The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Oh cool! More crimes to impeach!
The official "let's impeach Trump" thread
- Thread starter colton
- Start date
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
Oh cool. More nonsense to debunk.
Since we know this game so well you are gonna need more stories and bring them faster too. Because all we have to do at this point is just automatically dismiss them. No need to discuss.
Next
Zombie
Well-Known Member
I don't want to blow your mind or anything, but the US Constitution explicitly lays out the duty of congress to investigate and potentially impeach the President of the United States when they deem it necessary.
It has no such clause for the President to order such investigations into his political opponents.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
I guess I got my answer. The president has directed his AG to enlist foreign Intel services to undermine our own in an attempt to discredit its findings and exonerate...Russia.
That is one hell of a sentence.
Last edited:
There is no need for next. Trump admitted asking Ukraine to find dirt on Biden.
You don’t need anything else.
I’m assuming the investigation into Burisma must have then surely picked up with Shokin’s ouster, no? Biden Sr. And Jr.’s interest magically converge 5,000 miles overseas and it’s a huge coincidence. Biden’s son gets involved with a company that’s already been investigated for corruption and money laundering and Biden wants the investigator fired for not investigating companies such as Burisma, who’s paying his son more than 10x the average US household income? Clearly the clear message Ukraine received, and any incoming prosecutor, is that Biden wants to go after his son’s company. Perhaps Devin Nunes could do an Adam Schmidt on the House floor and give his ‘parody’ interaction of Biden to Burisma “hey, I know you’ve been investigated for corruption and money laundering, but I want you to do me a favor. My son is a fine young man. He’d be perfect on your board. You bring him on and I’ll take care of the prosecutors.” But, of course we can’t do that, because it’s just stupid to make up hyperbole, assuming the world works like a mafia movie. Or... maybe not. I should have that frame of mind when viewing the transcript and the whistleblower report, but it only leads to absolute paranoid fantasy if I apply it elsewhere.
But, should Don Jr. be in this position, we’d favor the more charitable interpretation? We wouldn’t read between those lines? We wouldn’t suggest Don Jr. landed his highly lucrative position (doing what, exactly?) in an exchange for Trump sending a message on not attempting to investigate Burisma? Trump throwing around $1 billion wouldn’t have any implied meaning to any prosecution on who’s running the show and who they’re ultimately answering to? We’d take a gander at that political nugget and say, “nah, Don Sr. and Don Jr. are creeps, but there’s really nothing to see here.” I’m confident we’d all accept their interest converging internationally as just a monumental coincidence and anomaly. We’re told to read between the lines to see the painfully obvious quid pro quo in the transcript that is implied. But looking at the Biden affair with any possible implications made to Ukraine is, well, only stuff that happens in Hollywood.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Don't worry about if don jr were in this position.
Just stick with what's happening instead.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
I’m worrying about what Trump did as much I’d be worrying about it if Clinton had done it. If you think that’s bias speaking, check out my posting history regarding Clinton or any Obama posts from when he was in office. I believe the retort would be that “well, duh, Clinton and Obama never did anything like this,” which I’d have to suggest may be someone else’s bias speaking.
Bottom line is that there’s a certain level of priming that’s happening, just like conservatives have their own priming that’s led them to believe all sorts of things that never came into fruition. If you don’t see this as a monumental crisis then it’s presumed that you’re just a partisan rube. There are of plenty of people on the left who are frustrated with the nonsense being paraded around because it is distracting from Trump’s worst policies, and this quote from an article today from Aaron Mate [progressive, not a conservative] probably highlights it best:
https://www.thenation.com/article/ukraine-scandal-democrats/
Zombie
Well-Known Member
According to this, yes in fact the investigation did pick up, and after months of renewed investigation it was closed pending outstanding fines and taxes be paid by Burisma.
https://www.kyivpost.com/business-w...ment-agencies-paid-full-outstanding-fees.html
I think Biden actually should have sat this one out, because as you point out, his involvement could end up with Ukraine getting mixed signals, and undermine his efforts.
If you have a problem with the ludicrous sums of money large companies pay members of their board, I agree with this also! I wonder if you think we should apply that standard to US companies as well.
So it sounds like they got away with just having to pay the equivalent of about $7M in taxes that they owed. Article states that outside of that they paid about $205M in taxes over 2 years. So not a bad punishment. Sounds like the kind of thing you’d pay a $50k/month insurance premium for.
All that aside, I’m not here for #Biden4Prison! or #****thiscorrupt****these****inglibs!! I don’t even think Biden’s possible shadiness is the biggest thing facing our country. But if this were Trump and Don Jr., with a President Hillary Clinton talking to Ukraine, nobody would be giving two ****s about what Clinton did and the call on Trump wouldn’t be about whether he did it or committed treason, but whether or not he should be hung. This would be the biggest cable news story on the planet. But since the characters are currently cast in different parts of this play, the Democrats are playing the hand dealt. Hard to say this judgement is not impacted by a 3-year foreplay that promised an epic climax but delivered a hospitalizable case of blue balls.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
Well, neither of us are privy to the facts in this case so there's really no way to judge whether or not the fines were appropriate or not. At this point it just seems like you are simply positing theories that align with your preconceived notions of wrongdoing. There were lots of examples of Shokin's corruption that led the entire western world to push for his ouster. This wasn't just a story about the Bidens and Burisma, but it's being boiled down to that by those who's goal is to tarnish Biden's reputation. It's pretty transparent tbh.
I'm not going to engage in counterfactuals, except to point out that the idea that no one would care about Trump's actions if they were done by Hillary is so ludicrously untrue it is kind of funny you used her as an example.
Trump's actions would be unthinkable in any presidency, regardless of party affiliation.
Last edited:
Except there wasn’t corruption, and we have our own intelligence for that, and they found something rather different that doesn’t conveniently align with your beliefs.
Feel free to have a single thought of your own, though.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
You can catch Aaron Mate on the Jimmy Dore show on youtube. Pretty good show. They are some of the few progressives out there that arent bat **** crazy and hypnotized by propaganda. Plenty of Trump bashing for those who love it. But they do a pretty good job of being fair on that show.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
Oh, you mean like the thoughts we are told to have? Is that what you mean by thought of your own? I thought not parroting all the left leaning propaganda would be closer to having a thought of my own. But maybe you can tell us what to think.
“Neither of us are privy to the facts.” We’re supposed to infer, no? Also, I’m not alleging any of these things. I’m saying what would (easily) be argued if the script was turned upside down.
My argument isn’t that people would think it’s ok for Hillary to break the law, or collude with other nations to get dirt. It’s that those questions wouldn’t even be relevant. (Steele dossier? Of course that’s not foreign collusion [but the answer to whether it is or not depends on which side of the dive you’re on.]) It’s not whether it’s ok for her to do those things, it’s about the spin of what those things are. If you’re wondering how the left could possibly spin it, just look at how the right is arguing it currently, and that’s what the left would be arguing.
This is like officiating of any game. You’re going to view the officiating through the lens of your fandom. As ridiculous as people are in sports, there’s at least a modicum of self-reflection among some in the fan base that don’t want to look like absolute homers. In politics, there’s absolutely no self-reflection. On this forum there’s never been a single controversy on the left. None. They’re all out of context. There’s have also been multiple scandals on the right of corruption and lies. All of them. And vice versa. It’s a statistical anomaly for the ages.