Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Statistikhengst, Nov 8, 2019.
Actually it has been underway for three years. Where have you been?
It has been going on for three years. I recommend they finish it.
Yes never did that and that was stupid on his part. What you and Trump apologists are ignoring ( on purpose I conclude) is that Biden did that in the course of delivering the anti corruption message from the IMF and the EU. The prosecutor that Biden asked be removed was protecting corrupt pro Russian Scum Turd oligarchs. This prosecutor originated from the Soviet era and I challenge you to support any Soviet era Scum Turd as not being corrupt.
I'm sure PMSNBC and CNN made that up. If they didn't provide proof.
Not sure how stopping the investigation into Burisma can be considered 'anti-corruption'. Ukraine was heavily involved with democrats looking for dirt on Trump.
For Hunter it would be.
so,, you get to say bad things about me but i don't get to say bad things about you?
ok got it
Neither Biden nor any good Ukrainian stopped the investigation on Burisma. Pro Russian scum wanted the Burisma investigation stopped because the owner of Burisma - Firtash a pro Russian Turd wanted it stopped. The two Guiliani criminals Furman and Parnas Furman being a Pro Russian Belarusian scum and Parnas a proRussian scum from Soviet Ukraine along with Guiliani got Lutsenko a one time Ukrainian prosecutor to create false statement in which he lied about Ukrainians being anti Trump and pro Biden. Lutsenko soon after recanted that lie.
That story or attempt to make Ukrainians the bad guys has Deep Roots in Russia and Putin.
Consider this truth- Ukrainians have no benefits in being anti Trump. Putin and Russians have enormous benefits in trying to make Ukrainians look like they are anti Trump.
The Ukrainians that the Russians are smearing are the real , the good Ukrainians and they are using pro Russian scum to do that.
Trump fans have been duped the Trump fans into believing that Russia is sone good country Russia is not a good country it is the enemy of Europe, of the US, and the enemy of all except Syria at this time.
This is not correct, and you know it as well. The impeachment proceedings were officially opened by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi on September 24th of this year. Knowing that a great many people have been very unhappy with Trump's presidency over three years is not the same as impeachment proceedings having gone on for three years. To say that impeachment has been going on for 3 years is just plain old bunk and claims facts that are not in existence, so, what you wrote is patently untrue.
Try using REAL facts next time.
You confuse a formal impeachment process with the attempt to undo a presidency. The formal process is simply the latest occurrence in an on going effort. It has been going on for three years. Period. Sorry you can't see it.
Given that definition the Republicans spent 8 years trying to undo Obama's presidency.
Gregg Jarrett nails this impeachment farce:
"Bill Taylor, the acting ambassador to Ukraine who will testify on Wednesday, told Schiff’s committee that it was his “understanding” there was a link between U.S. security assistance and an investigation of Joe and Hunter Biden. How did Taylor arrive at his opinion? He heard it through discussions with other diplomats, although there is no indication that any of these individuals had direct knowledge of anything. The chain of hearsay went something like this: the European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland told National Security Council official Tim Morrison who, in turn, told Taylor that there was a purported "quid pro quo."
But wait. If Sondland was the original source, where did he get his information? He initially testified that in a brief phone conversation with Trump, the president explicitly told him, “I want nothing ... I want no quid pro quo.” Sondland added that he “never” thought there was a precondition on aid. Later, he revised his testimony to state, “I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anti-corruption statement.”
Ah, yes. He "presumed." Reliable witnesses do not assume or presume anything. If they do, it is nothing more than supposition that should be discarded like yesterday’s trash.
My favorite purveyor of assorted hearsay is another star witness for Schiff this Wednesday. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent testified that he “believed” there was a “quid pro quo” after speaking to Taylor who spoke to Morrison who heard it from Sondland who, as noted, “presumed” a precondition. This is conjecture built on triple hearsay. It is not evidence, it is junk. If this were a court of law, the presiding judge would instruct the jury to disregard such testimony and strike it from the record."
I didn't see that. I saw that they spent 8 years disagreeing with his policies and actions. That is, was and will be what politics is all about. Obama's presidency was never in jeopardy.
Complete and utter nonsense!
On the day Obama was inaugurated the GOP set out to make him a one term POTUS. They OBSTRUCTED everything they could and went nuts with utterly BOGUS investigations into Benghazi and Hillary's email server which produced absolutely ZERO results.
They wanted to impeach him over DACA and Libya and the IRS and the Debt Ceiling and Transgender bathrooms.
The GOP even held a "hearing" that fallaciously alleged that Obama had "failed" to "faithfully execute the laws".
Complete and utter nonsense.
Kneejerk denialism does not alter FACTUALLY DOCUMENTED REALITY!
No, not really. I am confusing nothing. I simply pointed out that your more than direct inference that Impeachment has been going on for 3 years is patently untrue. It's always good to stay tethered to reality, nöööö
Indeed, I am old enough to remember all the bullshit that the GOP pulled on Obama and the overt racism that exuded (and exudes to today) from that crappy political party.
I believe I do remember the transgender bathroom articles of impeachment. [/sarcasm]
Yeah every time anyone disagreed with an Obama policy the racist race-baiters would blame it on race instead of genuine disagreement on policy.
And Clinton’s too. These guys must all be teenagers who have been Hannitized. Poor deluded schmucks....Bless their little hearts.
The attacks on Clinton started before he was sworn in and lasted until they impeached him 6 years later.
As soon as Obama was Elected to the Senate he was ordained to run as the first black president by the liberal press. It began in earnest when he made the speech at the Democrat National Convention right after that and his campaign started then amongst democrats. He never did a damn thing in the senate.
Since that first second the liberal press Idolized and lied day after day for him, they only reported how wonderful he was. They refused to report negatives and they told us everyday how very Beautiful Michele was.
Trump has been just the opposite they attacked him from the second he mentioned he might run for the nomination. They degrade and humiliate and denigrate him daily. More importantly they lie about him religiously. They never report a single positive about this president.
They demean Melania, ridicule her and never say how beautiful she actually is. She attempts to do something posittive and they spin it as laughable.
Obama presided over 8 yrs of the highest unemployment in history and the most americans on foodstamps ever.
Trumps economy is the strongest in history with the most minorities employed.
Obama gave us trannys in womens bathrooms and their destroying womens sports.
The left wants Trumps Taxs, they should be investigating how obama amassed millions in less than 2 yrs.
The contrast is dazzling
Obviously, you haven't been paying attention over the past 3 years.
True. It is just a matter of convincing people that there your idea of FACTUALLY DOCUMENTED REALITY is correct.
Separate names with a comma.