The official "let's impeach Trump" thread

[One Brow]

I think it would blow this whole thing open. I think it would show that this is exactly what many think this is, just another stupid attempt to "coup" the President. Just like Russia. We have the script. The witness Taylor today wasn't even part of anything more than hearing something from someone that heard something. What a ****ing waste that was speaking of "hearsay".

I agree that if all Taylor offered was hearsay, that would be a waste, unless it was used to discredit/frame other statements made by people.

I don't understand why you think having the whistle blower testify would blow something open. What would it blow open? What evidence being presented could it discredit?

It's obvious what this is when you're not so hellbent on impeaching Trump. I mean this thread was started months before any of this came out.

I agree that people were focused on other reasons for impeachment before the Ukraine fiasco manifested.

All this is is attemp #15 to get people thinking about Trump rather than the worthless Democratic party that hasn't accomplished a God Damn thing. They know Trump is the death of them and their party.

The Democrats survived the Reagan years, they'll survive the Trump years just fine.

 

[One Brow]

Lol, stutter stutter "from what I heard". What is the point of this idiot being up there? One Brow? We can't have the whistleblower but we have some random guy that doesn't know a damn thing? A conspiracy is now evidence.

Thank you for the link. What I heard was direct testimony about what Sondland and Morrison said. That's not hearsay.

If you want to claim Sondland and Morrison were acting without the President's knowledge, I suppose that would be a conspiracy.

 

[One Brow]

It's hilarious that the actual guy that committed Quid Pro Quo is now front runner of the Democratic Party. He even implicates Obama.

Not a word from you hypocrites. It's plain as day lol. Way more evidence than anything you hypocrites have on Trump.

As you would know, and possibly do know, Biden's son would not have been implicated by the investigation. This has been explained to you multiple times, by multiple posters. Ignoring it makes you seems incredibly stupid and/or desperate.

 

[JazzyFresh]

Thank you for the link. What I heard was direct testimony about what Sondland and Morrison said. That's not hearsay.

If you want to claim Sondland and Morrison were acting without the President's knowledge, I suppose that would be a conspiracy.

Yes it is.

 

[str8line]

Strong testimony from Taylor today. The case against Trump is strong. I didn't realize how many people were privy to Trump's extortion of Zelensky. This is like a mafia trial where everyone knows the don is guilty yet the defense attorneys try to act like he isn't.

 

[Jazzta]

I agree that if all Taylor offered was hearsay, that would be a waste, unless it was used to discredit/frame other statements made by people.

I don't understand why you think having the whistle blower testify would blow something open. What would it blow open? What evidence being presented could it discredit?



I agree that people were focused on other reasons for impeachment before the Ukraine fiasco manifested.



The Democrats survived the Reagan years, they'll survive the Trump years just fine.

I mean, is there any other alternative? It’s an impenetrable two party system with very defined lines in which the debate must stay in. Venture outside of these lines and you’re entering the dark world of conspiracy theories and Russian agents.

 

[JazzyFresh]

Thank you for the link. What I heard was direct testimony about what Sondland and Morrison said. That's not hearsay.

If you want to claim Sondland and Morrison were acting without the President's knowledge, I suppose that would be a conspiracy.

LAW
the report of another person's words by a witness, which is usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law.

 

[JazzyFresh]

As you would know, and possibly do know, Biden's son would not have been implicated by the investigation. This has been explained to you multiple times, by multiple posters. Ignoring it makes you seems incredibly stupid and/or desperate.

It makes you a hypocrite. Spare me Brow. You really don't give a ****. This is nothing more than you and your party still pissed off that they lost.

 

[One Brow]

Yes it is.

Are you claiming Sondland and Morrison acted without the President's knowledge?

 

[JazzyFresh]

Are you claiming Sondland and Morrison acted without the President's knowledge?

I'm claiming that Taylors knowledge is second and third hand. That is 100% hearsay. This has nothing to do with those two. Taylor has no direct knowledge of what happened.

 

[One Brow]

LAW
the report of another person's words by a witness, which is usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law.

While I'm not a legal expert, I know that reporting what another person said is evidence that they it, allowed in any court I can think of.

 

[One Brow]

It makes you a hypocrite.

I take your opinion with all the seriousness you have earned.