The official "let's impeach Trump" thread

[PJF]

"Abject failure"? That's about as uncreative and unconvincing a characterization as can be made. There wasn't an original thought in that lady's head. Her comments may as well have been written by Hannity himself, which in fact wouldn't surprise me to actually have been the case. Sorry, man, but posting a Fox News interview of a cookie-cutter GOP politician speaking stale insults through a fake smile isn't going to persuade anybody of anything.



I might not fully agree with Hurd's assertions of no evidence, but I very much appreciate and respect that he seems genuine and grounded. He made me think. This is the kind of engagement that should be happening, and not the antagonistic attempts at distraction coming from unlikable idiots like Devin Nunes and Jim Jordan. I wouldn't mind at all hearing more from Hurd.

Are you being a sexist douche or just obtuse? She was there for the whole thing, heard the testimonies and made up her own mind how stupid this impeachment hearing was.

 

[olden_undercover]

Are you being a sexist douche or just obtuse? She was there for the whole thing, heard the testimonies and made up her own mind how stupid this impeachment hearing was.

Hey, man-- I didn't insult you, call you names, or attack you personally, and I expect the same respect, okay? Have some class.

The words she uses, and the way she's set up by Hannity don't resonate with me, and that full interview-- to me-- seems entirely contrived. I'll admit I have a problem with Hannity-- I don't think he's a credible or objective source of information, and only works to further the deeply partisan disconnect going on in our country right now. We can agree to disagree on that basis, if you're cool with that.

 

[silesian]

Polls showing that people see through your idiotic bs.

http://emersonpolling.com/2019/11/2...es-biden-and-sanders-lead-democratic-primary/

You guys...YOU, are going to be the rason Trump wins. People are going to vote against you and your fairy tale bs more than they will for Trump. We see through you and your psychotic obsession. We are tired if it. You are nothing more than poor losers who will stop at nothing to get your way. Shut up and start helping instead of resisting.

Just wait until we start seeing how this whole Russia hoax started that you all fell for. Just imagine an Obama FBI agent doctoring evidence to get the FISA warrant. @Red @silesian (the faux conservative) won't say a word.

Vladimir approves of this message. Brainwashing mission: successful. Your posts remind me a lot of the ones I see on twitter from Russian bots. Onward, comrade! Tovarich!

 

[silesian]

@Red @silesian (the faux conservative) won't say a word.

Every insult from you is a high complement. If you ever say anything nice, I would be very worried about my position.

It really doesn't bother me at all that you choose to categorize me as a liberal. Every place needs a village idiot, so please continue.

 

[silesian]

Watched a ton of Sondland on Wednesday and Castor's questioning yesterday. Holy ****, did Sondland invent this entire quid quo pro thing up as a story inside his head? He basically says as much during Castor's questioning:

-Trump told me he did not want any quid pro quo
-I have no evidence, these are all my assumptions

Watch it yourself and tell me what you make of it.

OJ told us he was not the murderer.

 

[JazzyFresh]

Every insult from you is a high complement. If you ever say anything nice, I would be very worried about my position.

It really doesn't bother me at all that you choose to categorize me as a liberal. Every place needs a village idiot, so please continue.

It wasn't an insult. I was actually right that you wouldn't say a word about corruption against your own party. You're so quick to call it out against Trump but when an FBI agent allegedly lied to get the FISA warrant you don't say a word. It just shows you don't give a single damn about corruption. You don't...

 

[Zombie]

What people seem to be missing with Sondland is that the reason he claims he had to presume there was an improper quid pro quo was because he didn't see Trump's July 25th readout with Zelensky where he made that clear. His claim was during his work toward getting a meeting set up and the aid released, he came to presume there was a quid pro quo.

This has been shown to be a correct presumption based on the 25th of July phone call readout, as well as Trump's and Mulvaney's public statement since this all became public.

 

[JazzyFresh]

Vladimir approves of this message. Brainwashing mission: successful. Your posts remind me a lot of the ones I see on twitter from Russian bots. Onward, comrade! Tovarich!

Says the guy wanting to impeach an elected official over nothing. Doing exactly what Putin was shooting for no matter the candidate.

 

[JazzyFresh]

No matter red, blue, socialist I don't wish impeachment on any elected official like you guys. What I would want is for my party to get the clue and work harder for me and become better. Look at your party... What have they done for you?

 

[olden_undercover]

What people seem to be missing with Sondland is that the reason he claims he had to presume there was an improper quid pro quo was because he didn't see Trump's July 25th readout with Zelensky where he made that clear. His claim was during his work toward getting a meeting set up and the aid released, he came to presume there was a quid pro quo.

This has been shown to be a correct presumption based on the 25th of July phone call readout, as well as Trump's and Mulvaney's public statement since this all became public.

Great comment, Zombie-- thanks. I hadn't seen that broken down anywhere, and it totally clarifies the contradicting statements.

 

[Harambe]

What people seem to be missing with Sondland is that the reason he claims he had to presume there was an improper quid pro quo was because he didn't see Trump's July 25th readout with Zelensky where he made that clear. His claim was during his work toward getting a meeting set up and the aid released, he came to presume there was a quid pro quo.

This has been shown to be a correct presumption based on the 25th of July phone call readout, as well as Trump's and Mulvaney's public statement since this all became public.

The guys slimey as ****. But best I can tell, he was doing everything he could to push the aid through. Dirty, but did his job. Acting in the best interest of both countries relations.

The fact that it took three attempts to just get him to say trump would benefit from an investigation into burisma(biden) is telling

 

[JazzyFresh]

What people seem to be missing with Sondland is that the reason he claims he had to presume there was an improper quid pro quo was because he didn't see Trump's July 25th readout with Zelensky where he made that clear. His claim was during his work toward getting a meeting set up and the aid released, he came to presume there was a quid pro quo.

This has been shown to be a correct presumption based on the 25th of July phone call readout, as well as Trump's and Mulvaney's public statement since this all became public.

He still presumed as of Wednesday... There was no "I presumed then but don't now" like you claim.