JazzyFresh
Banned
Wtf does that have to with Kavanaugh? Pretty random comment.
The official "let's impeach Trump" thread
- Thread starter colton
- Start date
Well that’s a little tough as Trump declassified and released to the public what was on there, whereas Clinton had it scrubbed. And, having classified info there is not lawful. But that’s neither here nor there. Let’s say this same scenario plays out in some alternate universe where Hillary is president. Does that phone call have you seeing that as an obvious crime on her part? Do the players in the game affect how actions are perceived? If Trump had instead been threatening to withhold aid from Ukraine not for investigating a potential political opponent, but instead to fire a prosecutor investigating a company Don Jr. was being paid by, we’d be so laissez faire regarding Trump and beat the crime drum for Clinton?
When the right went after Clinton (or Obama), they threw everything at the wall. It didn’t really matter. There’s plenty I don’t like about either of them, but I prefer my arguments to be informed by bias as little as possible. It’s easy to do by honestly putting yourself in the shoes of the other side and asking how you would view something. That’s why you won’t find a record of me coming on here in a panic about every new Clinton allegation or Obama allegation and thinking whatever ‘crisis’ was at hand that it was pure, unprecedented evil. I never thought Clinton was going to prison because I didn’t have my head up my ***. I certainly don’t trust her and find the whole scenario shady, but I don’t view it as something that was so objectively disqualifying, at least not in terms of the standard we hold these people to. You and I would be ****ed, sure.
Why should we only read between the lines on one side? When Obama told Medvedev that he’d have more flexibility after the election, we needed to view that comment in a vacuum. Wikileaks emails are dismissed because connecting dots and reading between the lines is inappropriate and must be read in a vacuum. Now we’ve got this phone call and we’re told “nah, dawg, you’ve gotta look at it through a different lens, look at a different context, and read between the lines here. If you don’t, you’re stupid.” So is it about the principle, or is it just about the application?
We’d be totally cool if Don Jr. and Eric enriched themselves overseas and Trump withheld funding to get someone fired investigating the company they were paid by? That wouldn’t blow up all media outlets for months? But the media outlets would be absolutely livid at one of Trump’s opponents abusing their privilege by trying to get a foreign power to investigate that? There’d be calls for impeachment?
Last edited:
No. It's in context. Both are accused of rape. Is there really that big a disconnect in your mind?
JazzyFresh
Banned
Fantastic post.
Me personally I've been saying the corruption is pretty easily spotted by all parties. It would be absolutely hypocritical and childish of me to get mad at one and look past the other. Am I ok with it? No but to get so bent out of shape over it is worthless.
JazzyFresh
Banned
That had nothing to do with the conversation at hand. I asked who Kavanaugh drugged and raped... What in the flying **** does Bill Cosby have to do with that? Nothing, zero, nada
It's nothing more than not a single one of you being able to answer my question and trying to change the conversation. You all are phycological pros at that.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
It's getting really tiring having to point out to active participants in this thread how incorrect this is.
The prosecutor was explicitly not investigating the company Hunter Biden worked for. He was actively resisting its investigation. That's why he was fired. Stop repeating something you all should know by now is not true.
As an example that actually happened, I supported the notion that Franklin needed to resign. As for hypotheticals, no one really knows how they would respond.
Whereas the left was all to happy to discuss the context of the discussion.
What connections to you think are being ignored?
Depends upon whether there was a connection. Was all of the malfeasance by the company prior to Don and Eric Jr. joining it, and therefore they would not have been in any legal trouble regardless? Is the person being fired well-known for corruption in other matters?
And it is worth mentioning that Hunter Biden was never the subject of the investigation. He joined the company AFTER the stuff they were being investigated for happened.
Prove my point that you're a partisan loon? Your posts are adequate confirmation.
I don't think there's been question of Kavie boy drugging, but raping, yeah. Sure. Few have come forward, Blasely told her psychiatrist long before little k hit the supreme court. Cosby has multiple accusers, and only one instance stuck. And only after documents were unsealed where Cosby admitted to giving women drugs so he could have sex with them, but only on their consent.
JazzyFresh
Banned
After what happened to Ford, how many people are going to want to acknowledge getting more drunk than they should have 35 years ago, assuming they even remember, assuming they even noticed? Grain alcohol was almost tasteless when in punch, that's why it was used.
You're welcome to believe Kavanaugh was some paragon of virtue if you want. To me, he's just another heavy-drinking frat guy, and I knew plenty of them.