Well TSD's, the transcript is out.

[coati]

The D's ABSOLUTELY NEED an impeachment between Thanksgiving and Christmas. Otherwise, they have no hope at all of winning the election. What they don't see is that if they impeach based on the current lies, they won't win. And, if they don't impeach, they won't win. And finally, even if they do impeach Trump, they still won't win in November.

Those are very nice theories.

However, the Democrats had to forget about election theories, quit worrying about the damned election, and deal with the repeated behavior of a President who kept seeking foreign assistance for his own election interests.

It's your prerogative to condone the President's behavior, and the Senate probably will condone it, but impeachment is not primarily a political calculation by the Democratic leadership.

 

[HisArpy]

Those are very nice theories.

However, the Democrats had to forget about election theories, quit worrying about the damned election, and deal with the repeated behavior of a President who kept seeking foreign assistance for his own election interests.

It's your prerogative to condone the President's behavior, and the Senate probably will condone it, but impeachment is not primarily a political calculation by the Democratic leadership.

1. The Russian collusion thing was a hoax. Proven.
2. The Transcript fails to support your belief. Fact - anyone can read it, what you say isn't there.
3. D's were on board the "impeach Trump" train BEFORE he was elected. FACT. There's a video from an interview on (I believe) ABC from about 2 weeks before the Nov election where the guest was talking about impeaching Trump if he gets elected.

So, what you have is a pattern and practice of raising and maintaining false premises in order to remove the President beginning from prior to the election. This visual tends to defeat whatever talking point you come up with about "foreign interference".

 

[Adre]

1. The Russian collusion thing was a hoax. Proven.
2. The Transcript fails to support your belief. Fact - anyone can read it, what you say isn't there.
3. D's were on board the "impeach Trump" train BEFORE he was elected. FACT. There's a video from an interview on (I believe) ABC from about 2 weeks before the Nov election where the guest was talking about impeaching Trump if he gets elected.

So, what you have is a pattern and practice of raising and maintaining false premises in order to remove the President beginning from prior to the election. This visual tends to defeat whatever talking point you come up with about "foreign interference".

You’re quite the sharp lawyer. You saw one person saying something, and it’s an established fact that a group of millions (D’s, learn how and when to use an apostrophe) agree.

 

[coati]

^^^Yeah, keep telling yourself all that stuff, Harpy, but the Democrats are taking a big political risk by impeaching. They already know from past experience that the Senate will probably not convict.

You simply can't believe that anyone would be motivated by anything other than winning the next presidential election, because that is the only thing motivating your cult leader.

 

[jp55665566]

^^^Yeah, keep telling yourself all that stuff, Harpy, but the Democrats are taking a big political risk by impeaching. They already know from past experience that the Senate will probably not convict.

You simply can't believe that anyone would be motivated by anything other than winning the next presidential election, because that is the only thing motivating your cult leader.

Are you seriously suggesting that Democrats in Congress have an altruistic motive for initiating impeachment against President Donald Trump? What were the motives for insisting the President was a "Russian Agent"?

 

[coati]

Are you seriously suggesting that Democrats in Congress have an altruistic motive for initiating impeachment against President Donald Trump? What were the motives for insisting the President was a "Russian Agent"?

The Democrats are going to impeach Trump for what he asked of Ukraine in the transcript, what he openly asked of Putin during the last election, and what he is openly asking of other countries today, to investigate a political opponent. During the last election it was Hillary, and now he is going after Biden. Trump has stated numerous times that he thinks it is fine to do this

It is likely that if an impeachment takes place, the Senate will take the position that it is indeed perfectly OK for a President to do this, if that president belongs to the Republican Party.

Nonetheless, the Democrats will likely move forward to try to uphold the principle that the Constitution does not permit candidates to solicit foreign interference in our elections. The Democrats may take a political hit for doing so.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

I am not so sure that the Senate will condone using foreign aid as leverage in an election.

How many Republican Senators do we need to put party over country? Fourteen?

 

[contrifan32]

The Democrats are going to impeach Trump for what he asked of Ukraine in the transcript, what he openly asked of Putin during the last election, and what he is openly asking of other countries today, to investigate a political opponent. During the last election it was Hillary, and now he is going after Biden. Trump has stated numerous times that he thinks it is fine to do this

It is likely that if an impeachment takes place, the Senate will take the position that it is indeed perfectly OK for a President to do this, if that president belongs to the Republican Party.

Nonetheless, the Democrats will likely move forward to try to uphold the principle that the Constitution does not permit candidates to solicit foreign interference in our elections. The Democrats may take a political hit for doing so.

If a foreign government is asked to look into and uncovers corruption by a US citizen within that foreign country, you would call that "foreign interference in our election?"

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Stop with the fucking debunked conspiracy theories for fucks sake.

Trump used foreign aid as leverage to have the Ukraine do opposition research for the upcoming presidential election.

Enough is fucking enough.

 

[HisArpy]

Stop with the fucking debunked conspiracy theories for fucks sake.

Trump used foreign aid as leverage to have the Ukraine do opposition research for the upcoming presidential election.

Enough is fucking enough.

Obviously you haven't read the transcript because NONE OF THAT is in there.

In fact, the opposite is true. The House Democrats sent a letter to Ukraine demanding that they do something OR ELSE they wouldn't get any foreign aid.

So, knock off the lies.

 

[HisArpy]

You’re quite the sharp lawyer. You saw one person saying something, and it’s an established fact that a group of millions (D’s, learn how and when to use an apostrophe) agree.

1. More than "one person" has said that the Steele dossier is fake and that the Russian collusion thing is a myth.

I believe the most prominent person in that group was Robert Mueller but there are quite a few who also know that the Russian collusion thing was a hoax.

2. I've read the transcript. What you want to believe Trump said, isn't in the transcript. There isn't even a HINT of it.

3. FACT. The tape of the interview exists. I've seen it. FACT. Mad Maxipad Waters has been screaming "impeach 45" for years with nothing to support the impeachment. FACT. Congressman Al Green (D Tx) has stated that the D's HAVE TO impeach Trump or he'll be reelected. I could go on and on and on about how many people have been professing their desire to impeach the President since BEFORE he was even elected and have continued to do so after he was inaugurated.

Those are FACTS that cannot be denied. That you choose to believe that this represents only a minority of persons doesn't change the fact that it is true AND that it's more than "one person".

 

[Conager]

When Stephanopoulos, who invented the concept of on-message talking points and was a virtuoso of spin is not buying your narrative as a Dem, you've lost. He called out Bull-Schiff previously. Follow-up with Pelosi:

Stephanopoulos: I know you support Chairman Schiff, but was it right for him to have that dramatic interpretation of the president’s transcript of the phone call at the hearing last week?

Pelosi (doubling down): I want the American people to know what that phone call was about. I want them to hear, it. So yeah it’s fair. It’s sad, but it's using the president’s own words.

Stephanopoulos: Yhose weren't the president's words, it was an interpretation of the president's words. They're saying he made this up,

Pelosi (tripling down): He did not make it up.

Speaking about the urgency of impeachment she says that, "The reelection of Donald Trump would be the worst thing for America," thereby admitting the object is to derail his campaign.

 

[bellisarius]

When Stephanopoulos, who invented 5alking points and was a virtuoso of spin is not buying your narrative as a Dem, you've lost. He called out Bull-Schiff previously. Follow-up with Pelosi:



Speaking about the urgency of impeachment she says that, "The reelection of Donald Trump would be the worst thing for America," thereby admitting the object is to derail his campaign.

Of course it is. But I don't think that treating the public as if they're illiterates is going to get the job done. If they move forward with impeachment without a great deal more public support than they have now they're sticking their own necks in the Guillotine and Pelosi knows it.

 

[jp55665566]

3. FACT. The tape of the interview exists. I've seen it. FACT. Mad Maxipad Waters has been screaming "impeach 45" for years with nothing to support the impeachment. FACT. Congressman Al Green (D Tx) has stated that the D's HAVE TO impeach Trump or he'll be reelected. I could go on and on and on about how many people have been professing their desire to impeach the President since BEFORE he was even elected and have continued to do so after he was inaugurated.

Those are FACTS that cannot be denied. That you choose to believe that this represents only a minority of persons doesn't change the fact that it is true AND that it's more than "one person".

Respectfully, I must suggest that you are failing to recognize the new paradigm, as most eloquently elucidated by our next Commander in Chief, to wit: "We choose truth over facts" - Joe Biden 2019

 

[Conager]

Of course it is. But I don't think that treating the public as if they're illiterates is going to get the job done. If they move forward with impeachment without a great deal more public support than they have now they're sticking their own necks in the Guillotine and Pelosi knows it.

That's why she hasn't actually had the vote to begin impeachment. She wants all the benefits of having the cloud over his head without the ability for him to defend himself. The "whistleblower" being anonymous helps with that as well.

 

[jp55665566]

When Stephanopoulos, who invented the concept of on-message talking points and was a virtuoso of spin is not buying your narrative as a Dem, you've lost. He called out Bull-Schiff previously. Follow-up with Pelosi:
Stephanopoulos: I know you support Chairman Schiff, but was it right for him to have that dramatic interpretation of the president’s transcript of the phone call at the hearing last week?

Pelosi (doubling down): I want the American people to know what that phone call was about. I want them to hear, it. So yeah it’s fair. It’s sad, but it's using the president’s own words.

Stephanopoulos: Yhose weren't the president's words, it was an interpretation of the president's words. They're saying he made this up,

Pelosi (tripling down): He did not make it up.

Speaking about the urgency of impeachment she says that, "The reelection of Donald Trump would be the worst thing for America," thereby admitting the object is to derail his campaign.

Truth is no longer constrained by mere facts. The facts of this circumstance fail to illuminate the truth; as distinctly expressed by the Honorable Speaker Madame Pelosi and the Venerable Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Senator Adam Schiff. Facts are only shadows of the truth. Required is interpretation of the facts by insightful, gifted elected leaders, like Senators Pelosi and Schiff, in order to reveal the living corpus of truth, so often occluded by bare facts.

 

[LesDesirable]

The new characterization of the Republican party as "deplorable" is much bigger than a Lit phenomenon, in case you have not noticed.

And how did that bit of political idiocy work out for the democrats? About as well as it worked for Mitt Romney to call 47% of Americans freeloaders?

But you double down on the stupid campaign statement of a loser as if it is the gospel of Alinsky (which it is by-the-way).

"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."

 

[bellisarius]

And how did that bit of political idiocy work out for the democrats? About as well as it worked for Mitt Romney to call 47% of Americans freeloaders?

But you double down on the stupid campaign statement of a loser as if it is the gospel of Alinsky (which it is by-the-way).

"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."

Now that you've brought that subject up. The tactics laid out in "Rules for Radicals" were much more effective when the book was an academic underground tome. Once the word got out and more of the general public read it, the less effective those tactics are. Also, I have no idea whether Trump has read it or not, but he's certainly employing the "progressives" own tactics against them and they don't seem to care for it one damn bit.

 

[coati]

And how did that bit of political idiocy work out for the democrats? About as well as it worked for Mitt Romney to call 47% of Americans freeloaders?

But you double down on the stupid campaign statement of a loser as if it is the gospel of Alinsky (which it is by-the-way).

"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."

It will work out fine in the end. After all, the Deplorables are the party who are backing the most corrupt President in American history, one who emulates and supports Putin, Kim Jong-un, MBS, and Duterte.

Sometime you just gotta call a spade a spade, and not worry about the short term political consequences. Trump, a minority-elected "president", and his followers will eventually be memorialized in the most vile recesses of history.

 

[jp55665566]

"Tell Vlad, I can be more flexible... after the election" - Donald Trump

 

[someoneyouknow]

[Spamming, bumping multiple threads in order to flood the forum, posting same content to multiple locations, or screen-stretching to disrupt the forum is prohibited per our forum guidelines.] - Last Warning

 

[SpeareChucker]

It will work out fine in the end. After all, the Deplorables are the party who are backing the most corrupt President in American history, one who emulates and supports Putin, Kim Jong-un, MBS, and Duterte.

Sometime you just gotta call a spade a spade, and not worry about the short term political consequences. Trump, a minority-elected "president", and his followers will eventually be memorialized in the most vile recesses of history.

Okay, when it comes to insane political rants, this one is weak sauce...

 

[bellisarius]

I think he's channeling Schiff.

 

[SpeareChucker]

He does seem to be full of Schiff...

 

[bellisarius]

The narrative is already beginning to fall apart even with the hearings behind closed doors. My take on that is that Schiff moved behind the curtain so he could leak selective testimony. He's well aware that the previous public hearings turned out to be a disaster for the dems. I don't think he expected the witness's to get out in front of him.

Schiff is in great danger here. If any of the testimony the committee hears is classified and he leaks it, which he will, Schiff can't help himself, his own security clearance is in jeopardy. He's already under scrutiny for some of the stuff he's leaked in the past.

Further his own credibility is in the toilet now that he's openly lied about having met with the "whistleblower." That was a needless and stupid mistake on his part. Telling the truth wouldn't have damaged the hearings all that much but he lied anyway.

Schiff is busily undermining his own investigation. How long is Pelosi going to put up with that? Or she just going to let this side show run its course?