Page 206 of 272 FirstFirst ... 106156196204205206207208216256 ... LastLast
Results 2,051 to 2,060 of 2715

Thread: Pelosi: Impeachment Is Moving Forward

  1. Top | #2051
    Elder Contributor angelo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    11,832
    Archived
    5,706
    Total Posts
    17,538
    Rep Power
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Half-Life View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post

    Crickets...
    There's nothing in that clip that says "Biden shookdown Ukraine for his son's job".

    Yes, a LEGAL quid pro quo was asked for of Ukraine. In exchange for our monetary aid, Ukraine needed to clean up the corruption in the country. One of the corrupt things was prosecutor Sholkin who was specifically not prosecuting corruption. You still have not made any connection between Biden and illegal acts.

    The money Trump withheld had specifically been cleared by the DOD's requirement that they meet previously agreed upon anti-corruption goals, which they did. The GAO determined this was a violation of the Impoundment Act. It was done to personally aid Trump and smear a political opponent. Seeking foreign aid for an election is illegal. Using the office of the Presidency for personal gain is abuse of power.
    What makes you think the Trump needs foreign aid to defeat Biden or any of the busload of clown wannabees in November? That's what this impeachment bullshit is all about. An attempt by the left to grab power at any cost.

  2. Top | #2052
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Republic of Korea
    Posts
    1,270
    Archived
    1,216
    Total Posts
    2,486
    Rep Power
    67
    Quote Originally Posted by angelo View Post
    What makes you think the Trump needs foreign aid to defeat Biden or any of the busload of clown wannabees in November? That's what this impeachment bullshit is all about. An attempt by the left to grab power at any cost.
    Read it again. He didn't say that he thinks Trump needs illegal foreign aid to win. In fact, what we think he needs to win is entirely beside the point. It is only what Trump thinks he needs in order to win that is relevant here. Unfortunately, "tiny hands Trump" has proven that he is an insecure pansy over and over. He likely thinks he needs every single edge and back ally deal to win.

  3. Top | #2053
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,009
    Archived
    17,741
    Total Posts
    26,750
    Rep Power
    72
    Oh I see, angelo. So it's just a coincidence that Trump betrayed democracy in his impeachable quest for power. We have to ignore it. Because. Democrats.

  4. Top | #2054
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Burnsville, MN
    Posts
    3,328
    Archived
    2,911
    Total Posts
    6,239
    Rep Power
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by angelo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post

    There's nothing in that clip that says "Biden shookdown Ukraine for his son's job".

    Yes, a LEGAL quid pro quo was asked for of Ukraine. In exchange for our monetary aid, Ukraine needed to clean up the corruption in the country. One of the corrupt things was prosecutor Sholkin who was specifically not prosecuting corruption. You still have not made any connection between Biden and illegal acts.

    The money Trump withheld had specifically been cleared by the DOD's requirement that they meet previously agreed upon anti-corruption goals, which they did. The GAO determined this was a violation of the Impoundment Act. It was done to personally aid Trump and smear a political opponent. Seeking foreign aid for an election is illegal. Using the office of the Presidency for personal gain is abuse of power.
    What makes you think the Trump needs foreign aid to defeat Biden or any of the busload of clown wannabees in November? That's what this impeachment bullshit is all about. An attempt by the left to grab power at any cost.
    What makes you think, regardless of whether he "needs it" or not that the fact of him doing it isn't still an abuse of power, and a criminal act?

    Is it any less a criminal act if a billionaire Rob's a bank at gunpoint? Just because they don't "need it"?

  5. Top | #2055
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    25,778
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    68,251
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by angelo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post

    There's nothing in that clip that says "Biden shookdown Ukraine for his son's job".

    Yes, a LEGAL quid pro quo was asked for of Ukraine. In exchange for our monetary aid, Ukraine needed to clean up the corruption in the country. One of the corrupt things was prosecutor Sholkin who was specifically not prosecuting corruption. You still have not made any connection between Biden and illegal acts.

    The money Trump withheld had specifically been cleared by the DOD's requirement that they meet previously agreed upon anti-corruption goals, which they did. The GAO determined this was a violation of the Impoundment Act. It was done to personally aid Trump and smear a political opponent. Seeking foreign aid for an election is illegal. Using the office of the Presidency for personal gain is abuse of power.
    What makes you think the Trump needs foreign aid to defeat Biden or any of the busload of clown wannabees in November?
    I can't read Trump's mind. All we have is the evidence where Trump wanted a public announcement that Ukraine was investigating Biden for corruption... and the lack of any reference from Trump regarding corruption in Ukraine prior to Zelensky getting elected.

  6. Top | #2056
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,009
    Archived
    17,741
    Total Posts
    26,750
    Rep Power
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by angelo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post

    There's nothing in that clip that says "Biden shookdown Ukraine for his son's job".

    Yes, a LEGAL quid pro quo was asked for of Ukraine. In exchange for our monetary aid, Ukraine needed to clean up the corruption in the country. One of the corrupt things was prosecutor Sholkin who was specifically not prosecuting corruption. You still have not made any connection between Biden and illegal acts.

    The money Trump withheld had specifically been cleared by the DOD's requirement that they meet previously agreed upon anti-corruption goals, which they did. The GAO determined this was a violation of the Impoundment Act. It was done to personally aid Trump and smear a political opponent. Seeking foreign aid for an election is illegal. Using the office of the Presidency for personal gain is abuse of power.
    What makes you think the Trump needs foreign aid to defeat Biden or any of the busload of clown wannabees in November?
    I can't read Trump's mind. All we have is the evidence where Trump wanted a public announcement that Ukraine was investigating Biden for corruption... and the lack of any reference from Trump regarding corruption in Ukraine prior to Zelensky getting elected.
    ...and Biden entering the race and polling at numbers that put him in the lead and in the lead of Trump...

    ...and a history of Trump making up conspiracy theories and memes against previous opponents who started to challenge in the polls...

    To be clear, I know you know, Jimmy. I just think when we talk to conservatives we need to bring up what Trump did to conservatives such as Ted Cruz. These facts are in their brain somewhere even if unfairness of slights against Democrats cannot permeate the bubble.

    I will go one step further even. Evidence of Trump's involvement in making up such conspiracy theories ought to be included in the impeachment trial and/or arguments. Senator Ted Cruz needs to be on a hot seat for letting Trump make up stuff constantly even about his family.

    Interestingly, when Trump talked about the conspiracy theory as Cruz surged in the polls, he referenced the National Enquirer and said of the story coming out "I had nothing to do with it." Oh really? Who even accused him of that at the time?

    But it should be mentioned:
    This is not the first time the Enquirer has injected itself into the presidential campaign. A March Enquirer piece alleged multiple extramarital affairs for Cruz — an accusation that his campaign vehemently denied. Trump also landed a rare endorsement from the publication in March of this year, and has written several op-eds for the magazine. In addition to Cruz, the Enquirer has attacked many of Trump’s other campaign rivals, including Jeb Bush, Carly Fiorina, Ben Carson and Hillary Clinton.

    David Pecker, the CEO of the Enquirer’s parent company, American Media Inc., has been said to have a close personal relationship with Trump. New York Magazine called them “friends for years,” and the New York Daily News reported that they are “very close.” Trump has voiced support for Pecker in the past, endorsing him to take over Time magazine in 2013. It is worth noting that the Enquirer has also run several less-than-flattering stories on Trump in the past, especially in the 1990s before Pecker came on as CEO.
    https://www.factcheck.org/2016/05/tr...-tabloid-tale/

    Speaking of Pecker, this brings us roundabout to Stormy Daniels.

    But bringing up Cruz would be more effective.

  7. Top | #2057
    Veteran Member Treedbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    out on a limb
    Posts
    1,619
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by blastula View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by barbos View Post
    Democrat House lady (Val Demings) in Senate called pronounced Yanukovich as "Nanuvokich".
    Yeah, she mangled that, but she still did better than on her first day. It look like a couple of the House managers went up there without having practiced their presentation before. They really should have had Amash, he could have done that much.

    Mostly they were very good though. Schiff is great, just like he was at the House hearings, in summarizing everything.
    Schiff got high praise for his presentations from Lindsey Graham during a break in the hearings yesterday. I couldn't agree more. He said he wove a very clear "tapestry" of how the events unfolded. Schiff is the one they tended to stay awake for. Also Zoe Lofgren held my attention. The other managers that I saw gave more or less typical, cadenced House floor speeches. Schiff was very convincing in how he offered the evidence they actually have, in short excerpts of video and quotes from the House investigation, and then ("wait for it"): "Wouldn't you like to read the actual documents for what was said? I'd love to read them to you, but I can't. But you can have them just for the asking, in something called a subpeona." (Paraphrased). It was brilliant and clear and inescapable.
    Last edited by Treedbear; 01-24-2020 at 04:51 PM.

  8. Top | #2058
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    25,778
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    68,251
    Rep Power
    100
    Graham's praise was wonderful... beautiful... condescending... hand waving...

  9. Top | #2059
    Loony Running The Asylum ZiprHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Do you like my pretty crown?
    Posts
    16,718
    Archived
    3,034
    Total Posts
    19,752
    Rep Power
    90
    You think that was condescending? I noticed Moscow Mitch yesterday announcing the schedule, "and we will take a break for dinner at 6pm IF NEEDED.

    Fuck you, you prick.
    When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.

  10. Top | #2060
    Veteran Member Treedbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    out on a limb
    Posts
    1,619
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Graham's praise was wonderful... beautiful... condescending... hand waving...
    For someone who's been Trump's main attack dog/golfing buddy (i.e.; knows when to look the other way when Trump pushes someone's ball out of the way) it was extremely generous. He got hand-wavy about calling witnesses using the excuse that he didn't want to turn the trial into a circus. But that was after he explained that if Dems could call their witnesses then the Reps would want to call Biden. Which everyone knows could have no other purpose than to turn the trial into a circus. He might be thinking that would look bad for the Repubs. He also said he doesn't buy many of Trump's claims about Ukraine having Clinton's server and the Russians not having hacked the Dems. It almost seems as though Schiff's argument had convinced him, but he's still hoping for a hail mary play by Trump's defense team.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •