This is the most boring, dishonest, and pointless impeachment ever. - Politics Discussion

[–] elcamino (15540) 4 years ago

Yes and even a bunch of bad mind readers. You think by now with all the crooked things they have done they might be right sometime.
"Overheard convo between two Republican Senators who only watch Fox News. 'is this stuff real? I haven't heard any of this before. I thought it was all about a server. If half the stuff Schiff is saying is true, we're up sh*t's creek. Hope the White House has exculpatory evidence,'" Lockhart tweeted.
Shortly after sending the tweet, Lockhart, who is also host of the "Words Matter Podcast," then sent a follow up tweet saying that he "maybe...made up the convo, but you know that's exactly what they're thinking."

reply

[–] yatzo376 (7458) 4 years ago

This would perk things up:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-impeachment-poll/let-them-speak-most-americans-want-witnesses-in-trump-impeachment-trial-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1ZL33O

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

Complex issue polls are garbage anyway because they're too easy to manipulate with question wording and too hard to accurately measure meaningful aspects of reality with even when an outfit is trying to get it right. That Reuters, not an outfit that tries to get it right, conducted a cheesy online poll makes the one you linked even more useless. But I'll note that even it shows only 44% supporting Trump's removal.

Gallup, asking a far simpler question straight up, finds the split 51%-46% against removal, and that Trump's approval rating has been rising through this impeachment farce, now around the highest levels of his presidency so far in their polling.

https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/5e26b6e0331ba6098b955536/51?reply=5e29ebf56b5780364deb9746

https://news.gallup.com/poll/283364/senate-trial-begins-approve-trump.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_content=morelink&utm_campaign=syndication

reply

[–] ducksoup (3933) 4 years ago

You don't think Reuters does a good job polling? What's your evidence for that?

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

I said Reuters isn't an outfit interested in getting it right, a conclusion formed from decades of critical news consumption, including spectacular fraud jobs like doctoring photos to make it look like Israeli jets were carpet bombing Beirut when it was really a limited precision strike...

http://zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/

https://www.jpost.com/International/Reuters-admits-doctoring-Beirut-photo

...or routine "errors" (that virtually always tilt against conservatives) like when they recently reported that the Texas church killer owned a gun range and instructed shooters (what leftists would call "gun culture" things) when it was really the hero Jack Wilson who does those things and took down the murderer, saving untold lives (just got the story completely backward, no big deal).

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2020/01/02/whoops-reuters-pulls-false-story-mangling-texas-ags-quote-church

The salient point on polling was that complex issue polling in general is garbage for reasons I laid out.

reply

[–] ducksoup (3933) 4 years ago

I agree with you on complex issue polling. Heck, I don't think anyone does a very good job on simple issues either, really. I'm surprised to hear this stuff about Reuters, I'll have to look into it. I always felt they were better than AP.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

That's not setting the bar very high. I'd probably consider the AP to be even worse.

reply

[–] ducksoup (3933) 4 years ago

All of em got a lot worse in the last 30 years.

reply

[–] NormaAndNorman (3900) 4 years ago

Well in their defense they have absolutely nothing to work with no matter who was up there. 😅

All this is is preaching. 😴

Can't wait for Trump's defense team. They'll liven things up.

reply

[–] yatzo376 (7458) 4 years ago

Can’t wait to hear from Epstein & OJs lawyers !!

reply

[–] ultravioletx (10216) 4 years ago

It's disgusting what kind of people Trump gets his cult to worship.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

It's accurate.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

Trump and his followers do check some boxes in the "Are you in a cult?" questionnaire.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

LOL! Liberals are all about letting criminals walk free. Alan Dershowitz was a liberal hero for decades, from becoming the youngest law professor in Harvard history to defending OJ to being the most nationally prominent liberal legal pundit.

You've turned against him now that he's defending an innocent person and the US Constitution.

reply

[–] yatzo376 (7458) 4 years ago

Sure your Braille keyboard is functioning Helen?

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

Get some new material, Schiff.

reply

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

LMAO.

reply

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

"If the aid don't fit, you must acquit".

The only reason Johnny Cochrane and Robert Kardashian aren't there is because they are dead.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

*crickets*
*cough**cough*
*crickets*

reply

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

It was pretty weak.

reply

[–] Gd5150 (11022) 4 years ago

Surprised they haven’t found some Ukrainian family who’s dog died because of Trump and trapped one of the Republican rinos in an elevator with CNN cameras conveniently there to capture the so-called spontaneous confrontation. Maybe tomorrow. Poor hate filled communist Democrat media/party.

reply

[–] slimone (7996) 4 years ago

This impeachment trial is going on far, far too long! We know that the Senate is going to acquit t-Rump, so why pre-empt other tv/radio shows???? Get it over with!!!!!

reply

[–] NormaAndNorman (3900) 4 years ago

It just started 2 days ago, slim.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

"This is the most boring, dishonest, and pointless impeachment ever."

LOL! Compared to which other ones? There have only been two others, and no one was alive for the first one. Dramatic much?

"And Pelosi couldn't have picked worse presenters to lead this farce if she had tried."

Sounds like the republicans are nervous.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

Andrew Johnson's had big issues involved and he came within one vote of being removed from office. Clinton committed a slew of crimes, his case was inherently salacious, and his cover up featured antics that ran from buffoonish to scary, all of which captivated the nation's attention.

By contrast this purely partisan farce is a joke. It's a train wreck but the most slowly unfolding, boring train wreck ever.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Then call the Republicans on the Senate, and call #MoscowMitch and demand they do the right thing and allow physical evidence and eye-witnesses to testify (Mulvaney, Bolton, etc.) . Everything T-rump has blocked from the House. That will certainly make it 'less boring' and it will certainly clear T-rump's name and prove his innocence! And proving innocence is not boring, dishonest or pointless.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

If you truly have the "overwhelming" case your comrades claimed then you wouldn't need new witnesses and documents whose contents you don't know in a blind fishing expedition. You should have built a case in the House then voted to impeach. Or if you couldn't, as you didn't, then not voted for impeachment. Trump shouldn't set a precedent destroying Executive Privilege (aka Separation of Powers; checks and balances against congressional overreach), a principle exercised by presidents back to George Washington, just to help Democrats continue their treasonous coup attempt that they were too incompetent to organize themselves.

The two articles of impeachment, neither of which is an actual crime, are so ludicrous on their face that there's no point in further investigation anyway, even apart from the facts having already debunked their narrative. Your disingenuous post is rich not just because the widely recognized biggest liar on the board is talking about getting to the truth, or that you don't understand the fundamental concept of "innocent until proven guilty" (the burden of proof is on the accusers, not the accused), but because Democrats blocked Trump from calling any of the witnesses he wanted in that utterly one-sided railroad job in the House.

Democrats rushed to impeach based entirely on the political calendar, not the evidence, and have dug their own hole. That's not Trump's fault.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

They are not 'new witnesses and documents'. They are the same witnesses which the House wanted to call on, and the same documents. But T-rump - who had the perfect phone call - blocked it from happening (which is article 2 of his impeachment), I guess because he didn't want to be proven 'too innocent' ?

BTW, withholding the funding from Ukraine has been ruled as a crime by the GAO. Obstruction / Contempt of Congress is also a crime, one which forced Nixon to resign. But if you want to keep saying neither is a crime, go ahead. I'm sure it makes you sleep better.

And let us not forget what Lady Lindsay said on January 16, 1999 — an abuse of power by the president qualifies as a “high crime and misdemeanor.”

“What’s a high crime?” Graham said in 1999. “It doesn’t even have to be a crime. It’s just when you start using your office and you’re acting in a way that hurts people, you’ve committed a high crime.”

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4848798/user-clip-lindsey-graham-1999

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

Hogwash. Democrats didn't even subpoena Bolton and the others because the Trump administration had indicated it would resist in court and Democrats were afraid they'd lose. So instead of abiding by court rulings as President Trump was willing to do, they impeached him without a case, LOL.

Nancy Pelosi literally said, "We cannot be at the mercy of the courts." Think about that for a minute. That's abuse of power. She and her anti-American comrades are out of their minds with power hunger.

Contempt of Congress is also a crime

The article says "obstruction" of congress, which is most certainly not a crime. Things like vetoing legislation or asserting Executive Privilege are called checks and balances, ones with firm bases in constitutional law and past Supreme Court rulings. The notion that Trump is somehow wrong to let the judicial branch decide while Democrats are right to bypass the courts and try to rush to impeach the elected president when they don't get their way on everything is really insane.

BTW, withholding the funding from Ukraine has been ruled as a crime by the GAO.

You mean the Obama-appointed hack currently running the GAO wrongly claimed it was a crime. The GAO isn't a legal body that issues binding "rul(ings)". The OMB refuted the moronic claim, "ruling" that it was perfectly legal.

https://context-cdn.washingtonpost.com/notes/prod/default/documents/5dbd9f69-2537-4272-bd5d-60c94d3843b6/note/112b1caa-763c-4c4c-a5bb-0a04f7962d2c.pdf

It's lucky for Obama and Democrats that GAO opinions are non-binding, LOL, since the GAO "ruled" numerous times that Obama broke the law, and Obama didn't always even deny it.

https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/5e2389f18a995969f8f2acf7/The-GAO-found-that-Obama-broke-the-law-at-least-8-times

Nadler (1998) – “The effect of impeachment is to overturn the popular will of the voters, as expressed in a national election. There must never be a narrowly voted impeachment, or an impeachment substantially supported by one of our major political parties and largely opposed by the other. Such an impeachment would lack legitimacy, would produce divisiveness and bitterness in our politics for years to come, and would call into question the very legitimacy of our political institutions.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIGDfUkzTYo

Whoops.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

“What’s a high crime?” Lady Lindsay Graham said in 1999. “It doesn’t even have to be a crime. It’s just when you start using your office and you’re acting in a way that hurts people, you’ve committed a high crime.”

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4848798/user-clip-lindsey-graham-1999

If Lady Lindsay keeps his word from Clinton's impeachment - and there's not one good reason in the world why he should not - then this trial would turn around in a matter of moments from 'boring' to 'exciting' for everyone.

Let us not forget - this is the Senator who ran against T-rump four years ago in the primary, and told Americans to "Tell Donald T-rump to go to Hell!" Now he's licking his boots.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

It’s just when you start using your office and you’re acting in a way that hurts people,

Which Trump hasn't remotely done. Quite the opposite. But fat toad Nadler and his hypocritical Democrat comrades have undeniably done this:

Nadler (1998) - "There must never be a narrowly voted impeachment, or an impeachment substantially supported by one of our major political parties and largely opposed by the other. Such an impeachment would lack legitimacy, would produce divisiveness and bitterness in our politics for years to come, and would call into question the very legitimacy of our political institutions.”

Guess you're done talking about the GAO, LOL.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Which Trump hasn't remotely done.

Have you been in a coma since January 21, 2017 ?

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

Nope. That's why it's so easy to refute your weak points.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

If you haven't been in a coma for the past three years, then there's no viable excuse for you to be so ignorant to what's happening in reality.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

I'm the one educating you, Rachel. To wit, I see you still haven't brought the "GAO" talking point back up, LOL.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

If you need another ego boost and want to believe you're educating me, knock yourself out - but nothing can be further than the truth.

I believe I'm not the first who pointed out to you and your socks that Obama was never impeached under whatever laws he broke eight times (according to the GAO). Obama was never impeached at all.

T-rump has been impeached under the GAO law he broke (as well as obstructing Congress).

BIG difference. It's been fun educating you.

reply

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

Like a repub controlled house and senate wouldn't have jumped at the chance to impeach Obama.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Especially since he was guilty of being B-b-b-b-b-b-black!

reply

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

Do you remember what tea party rallies looked like?

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Oh yeah...indeed i do.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

T-rump has been impeached under the GAO law he broke.

LOL! First, there's no such thing as "GAO law", you ignoramus. It's not a legislative or regulatory body. It's an advisory agency that renders opinions to congressmen upon request. Second, the (incorrect) GAO opinion you're clumsily alluding to wasn't given until long after Democrats voted on impeachment, and was in fact not what Trump was impeached "under".

I believe I'm not the first who pointed out to you and your socks that Obama was never impeached under whatever laws he broke eight times (according to the GAO). Obama was never impeached at all.

LOL! Republicans didn't impeach Obama because they weren't power hungry lunatics on tilt. It's funny that Democrats spent years mocking Republicans as supposedly crazy people who wanted to impeach Obama, only for Democrats to become their own straw man. But by your own moronic logic Obama should have been impeached many times over. I'll bet you never once called for that to happen.

Oh and let Buckyboy know that Republicans did control both chambers of Congress during the last two years of the Obama administration, contrary to his claim.

See? I'm educating both of you. 😀

reply

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

Russian troll farm in full effect.

That's why I said IF the repubs could have impeached Obama they would have. I know they controlled both the senate and house. You see, I'm American. I lived through it. You just read about it in books you Russian troll account.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

BuckSwope: "Like a repub controlled house and senate wouldn't have jumped at the chance to impeach Obama."

Stop lying, Buckyboy. Is your account part of a Russian troll farm? Is that why you didn't know Republicans controlled the House and Senate late in Obama's presidency?

Answer quick: Who won Super Bowl XXVII? Don't look it up! A real American would know the answer.

reply

[–] slimone (7996) 4 years ago

We all know that the Senate is going to acquit Trump so why is this trial going on and on?????

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Because they are upholding their oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

If Democrats were truly doing that they'd resign and turn themselves in.

reply

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

Because the DEMs can cause damage to Trump by making a case so the public can see Trump's corruption. More Americans want Trump out of office than want him to remain.

The 2016 election was very close. Many states were extremely close.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

I agree that the treasonous partisan abuse of power by Democrats you just outlined, a campaign smear ad at tax payer expense that makes a mockery of the impeachment process, is their motive, but it seems to be backfiring so far judging by polls and fund raising. Heck, Democrats have literally already lost a House seat with a guy switching parties over this and becoming a Republican.

reply

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

LMAO! Comedy gold. Some of you guys sound legit crazy.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

How so? It's a fact that a Democrat congressman switched parties and became a Republican.

reply

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

"treasonous partisan abuse of power" C'mon man, that's hyperbole. That's what makes you guys sound crazy. Spewing hyperbole laden diatribes is not convincing.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

Did you not hear Nadler just call Trump a "dictator"? Pelosi and others repeatedly call him "unAmerican" and a "white nationalist"? Democrats have spent four years calling Trump "Hitler", the half of the nation that voted for him "Nazis", and ICE facilities "concentration camps" (motivating at least one Antifa nutjob to die attacking one with a rifle and firebombs), not to mention three years calling him a Russian spy working for Putin, spinning insane conspiracy theories nightly on shows like Rachel Maddow's, all of it absolute BS, and you really want to talk about "hyperbole" and sounding "crazy", LOL?

Your party is currently IMPEACHING the president on no grounds!

Hyperbole makes you sound crazy? 😄

At least my description is rooted in reality. Democrats really are abusing their power in an undeniably partisan effort to cancel two elections (2016 and 2020), the left really is opposed to core American values (see "anti-American), routinely exhibits visceral disdain for the country and its people, and would like to destroy it and replace it with something totally different (hence open borders, socialism, etc.). It's fair to call that treason, especially with the ongoing "coup" attempt, as the fake whistleblower's lawyer Mark Zaid, who worked with Schiff to orchestrate this whole farce, openly called it when boasting about it on twitter.

No wonder you've already had a Congressman switch parties.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

The fact that they have been calling for an impeachment before Trump even took office says it all.

reply

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

Who was calling for impeachment before he was sworn in? Honest question.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Their hate blinds them https://www.politico.eu/article/could-donald-trump-be-impeached-shortly-after-he-takes-office-us-presidential-election-2016-american-president-impeachment/

reply

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

That article quotes people on both sides of the fence. It doesn't bolster your case at all. Did you even read it?

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Oh Buck, you can't possibly require this much assistance! The Left wing rabble rioted and behaved like the very thugs they are when Trump won. I know you are a Left winger and so a lot of what I am saying will be too difficult for you to understand. But sometimes you have to learn how to read and find your own sources.

But then they don't want you to think, do they.

It's not going to matter how many articles I post because you will just dismiss them and call for more sources. This is what your side does "Disinformation".

There were just as many Republican members who were pissed off at Trump as there were Demokkkrats. Trump came in and made life long politicians look very bad. They don't like that.

I am sure you have some riot to plan so I will let you get on your way.

reply