Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Take This Impeachment And Shove It...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

    The Democrats have consistently proclaimed that they have more than enough already to impeach Trump but their constant whining demands that the Senate continue their investigation is tacit admission that they don't.

    The fact is that they should have continued their own investigation instead of trying to extort the Senate into doing their job for them but simply couldn't be bothered to do so. The claim that they couldn't wait has been exposed by Pelosi's weeks long stall as utter B.S. And now their claim that they had more than enough already on Trump is likewise being exposed as just another lie.
    The fact is that you can't handle the truth and so don't want any more evidence to come out. What are you afraid of, fool?

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    So answer me this: You guys have been whooping and hollering for weeks now about how damning the House testimony has been, that it leaves no question of Trump's guilt, that the preponderance of evidence is overwhelming, and Democrats apparently thought they had a compelling enough case to pass a vote to impeach.

    So if the case is really that strong, then why the need for additional evidence? And if the Democrats need Bolton's testimony to make their case then why didn't they fight it out in court to compel him to testify during the inquiry?

    Your argument is really an implicit admission that the articles, as they stand right now, lack sufficient evidence to support the accusations against the President, and as Mitch McConnell correctly stated, it's not the Senate's job to help the House make its case, so the proper thing to do is dismiss the articles and tell the House, "Try to get it right next time."

    The Democrats have consistently proclaimed that they have more than enough already to impeach Trump but their constant whining demands that the Senate continue their investigation is tacit admission that they don't.

    The fact is that they should have continued their own investigation instead of trying to extort the Senate into doing their job for them but simply couldn't be bothered to do so. The claim that they couldn't wait has been exposed by Pelosi's weeks long stall as utter B.S. And now their claim that they had more than enough already on Trump is likewise being exposed as just another lie.

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    So answer me this: You guys have been whooping and hollering for weeks now about how damning the House testimony has been, that it leaves no question of Trump's guilt, that the preponderance of evidence is overwhelming, and Democrats apparently thought they had a compelling enough case to pass a vote to impeach.

    So if the case is really that strong, then why the need for additional evidence? And if the Democrats need Bolton's testimony to make their case then why didn't they fight it out in court to compel him to testify during the inquiry?

    Your argument is really an implicit admission that the articles, as they stand right now, lack sufficient evidence to support the accusations against the President, and as Mitch McConnell correctly stated, it's not the Senate's job to help the House make its case, so the proper thing to do is dismiss the articles and tell the House, "Try to get it right next time."
    The reason for it is not because there isn't enough evidence already, but there is not enough to overcome the denial from the likes of you which is why you are appreciative of Trumps obstruction in the first place and are afraid of it's coming out at a fair trial. And yes it is the Senates job to seek the truth, not to defend the accused. The Senate is the jury, not the defense team.
    Anyone wanting to know the truth would want to see and to hear all the relevant evidence, not make excuses for it to not be admissable. You and the rest of those defending Trump obviously don't want to see it, and the reason for that is glaringly obvious.
    Last edited by JimL; 01-11-2020, 03:32 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by JimLamebrain View Post
    No it isn't. If Moscow Mitch and the republicans intend on putting on a sham trial, nothing democrats say is going to change that. Republicans as well as Democrats already know that direct and relevant evidence and testimony has been blocked by the White House. If they don't want to see it, if they don't want you to see it, then it's a cover-up pure and simple. So, why don't you want to see it, MM?
    So answer me this: You guys have been whooping and hollering for weeks now about how damning the House testimony has been, that it leaves no question of Trump's guilt, that the preponderance of evidence is overwhelming, and Democrats apparently thought they had a compelling enough case to pass a vote to impeach.

    So if the case is really that strong, then why the need for additional evidence? And if the Democrats need Bolton's testimony to make their case then why didn't they fight it out in court to compel him to testify during the inquiry?

    Your argument is really an implicit admission that the articles, as they stand right now, lack sufficient evidence to support the accusations against the President, and as Mitch McConnell correctly stated, it's not the Senate's job to help the House make its case, so the proper thing to do is dismiss the articles and tell the House, "Try to get it right next time."

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Then it's on the Democrat's to present a compelling enough opening argument to convince a majority of Senators that the presentation of additional witnesses and evidence is warranted. You think they're up to it?
    No it isn't. If Moscow Mitch and the republicans intend on putting on a sham trial, nothing democrats say is going to change that. Republicans as well as Democrats already know that direct and relevant evidence and testimony has been blocked by the White House. If they don't want to see it, if they don't want you to see it, then it's a cover-up pure and simple. So, why don't you want to see it, MM?

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Your sarcasm detector is in need of servicing.
    Sorry MM, you gave yourself away.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    There is no sham involved here MM. Trump abused his power and tried to enlist a foreign government's help in undermining a political opponent's campaign. That is as valid a reason as any to impeach a president. And the senate refusing to conduct a real trial, and especially not to allow a person that likely can clear the air once and for all as to exactly what Trump was up to says it all. The Senate and the president have conspired to, as much as is possible, hide any information that would require Trump be removed from office. They have conspired to keep a man unfit for office in the white house when his actions rightfully required his removal.
    Then it's on the Democrat's to present a compelling enough opening argument to convince a majority of Senators that the presentation of additional witnesses and evidence is warranted. You think they're up to it?

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by JimLamebrain View Post
    At least you admit to knowing that the republicans intent is a sham trial. Have you on record for that, MM.
    Your sarcasm detector is in need of servicing.

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    A sham trial for a sham investigation.

    Sounds fair!
    There is no sham involved here MM. Trump abused his power and tried to enlist a foreign government's help in undermining a political opponent's campaign. That is as valid a reason as any to impeach a president. And the senate refusing to conduct a real trial, and especially not to allow a person that likely can clear the air once and for all as to exactly what Trump was up to says it all. The Senate and the president have conspired to, as much as is possible, hide any information that would require Trump be removed from office. They have conspired to keep a man unfit for office in the white house when his actions rightfully required his removal.
    Last edited by oxmixmudd; 01-11-2020, 01:51 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    A sham trial for a sham investigation.

    Sounds fair!
    At least you admit to knowing that the republicans intent is a sham trial. Have you on record for that, MM.

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Tassman View Post
    Interesting that you accept the Senate leader’s stated determination not to run a fair trial.
    They don't want a fair trial, they're all breathing a sigh of relief after hearing that Moscow Mitch intended to sweep it under the rug. Winning is more important to them than truth, than the Constitution, or their democratic form of government, and the more they're lied to, the more the facts are covered up, the better they seem to like it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by JimLamebrain View Post
    Well, if they dismiss the impeachment, or put on a sham trial...
    A sham trial for a sham investigation.

    Sounds fair!

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    When the Senate dismisses the impeachment Jimmy will claim that they did that on purpose so they can add more charges later and impeach him for it all at once.
    Well, if they dismiss the impeachment, or put on a sham trial as Moscow Mitch affirmed to be his intention, if they purposely block direct testimoney and relative documentary evidence, then of course I'll say they did it on purpose. That's not rocket science, Sparko, even you know that, though you'll never admit to it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tassman
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    When the Senate dismisses the impeachment Jimmy will claim that they did that on purpose so they can add more charges later and impeach him for it all at once.
    Interesting that you accept the Senate leader’s stated determination not to run a fair trial.

    Leave a comment:


  • Teallaura
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Yep - I expected that after all the flak she's taken from all sides this week.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
16 responses
160 views
0 likes
Last Post One Bad Pig  
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
53 responses
400 views
0 likes
Last Post Mountain Man  
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
25 responses
114 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
33 responses
198 views
0 likes
Last Post Roy
by Roy
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
84 responses
379 views
0 likes
Last Post JimL
by JimL
 
Working...
X