Impeachment not going so well?

[Fuzzy1975]

What Fuzzy1975 also fails to take into account is that this 51/42% figure is nationwide, while that is not how presidential elections work. Presidential elections are actually 50 seperate state election of electors to the Electoral College. The most important line in my post is: "Recent polls in important swing states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan show Trump outpacing 2020 Democrats during impeachment." If Trump wins those three states, he wins reelection.

Interesting how you deflect. I only posted the other parts of the poll that you did not when you present your opinion, and used the poll to back up your argument.

If you are going to put out information, then put it ALL out, don't cherry pick to advance your argument.

 

[Dumpington]

DawnONight writes: "Presidential elections are actually 50 seperate state election of electors to the Electoral College."

The very fact that fifty SEPARATE elections are at play nationwide explains why the modern Democratic Party is so opposed to the Electoral College. Without our U.S. Constitution preventing massive cheating, one party could simply stuff ballot boxes in one corrupt principality (look at how the city of Chicago controls the state of Illinois), and the Democrats could then illegally adds millions of non-citizen votes in a single state they control (like California), thus tilting every national election to their candidates!

As a party, the Democrats virulently OPPOSE something as simply as voter-photo-ID laws, calling them racist - they actually claim that black & hispanic people are too unintelligent to acquire valid photo-ID's - and, in doing so, encourage people who CAN'T legally cast ballots to do so anyway!

Fuzzy1975 writes: "Interesting how you deflect"

You know, Fuzzy - I'm curious as to how the Trump-haters are going to deflect this president's vindication in the U.S. Senate after House-Democrats complete their clown-show of an impeachment. There is ZERO chance of this president's being removed from office, but are ALL of the Trump-haters even aware of this? If not, there's going to be some seriously angry & hysterical outbursts of Trump Derangement Syndrome early next year! And yes, TDS is a VERY real thing!

 

[Fuzzy1975]

DawnONight writes: "Presidential elections are actually 50 seperate state election of electors to the Electoral College."

The very fact that fifty SEPARATE elections are at play nationwide explains why the modern Democratic Party is so opposed to the Electoral College. Without our U.S. Constitution preventing massive cheating, one party could simply stuff ballot boxes in one corrupt principality (look at how the city of Chicago controls the state of Illinois), and the Democrats could then illegally adds millions of non-citizen votes in a single state they control (like California), thus tilting every national election to their candidates!

As a party, the Democrats virulently OPPOSE something as simply as voter-photo-ID laws, calling them racist - they actually claim that black & hispanic people are too unintelligent to acquire valid photo-ID's - and, in doing so, encourage people who CAN'T legally cast ballots to do so anyway!

Fuzzy1975 writes: "Interesting how you deflect"

You know, Fuzzy - I'm curious as to how the Trump-haters are going to deflect this president's vindication in the U.S. Senate after House-Democrats complete their clown-show of an impeachment. There is ZERO chance of this president's being removed from office, but are ALL of the Trump-haters even aware of this? If not, there's going to be some seriously angry & hysterical outbursts of Trump Derangement Syndrome early next year! And yes, TDS is a VERY real thing!

Just to keep it clear, Dawn posted incomplete information, all i did was add in the other parts, she left out.

However I agree things are going to get interesting down your way. Yes there are people with TDS, and with ODS too don't leave that out. My fear is it all falls apart, far too much tribalism, and not enough bi partisanship.

no one is 100% right all the time, or 100% wrong all the time.

 

[icanhelp1]

Interesting how you deflect. I only posted the other parts of the poll that you did not when you present your opinion, and used the poll to back up your argument.

If you are going to put out information, then put it ALL out, don't cherry pick to advance your argument.

I don't know how long you've been posting on LIT but cherry picking is most people do. Some people here will support their argument with comic book references, it's hilarious and some people just argue for the sake of argument and troll you. And some people just post one media headline after another thinking people give a shit. And then you have the arrogant passive aggressive and the name callers, like they're capable of advancing an argument. Of course there's phrodeau and Dan who can't handle Dawn and would rather see her banned because they can't take being intellectually outclassed. It's all entertainment.

 

[YDB95]

Anybody else notice that a Democrat switched to the Republican Party...rather than vote for impeachment.

It's pretty bad when people start LEAVING YOUR PARTY...!

You mean like Justin Amash left the Republicans? Yeah, I suppose it is. But I say good riddance.

I don't know...maybe it's not a good idea to lie, cheat, and steal your way through the political process....Democrats...maybe it's time for some soul-searching.

JayCuck, maybe it's time you stop projecting.

 

[YDB95]

Where's your proof (or even any evidence) that Schiff lied about Russia? I'm guessing you're referring to the Mueller Report without actually knowing what it said (hint: what Fox News had to say about it was all wrong. Of course.).

The phone call to Ukraine happened several months after the Dems took over the House, so Jerry Nadler can hardly be expected to have known back in January that Trump would commit an impeachable offence in July. (Though I doubt anyone who was the least bit honest with hirself about the way he has conducted his entire presidency was surprised when it did happen.)

And of course you say nothing about just how the Dems have "cheated" through the impeachment process. They've not only played by the rules, they've played by rules set by Republicans back when they controlled the House in 2015.

 

[YDB95]

Schiff spent the last two years on the networks you LOVE...CNN and MSNBC claiming he'd either seen or had PROOF Trump Colluded with Russia. He penned a memo that was proved FALSE by the recent Horowitz hearings. C'mon...this is EMBARRASSING for you.

The same Horowitz hearings that found that the Russia investigation was legitimate? Yeah, that didn't prove Schiff wrong about anything.

Nadler was recorded, and it was reported by Mollie Hemmingway from the Federalist who was sitting RIGHT NEXT to NADLER on the train..when she heard him saying they were going to impeach Trump...

Overlooking the questionability (at best!) of Mollie Hemingway's integrity (she was among those who have published the name of the whistleblower, after all), what she claimed was that Nadler was talking about impeaching Justice Kavanaugh for perjury. Whether right or wrong, that hasn't happened.

Quid Pro Quo - Suddenly Disappears
Bribery - anyone? anyone?

If you're referring to the articles of impeachment, that's simply a matter of legal strategy.

Everyone knows this, and representatives are literally LEAVING THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY....over impeachment.

Representatives? Plural? No.

Following the rules? Really? How may witnesses were republicans allowed to call? What committee started the impeachment hearings? Here's a hint...it wasn't the judiciary..which is responsible for Impeachment.

Yes, following the rules set by the Republicans in 2015. Besides, it's not a trial (that will be in the Senate), and the Republicans will be able to call all the witnesses they want then.

 

[Cubantripod]

Where's your proof (or even any evidence) that Schiff lied about Russia? I'm guessing you're referring to the Mueller Report without actually knowing what it said (hint: what Fox News had to say about it was all wrong. Of course.).

Everyone claims to have read the Mueller Report but rationalized it to justify the same conclusion they had before they ever read it.

 

[Dumpington]

JayCuck writes: "Anybody else notice that a Democrat switched to the Republican Party... rather than vote for impeachment."

New Jersey Democratic U.S. Representative Jeff Van Drew is no fool, and he knows full well that his party is walking over a cliff on impeachment and wants no part in it! "I’ve always been a Democrat," he said. "But our job is to represent the American people.” The Democratic Party is no longer doing that.

"Adam Schiff LIED for two years about Russia."

Adam Schiff was OBSESSED with Russia, Jay, until the Mueller Report came out and he realized that he had to find something else with which to impeach the president. That's exactly the kind of dishonesty that's causing Democratic Party representatives to leave that party!

YDB95 writes: "...the Republicans will be able to call all the witnesses they want then."

And the U.S. Senate will agree that Congressman Schiff is a LIAR, with President Trump cleared of all charges. NOBODY disputes that! Impeachment ends in the Senate! It's dead-on-arrival!

 

[phrodeau]

YDB...just stop. If you're not going to stay abreast of the issues...then move to the General Board.

Schiff spent the last two years on the networks you LOVE...CNN and MSNBC claiming he'd either seen or had PROOF Trump Colluded with Russia. He penned a memo that was proved FALSE by the recent Horowitz hearings. C'mon...this is EMBARRASSING for you.

Nadler was recorded, and it was reported by Mollie Hemmingway from the Federalist who was sitting RIGHT NEXT to NADLER on the train..when she heard him saying they were going to impeach Trump...

Let me know if this sounds familiar?

Quid Pro Quo - Suddenly Disappears
Bribery - anyone? anyone?

The democrats used a FOCUS GROUP to determine the impeachment charges, and they're complete B.S. Everyone knows this, and representatives are literally LEAVING THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY....over impeachment.

Following the rules? Really? How may witnesses were republicans allowed to call? What committee started the impeachment hearings? Here's a hint...it wasn't the judiciary..which is responsible for Impeachment. Did Eric Ciaramella testify? He's the whistleblower...who worked with Schiff's staff. (Schiff lied about that..btw).

So yes...The left lies. They project. They crave only one thing...control. Everything else is window dressing.

Be honest...you have to be getting tired of looking stupid....

WHat do you mean, quid pro quo suddenly disappears? It's right there in article I, conveniently spelled out in the first few pages.

(1) President Trump—acting both directly and through his agents Within and Outside the United States Government—corruptly solicited the Government of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations into—

(A) a political opponent, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.; and

(B) a discredited theory promoted by Russia alleging that Ukraine—rather than Russia—interfered in the 2016 United States Presidential election.

(2) With the same corrupt motives, President Trump—acting both directly and through his agents within and outside the United States Government–conditioned two official acts on the public announcements that he had requested—

(A) the release of $391 million of United 5 States taxpayer funds that Congress had appropriated on a bipartisan basis for the purpose of providing vital military and security assistance to Ukraine to oppose Russian aggression and which President Trump had ordered suspended; and

(B) a head of state meeting at the White House, which the President of Ukraine sought to demonstrate continued United States support for the Government of Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression.

Anyone who says that this isn't a quid pro quo is telling you a lie.

 

[YDB95]

Everyone claims to have read the Mueller Report but rationalized it to justify the same conclusion they had before they ever read it.

True, but that doesn't mean some of us aren't right about what it actually said.

 

[Dumpington]

phrodeau writes: "WHat do you mean, quid pro quo suddenly disappears? It's right there in article I, conveniently spelled out in the first few pages."

Good job reciting the Democratic Party's talking points, phrodeau - but the House Democrats WON'T have the final say in this whole thing. No, they can vote to impeach Trump over ANY stupid-ass reason they want to, but when it goes to the U.S. Senate the ADULTS will take over and this whole clown-show/witchhunt will all come crashing down! Already one Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives has bolted the party today - how many MORE before its all over?

YDB95 continues defending the Mueller Report: "True, but that doesn't mean some of us aren't right about what it actually said."

It's funny how neither Adam Schiff nor Jerry Nadler chose to include anything in the Mueller Report in their articles of impeachment, YDB95. I'm guessing that they both decided that doing so would only make them look even STUPIDER than they currently do. Why do YOU think the House Dems no longer speak of Robert Mueller in affectionate tones, as they once did?

 

[phrodeau]

phrodeau writes: "WHat do you mean, quid pro quo suddenly disappears? It's right there in article I, conveniently spelled out in the first few pages."

Good job reciting the Democratic Party's talking points, phrodeau - but the House Democrats WON'T have the final say in this whole thing. No, they can vote to impeach Trump over ANY stupid-ass reason they want to, but when it goes to the U.S. Senate the ADULTS will take over and this whole clown-show/witchhunt will all come crashing down! Already one Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives has bolted the party today - how many MORE before its all over?

YDB95 continues defending the Mueller Report: "True, but that doesn't mean some of us aren't right about what it actually said."

It's funny how neither Adam Schiff nor Jerry Nadler chose to include anything in the Mueller Report in their articles of impeachment, YDB95. I'm guessing that they both decided that doing so would only make them look even STUPIDER than they currently do. Why do YOU think the House Dems no longer speak of Robert Mueller in affectionate tones, as they once did?

The Mueller report showed evidence of obstruction of justice, which involves a different branch of government. Congress is impeaching Trump for obstruction of Congress, which is the branch that represents We the People.

I hope you learned something today.

 

[Dumpington]

phrodeau writes: "The Mueller report showed evidence of obstruction of justice, which involves a different branch of government. Congress is impeaching Trump for obstruction of Congress, which is the branch that represents We the People."

And We the People will be represented in the U.S. Senate, phrodeau, when Adam Schiff's silly clown show arrives there sometime next month.

It's funny how the House Democrats didn't make the Mueller Report the centerpiece of their articles of impeachment, isn't it? It's as if that report didn't produce a damn thing they could use against the president!

"I hope you learned something today."

Yes, of course, phrodeau - I learned that there's ZERO CHANCE of the U.S. Senate actually removing President Trump from office, making this whole impeachment witchhunt a massive waste of time & money!

 

[phrodeau]

Nope, you didn’t learn a thing. Try reading my post again.

 

[gunthernehmen]

No matter WHAT happens, this is entertaining as hell

 

[bhurry]

No matter WHAT happens, this is entertaining as hell

you got that right. beats the hell out of the lunytoon network .

 

[magicalmoments]

No matter WHAT happens, this is entertaining as hell

Best reality TV show ever! And... It's only going to get better!

 

[BotanyBoy]

The Mueller report showed evidence of obstruction of justice, which involves a different branch of government. Congress is impeaching Trump for obstruction of Congress, which is the branch that represents We the People.

I hope you learned something today.

Can't obstruct a co-equal branch of government you're not obligated to submit to.

The charge is a joke, on Democrats, by Democrats.

Congress also represents the states in what we call the Senate, where the punchline will be delivered.

 

[DawnONight]

Interesting how you deflect. I only posted the other parts of the poll that you did not when you present your opinion, and used the poll to back up your argument.

If you are going to put out information, then put it ALL out, don't cherry pick to advance your argument.

Just to keep it clear, Dawn posted incomplete information, all i did was add in the other parts, she left out....

Of course I cherry pick. Anytime anyone cites another source, they have to do so. If I posted the entire article, which you seem to expect, I would be in violation of copyright laws and Literotica rules.

In this case I left out something that was entirely irrelevant. It doesn't matter how Trump does in a nationwide poll, because the Presidential election is not a nationwide popular vote. It's amusing that you accuse me of manipulating sources and deflecting to make my point, when all I did was post the relevant data, while you counter with something meaningless.

Really Fuzzy1975, I stopped responding to the likes of dan_c00000 and phrodeau because their lack of intellectual vigor bored me. You used to be interesting, but recently you have gotten as bad as them.

 

[Cubantripod]

True, but that doesn't mean some of us aren't right about what it actually said.

Well do you think you are right about?

 

[YDB95]

Well do you think you are right about?

That the Russians did meddle in the election on Trump's behalf. The only gray area is whether Trump actually asked them for it.

 

[gunthernehmen]

That the Russians did meddle in the election on Trump's behalf. The only gray area is whether Trump actually asked them for it.

Let's just pretend you're right. How is that Trump's fault? How is that a "wrong act" on the part of anyone but the "boogeyman" Russians?

 

[Dumpington]

YDB95 writes: "That the Russians did meddle in the election on Trump's behalf."

gunthernehmen writes: "How is that Trump's fault?"

It's NOT Trump's fault - and I think that what YDB95 is wanting to know is WHO was in the White House in 2016 when the Russians chose to meddle in America's election?

The president of the United States takes an OATH OF OFFICE promising to DEFEND the integrity of our democracy, so WHO was the incompetent buffoon who didn't do his job?

THIS is what the Mueller Report should have been investigating, and then reporting to congress! We elect a president to keep this kind of crap from happening, but it's pretty obvious now that the Russians had enormous CONTEMPT for whomever held that office in November of 2016! If we can discover who that person was, we'll have our culprit!

 

[gunthernehmen]

YDB95 writes: "That the Russians did meddle in the election on Trump's behalf."

gunthernehmen writes: "How is that Trump's fault?"

It's NOT Trump's fault - and I think that what YDB95 is wanting to know is WHO was in the White House in 2016 when the Russians chose to meddle in America's election?

The president of the United States takes an OATH OF OFFICE promising to DEFEND the integrity of our democracy, so WHO was the incompetent buffoon who didn't do his job?

THIS is what the Mueller Report should have been investigating, and then reporting to congress! We elect a president to keep this kind of crap from happening, but it's pretty obvious now that the Russians had enormous CONTEMPT for whomever held that office in November of 2016! If we can discover who that person was, we'll have our culprit!

Nobody keeps records that far back. How the hell would we know who was president then?