but I suggest you hold off until Williams, Sondland, Volker, and Morrison have testified this week.

No doubt there will be a lot more to follow, and we will see who runs out of excuses first.

It just comes down to this. So far as I can tell, no one has witnessed a crime. They have some gripes, and the gripes might be legit, but there is no direct evidence of a crime. As to the Ukes investigating HB, it should be investigated. It has the smell of a conflict of interest with his dad being the VP. That might very well turn out to be the real criminal conduct in this whole mess.

Just another futile debate, evidence of something but who knows what

So where is the formal complaint from DOJ to the Ukraine government requesting such an inquiry. For that matter where is the dufus's formal request to the congress notifying them of funds being with held from Ukraine? Can you nnot see that going around the processes in place is highly suspicious, for what appears to be to give the dufus talking points for his re election campaign. Why did he have to smear the ambassador while removing her from her post as all we have is Rudy's words and actions and letters from a retired congressman who took money from Rudy's henchmen?

Of course none of that gives repubs or you, pause that something may not be right about what the dufus is doing, or how he has done it. That's okay we are going to look at it, and rightfully so.


Just another futile debate, evidence of something but who knows what

Not a debate, but INQUIRY. Big difference. I will point out that the dufus isn't letting key first hand witnesses testify and it would seem they could clear this whole thing up with their testimony, or the dufus could testify himself as Clinton did.

That don't look good but if he were my client I wouldn't let him answer questions under oath either.

Don't you think there is just too much interference in the conduct of government? What is the point of electing a government if all you are going to do is bicker about it and with it?

Clete we have 3 equal branches of government. Each with defined powers they get to exercise. Obviously we do more than just bicker, as anybody else you can think of that influences the whole world the way we have?

For that matter where is the dufus's formal request to the congress notifying them of funds being with held from Ukraine? Can you nnot see that going around the processes in place is highly suspicious, for what appears to be to give the dufus talking points for his re election campaign. Why did he have to smear the ambassador while removing her from her post as all we have is Rudy's words and actions and letters from a retired congressman who took money from Rudy's henchmen?

You don't like it. I get that, but there is no evidence of a crime that would warrant removing a duly elected president. A year from now is the time for you to make your move if you can with Warren, Sanders, Biden, or whoever you come up with.


Clete we have 3 equal branches of government. Each with defined powers they get to exercise. Obviously we do more than just bicker, as anybody else you can think of that influences the whole world the way we have?

Once again we basically agree. This is getting a little scary.

Wonder why the founders even bothered putting impeachment into the constitution if we could just wait for the next election? You don't need evidence to investigate, just enough circumstances for probable cause and with 13 witnesses who work for the government I would say that bar has been established. We still have that Mueller Report nobody read, and his conviction rate stemming from it.

If HC can go into an election under cloud of investigation I suppose the dufus can too. I think there was plenty of probable cause to investigate the dufus before his latest antics that led to the current inquiry. LOL, it might even turn out the dufus's head will be the only one that rolls when it's all said and done.

Wonder why the founders even bothered putting impeachment into the constitution if we could just wait for the next election? You don't need evidence to investigate, just enough circumstances for probable cause and with 13 witnesses who work for the government I would say that bar has been established. We still have that Mueller Report nobody read, and his conviction rate stemming from it.

If HC can go into an election under cloud of investigation I suppose the dufus can too. I think there was plenty of probable cause to investigate the dufus before his latest antics that led to the current inquiry. LOL, it might even turn out the dufus's head will be the only one that rolls when it's all said and done.

Obviously, in those days, there were some profoundly corrupt people, as distinct from today, of course. But the founders were well aware of the human condition as no doubt malfeasance was as prevalent as it is now. This, of course, was obvious in the case of BC, HC and I wonder what Trump will produce

Wonder why the founders even bothered putting impeachment into the constitution if we could just wait for the next election?

Not because you simply don't like the guy, but for "high crimes and misdemeanors."


You don't need evidence to investigate, just enough circumstances for probable cause and with 13 witnesses who work for the government I would say that bar has been established. We still have that Mueller Report nobody read, and his conviction rate stemming from it.

You've got nothing. Nearly every ounce of supposed testimony that has been presented would never be allowed for two seconds in a court of law. "Hearsay" and "relevance" would be the two objections, and they would be upheld even with Obama appointed judges. And bear in mind that both Trump and the Uke pres say that there was no agreement between the two of them. Even worse for the dems, the military aid was delivered and no investigation took place. So aside from a bunch of disgruntled people, as the old commercial said, "Where's the beef?"

I asked for five names. I haven't even seen one who has testimony that has a direct bearing on these allegations.

LOL, it's a LAWFUL congressional inquiry, not a court of law for one thing, so hearsay being admissible or not is irrelevant at this stage, but not surprising you don't know that as repubs and you think it's okay for the dufus to ask a foreign government to investigate his political foes with a formal process that starts with a request by the DOJ, and not the dufus's private attorney. To date, Barr has not done so.

Wonder why? Or why Rudy holds so much sway over policy and personnel in the Ukraine and is he making money from it (Dumb question, of course he is!)?

so hearsay being admissible or not is irrelevant at this stage

Irrelevant only to those who are interested in political revenge rather than true justice. Same stupid thing that happened to Kavanaugh. I'm almost to the point of hoping it someday happens to all the liberal dems who stand by and applaud these unethical circuses.

WOW, I feel the same about you loony right wingers and you're support of a lying, cheating, bully who can do no wrong in your eyes. I think the real difference is can the dems make their case, or will they be as incompetent as repubs are. LOL, that's funny that you think we are unethical when you have a dufus you support.

What's even funnier is neither you or repubs can make an argument on the substance, but resort to partisan assumptions to deflect, distract, and dismiss facts you don't like. We may as well just go watch Australia burn.

Hamilton was the "author" of the IMPEACHMENT comments in the Federalist Papers.....Hamilton clearly stated that IMPEACHMENT has to be associated with "clear abuse of public trust".....What really made Hamilton "go mad" was trying to ensure that the IMPEACHMENT PROCESS was not abused or used as a means of the illegitimate upending an elected of a duly elected President. This is where it all gets kind of hairy because many say that the constitutional legitimacy to Impeach can easily be violated without much in the way of any cross-check of its legitimacy.

Witnesses (some first-hand) who testified that Trump offered release of military aid in return for Pres Z announcing the start of an investigation into Biden. Shortly thereafter, the whole scheme blew up with the whistleblower coming forward.

Taylor, Holmes, Williams, Vindman, Morrison, Sondland, and Trump himself by releasing the "transcript" of himself doing the bribery. These witnesses are all scheduled to be publicly questioned this coming week. Except Trump.

Others witnessing the bribe - 12 senior White House officials at the July 25 phone call. Several staffers overhearing Trump on the phone in Kiev talking to Sonderland. Second-hand witnesses: Kent, Cooper, Hill, Yovanovitch, Volker, a few others.

These are potential witnesses but have refused to testify. Pompeo, Giuliani, Mulvaney, Bolton, a few others.

Trump and the Republicans initially denied there was a quid pro quo (bribe).
Then the Republicans agreed there was a quid pro quo.
But they said it wasn't impeachable.

This is the same party that impeached Clinton for lying about his private sex life, yet find bribery (specifically listed in the Constitution as impeachable) not impeachable.

I wonder what bribery in the impeachment process truely meant, and I suspect it eluded to the President profiting from his office. here there is a reverse intrepretation suggesting that the President bribed the President of the Ukraine in a manner where that person did not personally benefit and it is yet to be shown that Trump derived a personal benefit as such benefit may or may not be realised in the future, so then the whole allegation is founded in B/S

Or you anounce investigations into Biden and Ukraine interference and I give you money! He got caught so Ukraine doesn't have to announce it via CNN, so yes his BS didn't work. Attempted bribery is a crime just as serious as actual bribery. So is attempted extortion given the dufus's tremendous leverage over a country that is at war with a super power.

In case you haven't noticed Clete the dufus loves his talking points that smear and degrade his opponents and having a foe under investigation by a foreign country is right up his alley as was Clintons emails. Doesn't take a genius to figure that out or that Biden is a favorite of repubs looking to vote against the dufus. Who else even has a chance with the independent conservative crowd be they disenchanted by his antics or HC haters.

Darn the law, it's illegal to encourage election help from a foreign source, and this fool got away with it once already so of course he will do it again, and his right wing noise machine is right there with him. Elected repubs are scared stiff to hold him accountable for anything, so he thinks he is above the law.

Just ask JL, or Vac7, you think they care the dufus breaks the law? Naw, they rather listen to his OBVIOUS and continuous LIES, and call dems sore losers, and go along with the lies and antics. Come on Clete, even with your biases you're smarter than that.

I could be wrong about that.

Here's the fly in the ointment in all of this: Biden's son was suspected of breaking the law: How do I know this? Because the UKRAINE (not the U.S. while Obama was in Office) was poised ready to investigate them. So Old Pappy Biden, as V.P. coerces the Ukraine, through Quid Pro Quo threats, to drop the investigation.....which kind of makes Biden look like the dirty rascal he is.....Fast forward, Trumps in Office and the Ukraine investigation is still stalled...whatever Biden's boy was up to is still a potential criminal act worthy of investigation, so Trump asks the Ukraine about the investigation: How is that stretched into a crime? If you follow this logic out to Nth degree, all a criminal has to do is commit a crime in a foreign country then declare himself a U.S. POTUS candidate and he automatically can't be pursued as a criminal because it could be misconstrued as "using a foreign government to assist in an election process": You can see why this all stinks to high heaven! A CRIMINAL SHOULD NOT GET AWAY WITH A CRIME JUST BECAUSE HE IS A POTUS CANDIDATE! And Trump should be in trouble for pursuing JUSTICE any where in the world or with anybody, regardless of who or what position they hold: JUSTICE SHOULD OBSERVE NO BARRIERS!

Taylor, Holmes, Williams, Vindman, Morrison, Sondland,

None of those had first hand knowledge of the offering of a bribe. I've already dispensed with Vindman by quoting his testimony. Sondland is the only one who is thought to have the potential of being able to say he has first hand knowledge of such a thing. Taylor? Taylor admitted that he spoke with Zelensky three times and there was no mention of withholding aid. Taylor was a great big zero in his testimony. Morrison and Williams haven't even publicly testified yet. They are scheduled for Tuesday. All that is known is from leaked information from the so-called "closed door" testimony of those two. The best either one can say is that they listened to the phone call, the transcript of which was released weeks ago. They likely have nothing more than the other so called "witnesses" the dems have called in.

Time will tell, but from what I am reading, Sondland is the only real hope the dems have. And bear in mind that both Zelensky and the Uke foreign minister say there was no connection between the aid and doing an investigation.


Darn the law, it's illegal to encourage election help from a foreign source, and this fool got away with it once already so of course he will do it again, and his right wing noise machine is right there with him. Elected repubs are scared stiff to hold him accountable for anything, so he thinks he is above the law.

You come up with something more that hearsay evidence that he broke a law and we can talk about it. Same pathetic situation as Kavanaugh. Someone said he did it, we don't like him, so he must surely be guilty. That's all you have for a second time.


Just ask JL, or Vac7, you think they care the dufus breaks the law? Naw, they rather listen to his OBVIOUS and continuous LIES, and call dems sore losers, and go along with the lies and antics. Come on Clete, even with your biases you're smarter than that.

Says the man who listened to Obama lie and thought nothing of it. If you want to make an appeal to morality, then better make sure you have a clear conscience yourself first.


This is the same party that impeached Clinton for lying about his private sex life, yet find bribery (specifically listed in the Constitution as impeachable) not impeachable.

He was not impeached for lying about his sex life. He was impeached for perjury before a federal grand jury and obstruction of justice. There is no direct evidence that Trump committed bribery. Which witness so far has alleged he/she heard Trump attempt to bribe someone? As I understand it, the only reason the dems switched tactics to extortion/bribery is because they ran focus groups that showed them the average person did not understand quid pro quo. Real ethical, that approach.

Sondland is a filthy turd, already a proven liar: He has already changed his version of events. Sondland cannot be trusted: He will do anything to save his own arse. Sondland has impugned himself.

Just more evidence of the swamp that D.C. has become.


The Rev. Al Sharpton raked in $1,046,948 from his own charity last year, according to National Action Network’s latest tax filings obtained by The Post.

Sharpton got a $324,000 salary — 32% higher than his 2017 pay — in addition to a $159,596 bonus and $563,352 in “other compensation.”

According to the dufus released memo what favors did he ask of Zelesnski?

What does quid pro quo literally mean?

Who put a hold on Ukrainian assistance, and how?

Simple questions with simple answers. You are allowed to use any resource you have. This is a simple test to determine whether you are a right wing loon, have simple intellectual skills to understand simple stuff, or just trying to sound smart by talking dumb stuff, or if you are just a parrot hoping to get a cracker.

You do understand what you have posted has no basis in facts, or even fits a loose logic other than right wing loony NOISE! The dufus has been invited to tell his side anytime he wants too, and it was reported he is strongly considering it.

Bonus question;

How did Clinton commit perjury?

According to the dufus released memo what favors did he ask of Zelesnski?

The text says, "The· President: I would like you to do us a favor though
because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a
lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with
this whole si�uation with Ukraine, they s_ay Crowdstrike... I guess
you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say
Ukraine has.it� There - are a lot. of things that went on, the·
:whole situation ..I think you 1 re _surrounding yourse·lf with some
of the same people. I .would like to have the Attorney General
call you or your people and I would like you t� ·get to the
bottom of it�. As you sa� yest�rday, that whole nonsetise ended
with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mue�le_r, an
incompetent performance -, _but they. say a lot of it started with
Ukraine. Whatever you can do, ·it's very important that· you. do it
if that's possible."

Oooohhh! Really sounds sinister!! Please do us a favor??


What does quid pro quo literally mean?

Literally it means "this for that".


Who put a hold on Ukrainian assistance, and how?

According to Politico, "The Trump administration is slow-walking $250 million in military assistance to Ukraine, annoying lawmakers and advocates who argue the funding is critical to keeping Russia at bay.

President Donald Trump asked his national security team to review the funding program, known as the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, in order to ensure the money is being used in the best interest of the United States, a senior administration official told POLITICO on Wednesday."


Simple questions with simple answers. You are allowed to use any resource you have. This is a simple test to determine whether you are a right wing loon, have simple intellectual skills to understand simple stuff, or just trying to sound smart by talking dumb stuff, or if you are just a parrot hoping to get a cracker.

Wow. What an angry man you have become. The name calling serves no purpose. I would hope you would be above that.


You do understand what you have posted has no basis in facts, or even fits a loose logic other than right wing loony NOISE! I absolutely challenge you to show any assertion I have made which has "no basis in facts." Go ahead and go for it. Let's see what you've got. All you did in your post above was engage in name calling and ask questions.

Bonus question;


How did Clinton commit perjury?

For your reading pleasure. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/gperjury092498.htm

Here's the fly in the ointment in all of this: Biden's son was suspected of breaking the law: How do I know this? Because the UKRAINE (not the U.S. while Obama was in Office) was poised ready to investigate them. So Old Pappy Biden, as V.P. coerces the Ukraine, through Quid Pro Quo threats, to drop the investigation.....which kind of makes Biden look like the dirty rascal he is.....Fast forward, Trumps in Office and the Ukraine investigation is still stalled...whatever Biden's boy was up to is still a potential criminal act worthy of investigation, so Trump asks the Ukraine about the investigation: How is that stretched into a crime? If you follow this logic out to Nth degree, all a criminal has to do is commit a crime in a foreign country then declare himself a U.S. POTUS candidate and he automatically can't be pursued as a criminal because it could be misconstrued as "using a foreign government to assist in an election process": You can see why this all stinks to high heaven! A CRIMINAL SHOULD NOT GET AWAY WITH A CRIME JUST BECAUSE HE IS A POTUS CANDIDATE! And Trump should be in trouble for pursuing JUSTICE any where in the world or with anybody, regardless of who or what position they hold: JUSTICE SHOULD OBSERVE NO BARRIERS!

Please supply links to what you claim. Only the dufus and his sycophants are calling for an investigation with no probable cause or claim of wrong doing. Now if you wanted to investigate everybody that served on the board that's a whole nuther tree to bark up, so links into this conspiracy theory would be great and be sure to take my quiz so I don't go jumping into the sh1t of an innocent person.

In the USA the rule of law has specific processes, policies, and procedures that should be adhered to and the dems say not only did the dufus break the law, but did so willfully with a criminal intent, and has a history of it going back decades.

Highlight the statement you want to double check. Right click and select "search bing". It'll find it for you.

You really think I'm going to go out of my way to help you find those links after this crappy statement you made? "You are allowed to use any resource you have. This is a simple test to determine whether you are a right wing loon, have simple intellectual skills to understand simple stuff, or just trying to sound smart by talking dumb stuff, or if you are just a parrot hoping to get a cracker."

Nah. You find it yourself. Let's see what kind of "simple intellectual skills" you have.


BTW, I did give you one link to the bonus question. Did you read it?

The text says, "The· President: I would like you to do us a favor though
because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a
lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with
this whole si�uation with Ukraine, they s_ay Crowdstrike... I guess
you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say
Ukraine has.it� There - are a lot. of things that went on, the·
:whole situation ..I think you 1 re _surrounding yourse·lf with some
of the same people. I .would like to have the Attorney General
call you or your people and I would like you t� ·get to the
bottom of it�. As you sa� yest�rday, that whole nonsetise ended
with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mue�le_r, an
incompetent performance -, _but they. say a lot of it started with
Ukraine. Whatever you can do, ·it's very important that· you. do it
if that's possible."

Oooohhh! Really sounds sinister!! Please do us a favor??

You forgot the rest of the his call JL, (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uyWKAGgHIqDEORgjOyo0uq7JOXzhxOQf/preview)



The ot�er thing,
There's a lot talk about Biden's son,. that Biden stopped the
prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so
whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.
Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if
you ·can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me.





Sounds pretty sinister to me since the ONLY investigations the dufus was concerned about was his political opposition and a right wing conspiracy theory started by Vlad to deflect attention away from HIS 2016 election meddling.


Literally it means "this for that".

Do me a favor and we release money. The peoples money duly authorized for Ukraine security. Under law this is bribery (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribery) or extortion, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion)


According to Politico, "The Trump administration is slow-walking $250 million in military assistance to Ukraine, annoying lawmakers and advocates who argue the funding is critical to keeping Russia at bay.

President Donald Trump asked his national security team to review the funding program, known as the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, in order to ensure the money is being used in the best interest of the United States, a senior administration official told POLITICO on Wednesday."

Yeah, his ONLY concerns were investigating the Bidens and Ukraine election interference and collusion with the dems. That's a pretty narrow review, and pretty specific and a quid pro quo, THIS for THAT. Or did we miss more favors he requested. The tell here is what he asked for, which by law is illegal, even as a "favor" , and what NSA team?


Wow. What an angry man you have become. The name calling serves no purpose. I would hope you would be above that.

That's not anger at all just amusement and mocking in my own inimitable style cause you and Vac talk crazy sometimes, so sorry if you took it personally and can you blame me for checking to see if you are a right wing loon? Most times you sound like one or do you accidently miss (Or just dismiss) obvious things like the rule of law. Further it's not name calling if it's TRUE. Obviously you dismiss that too, since I have to keep reminding you.


I absolutely challenge you to show any assertion I have made which has "no basis in facts." Go ahead and go for it. Let's see what you've got. All you did in your post above was engage in name calling and ask questions.


Asking a foreign power to investigate your political opponents is against the law. More so if you use bribery or extortion to do it.

Bonus question;

For your reading pleasure. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/gperjury092498.htm[/QUOTE]

Read that years ago, it was about adulterous behavior for sure, and while I'm here, Hearsay is not admissible in a criminal case except under certain conditions and since this is an INQUIRY those rules don't even apply. None of the witnesses has even testified to the legality or illegality YET, of the dufus actions except in the actual way he held up the funds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay_in_United_States_law


"Generally in common law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law) courts the "hearsay rule" applies, which says that a trier of fact (judge or jury) cannot be informed of a hearsay statement unless it meets certain strict requirements. However, the rules for admissibility are more relaxed in court systems based on the civil law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_law_(legal_system)) system. In the civil law system, the courts, whether consisting only of judges or featuring a jury (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury), have wide latitude to appreciate the evidence brought before them....Furthermore, even in common-law systems, the hearsay rule only applies to actual trials. Hearsay is admissible as evidence in many other judicial proceedings, such as grand jury (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_jury) deliberations, probation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probation) hearings,
parole (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parole) revocation hearings, and proceedings before administrative bodies."


When you don't have a clue then anybody can lie right to your face! Present company excepted. You can quote scripture but concepts like the law escape you and ignorance of the LAW is no excuse. Ever hear that before?

Do me a favor and we release money.

Might have some meaning IF Trump had said that. You have no case, so you have to make things up.


That's not anger at all just amusement and mocking in my own inimitable style cause you and Vac talk crazy sometimes, so sorry if you took it personally and can you blame me for checking to see if you are a right wing loon? Most times you sound like one or do you accidently miss (Or just dismiss) obvious things like the rule of law. Further it's not name calling if it's TRUE. Obviously you dismiss that too, since I have to keep reminding you.

I'm going to challenge you again. Find the places where I have misstated facts.


There's a lot talk about Biden's son,. that Biden stopped the
prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so
whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.
Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if
you ·can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me.

Sounds reasonable to me. So where is that part where Trump says, "I won't release the money if you don't investigate"? Do you see that part? I don't see it. Do you see it ANYWHERE??? And why wouldn't the Ukes investigate Biden's son? Had the smell of corruption all over it.

You are conveniently forgetting to note that both the Uke pres and foreign minister have stated they were not pressured to investigate anything. The money went through and no investigation has taken place. What is it about that which you find so hard to comprehend?

I have no idea why you posted all the garbage at the bottom. The rules of civil cases don't apply here. This is the government alleging Trump committed a crime. Hearsay is not admissible in a criminal trial because (duh!) it proves nothing. That's what's so funny about your post. Your paragraph at the bottom supports the idea that hearsay is not allowed in a criminal trial!! Your own source shoots you down. And you think I don't know the law??? Good luck, my friend. Now yes, this is a hearing, but if you want to be able to impeach a pres, you will have to have direct evidence. "I heard my friend say that his mother heard her boyfriend say that Trump was a crook!" just won't do.

It was innapropriate that the dufus framed his call around "we have done so much for Ukraine" and it hasn't been reciprocated and ask a favor of a country at war with HIS well known buddy Vlad that is of interest to himself, AND Vlad, an obvious inference, or implied threat as was his REVIEW of corruption in the Ukraine, which sounds reasonable to his sycophants, I mean what would you expect the guy to say? How would he look to his people to admit such a thing, a newly elected president of the most corrupted (BY VLAD!) nation on Earth? It's called a rock and a hard place and you cannot comprehend THAT? Come on guy.

The government has alleged nothing, but it is in their constitutional power of OVERSIGHT to INVESTIGATE this situation, which is why it's called an INQUIRY. Maybe you confuse a CRIMINAL trial with an INQUIRY, or fail to note the distinct difference, which I provided to you. Whether articles of impeachment are actually filed is another matter. Now you can play it dumb as to my hearsay references but again the law is the law and doesn't matter what you can or cannot comprehend. That's why you should read the transcripts and note the framing of questions and the language of the replies, and the latest testimony by Morrison that you have already dismissed. (https://thehill.com/homenews/house/470793-read-top-nsc-aide-tim-morrisons-closed-door-impeachment-inquiry-testimony)

Page 15 line 9, through page 17 inclusive. (Site would not allow C&P)

I doubt you read the whole thing but as others have testified they all were aware of the irregular process as opposed to the regular process of Ukrainian policy and warned to stay away from it and that involved Sondland and often Giuliani at the behext of the dufus directly. Wait until you get a load of Mulvaney's emails, but you aren't much on homework, reading, or any kind of research that's not quoted in scripture.

I am well aware of the process and evidence it takes to dump the dufus or send him to jail like the rest of his flunkies.

Trump asked for an a review of why the investigation into Biden's son was halted: NOT OLD BIDEN, BIDEN'S SON! Technically, Trump didn't ask about OLD BIDEN! So, no illegal act.

With all the money that the U.S. has pissed down the toilet in the last almost 20 years (Afghanistan, Iraq, & Syria, as well as multiple other little slices of heaven), I am glad someone IS QUESTIONING AND LOOKING AT HOW U.S. TAX DOLLARS ARE SPENT OR, BETTER PUT, GIVEN AWAY! We are Congresses' boss and they have proven to be frivolous with OUR MONEY! About time someone said "Let's reevaluate this spending!"

The government has alleged nothing,

The House is not a part of the government??? Well why didn't you say so before now? That clears up everything.

Many words, but no evidence of a crime. This is just a witch hunt for a bunch of bitter democrats. Nothing more.

You're a card but you no longer can make excuses for not reading, researching or doing your own homework. In otherwords YOU FLUNKED!

Make up test! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Budget_and_Impoundment_Control_Act_o f_1974)



Title X of the Act, also known as the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, specifies that the President may request that Congress rescind appropriated funds. If both the Senate and the House of Representatives (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives) have not approved a rescission proposal (by passing legislation) within 45 days of continuous session, any funds being withheld must be made available for obligation. Congress is not required to vote on the request, and has ignored most Presidential requests.[4] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Budget_and_Impoundment_Control_Act_o f_1974#cite_note-4) In response, some[who? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch#Unsupported_attributions)] have called for a line item veto (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_item_veto) to strengthen the rescission power and force Congress to vote on the disputed funds.The Act was passed in response to feelings in Congress that President Nixon was abusing his power of impoundment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impoundment_of_appropriated_funds) by withholding funding of programs he opposed. The Act, especially after Train v. City of New York (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Train_v._City_of_New_York) (1975), effectively removed the presidential power of impoundment.[5] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Budget_and_Impoundment_Control_Act_o f_1974#cite_note-5)

Vac, sorry guy, but your on probation slick!

Talaniman: We have wasted TOO MUCH of our precious TAXPAYER monies on bottomless pits of nations......these were monies better spent here, at home, to provide for the needy of the U.S. Whatever can be done to prevent Congress from just straight-out burning U.S. Taxpayer monies is a good thing: In this case, it appears the UNLIKELY and RELUCTANT HERO OF TAXPAYER MONEY IS PRESIDENT TRUMP: He may take a bullet for all of us because he may be IMPEACHED protecting our TAXPAYER MONIES from a Congress that want to give it away like a drunken sailor on Norfolk's Granby St. If Trump is willing to heroically STAND IN THE GAP TO PROTECT THE FUTURE MONETARY WEALTH OF U.S. CITIZENS, he would have performed far above and beyond that any of us thought he was capable of when he was elected.

Congress needs its wings clipped: For far too long, Congress has tried to usurp the power of the Presidency: Don't you think its time we give the POTUS his power back?

Talaniman: We have wasted TOO MUCH of our precious TAXPAYER monies on bottomless pits of nations......these were monies better spent here, at home, to provide for the needy of the U.S. Whatever can be done to prevent Congress from just straight-out burning U.S. Taxpayer monies is a good thing: In this case, it appears the UNLIKELY and RELUCTANT HERO OF TAXPAYER MONEY IS PRESIDENT TRUMP: He may take a bullet for all of us because he may be IMPEACHED protecting our TAXPAYER MONIES from a Congress that want to give it away like a drunken sailor on Norfolk's Granby St. If Trump is willing to heroically STAND IN THE GAP TO PROTECT THE FUTURE MONETARY WEALTH OF U.S. CITIZENS, he would have performed far above and beyond that any of us thought he was capable of when he was elected.

Congress needs its wings clipped: For far too long, Congress has tried to usurp the power of the Presidency: Don't you think its time we give the POTUS his power back?

Ok Vac, so america first, this is what you want? I can agree with you, each nation should put its own interests first, but you know, I thought that was what america is doing with its War on Drugs, War on Terror, Trade War with China, beggar my neighbour foriegn policies, beggar my neighbour free trade agrements, and still you complain that america isn't putting its interests first, there is just no feeding that avericous maw

Heck no dump the dufus and lock him up like his cronies have been! Are you kidding? This is the dude who scammed consumers and donors alike with his charities and schools, and before then fudged the books and bilked the government on rent subsidies and currently is still an unindicted co conspirator with his other fixer lawyer Cohen.

You continue to try and make a snake into a hero don't you? This is the guy who wanted the next G7 at his Doral Golf course! Come on man!

Or are you just pulling our leg with that wacky humor of yours? Hard to tell sometimes.

Ok Vac, so america first, this is what you want? I can agree with you, each nation should put its own interests first, but you know, I thought that was what america is doing with its War on Drugs, War on Terror, Trade War with China, beggar my neighbour foriegn policies, beggar my neighbour free trade agrements, and still you complain that america isn't putting its interests first, there is just no feeding that avericous maw

What you say we compare foreign aid by the U.S. versus foreign aid for Aussie Land. About 50 bil for us compared to about 4 bil for you. And you want to point fingers?

Talaniman: You don't think people can change? It is very possible that Trump has "A HIGHER LOYALTY", one that we never imagined......Isn't history full of individuals that have demonstrated these qualities? I am forever an optimist.

It is very possible that Trump has "A HIGHER LOYALTY", one that we never imagined..

LOLOLOLOL.This has got to be the funniest, wackiest thing I've ever seen on the internet. Satan is really Jesus in disguise.

Yeah I see that, but guy shouldn't we just wait on that change, maybe hold our breathes for him to show your optimism is justified? I know the dude sucks all the oxygen out of a room, and is always doing and saying dumb stuff, and frankly I think he's nuts and needs somewhere else to be while we wait for that change you hope for. I mean if you're going to sling this much crap be nice if you flush twice every now and them.

Athos: Thought that you would like that!-:)

Talaniman: NO MERCY FLUSHES!!!

This whole thing really does stink to high heaven, though.

What you say we compare foreign aid by the U.S. versus foreign aid for Aussie Land. About 50 bil for us compared to about 4 bil for you. And you want to point fingers?

When you consider the size of your budget, 50 Billion is small change and it is tied aid so the only economy you help is your own, and your economy is 100 times the size of ours so on that scale your efforts are paltry

When you consider the size of your budget, 50 Billion is small change and it is tied aid so the only economy you help is your own, and your economy is 100 times the size of ours so on that scale your efforts are paltry

If 50 bil is "paltry", then what is 4 bil? Minuscule? We are trying to defend much of the world. You only worry about yourself in that respect, and still we "outaid" you almost 13-1. You might want to find something else to complain about.

Still waiting for those five names of people who had first hand knowledge of a crime. Tal tried to give one but that was a complete dud. For that matter, let's just shoot for two.

Why wait? You have the same list I have of the witnesses, and the same access to transcript of their testimony, or hearings, as I have, so why wait for me to do your own reading, research, and draw your own conclusions and opinions. I referenced yesterday the parts of a transcripts I thought were pertainant to my opinion, so it's your turn.

Sorry you think criminals admit their crimes in straight forward perfect speech as that is a mistake and admittedly premature at this stage of taking testimony and gathering facts for which evidence can be assembled. Now being the learned and read person I am I can already take the words actions and antics of the dufus and his cronies and form the opinion the dufus was running a side deal with Ukraine with Giuliani and some Ukrainians and Americans to solicit a bribe and or extort Zelensky to publicly announce an investigation into his chief political rival as a smear campaign, since there has never been any EVIDENCE of wrong doing by either Biden, as well as investigate the right wing lunatic suggestion that Ukraine and not Russia waged a cyber war during the 2016 elections to benefit the dufus. We know from the Stone trial that Stone was in touch with wiki leaks and kept the dufus informed of coming dumps of DNC hacked emails by Russia, contrary to public statement made by the dufus, and AG Barr.

So my opinion so far is the dufus is a liar and cheater, and guilty of underhanded shady dealings that may be criminal. Now you can figure out your own conclusions and opinions, but I believe even a novice attorney could bring charges and prove my opinion just based on the known facts so far, and feel even more will be revealed later..

Now, however you see it is entirely up to you.

Why wait? You have the same list I have of the witnesses, and the same access to transcript of their testimony, or hearings, as I have, so why wait for me to do your own reading, research, and draw your own conclusions and opinions. I referenced yesterday the parts of a transcripts I thought were pertainant to my opinion, so it's your turn.

Athos claimed there were five. I just want to know who they are. Vindman, Taylor and Yovanavitch aren't one of them, so I would just love to know who you guys think they are.

As to the rest of your post, there were many words and many opinions (of yours) but, again, no evidence. This bitter witch hunt needs to stop unless there is something substantial we have not heard. All we have is witnesses who did not witness anything. As someone said recently, "It was a herd of heards."

There will never be enough evidence to change your mind about the lying cheating dufus. The good news is the dufus and his ilk will get what they deserves for their lying cheating and loud mouth bullying.

There will never be enough evidence to change your mind about the lying cheating dufus.

Amazing. You have nothing, but it's all my fault. What a joke.

Athos claimed there were five. I just want to know who they are.

I estimate between 15 and 20. Knock yourself out.


Witnesses (some first-hand) who testified that Trump offered release of military aid in return for Pres Z announcing the start of an investigation into Biden. Shortly thereafter, the whole scheme blew up with the whistleblower coming forward.

Taylor, Holmes, Williams, Vindman, Morrison, Sondland, and Trump himself by releasing the "transcript" of himself doing the bribery. These witnesses are all scheduled to be publicly questioned this coming week. Except Trump.

Others witnessing the bribe - 12 senior White House officials at the July 25 phone call. Several staffers overhearing Trump on the phone in Kiev talking to Sonderland. Second-hand witnesses: Kent, Cooper, Hill, Yovanovitch, Volker, a few others.

These are potential witnesses but have refused to testify. Pompeo, Giuliani, Mulvaney, Bolton, a few others.

Trump and the Republicans initially denied there was a quid pro quo (bribe).
Then the Republicans agreed there was a quid pro quo.
But they said it wasn't impeachable.

This is the same party that impeached Clinton for lying about his private sex life, yet find bribery (specifically listed in the Constitution as impeachable) not impeachable.

He was not impeached for lying about his sex life. He was impeached for perjury

Yeah, for lying about his private sex life.


and obstruction of justice.

Yeah, for lying about his private sex life.

Yeah, for lying about his private sex life.


I didn't realize the law said you could lie to a federal grand jury as long as it was about your "private sex life", meaning of course an affair you were having in the WH with a 22 year old intern. Thanks for clearing that up.

So could you also lie about your "private bank accounts" or your "private business dealings"?


I estimate between 15 and 20. Knock yourself out.

I guess that is what now passes for 5 names. As to the bribe, the problem of course is that there was no bribe. Kind of inconvenient, but true nonetheless.

I didn't realize the law said you could lie to a federal grand jury as long as it was about your "private sex life",

It doesn't say that but a lie re someone's sex life is about as trivial as you can get. Lies are common in courts and and are rarely punished.


meaning of course an affair you were having in the WH with a 22 year old intern. Thanks for clearing that up.

This is news to you?


So could you also lie about your "private bank accounts" or your "private business dealings"?

Of course not. That's a dumb question.


I guess that is what now passes for 5 names.

No, it's 10 to 15 more. Maybe you ARE that dumb!


As to the bribe, the problem of course is that there was no bribe. Kind of inconvenient, but true nonetheless.

Ok, you've convinced me. You're dumb as a rock. Of course, there was a bribe. The Republicans and you are the only ones who think that. The Republicans have an excuse - they're terrified of Trump. What's your excuse?

It doesn't say that.

Exactly, which makes me wonder why you ever made such a ridiculous assertion.



I guess that is what now passes for 5 names.
No, it's 10 to 15 more. Maybe you ARE that dumb!

OK. Let's see. What is it about the word "name" that you don't understand? You know, "name" kind of like, "My name is Athos and I evidently don't know what the word 'name' means." So until you give names, which you plainly don't have, then don't try to pretend you are answering the question.

Getting straight answers out of you is like pulling teeth, and when you don't have any, then you start calling names which is pretty pathetic.

Amazing. You have nothing, but it's all my fault. What a joke.

I placed no fault. Just made a statement of fact. If you have the dufus in his own words saying he needs an investigation of the Biden's and the 2016 elections, 8 people heard him say it. Do you dispute those facts?

The dufus ordered the hold on assistance to Ukraine, or do you dispute that fact too?

Sondland and Rudy told the Ukrainians they would get no money or meeting without a public announcement of those investigation. You don't dispute those facts either do you?

Sounds pretty straight forward to me, but if the mule don't want to move what can you do?

I know, we can get the dufus in front of a grand jury and see what lies he tells. He and his minions have certainly been invited but so far nada.

NO LIE IN COURT IS SMALL. In fact, you are "SWORN" to "tell the truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God".

If you will lie about one thing, even small things, you will most assuredly will lie about larger things.

If you lie about ANYTHING, you are a liar.

Bill Clinton is a CONVICTED LIAR.

If Bill Clinton lied about his "personal sex life", GOD ONLY KNOWS WHAT OTHER LIES HE TOLD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE during his tenure as POTUS: Truly a dark time period in the nations history.

Hmm, the dufus lies everyday about everything, big small fat or tall. I guess it's a dark time in America AGAIN.

I placed no fault. Just made a statement of fact. If you have the dufus in his own words saying he needs an investigation of the Biden's and the 2016 elections, 8 people heard him say it. Do you dispute those facts?

The dufus ordered the hold on assistance to Ukraine, or do you dispute that fact too?

No. That is accurate and not in dispute. In fact, the pres released the transcript of the call, so there is no doubt about it. He also went to the LSU/Alabama football game. In both cases, he is not guilty of a crime. There is one distinction. I don't think he said "he needed it". He asked for it as a favor. But you can provide the quote if that is wrong.


Sondland and Rudy told the Ukrainians they would get no money or meeting without a public announcement of those investigation. You don't dispute those facts either do you?

I know that Sondland said he did. If you want to prosecute Sondland, then go for it. As for RG, you have only the word of Sondland on that.

Both the Uke prime minister and the foreign minister say there was no linkage. And if fact, the money was delivered and the investigation never took place. You don't dispute those facts do you?


Hmm, the dufus lies everyday about everything, big small fat or tall. I guess it's a dark time in America AGAIN.

Maybe he learned from Obama? Well, at least he didn't lie about the deaths of four Americans so he could win an election.

I guess the answer to my question is stupidity, 500 homes later, and the fight rages on and no one is interested, they have decided that all this enhances the rediculous climate change debate, as if catastrophic fire events have not happened in the past. Today is another catastrophic fire rating day somewhere in the country. I lay blame for climate change where it belongs, Sol and our wobble in our orbit

I guess the answer to my question is stupidity, 500 homes later, and the fight rages on and no one is interested, they have decided that all this enhances the rediculous climate change debate, as if catastrophic fire events have not happened in the past. Today is another catastrophic fire rating day somewhere in the country. I lay blame for climate change where it belongs, Sol and our wobble in our orbit

You could very well be correct about GW. For certain the fires in California are, at least in part, due to poor management.

Apparently you haven't been doing your homework, specifically about the fly in the ointment Giuliani. I sort of gave you a heads up about him before but you dismissed that so we wait until him and his nefarious old arse has been exposed more. A simple follow the money approach is all you need and seeing how and who pays the dude.

Everybody whose testified has mentioned him being in the shadow screwing stuff up with BS, and some are admitting to living with it like Volcker who has amended his statement to distance himself from his previous position. None as yet has any stomach for what Rudy and the prez are pushing though and that's investigating the Biden's so making such crap the exclusive idea of Rudy and the dufus with Sondland as the butt boy messenger.

You still got more excuses for bad behavior by the dufus?

Apparently you haven't been doing your homework, specifically about the fly in the ointment Giuliani. I sort of gave you a heads up about him before but you dismissed that so we wait until him and his nefarious old arse has been exposed more. A simple follow the money approach is all you need and seeing how and who pays the dude.

Everybody whose testified has mentioned him being in the shadow screwing stuff up with BS, and some are admitting to living with it like Volcker who has amended his statement to distance himself from his previous position. None as yet has any stomach for what Rudy and the prez are pushing though and that's investigating the Biden's so making such crap the exclusive idea of Rudy and the dufus with Sondland as the butt boy messenger.

I just don't know how to help you. You took the same awful approach with Kavanaugh. You don't seem to be able to understand that you have to actually have reliable evidence before you can convict someone. You don't have it.


You still got more excuses for bad behavior by the dufus?

I have made no excuses for his bad behavior, just like I make no excuses for your deplorable behavior of wanting to impeach a pres simply because you don't like him.

If you will lie about one thing, even small things, you will most assuredly will lie about larger things.

If you lie about ANYTHING, you are a liar.

Does that go for you, V7? You know, that lie you told about there being a video of Biden's son - the one "everybody saw and heard"? So you're admitting to being a liar.


GOD ONLY KNOWS WHAT OTHER LIES HE TOLD

What other lies have YOU told, V7?

I just don't know how to help you

Tal hardly needs help from the likes of you.


You don't seem to be able to understand that you have to actually have reliable evidence before you can convict someone.

Does the testimony of all the witnesses mean nothing to you? These are professionals at the top of their field. They have Top Secret clearances, long years serving their country, and proven patriotism. Yet, you give them no credence.


I make no excuses for your deplorable behavior of wanting to impeach a pres simply because you don't like him.

You deny loving Trump yet you support him every chance you get. Hypocrisy, anyone?

Names. People who have names is what we need. Not numbers, but names. Plainly, you don't have the faintest idea of who those five people are you were so sure of a couple of days ago. It's funny how when you get cornered, you get nasty.

Who has first hand evidence of criminal activity? Names, please.

Athos: Were you a Bulldog in a former life? Or a mule with blinders on? I say this because you still doggedly and stubbornly continue to contend that I lied: I did not......Here's where this goes: You said: "You know, that lie you told about there being a video of Biden's son - the one "everybody saw and heard"? I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT "A VIDEO OF BIDEN'S SON", go back and look at what I said! NOW WHO IS THE LIAR, ATHOS? YOU SLIPPED UP TRYING TO CALL ME A LIAR AND NOW YOU HAVE TOLD A BOLD-FACED LIE....AND I CAUGHT YOU! TWO CAN PLAY AT TRYING TO BE A LAWYER!

WHAT SAY YOU, LIAR?

You said: "You know, that lie you told about there being a video of Biden's son - the one "everybody saw and heard"?

Calm down, V7, don't get your panties in a bunch. Here's what you said - (quote) I did see a video of Joe Biden bragging about getting the Ukrainians to end their investigation of his son Hunter....that we did hear and see (close quote) Not exactly a perfect quote, but close enough - same idea. Ok?


NOW WHO IS THE LIAR, ATHOS? YOU SLIPPED UP TRYING TO CALL ME A LIAR AND NOW YOU HAVE TOLD A BOLD-FACED LIE.

A badly quoted thing YOU wrote is not a lie. That's one of the simpler things in life to contend with, but, in your heated need to "get me", you have gone overboard with your bolding and caps to make sure I get your outrage. What you HAVE convinced me of, V7, is your pathos.


...AND I CAUGHT YOU! WHAT SAY YOU, LIAR?

Not even a nice try. I know you're desperately trying to win one, V7, but you gotta do better. To get practice on actual lies,. go back and read your own posts - many of them are outright lies from your favorite sources - Russian Television and OAN.

Here's a starter for you - I did see a video of Joe Biden bragging about getting the Ukrainians to end their investigation of his son Hunter....that we did hear and see. That's how to use formatting.

Calm down, V7, don't get your panties in a bunch.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black, you're one of the chief "panties in a bunch" persons on this board. I'm sure we could all start taking a deep breath from time to time, but, for instance, this was a response from you about the video.

"ARE YOU SERIOUS? This video clearly states that "there is NO evidence that Biden stated the prosecutor was investigating his son". NONE! Nada!

In fact, it is stated TWICE! What's wrong with you two? Can't you hear? See?

It's one thing to believe something. It's quite another to offer proof of something that absolutely proves the OPPOSITE! This is typical right-wing BS, offering false statements as true."

Or try this one from just above. "Does that go for you, V7? You know, that lie you told about there being a video of Biden's son - the one "everybody saw and heard"? So you're admitting to being a liar.

What other lies have YOU told, V7?"


Here's what you said - (quote) I did see a video of Joe Biden bragging about getting the Ukrainians to end their investigation of his son Hunter....that we did hear and see (close quote) Not exactly a perfect quote, but close enough - same idea. Ok?

It can't be a quote but then be "not exactly a perfect quote, but close enough."

Sorry Vac, but this is the actual quote. It's from another thread. "Athos: There is a YouTube video of Biden bragging about stopping the investigation of his son." Or at least I guess this is what you two are talking about.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=846823&page=4&p=3844292#post3844292

What a load of crap over NOTHING as even repub witness Kurt Volcker testified the investigations the dufus wanted had no merits and the Joe Biden was not corrupt.


I just don't know how to help you. You took the same awful approach with Kavanaugh. You don't seem to be able to understand that you have to actually have reliable evidence before you can convict someone. You don't have it.

I don't need your help and how easy it is to just read and quote the testimony witnesses to what they actually saw, and heard. The difference between repub investigations of Kavanaugh, and the dem investigations of the dufus is yours was a SHAM and ours is NOT!


I have made no excuses for his bad behavior, just like I make no excuses for your deplorable behavior of wanting to impeach a pres simply because you don't like him.

That's at best inaccurate, as the dufus should be impeached by his lying words, and CRIMINAL actions. The evidence is being gathered and that burns your right wing loony butt doesn't it?


I guess the answer to my question is stupidity, 500 homes later, and the fight rages on and no one is interested, they have decided that all this enhances the rediculous climate change debate, as if catastrophic fire events have not happened in the past. Today is another catastrophic fire rating day somewhere in the country. I lay blame for climate change where it belongs, Sol and our wobble in our orbit

I can't just blame humans for being unable to cope with the destruction Mother Nature causes us. Don't you guys have insurance for this kind of thing, and gym shoes to run when you smell smoke?

I can't just blame humans for being unable to cope with the destruction Mother Nature causes us. Don't you guys have insurance for this kind of thing, and gym shoes to run when you smell smoke?

Tal where are you going to run too, insurance doesn't protect life and if your home goes how long is it going to take you to get another one. You just join the queue. All day today I could smell smoke and there was a bad smoke haze, now I don't know of any fire near me, so wind is just blowing it in, but as an old fire fighter, my attention was up. Nearest fire might have been 100 km or 10 Km, no way of knowing. So tonight South Australia is burning, tomorrow it will be our turn again as temperatures soar and the wind rises. All the evac warnings are for places far away

What a load of crap over NOTHING as even repub witness Kurt Volcker testified the investigations the dufus wanted had no merits and the Joe Biden was not corrupt.

That's funny. There was never an investigation, so how could Volcker have known that Biden was not corrupt? The best he would be able to say was that he was not aware of any corruption. I don't know if there was any corruption or not, but having a completely unqualified (other than his last name) HB, who had recently been kicked out of the navy for cocaine use and was hired, by his own testimony, solely because of his last name, on that board of directors has certainly the appearance of corruption.

BTW, Volcker's testimony was a negative for the dem's circus.


That's at best inaccurate, as the dufus should be impeached by his lying words, and CRIMINAL actions. The evidence is being gathered and that burns your right wing loony butt doesn't it?

Good luck with that "evidence". Volcker, Williams, Morrison, and Vindman all testified yesterday that there was no bribery. Oh well. If this circus makes it to the Senate, then it will be a different show. Hearsay is not allowed in that setting, so who do you think will testify? At least it will be a short hearing. Very short.

Let's try it one more time. "Both the Uke prime minister and the foreign minister say there was no linkage. And in fact, the money was delivered and the investigation never took place. You don't dispute those facts do you?"

Man you guys sure don't like to answer questions.

We don't know if OLD Biden is corrupt or not.....we haven't proven he is innocent of a crime, yet named......I mean, we are at a different juncture of what constitutes JUSTICE in the U.S.: We take a person and TRY to fit a crime to the person....forget about "innocent until proven guilty".....The whole IMPEACHMENT proceeding is beginning to take on the appearance of an old SOVIET SHOW TRIALS from the 1930s, where a the weight of proof of innocence was far heavier than the weight of proof of guilt: Remember the BALANCE OF JUSTICE we are supposed to go by? What happened to that?

If I hear another SOB trying or even attempting to equate what these IMPEACHMENT proceeding are with anything even remotely associated with JUSTICE, I think I will have to tell them to go to hell: There is nothing but nothing in these Impeachment proceedings that is for the benefit or the welfare of the United States Of America or even for the preservation of the RIGHTS of the accused related to due process....the PERSECUTORS (because that is what they are) have been permitted to go from one named accusation to naming the accusation something else.....This whole thing is about overturning the election of a duly elected POTUS and about delegitimizing the 2016 Election.

It is the dem's effort to sway public opinion prior to 2020.

Tal where are you going to run too, insurance doesn't protect life and if your home goes how long is it going to take you to get another one. You just join the queue. All day today I could smell smoke and there was a bad smoke haze, now I don't know of any fire near me, so wind is just blowing it in, but as an old fire fighter, my attention was up. Nearest fire might have been 100 km or 10 Km, no way of knowing. So tonight South Australia is burning, tomorrow it will be our turn again as temperatures soar and the wind rises. All the evac warnings are for places far away

You know how it goes Clete, you have to have a plan for disaster, Both an A and B.


That's funny. There was never an investigation, so how could Volcker have known that Biden was not corrupt? The best he would be able to say was that he was not aware of any corruption. I don't know if there was any corruption or not, but having a completely unqualified (other than his last name) HB, who had recently been kicked out of the navy for cocaine use and was hired, by his own testimony, solely because of his last name, on that board of directors has certainly the appearance of corruption.

There was an investigation and the rats ran (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-whistleblower-ukraine-buris-idUSKBN1WC1LV) after 2012. You want another investigation because of a guys name and blood line? (https://www.conservapedia.com/Burisma_Holdings)


"Morgan Williams, director of the US-Ukraine Business Council, discerned a conflict, though he had seen no direct evidence of one. He argued it was a problem of appearance, as there was an "unspoken" American tradition that "frowns" on "close family members of government working for organizations with business links to active politics."



BTW, Volcker's testimony was a negative for the dem's circus.

You can explain that any time if you watched it and not just read about it. Makes for a great discussion.


Good luck with that "evidence". Volcker, Williams, Morrison, and Vindman all testified yesterday that there was no bribery. Oh well. If this circus makes it to the Senate, then it will be a different show. Hearsay is not allowed in that setting, so who do you think will testify? At least it will be a short hearing. Very short.

I'd rather wait for charges by a lawyer if you don't mind as they all testified to the inappropriateness of the call that raised alarms enough to consult with counsel.


Let's try it one more time. "Both the Uke prime minister and the foreign minister say there was no linkage. And in fact, the money was delivered and the investigation never took place. You don't dispute those facts do you?"

My versions says a failed attempt at bribery and extortion is still a crime, and I believe I will be found correct in that assessment.


Man you guys sure don't like to answer questions.

Says the guy who doesn't do his own homework, but criticizes mine.

You know how it goes Clete, you have to have a plan for disaster, Both an A and B.


My plan A was to move out of a bush fire prone area, this I did 25 years ago, Plan B was to live in a incombustable house, also 25 years ago, so now I can feel sorry for those who have to fight the fires. What I know is if it floods at my place, we are all in a lot of trouble, However, I can't do anything about smoke which might blow in from 1,000 km away and only AC deals with the heat

Do you understand that we have fires here with a 1,000 km perimeter, and maybe even bigger, we are not talking about one state burning but all of them. Some of these fires were lit by children and idiots, so we are not dealing with nature but as I said in the beginning, stupidity

But all of this pales in comparison with the stupidity of Trump who lights fires under his opponents every day and gets burned doing it

You can explain that any time if you watched it and not just read about it. Makes for a great discussion.

Volcker had zero evidence of bribery or a quid pro quo.



I'd rather wait for charges by a lawyer if you don't mind as they all testified to the inappropriateness of the call that raised alarms enough to consult with counsel.

So you want to charge him with "inappropriate calls"? Good luck with that one.


Let's try it one more time. "Both the Uke prime minister and the foreign minister say there was no linkage. And in fact, the money was delivered and the investigation never took place. You don't dispute those facts do you?"
My versions says a failed attempt at bribery and extortion is still a crime, and I believe I will be found correct in that assessment.

Congrats on not answering the question and verifying what I said below.


Man you guys sure don't like to answer questions.
Says the guy who doesn't do his own homework, but criticizes mine.

You find a place where I haven't done my homework and we'll talk about it. Otherwise your accusation is no more credible than the dems in Congress.

Saw the exchange today between the turd Gordon Sondland and the other turd, Little Adam "Boy Scout" Adam Schiff: Little Adam tried like hell to get Gordon Sondland to say that Trump told him to pressure Ukraine but Sondland didn't read the Democrat script! It was hilarious to see!!! Little Adam, bug-eyed as ever, was just hemming and hawing like made: I thought he was constipated and trying to dislodge a rather enormous log!

These IMPEACHMENT inquiries are good comic relief....especially when the ones who are supposed to be the "Smart Guys" keep stepping in the dog pile.,

These IMPEACHMENT inquiries are good comic relief....especially when the ones who are supposed to be the "Smart Guys" keep stepping in the dog pile.,

You really think there are smart guys over there, the Demonrats just re-endorsed the Patriot Act a piece of legislation they are opposed to

LOL, now that was funny Clete. @JL, They didn't have to show evidence, just enough probable cause for charges to be brought.

https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/176/17680/1768056.gif


Won't be easy because there are many!

It's all politics. They have nothing of substance. Sondland testified today that Trump told him he wanted nothing from the Ukes and there was no quid pro quo. He just wanted Zelensky to do what was right.

Most important exchange of the day. Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio. "Mr. Sondland, let's be clear: no one on this planet—not Donald Trump, Rudy Guiliani, Mick Mulvaney, Mike Pompeo—no one told you aid was tied to political investigations, is that correct."

Gordon Sondland: "That's correct."

Case over. Find something else to worry about.

Paraclete: THE PATRIOT ACT! WOW! I remember that "Feel Good" legislation.....man did that ever help preserve OUR RIGHTS and make us all feel so safe! All it costs us was a good chunk of our liberty: a small price to pay for more government control over every single aspect of our lives!

Here is something Talaniman, jlisenbe, and Athose can all agree with me on: The no thinking, sheople, idiots of this country, whether they be Repubs, Demos, Libertarians, Christians, Jews, whatever whatever need to take heed of what Ben Franklin said:

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Got to say, these "State Department" type bureaucrats, some of them lifelong, are all, even the women, very creepy, very slimy people! I don't get why they are so fawned over and lauded: Sondland and Vinman, particularly, are not to be trusted.....Did you notice how shifty (pardon the pun) Vinman was during testimony: He kept looking down and to his right: This is an Italian "Tell" for someone who is lying....and Vinman was lying like a madman!

I don't know if they were lying or not, but when Sondland told the committee that the pres told him there was no quid pro quo and that he expected nothing from Zelensky, then why didn't they just drop the gavel, dismiss the hearing, and all go home? It's over for those who know the meaning of English words.

Fiona Hill testifies today, and she has FIRST hand knowledge of the meetings that took place and who did what. I hope they get into the talking point Devin Nunes parrots about Ukraine, and not Russia meddled in the 2016 election. This whole thing could be put to bed with the appearance of those others with first hand knowledge appearing under oath, like Pomeo, Pence, Bolton, and Mulvaney.

Why would they refuse if everything is so legal and above board? No the dufus would rather obstruct the investigation than get the truth out. Sondland says they were kept in the loop so let's hear what they have to say...under OATH.

Fiona Hill testifies today, and she has FIRST hand knowledge of the meetings that took place and who did what

That's the motto of the dems. "What til you hear what the next guy says!" Now Sondland clearly stated that the pres told him there was no quid pro quo and no demands made on Zelensky. He agreed that he knew of no linkage. The Uke PM and foreign minister both say there was no linkage. But by George, wait til the next witness! This gets tiresome after a while.

Talaniman: Here is a major issue with anyone in either of these "camps": Loyalty and Disloyalty. Loyalty, despite whether that loyalty is on the side of a cause you despise or are in favor of, is a very admirable trait. Disloyalty, whether it is favorable to a cause you support or one you despise, is entirely repulsive. Trump may be a lot of things, bad in some ways maybe good in others, but one thing is for sure: TRUMP ISN'T WORTH A DAMN AT PICKING PEOPLE TO WORK FOR HIM THAT ARE LOYAL! I have never seen so many people turn on a man like I have seen those turn on Trump. Its hard for me to come to terms with disloyalty, particularly in the workplace.....and when I hear it expressed or see it in action, it sickens me. The career bureaucrats that have turned on Trump and, effectively, backstabbed him, have sealed their reputations as to never be trusted again.....Vinman says that people he works with don't want to include him in meetings anymore: Why is that surprising? I don't think anyone like treachery.

JL and Vac7, I doubt that I will hold your defense of a lying, cheating, dufus against you. Isn't that what right wing conservative southerners do? I understand. Frankly I enjoy the repubs trying to defend their dufus.

Talaniman: I fully anticipated you coming back slinging stuff.....A few points: I don't think I was "defending" anything, other than saying that DISLOYALTY is DISHONORABLE: Do you not agree? Conversely, I was simply stating that LOYALTY WAS HONORABLE. The mere fact that a lot of these BUREAUCRATS ACCEPTED JOBS THAT TRUMP GAVE THEM, AND NOW THEY ARE BITING THE HAND THAT GAVE THEM A HAND, TELLS YOU A LOT ABOUT THE RANCID, UNSCRUPULOUS NATURE OF THESE BEAUROCRATS CHARACTER: THEY ARE TURDS! Did you ever turn on a man that gave you a job? I bet you didn't! If you had a problem with a superior, you simply put in for a transfer or left the job completely....you didn't try to torpedo the man who hired you, even if you had issue with him....that is what real men do.

I will take the liberty to speak for JL on this: All of these comments have little to do with anything "conservative" or "Southern"....but they have everything to do with what is right and what is wrong. The public lynching/attempted coup of a duly elected POTUS by a conspiracy of ideological zealots is unbecoming of the United States and, in fact, is unprecedented.....the whole thing sets a horrible precedence for future Administrations to contend with because the same tactic can be duplicated upon Demos as it is being acted upon a Repub POTUS.

The public lynching/attempted coup of a duly elected POTUS by a conspiracy of ideological zealots is unbecoming of the United States and, in fact, is unprecedented.....
You mean being impeached? Andrew Johnson? Richard Nixon? Bill Clinton?

Talaniman: I fully anticipated you coming back slinging stuff.....A few points: I don't think I was "defending" anything, other than saying that DISLOYALTY is DISHONORABLE: Do you not agree? Conversely, I was simply stating that LOYALTY WAS HONORABLE. The mere fact that a lot of these BUREAUCRATS ACCEPTED JOBS THAT TRUMP GAVE THEM, AND NOW THEY ARE BITING THE HAND THAT GAVE THEM A HAND, TELLS YOU A LOT ABOUT THE RANCID, UNSCRUPULOUS NATURE OF THES BEAUROCRATS CHARACTER: THEY ARE TURDS! Did you ever turn on a man that gave you a job? I bet you didn't! If you had a problem with a superior, you simply put in for a transfer or left the job completely....you didn't try to torpedo the man who hired you, even if you had issue with him....that is what real men do.

I will take the liberty to speak for JL on this: All of these comments have little to do with anything "conservative" or "Southern"....but they have everything to do with what is right and what is wrong. The public lynching/attempted coup of a duly elected POTUS by a conspiracy of ideological zealots is unbecoming of the United States and, in fact, is unprecedented.....the whole thing sets a horrible precedence for future Administrations to contend with because the same tactic can be duplicated upon Demos as it is being acted upon a Repub POTUS.

Stuff it will you. None of the people who have testified owes the dufus a darn thing not even loyalty, and all have served several presidents and all over the world for many tears. Heck I have yet to hear any of them acknowledge a party affiliation. Conservative southerners is MY characterization of you and JL, and accurate to my knowledge so please save me the dufus language of hoax and witch hunts and such to defend a guy whose asking a favor of a foreign country to get dirt on his fellow American and political foe. That's the disgusting stuff you should be concerned about.

Haven't heard any righty address that at all and don't expect you too! That's a shame!

W.G.: NO! Not being IMPEACHED: IMPEACHMENT was put into place in the Constitution by men a lot smarter than me and men who had divine wisdom, which I also do not possess and which is not possessed by any man in our Government today. IMPEACHMENT is needed when it is justified....and that is the key. Richard Nixon was not IMPEACHED....probably would have been if he stayed around long enough. But, if you have listened to the Trump Impeachment Inquiry proceeding, I think you can tell that nothing has been stated that is illegal or an IMPEACHABLE offense.....Adam Schiff is a highly partisan leader of this cabal and evidence suggest that the Demos have been talking IMPEACHMENT of Trump from the day he was elected.....This is nothing akin to JUSTICE, it is, however, very akin to a coup.

I will take the liberty to speak for JL on this: All of these comments have little to do with anything "conservative" or "Southern"....but they have everything to do with what is right and what is wrong. The public lynching/attempted coup of a duly elected POTUS by a conspiracy of ideological zealots is unbecoming of the United States and, in fact, is unprecedented.....the whole thing sets a horrible precedence for future Administrations to contend with because the same tactic can be duplicated upon Demos as it is being acted upon a Repub POTUS.

Pretty well stated, Vac. The dems need to figure out that before you can impeach someone, you should first be able to demonstrate guilt.

You know I'm still going with stupidity, what has been demonstrated is that there is nothing worth discussing among current events, just boring crap

asking a favor of a foreign country to get dirt on his fellow American and political foe.
That's the disgusting stuff you should be concerned about.

Haven't heard any righty address that at all and don't expect you too!

Waiting for you righties to quite crying foul and address the reason for the INQUIRY.

As I said, STUPIDITY! or perhaps as trump said, SCUM! can we move on?

You can do whatever you want Clete. What's stopping you? Oh that's right your island burns and the roos is getting BBQ'd, and you Aussies don't know what to do.

You can do whatever you want Clete. What's stopping you? Oh that's right your island burns and the roos is getting BBQ'd, and you Aussies don't know what to do.

Next time you BBQ some lefties in 'fornia I'll show the same sensitivity Tal, or perhaps the next time Texarse gets hit by a hurricane or a caravan. You think it amusing that we have a small problem, well I find it amusing you have an insurmountable problem. My problem will be a memory next week but yours will linger on, maybe for another five years

You should know better than to get in the way when I'm chunkin' rocks at the wingers.

Waiting for you righties to quite crying foul and address the reason for the INQUIRY.

I've already addressed the problem. The dems are still mad about Saint Hillary losing. They are bitter and think they have Trump in a bind, but I suspect this thing is going to come back and bite them when it begins to dawn upon everyone that they have no real evidence.

Russia if your listening, I need your help AGAIN! Of course Vlad is listening.

Talaniman: If the Demos are smart, they won't take a vote on IMPEACHMENT....and I pray that they do not because of what comes next: The words of Admiral Yamamoto, once the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, will ring in ears of all Demos if they vote IMPEACHMENT: "I am afraid that all we have done is awaken a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve"......If the Demos vote IMPEACHMENT, the TRIAL goes to the REPUBLICAN SENATE: that means that THE SCHIFF SHOW is over and the REPUBS can call witness after witness, including Little Adam, and all of the little fawned over bureaucrats that strutted up in from of the Demo House Committee will have to be dragged up in front of the Senate to abused by the truth.....It won't be pretty for the Demos. The Repub Senate will come with fangs and knives: it will be bloody. VOTE ON IMPEACHMENT WILL COST THE DEMS EVERYTHING: THE PRESIDENCY, THE SENATE, AND, YES, THE HOUSE!

Russia if your listening, I need your help AGAIN! Of course Vlad is listening.

Well my my. Looks like the libs are appealing to the Russkies now. How convenient.

Vac, I think your observation of the Senate trial is thought provoking. If it does get to the Senate, I hope they pull out all the stops and reveal to the country the truth about this miscarriage of justice.

Well my my. Looks like the libs are appealing to the Russkies now. How convenient.
You missed tal's point.

Well my my. Looks like the libs are appealing to the Russkies now. How convenient.

Worked for the dufus didn't it? Actually I was parroting yo' boy. You don't seem to mind he and Vlad doing their thing together.

jlisenbe: I don't know if we really want the Senate to TRIAL this IMPEACHMENT.....I don't know if it will be good for the country because of what the Senate will do to these people will be DISGUSTING.....Remember, JL, sometimes REVENGE doesn't feel good, it just makes you more bitter and thirsty for evermore revenge. Maybe it would be best for the country to just move on and try to get past the damage the Demos have done to the country.....maybe its time to let the country heal.

Worked for the dufus didn't it?

Your hobby must be making accusations for which you have no evidence.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=sonland+testimony&view=detail&mid=37B3C52DCBABAC9C551037B3C52DCBABAC9C5510&FORM=VIRE

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/20/us/politics/impeachment-hearings.html#link-4911ce00

Though I should know better than to try out your links, I did it anyway. Did you read this last, buried paragraph in the incredibly dishonest NYTimes article?


But under questioning, Mr. Sondland acknowledged that Mr. Trump never told him that. “I never heard from President Trump that aid was conditioned on an announcement of investigations,” he testified.

This video shows Sondland's testimony getting absolutely buried. Watch the five minutes if you dare.

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

You're just going to have to try a LOT harder. Besides, your unsupported allegation was about Russia, not Sondland. But backing up a witch hunt is what dems are good at. They practiced it well against Kavanaugh.

You should know better than to get in the way when I'm chunkin' rocks at the wingers.

Can I remind you what this op was about, it was not about chucking rocks at each other. How can I expect you dullards to stay on subject, you have one track minds

Tal, I answered your questions. Why won't you answer this one? "Both the Uke prime minister and the foreign minister say there was no linkage. And in fact, the money was delivered and the investigation never took place. You don't dispute those facts do you?"

Still waiting on those five names. You have given me Sondland and Vindman. Neither one had anything. Sondland even admitted he had nothing, that his allegation of a quid pro quo was based on nothing more than his "presumption", and that Trump told him directly that there was no quid pro quo.

And now, in the great liberal tradition of fairness, liberal crowds are protesting at his businesses in Oregon because he actually testified before the committee.

The truth is the dufus's plot got exposed before he could get what he was after and blown up in the public.

LOL, that's pretty disengenous saying there is NO evidence when we have a lot of it and still more that the dufus and his cronies are allowed to sit on. Even worse you asking for names again when you have a list of 13 witnesses already, so I'll just let you keep dismissing and missing while the House crafts those articles and presents it to the senate and you can watch it on TV.

I've been known to chunk rocks but talking to them is pretty fruitless, both for facts or logic. You must be one of those rocks from the shores of DE NILE.


Can I remind you what this op was about, it was not about chucking rocks at each other. How can I expect you dullards to stay on subject, you have one track minds

Sorry Clete but this is big for us and if scripture can be quoted for pages I don't see why current events cannot be too. I do have sympathy though because fires and floods and mother nature reeking havoc on us humans is as scary as it gets.

Tal, I answered your questions. Why won't you answer this one? "Both the Uke prime minister and the foreign minister say there was no linkage. And in fact, the money was delivered and the investigation never took place. You don't dispute those facts do you?"

And still no answer.


LOL, that's pretty disengenous saying there is NO evidence when we have a lot of it and still more that the dufus and his cronies are allowed to sit on. Even worse you asking for names again when you have a list of 13 witnesses already, so I'll just let you keep dismissing and missing while the House crafts those articles and presents it to the senate and you can watch it on TV.

Fine. Let's hear all that evidence. List it for us. Give us names and not just numbers. List the names of those witnesses who had direct evidence of guilt by the pres and not just, "I heard this one say that that one overheard a phone call from another one that he now can't remember." Or one who doesn't have to admit that no one ever told him there was a quid pro quo and that Trump directly told him there was not one. Yeah. That's really powerful stuff.


You gave us two names and I blew both of them out of the water, so now you're afraid to list any other name. So have a little courage and step forward. Either that or please, please find something else to complain about. This has gotten tiresome.

As to the Senate, I can hardly wait. They can call Schiff, the whistle blower, Hunter Biden, and a host of other witnesses. I'm about to the point of hoping they do this so that the whole country can see what a circus this whole thing was, and so the dem party can rightfully be exposed as the party of a bunch of bitter losers. My only hesitation is that, as Vac pointed out, it would even further divide the country, a concern which the House dems plainly have no concern about.

See what I mean JL, the first line of the previous post was my answer, as to the rest of your assignment...DO IT YOURSELF first, and for the record, you may have blown your own mind, but have not blown the two witnesses story out of the water. None of the repubs in the House did when it was their time to do so. I will elaborate a bit for you my position based on the testimony I have heard so far and refer you to the fact that it was revealed that the Ukrainians did know of the dufus with holding funds and brought it to the attention of the diplomatic corps in late July I think, (https://americasvoice.news/us-senators-congress-likely-to-restore-aid-to-ukraine/) and this was after the Ukrainian president had scheduled an interview on CNN (https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/07/politics/volodymyr-zelensky-fareed-zakaria-ukraine-aid/index.html) for 9/16/2019, which was cancelled after the congress guaranteed they would get the money the congress passed and the dufus signed before he unsigned, which as I referenced may in of itself be a violation of law which I have linked before.

From the link


"We had been negotiating with President Zelensky and his office for a while, for months, to try to get an interview with him anyway, ever since he was elected President," Zakaria, host of "Fareed Zakaria GPS," told Baldwin.
Once news of the whistleblower's complaint surfaced, "it became clear to us that the interview was off," he continued.





The Times reported that the decision to unfreeze the aid to Ukraine erased the need for Zelensky's televised appearance."

So I'll stick with my position that there is sufficient evidence to formulate charges and we may yet get more testimony. Personally, I would press for subpoenas to wind through the courts for key witnesses no matter how close to the election it may be and let you repubs deal with whatever comes of it. And then there is that Rudy Giuliani contribution to this rather bizarre process, and his cronies that got Amb. Yovanovitch removed from her post and reputation smeared publicly.

Plenty to see here and more to learn.

Catching up - Impeachment is a done deal. The evidence is overwhelming.

The only question left is will the Republican Trumpista cult in the Senate confirm that the American president is not above the law.

The truth is the dufus's plot got exposed before he could get what he was after and blown up in the public.

THAT'S your answer? Wow.


"We had been negotiating with President Zelensky and his office for a while, for months, to try to get an interview with him anyway, ever since he was elected President," Zakaria, host of "Fareed Zakaria GPS," told Baldwin.
Once news of the whistleblower's complaint surfaced, "it became clear to us that the interview was off," he continued.

So that's the best you have? What a CNN reporter had so say? Good. What a relief. I thought you might actually have something that directly tied Trump to a quid pro quo. All you have is a sguid pro squat.

Like Vac said, if this trainwreck gets to the Senate, then it will become obvious to everyone how pathetic the whole thing is.

Still waiting to hear all those names you said were there. Me do the homework? Why would I do the homework to verify what YOU said? Nah. That's your job my friend. You make the statement, then you should back it up. Truth is, you can't.

The dufus rules with an iron fist and anybody who steps out of line gets wapped really viciously and they know it. Wasn't it the rightt winger at Fox Laura Ingram who said "without the dufus there is no republican party."? I think that may be true and rebubs believe that too!

@JL

You said there was NO evidence so back that up.

The dufus rules with an iron fist and anybody who steps out of line gets wapped really viciously and they know it. Wasn't it the rightt winger at Fox Laura Ingram who said "without the dufus there is no republican party."? I think that may be true and rebubs believe that too!

I think Trump can be beaten in 2020, but not with one of the sad group the dems are looking at now. Tom Steyer might end up making a run at it.

You said there was NO evidence so back that up.

OK. Here is the list of real evidence demonstrating the existence of a quid pro quo, extortion, or bribery.

1. nothing
2. nothing
3. nothing
4. nothing
5. nothing
6. nothing
7. nothing
8. nothing

Here is the list of names of people who actually had first hand knowledge of an impeachable offense.

1. no one
2. no one
3. no one
4. no one
5. no one

Maybe we should give Clete his thread back since you got nothing and I don't comment on NOTHING!

As I gaze at a sky filled with smoke I wonder; has the apocalypse arrived? did it sneak up while I was distracted?

I don't smell smoke, but I wonder if the world has lost it's freaking mind, but realize that people are just SCARED right now. I'm knocking on wood though because we have had a few fires here in Texas, and during the dry season it doesn't take much to have a few more.

Rest assured you aren't alone by any means.

Thanks, Tal, the smoke haze might have even lifted this morning

Paraclete: Just seen this evening where Koalas are probably going to go extinct with all the wildfires. I guess the Dingo population will explode since the vegetation burn-off will make it easier for them to hunt.

Forest Management here in the Southeastern U.S. is hallmarked by "Prescribed Burns" where the vegetation in the understories of our primary Pine Plantation Forest are burned in scheduled exercises so that the understory vegetation growth is not permitted to get so dense as to provide the volume of fuel BTUs that would kill the Pines under which it grows. Its all about managing your risks!

California is an idiotic state, in general, where burn management is all but ignored completely. Californians would rather worry about establishing and preserving Sanctuary Cities for illegal aliens, electing leftist local and state representation, and smoking dope like there is no tomorrow to avoid the realities put upon them by the first couple of things I mentioned all wrought by poor arse leadership.

California has it's wildfires and mudslides and Florida has it's hurricanes and floods, and sink holes, so every climate region has something to deal with so kind of unfair to compare and criticise since last I checked everybody likes their dope...even Floridians.

Must not be any sanctuary cities in Florida huh?

Paraclete: Just seen this evening where Koalas are probably going to go extinct with all the wildfires. I guess the Dingo population will explode since the vegetation burn-off will make it easier for them to hunt.

Don't think that theory works, the dingo will eat BBQ for a while then starve


Forest Management here in the Southeastern U.S. is hallmarked by "Prescribed Burns" where the vegetation in the understories of our primary Pine Plantation Forest are burned in scheduled exercises so that the understory vegetation growth is not permitted to get so dense as to provide the volume of fuel BTUs that would kill the Pines under which it grows. Its all about managing your risks!

Yes we do that too, however not a great idea in the middle of a drought, and no burnoffs in national parks, the greenies go ape at the thought of it


California is an idiotic state, in general, where burn management is all but ignored completely. Californians would rather worry about establishing and preserving Sanctuary Cities for illegal aliens, electing leftist local and state representation, and smoking dope like there is no tomorrow to avoid the realities put upon them by the first couple of things I mentioned all wrought by poor arse leadership.

California also has a lot of eucalypts which makes their fires bad in the same way ours are. I think you miss the point with 'fornia it is just the mex taking back the homeland and you made the mistake of feeding them

Talaniman: California's burns are SELF FULFILLING PROPHECIES because the weirdos won't permit brush cleanup.....the brush is fuel for the fires......dope smoking starts to interfere with rational thoughts! Got a 'Nam Vet brother who came back from there smoking dope: didn't get right until he was in his '40s: scraps with the law, revolving door of women, violence, he was constantly involved with something bad....it was horrible.....Talaniman: I know you think I am just being "reactionary" about the dope thing but its a lot deeper than that with me after what it did to my brother and our family......its effects are much more evil than what is advertised.....it is something that revolts me.

I can certainly understand and sympathize with the aversion to dope and have seen it with alcohol as well, truly bad situation by some, but unrelated I think in large part to the task at hand or the politics of institutional racism, or capitalist stupidity. Cali is hardly alone or isolated in such regards to the challenges of modern life and dealing with Mother Nature, or anything else.


California also has a lot of eucalypts which makes their fires bad in the same way ours are. I think you miss the point with 'fornia it is just the mex taking back the homeland and you made the mistake of feeding them

For decades and generations the brown people from the south have lived in peace and contributed to the betterment of the country. Not saying there are not the worst among them but like any peoples bad apples exist and have to be dealt with.

For decades and generations the brown people from the south have lived in peace and contributed to the betterment of the country. Not saying there are not the worst among them but like any peoples bad apples exist and have to be dealt with.

Why did you bring race into it, referring to the "brown" people

I'm not sure

Why did you bring race into it, referring to the "brown" people
You had said:

"California also has a lot of eucalypts which makes their fires bad in the same way ours are. I think you miss the point with 'fornia it is just the mex taking back the homeland and you made the mistake of feeding them."

You had said:

"California also has a lot of eucalypts which makes their fires bad in the same way ours are. I think you miss the point with 'fornia it is just the mex taking back the homeland and you made the mistake of feeding them."

Yes but I didn't bring race in referring to the antecedent people by their former nationality. You have to expect the way things are going California will be lost to English speaking peoples, but you don't have to accept this, you can call on the "manifest destiny" of the white eurpoean to rule the americas and eject them. Build the wall, but to keep you in

Clete you just have a sneaky way of injecting your racial biases into things, but all the states have challenges to work on. The weather is a big deal and man is helpless even with all his other issues he has. LOL, if the advanced civilization you have hasn't solved the problem, then what makes you think the heathens over here have a clue? So go ahead and lead the world with your solutions so we can follow YOU for a change.

Clete you just have a sneaky way of injecting your racial biases into things, but all the states have challenges to work on. The weather is a big deal and man is helpless even with all his other issues he has. LOL, if the advanced civilization you have hasn't solved the problem, then what makes you think the heathens over here have a clue? So go ahead and lead the world with your solutions so we can follow YOU for a change.

Honestly, Tal, none of us have a clue, I just saw an OP piece once again "proving" man, and read industralised societies, are responsible for climate change without any mention of other factors. We cannot control the weather, it is futile to try, even if we stop all emissions of CO2, Methane and Nitros Oxide immediately we will still reap any effects these things might have had, because the problem is population, it is increasing just as quickly as any other factor and forcing many other problems such as deforestation, growth in cities, etc

The only racial bias I have is against idiocy and there seems to be more of it in certain places

So some races are more idiots than others? Is that what you meant? Good luck getting humans to stop breeding voluntarily, and China is an example of too little too late.

So some races are more idiots than others? Is that what you meant? Good luck getting humans to stop breeding voluntarily, and China is an example of too little too late.

Yes, Tal, I understand the attraction that leads to population growth, China tried and created another problem, however, their efforts may have impact eventually. The real problem is lack of war, the last 50 years have not had the same effect on the population as did the previous century. As to some races being idiots, it is racist to point it out, however, research has suggested that some races are smarter than others, which may demonstrate why some didn't get much past the stone age, while others enjoyed great development. Some are not as smart as they think they are, witness the degradation Japan and Germany brought upon themselves

If we had left the Chinese in their blissful ignorance we wouldn't have the problems we do today, and one day we may say the same of India

LOL, never heard the lack of war being a bad thing before, but if we need a war to solve problems then you Aussies better start killing folks. Can't find your guns? I'm sure we could sell you a few. Discount for allies.

That was a rather bizarre post even for you Clete.

Paraclete: I know you aren't promoting a World War, I know that: But it doesn't necessarily take a big war to wipe out millions: In 1918, while WWI was still raging, there came about a world wide "Spanish Flu Pandemic" that killed 50 million people.....we haven't had any big PANDEMICS for a long time....The world doesn't have the stomach for a whole lot of killing anymore but "natural kill-offs" from a pandemic could get the job done.

.we haven't had any big PANDEMICS for a long time....The world doesn't have the stomach for a whole lot of killing anymore but "natural kill-offs" from a pandemic could get the job done.

Good Lord! Now they're discussing the most efficient way to kill off millions of people. It gets loonier and loonier!!!!

LOL, never heard the lack of war being a bad thing before, but if we need a war to solve problems then you Aussies better start killing folks. Can't find your guns? I'm sure we could sell you a few. Discount for allies.

That was a rather bizarre post even for you Clete.


No Tal, we have plenty of guns, it is a myth promoted by the american right that we don't have guns, what we don't have is mayhem. So you think my thoughts bizzaire?


Paraclete: I know you aren't promoting a World War, I know that: But it doesn't necessarily take a big war to wipe out millions: In 1918, while WWI was still raging, there came about a world wide "Spanish Flu Pandemic" that killed 50 million people.....we haven't had any big PANDEMICS for a long time....The world doesn't have the stomach for a whole lot of killing anymore but "natural kill-offs" from a pandemic could get the job done.

Vac, don't go there

I find myself in the rather bizarre position of agreeing, at least somewhat, with Athos's sentiment,

Paraclete: Yes, your right: We could be closer to that reality than we know with Smallpox, Plague, and other stuff hanging out there, ready to go off as soon as we let our guard down.

Paraclete: Yes, your right: We could be closer to that reality than we know with Smallpox, Plague, and other stuff hanging out there, ready to go off as soon as we let our guard down.

While that might be true, this is happening all the time for example; at the moment measles is making a reappearance because of stupidity where people are encouraged to forgo vaccination. Swine fever is a serious problem in the pig population which may bring food shortages, but our guard is down because the profit motive has allowed the opioid crisis to arise. We don't need illness to kill us, Pharma will gladly do it for us

Paraclete: Very astute statement, can't help but agree. BIG PHARMA is out of control.

Capitalism is out of control. The flow of money is a one way street, and what trickles down is high interest rates, hidden fees, and debts, and higher prices. We learned nothing from past recessions and downturns in the business cycles with such tools as variable interest rates. Big Pharma is hardly the only price manipulators out there, and lobbiest make sure any legistlation makes their clients profits.

Are you forgetting there are two sets of rules differing between rich and poor? Big money cares little for what everybody else goes through while the pursue MO'MONEY by any means necessary.

Are you forgetting there are two sets of rules differing between rich and poor?

One of those rules is that the wealthy actually have to pay income tax. The top 20% of income earners pay more than 85% of income taxes. The bottom 50% pay next to nothing. Is that one of the rules you are talking about?

The wealthy also pay enormous amounts of property taxes, capital gains taxes, and inheritance taxes. The lower income people pay far, far less of those taxes. So that's another rule you might be referring to.

Poor people have nothing to tax except wages, often meager, while the wealtly have major assets and options along with plenty of loopholes and deductions and perks with accountants to guide them and lobbyests to speak for them. Add to that the tax shelters and havens, they have plenty of perks they take advantage of just with the tax code.

I wouldn't expect a supply sider such as yourself to have it any other way though, but the disconnect between rich guys and government policy and the lower 90% of Americans is forever lost on you, and that's your choice but you don't get to holler about the debt, and defend supply siders tax policy without recognizing that's how the debt is perpetrated in the first place. Poor people ain't contributing to the debt nor benefit from the trillions of dollars that the cost of that debt entails, nor does it stimulate the 70% consumer demand economy of the US.

Really simple dude, you want to pay the debt, then you need tax policy that does that and guess what, poor and middle class people, the bulk of the population, cannot do that. So now what?

One of those rules is that the wealthy actually have to pay income tax. The top 20% of income earners pay more than 85% of income taxes. The bottom 50% pay next to nothing. Is that one of the rules you are talking about?

The wealthy also pay enormous amounts of property taxes, capital gains taxes, and inheritance taxes. The lower income people pay far, far less of those taxes. So that's another rule you might be referring to.


You keep trotting out this hackneyed statistic to defend privilege with no understanding at all. The wealthy are the ones who benefit most from the economy. How many poor people drive Ferraris. How many poor can enjoy the benefits of proper healthcare. Low income people pay less because they have less, it is called a progressive taxation system because it is designed to tax those who benefit most, but the ones at the top have loop holes to avoid the impact. Until these loopholes are closed the system will still be ufair

while the wealtly have major assets and options along with plenty of loopholes and deductions and perks with accountants to guide them and lobbyests to speak for them. Add to that the tax shelters and havens, they have plenty of perks they take advantage of just with the tax code.

Yeah. That's how the top 20% of income earners end up paying 85% of income taxes and vast amounts of inheritance and property taxes. Wow. How clever those rich people are!!


I wouldn't expect a supply sider such as yourself to have it any other way though, but the disconnect between rich guys and government policy and the lower 90% of Americans is forever lost on you, and that's your choice but you don't get to holler about the debt, and defend supply siders tax policy without recognizing that's how the debt is perpetrated in the first place. Poor people ain't contributing to the debt nor benefit from the trillions of dollars that the cost of that debt entails, nor does it stimulate the 70% consumer demand economy of the US.

I've never claimed to be a supply sider. I believe in personal freedom and free enterprise, and then let the chips fall where they may.


Really simple dude, you want to pay the debt, then you need tax policy that does that and guess what, poor and middle class people, the bulk of the population, cannot do that. So now what?


Fed debt was 23% of GDP in 1982. By 2011 it had grown to 97%. Only stupid, ignorant people ignore such things. You are neither of those, so you need to get on board. As to how to deal with it, you cannot tax your way out of a trillion dollar deficit without wrecking the economy. Federal budget outlays are now 1,000% greater than just in 1980, which is to say it has grown 10X larger in only 40 years. That is absurd. Spending must be cut substantially.




You keep trotting out this hackneyed statistic to defend privilege with no understanding at all. The wealthy are the ones who benefit most from the economy. How many poor people drive Ferraris. How many poor can enjoy the benefits of proper healthcare. Low income people pay less because they have less, it is called a progressive taxation system because it is designed to tax those who benefit most, but the ones at the top have loop holes to avoid the impact. Until these loopholes are closed the system will still be ufair

I have said nothing to defend privilege. The rich benefit from being rich? Well congratulations, Mr. Edison. You think you just discovered that? You think that has not been true for all of time? Low income people pay less because they have less? Well congratulations on that amazing discovery as well.

It is your statement at the end about closing loopholes to make the system "fair" that is complete nonsense. The top 20% pay over 85% now and the bottom 50% pay next to nothing. How much fairer a system do you want? That's what really gets me about your contention. What do you want to do, go to the bottom 50% and cut their taxes from the current 2.7% to nothing? Yeah boy. That would solve a lot of problems. A "hackneyed" statistic? Only to those who don't care for the truth. If you want to contribute, then you need something more substantial than telling us that poor people don't drive a Ferrari.

Want another "hackneyed" statistic? The top 1% of income earners earn 20% of the income, but pay almost 40% of the income taxes. Yeah, those rich guys have sure got the system rigged to their benefit big time! How unfair!!

One of my missions in life is to help more people see that fallacy of the kind of thinking you used. It's the idea that it's all of those sorry rich folks who are shafting the rest of us. If we could only make the tax system "fair", then our problems would be over. Well, I don't know how else to make a system "fair" than to have the people who make a lot of money pay nearly all of the taxes. How much "fairness" would it take to satisfy you?

Want another "hackneyed" statistic? The top 1% of income earners earn 20% of the income, but pay almost 40% of the income taxes. Yeah, those rich guys have sure got the system rigged to their benefit big time! How unfair!!

What a dill you are relying, on the refuge of a scoundrel; STATISTICS. Do you honestly think those at the bottom should have their meagre resources taxed in the same way as the rich. This is a quick way to bankrupt your economy. The rich understand this in a way you do not

Do you honestly think those at the bottom should have their meagre resources taxed in the same way as the rich.

So let's see. The top 20% pay 85% of income taxes. The bottom 50% pay 2.7%. On what planet are you living where that somehow equates to them being taxed "in the same way as the rich"?

You don't like statistics? That's because they don't support your ridiculous ideas. But again, what kind of "fairness" would you propose?

So let's see. The top 20% pay 85% of income taxes. The bottom 50% pay 2.7%. On what planet are you living where that somehow equates to them being taxed "in the same way as the rich"?

You don't like statistics? That's because they don't support your ridiculous ideas. But again, what kind of "fairness" would you propose?

I don't like statistics because they are used to support all sorts of outrageous arguments, just stating a "fact" over and over again does nothing and shows you have not taken broader factors into account. You think my ideas rediculous, well let me ask you have you studied economics? perhaps you went to the same economics school as your illustrious leader, who emerged with no understanding other than a hatred of taxes and a love of tariffs, which he thinks don't tax the rich.

Where I come from governments start with reducing the tax burden on the low end, this stimulates the economy, because they know reducing the tax burden on the rich does nothing but enrich them. Our economy has flourished since we did away with tariffs and progressively reduced taxation. I live in a place where many of the best ideas have been implemented, tempered with common sense, so I know that if I tell you something it has been tested. Universal health care works, funded by a levy on the population. Consumption taxes work, those who have more to spend pay more, gun control works, resource royalties work, income tax has been progressively reduced, so that those on the bottom pay nothing

Where I come from governments start with reducing the tax burden on the low end, this stimulates the economy, because they know reducing the tax burden on the rich does nothing but enrich them. Our economy has flourished since we did away with tariffs and progressively reduced taxation.

Where to begin? THE LOW END PAYS PRACTICALLY NO TAXES!!! HOW CAN THE TAX BURDEN BE REDUCED ANY FURTHER OH WISE ONE???

I hoped that shouting in text might help. You think your economy is flourishing, try comparing it to ours and show me how you are ahead of the United States. But that would require you to use some more of those statistics you dislike so much.

Paraclete: I like a lot of ideas you have but not the ones about taxing only the rich and making anyone on the bottom pay no taxes....and, of course, the ideas you have about gun control: We have a Constitutional Right to own firearms, so that idea won't be happening here in the U.S.: You know, COMMUNISM WOULD WORK, TOO, IF YOU TOOK AWAY THE PEOPLE'S CAPACITY TO DEFEND THEMSELVES.....You might want to ask yourself "How are Australians supposed to fend off a screwball who declares himself dictator for life now that the liberals have taken your firearms away?" You guys will be screwed: You should never let rotten politicians take your guns away and it doesn't matter what stripe they hail from, either.

Now, there are all kinds of different State Level income and property taxes that vary from state to state: We just aren't going to get into the CENTRAL GOVERNMENT CONTROL crap, if we wanted to follow that route, we would have adopted straight-up Marxism and we have, so far, rejected becoming Bolshevik subjects, despite a fair amount of radicals brave enough to show their dirty faces lately.

The whole notion of "CLASS WARFARE", perpetuated by the ideas of "hatred of the rich" is bunch of pure, unadulterated bullsh%$! The United States should cherish its RICH: Our RICH are a national treasure! Our RICH pay the most of our Federal Taxes. Our RICH employ vast numbers of our population: HOW MANY POOR ARSE PEOPLE HAVE YOU SEEN CREATING OR EMPLOYING PEOPLE? I already know the answer to that question. CLASS WARFARE IS A COMMUNIST IDEAL. Keep messing with the RICH and the RICH will just say ADIO and you won't be able to collect any taxes! The RICH take a lot of abuse already.

Paraclete: I like a lot of ideas you have but not the ones about taxing only the rich and making anyone on the bottom pay no taxes....and, of course, the ideas you have about gun control: We have a Constitutional Right to own firearms, so that idea won't be happening here in the U.S. Now, there are all kinds of different State Level income and property taxes that vary from state to state: We just aren't going to get into the CENTRAL GOVERNMENT CONTROL crap, if we wanted to follow that route, we would have adopted straight-up Marxism and we have, so far, rejected becoming Bolshevik subjects, despite a fair amount of radicals brave enough to show their dirty faces lately.

The whole notion of "CLASS WARFARE", perpetuated by the ideas of "hatred of the rich" is bunch of pure, unadulterated bullsh%$! The United States should cherish its RICH: Our RICH are a national treasure! Our RICH pay the most of our Federal Taxes. Our RICH employ vast numbers of our population: HOW MANY POOR ARSE PEOPLE HAVE YOU SEEN CREATING OR EMPLOYING PEOPLE? I already know the answer to that question.

Another rabid capitalist, they are lining up today. You really have no idea because you have been sold on the idea of your wonderful democracy, which isn't. You think me a bolshevik, why, because I oppose oligarchy of the rich that rules your land. Billionaires in power, tell me how that differs from Russia? You should not be against the poor and the disadvantaged, on such is your nation built.

The only class warfare is the oppression of the masses, not the hatred of the rich. Your ideas suggest the rich should not be taxed, that the masses should bear the burden. Out of what will they provide the money? No wonder your avatar is vacuum

I have not said only the rich should be taxed, but even in your nation taxation is progressive. What I do say is the low income should not be taxed. What is the point in taxing them then handing out welfare to supplement their income. It is just a political exercise, grandstanding! What was the point of that stupid exercise Obama initiated. Just a tax on the poor

Another rabid capitalist, they are lining up today. You really have no idea because you have been sold on the idea of your wonderful democracy, which isn't. You think me a bolshevik, why, because I oppose oligarchy of the rich that rules your land. Billionaires in power, tell me how that differs from Russia? You should not be against the poor and the disadvantaged, on such is your nation built.

The only class warfare is the oppression of the masses, not the hatred of the rich. Your ideas suggest the rich should not be taxed, that the masses should bear the burden. Out of what will they provide the money? No wonder you avatar is vacuum

Many words...no content.

Really, and I suppose you contribute content at least I have context

My content is called statistics and facts. You don't like them because you don't have any and mine contradict your positions.

Bottom Line: The "Evil Rich" are an essential for the continuation of this nation AS WE KNOW IT TODAY! They are not dead weight and they aren't to be demonized. With the RICH, progress in all areas is possible and without them the avenues of progress are extremely limited. To rid ourselves of the RICH would be akin to ridding yourself of your own right leg.

Milch cows

Bottom Line: The "Evil Rich" are an essential for the continuation of this nation AS WE KNOW IT TODAY! They are not dead weight and they aren't to be demonized. With the RICH, progress in all areas is possible and without them the avenues of progress are extremely limited. To rid ourselves of the RICH would be akin to ridding yourself of your own right leg.

Finally, the right-wing philosophy in black and white.

1. The rich are essential since all progress depends on them.
2. The poor, low-income and middle class need to be periodically culled in an efficient manner. World War and/or an epidemic/pandemic like the plague is best for maximum killing of this segment of society.

It's all in black and white in this thread. In case you're shocked, don't be. It's good to know what the right thinks of the people.

Throw in a bit of religion, and you come up with the unbelieving dead spending eternity in hell undergoing constant torture. That's from the religious right.

Throw in a bit of religion, and you come up with the unbelieving dead spending eternity in hell undergoing constant torture. That's from the religious right.

You ever decide what you think of the Matthew 25 passage?

You ever decide what you think of the Matthew 25 passage?

Yes, I have.

Perhaps you will share it with us one of these days. Jesus clearly spoke of an eternal hell.

Back to the federal budget for a moment. We are now spending, adjusted for inflation, about three times more than we spent in 1980. Not adjusted for inflation, it has risen about 900%. That is just crazy. Spending is out of control and thus we have enormous budget deficits.






https://www.mercatus.org/sites/default/files/chart2totaloutlays1000.png

http://www.polidiotic.com/by-the-numbers/us-federal-deficit-by-year/

It's not enough to say you're spending to much without the why and where of it. In addition a consideration to increase revenues is also needed.

Perhaps you will share it with us one of these days.

I intend to.


It's not enough to say you're spending to much without the why and where of it. In addition a consideration to increase revenues is also needed.

Obama's spending was to avoid a disastrous recession/depression. Trump's spending was to reward his rich friends.

It's not enough to say you're spending to much without the why and where of it. In addition a consideration to increase revenues is also needed.


So if you go disastrously into debt, it's OK as long as you can give the "why and where of it?" Try that with your personal finances and see how far you get. The only way out of this is to insist that our politicians of both parties behave responsibly. The continuous and deranged excuse-making for Obama DOUBLING the national debt gets old. Obama and Trump are both skunks with identical stripes when it comes to spending.

If you increased income tax revenues by 25%, which no one is proposing, you would still have a deficit of hundreds of billions of dollars. It cannot be done without reducing spending. That is going to happen someday. We can just wait until doomsday like Greece did or we can grow up and become responsible adults. I think we owe it to our children to do the right thing.

The continuous and deranged excuse-making for Obama DOUBLING the national debt gets old.

The Republicans left Obama with a crashing economy which was headed toward another Great Depression. Obama saved the nation and the world with his spending.

Obama left Trump with a burgeoning rapidly recovering economy which Trump, through no talent of his own, continues to claim its successes as his own.

These are facts, not opinions.

Calling Obama's efforts "deranged excuses" is itself deranged.

The Republicans left Obama with a crashing economy which was headed toward another Great Depression. Obama saved the nation and the world with his spending.

So it required eight years of continuous, unbroken deficit spending to the tune of 9 trillion dollars to "save the world"??? That's laughable.

It's just the typical liberal spin. "It's fine when I do it, but it's bad when you do it." Just more of the same.

So it required eight years of continuous, unbroken deficit spending to the tune of 9 trillion dollars to "save the world"??? That's laughable.

No, it's not laughable, but it is complicated. Non-economists are prone to "headline reporting". They rarely have the skills or patience to make the effort to truly understand what's happening financially.

I've provided here (below link) a non-partisan explanation of Obama's actions during the financial crisis he inherited. His responsibility, depending on how you look at it, is as low as just under one trillion dollars overall for his term. Or as high as the nine trillion you claimed. The reality is probably somewhere in between.

In any case, the solution carried out by Obama was far, far better than doing what the conservative right-wing was suggesting. That was to let the world economy play out and self-correct. Such a method would undoubtedly have had little impact on the national debt, but the price would have been enormous in human terms.

https://www.thebalance.com/national-debt-under-obama-3306293

Budget deficit = spending minus revenues. Not complicated. It is simply how much money had to be borrowed. Any other way of describing it is just political speech designed to cover up poor performance. But even at that, while a person might be able to justify some of the deficit spending the first year or two of Obama's presidency, to try and suggest he had to engage in hundreds of billions of dollars of deficit spending every year for eight years is just fantasy. Obama engaged in about as much deficit spending as every other president before him combined.

Obama engaged in about as much deficit spending as every other president before him combined.

Because of prior Republican mismanagement.

Because of prior Republican mismanagement.

Lib rule #1. It's OK if we do it, but wrong if you do it.
Lib rule #2. It's always someone else's fault.

Those repubs must have been pretty powerful (and Obama mighty weak) to make Obama run multi-hundred billion dollar deficits even seven or eight years into his administration.

Naw it was the usual repub mismanagement and right wing loony noise.

Naw it was the usual repub mismanagement and right wing loony noise.

Refer to liberal rule #2.

Refer to post #228, or any history book.

Post 228 was the fairytale Athos told. You'll have to do a lot better than that.

When you tell people to look at "any history book", it tells me you have no idea what history book to look in. In the meantime, democrat and republican politicians alike continue to increase the national debt to disastrous levels and no one cares. Everyone is too interested in participating in partisan politics and circus sideshows like the Trump impeachment charade. The pols are happy because they can brag about lowering taxes and increasing spending ("taking care" of people). They don't think about ten years from now, but they think a lot about reelection. And we have become so stupid and thoughtless that we allow them to get away with it and even worship some of them.

Athos has FACTS, you have words. The dufus wanted a favor from Ukraine which was illegal, yet you right wing loonies say investigating that is a charade. Investigate Biden with no evidence of wrong doing isn't? You worship a lying cheating dufus but bash dems for worshipping Obama?

Yeah read any history book you want, but you take your deficit funded tax cuts, and holler about the deficit? Bet you'd be thrilled with another tax cut wouldn't you? Your concern for the debt and deficit doesn't match your words, fella! Makes for a heckuva fairytale though and explains your support for the biggest fairy teller of all time, though LIAR, and cheater would be a lot more accurate and precise a description.

Liars and cheaters should be investigated I'm sure you agree. NO?

Athos has FACTS,

Oh? Let's hear those facts. Making a statement and then just claiming it's a fact doesn't count.


The dufus wanted a favor from Ukraine which was illegal, yet you right wing loonies say investigating that is a charade. Investigate Biden with no evidence of wrong doing isn't? You worship a lying cheating dufus but bash dems for worshipping Obama?

Calm down. You have no evidence that Trump did anything illegal. If it existed, the dems would be falling all over themselves to hold an impeachment vote. As to HB, we'll see about that. One thing we know for certain. Burisma did not hire him because of his expertise in oil, gas, and business. Wonder why they did hire him??? He said it was because of his last name. What do you think?


Yeah read any history book you want

Like I said, you have no clue what any history book says about that episode. If you did, you would already have referred to it.


but you take your deficit funded tax cuts, and holler about the deficit? Bet you'd be thrilled with another tax cut wouldn't you? Your concern for the debt and deficit doesn't match your words, fella! Makes for a heckuva fairytale though and explains your support for the biggest fairy teller of all time, though LIAR, and cheater would be a lot more accurate and precise a description.

I've already shown you that the deficit is not simply the result of tax cuts. It is the result of fantastic, irresponsible, and disastrous increases in fed spending. The feds spend almost ten times more now than just 40 years ago. There is no excuse for it, and there is no reasonable level of taxation that would close the deficit. It is just that simple. Not even your beloved dems have suggested anything. The deficit is now so great that neither party will suggest a solution because they know it will have to be significant and unpopular. Our country has become so filled with stupid, non-thinking people that I don't see much hope for it. We are exactly like a married couple who bury themselves in debt to the point that there is no way out.


Liars and cheaters should be investigated I'm sure you agree. NO?

You better be ready to investigate about half the Congress including Schiff and Pelosi. You better be ready to investigate Obama because he lied without question about Benghazi. I wonder if we are truly prepared to set aside our partisan political ideas to engage in such investigations.

Oh? Let's hear those facts. Making a statement and then just claiming it's a fact doesn't count.

You can easily fact check Athos and find that he is correct about his FACTS. Explaining it to a closed minded person who is in denial is the issue, not the FACTS!


Calm down. You have no evidence that Trump did anything illegal. If it existed, the dems would be falling all over themselves to hold an impeachment vote. As to HB, we'll see about that. One thing we know for certain. Burisma did not hire him because of his expertise in oil, gas, and business. Wonder why they did hire him??? He said it was because of his last name. What do you think?


That's what the INQUIRY process is about, gathering FACTS! There is also a process for investigating Americans in foreign lands and the dufus hasn't followed that either.


Like I said, you have no clue what any history book says about that episode. If you did, you would already have referred to it.

Just pick one and see what it says about the economic situation on 2007. How simple is that since even though we have linked it and talked it to death, and you still say it didn't happen. Nothing else I can do for you there bud!


I've already shown you that the deficit is not simply the result of tax cuts. It is the result of fantastic, irresponsible, and disastrous increases in fed spending. The feds spend almost ten times more now than just 40 years ago. There is no excuse for it, and there is no reasonable level of taxation that would close the deficit. It is just that simple. Not even your beloved dems have suggested anything. The deficit is now so great that neither party will suggest a solution because they know it will have to be significant and unpopular. Our country has become so filled with stupid, non-thinking people that I don't see much hope for it. We are exactly like a married couple who bury themselves in debt to the point that there is no way out.


The tax cuts are but an example of spending that contributes to the deficit true, but it would help if you would be more specific about that irresponsible spending over decades that has ballooned the deficit. Then we can discuss those specifics.


You better be ready to investigate about half the Congress including Schiff and Pelosi. You better be ready to investigate Obama because he lied without question about Benghazi. But I'd be willing to bet you are not interested in doing any of that. Your partisan political outlook won't allow for it.

Repubs did investigate HC and Obama and found NOTHING on Benghazi, so no not interested in doing it yet again. Same goes for all your investigations that end up no where. You want to investigate everybody in congress and there mama's, go ahead. Let me know how that works because I think you need evidence and not just right wing loony conspiracy theories that get debunked with REAL investigations.

You got nothing but noise, or are just plain incompetent! Bet you know that though!

You can easily fact check Athos and find that he is correct about his FACTS. Explaining it to a closed minded person who is in denial is the issue, not the FACTS!

Like his "facts" about Aquinas or his "facts" about Matthew copying Mark? Give me a break.


Just pick one and see what it says about the economic situation on 2007. How simple is that since even though we have linked it and talked it to death, and you still say it didn't happen. Nothing else I can do for you there bud!

Exactly right. There is nothing you can do.


but it would help if you would be more specific about that irresponsible spending over decades that has ballooned the deficit. Then we can discuss those specifics.

More specific, kind of like saying that, even adjusted for inflation, the feds spend 300% more now than just 40 years ago? You mean that kind of specifics? Or that we spend more than twice as much now as just 18 years ago? That kind of being specific? Is that what you're after? Or the fact that Obama nearly doubled the national debt in only eight years. Is that specific enough for you?


You want to investigate everybody in congress and there mama's, go ahead. Let me know how that works because I think you need evidence and not just right wing loony conspiracy theories that get debunked with REAL investigations.

You're the one who suggested we investigate all the lying and cheating. OK. That's fine with me, but you really don't want to do that. You want to aim all your hatred and vitriol at Trump and let your beloved dems get away with anything they want. I won't go with you on that.

Like his "facts" about Aquinas or his "facts" about Matthew copying Mark? Give me a break.

That is how ancient man communicated, but I wasn't talking about the bible I refer to the facts and reality of NOW!


Exactly right. There is nothing you can do.

Was that snark, or a dodge because you got nothing just NOISE?


More specific, kind of like saying that, even adjusted for inflation, the feds spend 300% more now than just 40 years ago? You mean that kind of specifics? Or that we spend more than twice as much now as just 18 years ago? That kind of being specific? Is that what you're after? Or the fact that Obama nearly doubled the national debt in only eight years. Is that specific enough for you?


No I was referring to being specific on what the money was spent on. Or an accounting for rising cost of living or other pertinent factors to discuss.


You're the one who suggested we investigate all the lying and cheating. OK. That's fine with me, but you really don't want to do that. You want to aim all your hatred and vitriol at Trump and let your beloved dems get away with anything they want. I won't go with you on that.

Maybe we should investigate you for some kind of insanity, and I admit the dufus's lying cheating and bullying does irk me though not to the degree your rhetoric suggest. I figure you should be irked at his antics words and behavior too, but since you got your tax cuts and conservative judges during good economic times you may be placated enough to ignore the other crap he spews.

He makes more noise than the average loony and we know you wingers love noise, since your incompetence didn't allow you to lock up HC, or Obama for that matter.

OUR TURN!

That is how ancient man communicated, but I wasn't talking about the bible I refer to the facts and reality of NOW

You know that wasn't the point. I don't accept anything a person on this board says is a "fact". Investigate it all. There are some here who have a history of distorting the truth.


Was that snark, or a dodge because you got nothing just NOISE?

I was simply agreeing with you. You have claimed something to be true for which you clearly have no evidence, so there is nothing else you can do. Exactly correct.


No I was referring to being specific on what the money was spent on. Or an accounting for rising cost of living or other pertinent factors to discuss.

When we go broke, I'm sure it will be comforting to you when you check into what the MONEY WE DIDN'T HAVE was spent on. That's just excuse making. The truth is, you won't get on the balanced budget bandwagon because you know full well that your hero, Mr. Obama, was the biggest budget offender of all time. But if you ever decide to get honest, then perhaps we can join together in raising our voices for fiscal sanity. Sadly, I won't hold my breath until that happens.


Maybe we should investigate you for some kind of insanity, and I admit the dufus's lying cheating and bullying does irk me though not to the degree your rhetoric suggest. I figure you should be irked at his antics words and behavior too, but since you got your tax cuts and conservative judges during good economic times you may be placated enough to ignore the other crap he spews.

I despise his abrasive words and behavior, just like I despised Obama's slick lying. The difference between me and you is that you hate Trump and so you are critical of him, but you practically worship Obama so you won't say anything negative about him. I am an equal opportunity criticizer. If you ever get to the place of being willing to be honest about Obama, then your words about Trump will begin to have a ring of honesty to them and not just the tinkling sound of desperate partisanship.

jlisenbe: Today's society claims they want truth but what they really want is "packaging" of information so that it is "fed to them" and it smells good.....its all about how good this version of truth sounds and how good this version of truth looks.....and this is one reason TRUMP isn't popular with these "touchy-feely" types: TRUMPS speaks truth WITHOUT the packaging: Its appropriate to steal the movie line: "You want the TRUTH? You can't handle the TRUTH!".

What will be funnier than all hades will be when TRUMP trounces his opponent in Nov., 2020: He is going beat the bricks off of them and even they know it. Can you imagine a weirdo like Bloomberg or Biden against Trump: Trump will clean his boots on them.

@JL

I recognize the Tea Party mentality, and like the movement was subverted by establishment repubs before, you have allowed the dufus to subvert it again.


jlisenbe: Today's society claims they want truth but what they really want is "packaging" of information so that it is "fed to them" and it smells good.....its all about how good this version of truth sounds and how good this version of truth looks.....and this is one reason TRUMP isn't popular with these "touchy-feely" types: TRUMPS speaks truth WITHOUT the packaging: Its appropriate to steal the movie line: "You want the TRUTH? You can't handle the TRUTH!".

What will be funnier than all hades will be when TRUMP trounces his opponent in Nov., 2020: He is going beat the bricks off of them and even they know it. Can you imagine a weirdo like Bloomberg or Biden against Trump: Trump will clean his boots on them.

Naw Vac, people just want to be listened to and acknowledged even if it's different than the preconceived notions of what's always been acceptable. That's our conflict, folks are tired of fitting into neat little categories to please the so called mainstream.

LOL, even if the dufus gets re elected will he have a congress that can protect him still? Half the country wants him impeached AND removed, Maybe he doesn't get removed, but he may end up severely limited and that is a good outcome too. Truth is you guys should have paid better attention when you lost the House, and started covering your butts by toning down the noise.

The TRUTH is it depends on the 2018 turnout. Dems don't have to win the WH to win the election, just winning the congress against a lame duck dufus will make a heckuva difference on the right wing loony fun and games. Just ask Obama how that works.

I don't know how you can celebrate your government becoming ineffective. It seems, on average, your government is effective for a small period every four years and maybe not even then. I know the word Congress is the opposite of progress but you don't have to prove it. I live in a place where this happens much more rarely, although it did happen last week: bloody communists, reactionaries and independents. There is nothing worse than a lame duck government just sitting there taking abuse

I expect Trump to win easily, especially if polling is correct which shows that he is going to get a significant portion of the black vote. If that happens, then it's over for the dems.

I don't know how you can celebrate your government becoming ineffective. It seems, on average, your government is effective for a small period every four years and maybe not even then. I know the word Congress is the opposite of progress but you don't have to prove it. I live in a place where this happens much more rarely, although it did happen last week: bloody communists, reactionaries and independents. There is nothing worse than a lame duck government just sitting there taking abuse

Certainly makes you wonder how the US of A is the top country in the world despite our ineffective lazy arrogant a$$es and has been for an awful long time.


I expect Trump to win easily, especially if polling is correct which shows that he is going to get a significant portion of the black vote. If that happens, then it's over for the dems.

Define significant!

Define significant!

Polling shows it to be as much as a third of the black vote. If he can go from 8% to 30%, he will win easily, and it will be an alarm bell for the dems to see black voters fleeing from their addiction to liberal ideals. It is bound to happen sooner or later.

Paraclete: Like Talaniman alluded to: Yes, we may be IMPERFECT but the U.S. is about AS PERFECT AS YOU ARE GOING TO FIND IN THIS WORLD in terms of our election process and Governmental architecture. In the U.S., we have ELECTION cycles of 2 year Congressman, 6 years Senator, and 4 year President: WE GET WHAT WE VOTE FOR, ITS THE AMERICAN WAY. If the result of that voting selection is such that it means gridlock, well, that is what it is: Its our democracy in action, even though, technically, the United States is a Republic. In any event, WE AIN'T CHANGING OUR SYSTEM.