Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
PP again - and I'll add that I really couldn't care less about Trump's political opponent who is being unfairly targeted in this scheme. The accusations are not true, they've been investigated by a slew of journalists from the left and right, nothing holds up. But this is not about Biden. This is about the President abusing his powers. You don't want the next President, and the next after that, abusing their powers too! Be careful what precedent you set. |
Anonymous
| It's funny seeing Trump supporters crying about traditions. Where have you guys been the last 3 years? |
Anonymous
A legitimate investigation into Russian interference in our last presidential election would have investigated what the President then did to prevent such interference, which we now know started before 2014, and why we failed, and how to fix it. What took place was a crazy witch hunt. |
Anonymous
How long are you going to defend what is clearly two deranged old senile men (Trump and Guiliani) ruining our country? They clearly have large wholes in their brains. You really want to pretend this is normal? That's the kind of world you want to live in? |
Anonymous
The PP to whom you’re responding is displaying a sick combo of sunk cost fallacy and Dunning Kruger. |
Anonymous
Gee, why not? SMH |
Anonymous
Sadly it’s not two senile old men. There is a huge machinery behind this: Mercer $, Pompeo with his hunger for the rapture, Barr w/ belief in unbridled executive power, Mitch w/ his grim reaper hard on... and these are only the US players. |
Anonymous
1. Who said they're off-limits? Since you're so sure there was a crime, why don't you call the FBI and report your evidence. 2. LOL 3. I forgot to mention Sonderland's texts too ("stop texting about our crimes - call me") 4. It's official now - no vote needed. The Republicans are lying about that - surprise, surprise (ie: there was no vote to open impeachment inquiry into Andrew Johnson) |
Anonymous
Sad to see educated people turned into conspiracy theorists. |
Anonymous
This is not a theory, it's the truth, and it's not a conspiracy, it's the way many humans act unless they have clear boundaries. Democrats would do the same thing if they could! This is why we need to impeach and jail some of these people now, and uphold the rule of law, so we don't have the same problems with the next White House. You all need to understand that we need to be bipartisan here. This kind of corruption goes beyond politics and undermines every single institution. |
Anonymous
1) Then the FBI and not Rudy Giuliani (being paid by an Oligarch) should be investigating, why isn't it? 2) Conjuecture on your part, it is pretty hard to spin given the President and Rudy have already admitted it. At this point, the question is, is it ok with the Senate and voters or is it illegal? 3) If there is no cover up, then why did Pompeo bar people from testifying, and why are transcripts illegally being reclassified into an NSC server? Why did the DOJ and DNI sit on the whistleblower complaint illegally for three weeks? Those are not actions of innocence. 4) All of the above are obstruction, on the face of it. |
Anonymous
This combined with the rest of the string does seem to be a smoking gun. And that string isn't the whole thing - they are planning to release more. The texts on July 25 before and after the call are the smoking guns IMO. The ones into August and September are CYA. Taylor was pretty naive with some of the stuff he put into text. 7/25 (before call): Volker: Good lunch - thanks. Heard from White House - assuming President Z convinced trump he will investigate/"get to the bottom of what happened" in 2016, we ill nail down date for visit to Washington. Good luck! See you tomorrow - kurt 7/25 (after call) Yermak: Phone call went well. President Trump proposed to choose any convenient dates. ... 9/1: Taylor: Are we going to say that security assistance and WH meeting are conditioned on investigations? Gordon: Call me This stuff is just nuts. |
Anonymous
The House may make the rules as it wishes, see the US Constitution. Elections have consequences. The R's were able to ask as many questions of the witness yesterday as they wished. That was a flat out lie from Jim Jordan. I am not sure why you would want to fracture whats left of the GOP in the House - they are the ones who would risk being primaried if they voted to open the investigation and have more to lose. The fact is, Pelosi already has the votes. This is a null talking point both in law and tactics. |
Anonymous
| These text messages are damning. I seriously question the basic brain function of anyone who would read them and not see that. |
Anonymous
he took the conversation off text because he knew it was incriminating, as evidenced by the reference to the phone call in the following text. Note also, this took place the same day Bolton resigned. That isn't a coincidence and adds further to the idea of criminality. |