Kavanaugh sexually assaulted someone when he was in college.
Russia interfered in our election.
What's your point again?
The official "let's impeach Trump" thread
- Thread starter colton
- Start date
Russia interfered in our election.
What's your point again?
Getting Traded
Banned
Well said.
Getting Traded
Banned
It has been made known that both whistleblowers are members of the Intelligence Community -- apparently CIA. So, they aren't exactly nobodies. It's their job to see that the rule of law is followed, and in their opinion, Trump's activities are unlawful under the Constitution. And who says that any of us are supporting Kavanaugh. I certainly am not, though I would agree that to deny him on the basis of what he did as a frat boy was not right. But there was plenty else to deny him, based on his judicial record. If you didn't already know, Kavanaugh is close to Barr, who also had a close association with the dirt bag Epstein.
JazzyFresh
Banned
A) did he? I didn't realize it was a fact.
B) who was president when Russia meddled? We knew this was happening as way as 2014.
Credible testimony has been given and I accept it as evidence of the fact.
What the **** does that have to do with anything?
JazzyFresh
Banned
Lol of course you do.
We're talking about Russia. Collusion was not found so what we do know is that the Obama administration allowed it to happen. Theories of why he did are out there but I think the one where Obama allowed meddling so he could get his Iran deal done is pretty suspicious. It would answer why his administration was told to "stand down"
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
No idea what you are talking about here. Your posts have turned into the rantings of a lunatic.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Zombie
Well-Known Member
I love seeing this line from the same people who accuse Obama of "spying" on the Trump campaign.
Considering members of the Trump campaign were soliciting Russian help in the election, was Obama investigating Russian interference efforts or not?
You can't have it both ways.
Red
Well-Known Member
So let's have this unknown person testify to the appropriate House committees. Let he or she identify the source(s) within the White House who heard the call, and conveyed impressions to that whistleblower. There are others besides the unknown whistleblower to hear from.
As for a court of law, in this instance, that would be the Senate, since we're talking impeachment. I don't want to see an obstruction of Congress count as the only Article of Impeachment. I want to hear the evidence, and hear from the witnesses and informants where the Ukraine matter is concerned. But, your president is refusing to recognize that the Constitution grants the Legislative branch the checks and balances power of oversight over the Executive branch. This is very unconstitutional of him, I believe.
We were supposed to hear from the EU ambassador, Sondland, yesterday. Earlier in this thread you made a point of stating that nobody here wanted to mention that Sondland said "no quid pro quo" in the text message exchange with Taylor. But, what you did not mention is that there was a 5 hour gap between Taylor saying it was "crazy" to link assistance to Ukraine with investigating the Bidens, and Sondland's next text reply. Further, of all the comments in the text exchange, that reply by Sondland sounds like it was written by a lawyer. You also failed to mention that Sondland ended his text by saying let's stop texting about this. I wonder why. Actually, no, I don't:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/wh...ed-trump-texting-no-quid-pro-quo-top-n1063841
Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland consulted directly with President Donald Trump before telling the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine that there had been "no quid pro quo” regarding the administration's pressure campaign on the country and urging the diplomat to stop texting about his concerns, a person with knowledge of the call confirmed to NBC News.
Sondland spoke to Trump by phone on Sept. 9 before responding to acting Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor's remark that it would be “crazy” to link Ukraine assistance to help with a political campaign, the person said. When Sondland responded several hours later, he told Taylor that Trump had been “crystal clear” that there had been no quid pro quo.
Of course you believe that.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
It doesn't matter what the political affiliations of the whistleblowers are. Everything they have complained about has been verified through the call's summarized transcript, through Rudy's rantings on TV, and through Donald's own actions.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Zombie
Well-Known Member
It's almost incredible to see them continue to go to this well. Their supposed political bias might have some meaning if what they alleged was inaccurate, but it's all been borne out as being true.
The truth doesn't change just because of the political affiliation of the person saying it.
JazzyFresh
Banned
***
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
You would think this was obvious... But it appears that 40 percent of this country, including several frequent posters here, don't get it. It's so Orwellian that even Orwell must be rolling in his grave.
JazzyFresh
Banned
Hell yeah let's have this person testify. Everyone but the Democrats want that. I've been calling on an inquiry vote for days all while Democrats know damn well giving the right their fair access just might end the entire party.
To your second hypothetical that's all it is. What if by wanting to end the text he didn't care to get sucked into this very scenario. At no point did he incriminate anybody even though Taylor tried. You are making up a fairy tale scenario. Sondland specifically said there is "no quid pro quo". Twist that all you want but it's right there in writing. Nowhere and I mean nowhere is there any quid pro quo. It's a figment of your imagination.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
Doesn't need to be quid pro quo to be impeachable silly.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Last edited:
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Quid pro quo is so fun to say.
I’m going to check back here to see who the last rat will be to jump off the sinking ship.
drudge is fed up
Tucker has condemned trump
Even that moron from fox and friends
Lindsay
Will you be last man standing?
Yet here you guys are. Deaf to facts and hanging on to the guy who promised you to feel good about being a white male again.
He scared you into his camp. And he won’t be there to hold your hand as his historically terrible rein comes to an end.
Man, this is going to be soooooo painful that I almost feel bad for these mentally challenged nimrods.
drudge is fed up
Tucker has condemned trump
Even that moron from fox and friends
Lindsay
Will you be last man standing?
Yet here you guys are. Deaf to facts and hanging on to the guy who promised you to feel good about being a white male again.
He scared you into his camp. And he won’t be there to hold your hand as his historically terrible rein comes to an end.
Man, this is going to be soooooo painful that I almost feel bad for these mentally challenged nimrods.