What's new

The official "let's impeach Trump" thread

I’m confused. I think he was insulting trump supporters and if are an independent and not a trump supporter, why would you be personally offended?
He was talking specifically to me you idiot.

"It's supporters like you that I would consider a traitor."

PS I'm not offended. All I'm doing is pointing out how absolutely stupid it was. I know I'm not a traitor.
 
OK, so let's sum up what we know so far. Two businessmen helped Rudy Giuliani work the Ukrainians to investigate Biden at the request of Donald Trump. Those businessmen, who described themselves as part of Trump's legal team, were illegally funneling Russian money into Trump's campaign, as well as donating to some of his most staunch congressional defenders, including the Republican leader in the House.

Those businessmen wanted the removal of a career US ambassador to Ukraine because she was opposed to Ukraine replacing two members of their state owned gas company with those two men. Trump later removed that ambassador, and replaced her with a man who donated millions of dollars to his campaign and later inauguration fund.

Finally Trump withheld military aid from Ukraine to try to get their president to, again, work with Giuliani and others to dig up dirt on Joe Biden and his son.

The DOJ was aware of the investigation into the two businessmen for illegal campaign contributions, but declined to take any action when the whistleblower presented them with the complaint about Trump's phone call, which was related to the matter.

Yeah, this doesn't look like a criminal conspiracy at all.
 
Last edited:
OK, so let's sum up what we know so far. Two businessmen helped Rudy Giuliani work the Ukrainians to investigate Biden at the request of Donald Trump. Those businessmen were illegally funneling Russian money into Trump's campaign, as well as donating to some of his most staunch congressional defenders, including the Republican leader in the House.

Those businessmen wanted the removal of a career US ambassador to Ukraine because she was opposed to Ukraine replacing two members of their state owned gas company with those two men. Trump later removed that ambassador, and replaced her with a man who donated millions of dollars to his campaign and later inauguration fund.

Finally Trump withheld military aid from Ukraine to try to get their president to, again, work with Giuliani and others to dig up dirt on Joe Biden and his son.

The DOJ was aware of the investigation into the two businessmen for illegal campaign contributions, but declined to take any action when the whistleblower presented them with the complaint about Trump's phone call, which was related to the matter.

Yeah, this doesn't look like a criminal conspiracy at all.
At least you admit it's a conspiracy.
 
When you say "this doesn't look like" you lose the idea that it's a fact. Things "looking like" is subjective thus it's a conspiracy until fact. Now if you said "this is a criminal conspiracy" you're opinion would hold weight.
Thank you for this lesson on pedantry. I will take your words to heart.
 
OK, so let's sum up what we know so far. Two businessmen helped Rudy Giuliani work the Ukrainians to investigate Biden at the request of Donald Trump. Those businessmen, who described themselves as part of Trump's legal team, were illegally funneling Russian money into Trump's campaign, as well as donating to some of his most staunch congressional defenders, including the Republican leader in the House.

Those businessmen wanted the removal of a career US ambassador to Ukraine because she was opposed to Ukraine replacing two members of their state owned gas company with those two men. Trump later removed that ambassador, and replaced her with a man who donated millions of dollars to his campaign and later inauguration fund.

Finally Trump withheld military aid from Ukraine to try to get their president to, again, work with Giuliani and others to dig up dirt on Joe Biden and his son.

The DOJ was aware of the investigation into the two businessmen for illegal campaign contributions, but declined to take any action when the whistleblower presented them with the complaint about Trump's phone call, which was related to the matter.

Yeah, this doesn't look like a criminal conspiracy at all.
I guess I should add to this that we also know Rudy met with these two men in Dallas hours before they were intercepted by law enforcement with one way tickets out of the country.

That's not suspicious at all.
 
OK, so let's sum up what we know so far. Two businessmen helped Rudy Giuliani work the Ukrainians to investigate Biden at the request of Donald Trump. Those businessmen, who described themselves as part of Trump's legal team, were illegally funneling Russian money into Trump's campaign, as well as donating to some of his most staunch congressional defenders, including the Republican leader in the House.

Those businessmen wanted the removal of a career US ambassador to Ukraine because she was opposed to Ukraine replacing two members of their state owned gas company with those two men. Trump later removed that ambassador, and replaced her with a man who donated millions of dollars to his campaign and later inauguration fund.

Finally Trump withheld military aid from Ukraine to try to get their president to, again, work with Giuliani and others to dig up dirt on Joe Biden and his son.

The DOJ was aware of the investigation into the two businessmen for illegal campaign contributions, but declined to take any action when the whistleblower presented them with the complaint about Trump's phone call, which was related to the matter.

Yeah, this doesn't look like a criminal conspiracy at all.

I remember when liberals were screaming about how citizens united would invite foreigners to unjustly influence our elections. Conservatives including Justice Alito claimed we were merely being over dramatic. Remember? Justice Alito during the SOTU:

“Last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limits in our elections. I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities.”

Check out the videotape: Alito’s “not true” was spoken specifically in response to Obama’s claim about the risk of foreign influence in U.S. elections.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2018/12/21/justice-alito-you-owe-president-obama-an-apology/

Good times.
 
This again... just blows my mind.

People are okay with this?



Russia.
I remember when liberals were screaming about how citizens united would invite foreigners to unjustly influence our elections. Conservatives including Justice Alito claimed we were merely being over dramatic. Remember? Justice Alito during the SOTU:



https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2018/12/21/justice-alito-you-owe-president-obama-an-apology/

Good times.
Russia.
Look at this photograph!!!



This again... just blows my mind.

People are okay with this?



Russia again? Who would have known?!
 
This again... just blows my mind.

People are okay with this?


Parnas met with Sessions after making sizable donations and asked him to push for the US ambassador removal. Shortly after the meeting Sessions wrote a letter to Pompeo asking for just that. Months later, the request came to fruition.

The swamp, it's endless!
 
I’m confused. I think he was insulting trump supporters and if are an independent and not a trump supporter, why would you be personally offended?

Yes, I did exhibit poor self control and referred to him as a traitor, in fact. And as he replied to me, I don't know him at all. I agree with @Jonah in his definition of treason. I have generally seen it as applying in time of war, and constituting "aid and comfort to the enemy", but it would also include betrayal of ones country in a non war context. Where I am really coming from stems directly from a thread I started in the summer of 2016, where I asked if Putin was trying to help Trump win. It seemed among some that such an attack was no biggie and may even be justified since we had also interfered in the internal affairs of other nations.

As I noted to Jonah, it would be very difficult to call Americans with such an attitudes "patriots". Not traitors as such, but unwilling to defend their own country.

As well, people who can see clearly what is going on with the president's responses to Congress can see he has zero respect for our Constitution. That's zero. If Trump supporters continue to support him despite that, then they too, I must assume, have little respect for our Consitution. Of course, I understand they would likely simply deny that Trump disrespects the Constitution. But, sorry, he clearly does, and I can only think less of his supporters for siding with him under those circumstances.

But, it is our partisanship raised to the level of tribalism that is at the heart of this, and I prefer to think of Trump supporters as being seriously misguided by that tribalism. If owning the libs means Trump can tear up the Constitution to do so, well, at least some of his supporters will be fine with that. And since Trump seems to be trying to put himself above the law, at least some of his supporters not only do not believe "it can't happen here", they must be fine with that as well. So, whatever label fits such supporters, I'll just say it does not seem to support the American values I was raised to believe in.
 
He was talking specifically to me you idiot.

"It's supporters like you that I would consider a traitor."

PS I'm not offended. All I'm doing is pointing out how absolutely stupid it was. I know I'm not a traitor.

I'll own my own words, but I do think you were overanalyzing my original response to @silesian, where I called his short comment "succinct" and I laughed. Obviously, your objection was to me basically giving a thumbs up to a comment that included the observation that Trump supporters were traitors.

But, in actuality, at the time, I bout near fell out of my chair laughing at "this is the WTF age in American history". I just found that, in particular, spot on, in its own way. So, there was a misunderstanding here, but I'll acknowledge I compounded that by continuing to use the term "traitor". It really wasn't worth all the back and forth that resulted, but in my comment prior to this one, I stated my position, hopefully in clearer terms.
 
Like what? What do you suggest I do to this guy wearing a MAGA hat sitting across Taco Time(lunch)? He's just minding his own business enjoying himself hurting no one.
I was thinking more of discussions either in person or here on Jazzfazz. No reason to barge in and interrupt a stranger’s lunch no matter what kind of hat they’re wearing. That’s just needlessly rude behavior.
 
your premise that all traitors are committing treason is incorrect and certainly not common usage.

you claim that I deviated from “common usage” but provided no evidence to back up your claim. Please explain specifically what you mean.

And finally, you are arguing that because trump calls people traitors for a certain reason, that everyone who does so must be for the same reason. This is a logical fallacy/ false generalization.
You know, I don’t believe your pretense. Traitor has been inexorably linked to treason since Benedict Arnold. That’s the common usage. As for false generalizations, I wasn’t comparing everyone who calls someone a traitor to Trump. I was comparing you, and your usage in this thread, to Trump. Not only do you use the word in the same manner as Trump, as a deliberately false rhetorical bludgeon, but you relish its effect. A way to troll other posters. Also, very Trump like.
 
Top