That's what the trial is for.......................................!
![]() |
That's what the trial is for.......................................!
No it's not. The House is responsible for investigating allegations and determining if the evidence warrants a trial. The Senate is only responsible for evaluating the evidence the House has uncovered. That being the case, the dems are in for a long ride.
So are Moscow Mitch and repubs despite the spin. I don't think either side gets through this unscathed.
No one gets out of a fight unscathed Tal, but you know I think the ones who have been mauled the most are the demonrats, they have demonstrated how shallow they are and things have been uncovered they would rather not be known
Like what? That the private attorney for the dufus was also mucking about in Venezuela as well as the Ukraine and our government knew nothing about it? Or the majority leader Moscow Mitch was going around his own government cutting deals with Russian oligharchs? You say dems are shallow for breaking up and exposing the dufus and his sycophants scandalous corruption?
The smoke must be getting to you clete if you believe a word the dufus says. That's not good.
I try to take abalanced view Tal and to use the current position where there is smoke there is fire and fire burns indiscriminately
You can't take a balance view with our dufus. Whether you fact check, or follow the money, you get a lying cheater. This whole impeachment deal is about his lying and cheating. It's all he knows and conservatives think that's okay.
I don't know of anyone better at lying and cheating than HC was. And the group now contending for the dem nomination is the biggest collection of incompetents I've ever seen. When Liz Warren and Bernie Sanders are serious considerations, then you know you're in trouble. So if you want to complain about Trump, then you need to nominate an "anti-Trump". Good luck with that one.
I certainly like your optimism in the face of the current fact that your elected choice is a crook of the worst kind and shall forever carry that label of being impeached in his first term. I know no matter what the evidence is against him his sycophants say it's not enough or is a lie, but don't all crooks say that? Nixon did for sure. That's okay, we haven't started presenting the case with the world watching as we move into a brand new decade and the court seems poised to rule on a few subpoenas, and we may have a few more witnesses to hear from, you know the ones that hide behind the dufus.
Seems if you had witnesses that would clear you or back up your side they would have been heard from by now but we shall see what happens. So you just keep hollering Hillary, and we will keep hollering dufus, and see who gets got!
Considering who did the impeaching, I would suggest he wear it as a badge of honor.Quote:
shall forever carry that label of being impeached in his first term.
Still waiting on those names.Quote:
. I know no matter what the evidence is against him
Thank goodness we do not operate by that gosh awful and warped view of justice. Of course you do have the Ukrainian PM and Foreign Minister both saying there was no quid pro quo. One of your beloved witnesses actually said that Trump had told him months ago there was no guid pro quo. But still, you do have all those witnesses saying they had first hand knowledge of criminal activ....No wait. You don't have those witnesses, do you? CASE DISMISSED!!Quote:
Seems if you had witnesses that would clear you or back up your side they would have been heard from by now
To be sure. The only thing to see in the future will be if there are any dem senators who will do the honorable thing and admit that there is not sufficient evidence to impeach a sitting president of the United States.Quote:
So you just keep hollering Hillary, and we will keep hollering dufus, and see who gets got!
The impeachment is a done deal. It will be forever part of his legacy.
To be sure. The only thing to see in the future will be if there are any dem senators who will do the honorable thing and admit that there is not sufficient evidence to impeach a sitting president of the United States. From JL.
That's not how it works. He was IMPEACHED. Now CONVICTING him, is another matter. Or NOT convicting him or anything in between. That's what trials are about. No president has ever been removed in our history...YET! Nixon resigned, Johnson not convicted, Clinton convicted but not removed. He lost his law license though.
Maybe the dufus won't be convicted but forced to wear a muzzle, have his twitter account closed, have his phone taken away, or some other thing but his impeachment sticks forever like I and WG have said.
That's true. The question concerns who should bear the shame, Trump or the House dems. You know what I think.Quote:
Maybe the dufus won't be convicted but forced to wear a muzzle, have his twitter account closed, have his phone taken away, or some other thing but his impeachment sticks forever like I and WG have said.
He bears no shame. The shame falls on the feckless House dems who had decided, only days after his election, to try and remove him through impeachment. It is not going to work, and could very well backfire on the dems as the American people watch this political circus proceed. It is purely political and has nothing to do with justice.
If you have evidence of that, then call the House dems immediately. They couldn't find any. As I've been saying, I'm waiting on the name(s).Quote:
It has everything to do with his unlawful behavior as a president.
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:45 AM. |