Jump to content
Peter

Trump is the President

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

I wonder what's in his tax returns that is so important that he is going to the Supreme Court to stop them being shown?

But he's "the most transparent president in history"......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Nath. said:

Lets be honest, its just going to be argued and faught on partisan lines, and the final outcome will be determined whether 4 GOP senators are concerend enough about their jobs to vote to charge.

Considering the mid terms were record swings to dems and the recent Kentucky & Virginia results I'm tipping there are a few GOP's considering their future.

Problem is that you need a 2/3rds majority in the Senate to convict, so you're going to need a few more than four

I'm tipping there are a few House Democrats from red states who will be considering their futures too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought they needed 19 to flip, plus every democrat.  They would have to turn up something that just makes it completely impossible for them to keep him.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, goughy said:

I thought they needed 19 to flip, plus every democrat.  They would have to turn up something that just makes it completely impossible for them to keep him.  

And even then, it would save them face to just not re endorse him for the next election rather than to kick him out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, goughy said:

I thought they needed 19 to flip, plus every democrat.  They would have to turn up something that just makes it completely impossible for them to keep him.  

Correct

Even accounting for squishes like Mitt Romney it's quite simply not going to happen

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

They've gone too far already by ramping everything up to 11

Sure have.....the Dems have been methodically interviewing and following the procedures as set out by GOP previously.

But the GOP are in full scale meltdown and can’t get their stories straight A’s they kept getting proved wrong.

if they had anything to dispute the bribery by Trump, they would release it, but they can only rant & rave arguing processes because they can’t argue the facts or the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Nath. said:

Sure have.....the Dems have been methodically interviewing and following the procedures as set out by GOP previously.

But the GOP are in full scale meltdown and can’t get their stories straight A’s they kept getting proved wrong.

if they had anything to dispute the bribery by Trump, they would release it, but they can only rant & rave arguing processes because they can’t argue the facts or the law.

Um... what?

Name one 'GOP story' which you think was proven wrong yesterday

Asking someone to prove something that did not happen is both unconstitutional and a logical fallacy

The whole thing is based on the withholding of funds which the Ukrainians did not know were being withheld until after they were released, and linking this to an investigation which never took place...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this really worth pursuing. There is not much in the way of actual proof, does it help the dems. If Trump is so bad why don't they run a campaign which highlights how good they are and by all means use some of the material to outline why he should be replaced.

All we can see for now is the dems stand against trump

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

Um... what?

Name one 'GOP story' which you think was proven wrong yesterday

Asking someone to prove something that did not happen is both unconstitutional and a logical fallacy

The whole thing is based on the withholding of funds which the Ukrainians did not know were being withheld until after they were released, and linking this to an investigation which never took place...

If you believe that trump wasn’t bribing Ukraine for his own benefit I’ve got a bridge in north Sydney to sell you. No time now but will respond later.

BB - why impeach him? Because they have a career criminal who is a Russian money laundering crook in office who is more interested in enriching himself than doing to right thing by the country. When he has finally lost all of his Supreme Court appeals and his secrets come out it will be devastating for him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Nath. said:

If you believe that trump wasn’t bribing Ukraine for his own benefit I’ve got a bridge in north Sydney to sell you. No time now but will respond later.

Looking forward to it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

And even then, it would save them face to just not re endorse him for the next election rather than to kick him out.

Do they need to endorse a sitting president? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump will be impeached, but most definitely not convicted. The strategy for the democrats now is political damage, and they are doing a decent job at it by all standards.
Some of the career diplomats in the public hearings have served multiple presidents both republican and Democratic. Despite what the fear mongering deep state conspiracy theorists may tell you, their testimony is compelling and will continue to sway public opinion. 
 

Edited by Rog
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rog said:

Trump will be impeached, but most definitely not convicted. The strategy for the democrats now is political damage, and they are doing a decent job at it by all standards.
Some of the career diplomats in the public hearings have served multiple presidents both republican and Democratic. Despite what the fear mongering deep state conspiracy theorists may tell you, their testimony is compelling and will continue to sway public opinion. 
 

What would you know? Its not like you live in America when its easier to make such calls sitting in Sydney and having never visited the USA.  

Oh hang on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rog said:

Trump will be impeached, but most definitely not convicted.
 

Agreed.  I disagree though that he'll be damaged politically. In fact certain Democrats might find themselves having to answer some difficult questions in the next 12 months.  And in the end it's the swing voters that will decide and I'll bet there's plenty who will vote Republican not because they like Trump but because they hate the Democrats single minded pursuit of Trump for the last 3 years. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that’s a true possibility but given the past mid term elections, and recent results from Kentucky and Virginia, maybe what you are saying is coming directly from the republican book of talking points but is not necessarily the reality on the ground. 

The real issue for democrats is not swing voters but voter turn out and this could well be their key to energize the democratic base (along with a decent progressive candidate). 

Irrespective though, history will never forget what happened to this president because of this impeachment process and I personally think that alone is a good thing.

Quote


In Virginia, the House of Delegates that has had a Republican majority since 2000 was flipped to a blue Democratic majority of 55 Democrats to 45 Republicans. As recently as the election for 2014-2016, Democrats in the House had dropped to 32 members. The turn-around came decisively in amazing political time; there will be a recount in only one seat the Democrats won. The Senate that had a Republican majority before the election flipped to blue with 21 of the 40 Senate seats now being held by Democrats.

Edited by Rog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is getting into bizzare, making comments while the peron is testifying. Regardless of the content, the context is unprecedented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I heard that the Donald is thinking of stepping down. He can no longer handle what the Transitions forum is saying abou him. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Surfer said:

So long as he doesnt sign up here, I dont care what he does. He would be THE worst trannie ever

He's got the "It's all about me" down pat though.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/11/2019 at 5:00 PM, IronJimbo said:

Um... what?

Name one 'GOP story' which you think was proven wrong yesterday

Asking someone to prove something that did not happen is both unconstitutional and a logical fallacy

The whole thing is based on the withholding of funds which the Ukrainians did not know were being withheld until after they were released, and linking this to an investigation which never took place...

Gordon Sondalamd, Trumps appointed ambassador to Ukraine.

6E3DEECB-20F5-4C5F-92D4-3481CF713BC1.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Nath, welcome back

3 hours ago, Nath. said:

Gordon Sondalamd, Trumps appointed ambassador to Ukraine.

6E3DEECB-20F5-4C5F-92D4-3481CF713BC1.png

So you have Sondland confirming a quid-pro-quo about investigations, but having no knowledge about what it might have been about (like DNC involvement in 2016)

And also confirming that Trump specifically told him 'no quo-pro-quo of any kind'

And also confirmed that Zelinsky and the Ukranians were not aware that the aid had been withheld...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, roxii said:

Only thing you have said on this thread that I agree with

:lol: 

It was an abbreviation

'Nath's argument < my argument'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

This proves ?

That Sondland had no knowledge of why the the aid was being withheld 

As opposed to the Ukrainians of course, who didn't even know it was being withheld at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IronJimbo said:

That Sondland had no knowledge of why the the aid was being withheld 

As opposed to the Ukrainians of course, who didn't even know it was being withheld at all

it is a bunch of tweets, is there something I am missing? I did not watch the videos, too tiring. Happy for your analysis and summary.

Edited by BarryBevan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

it is a bunch of tweets, is there something I am missing? I did not watch the videos, too tiring. Happy for your analysis and summary.

Well over the last few days there have been a bunch of witnesses who were all asked whether they had any evidence that Trump had engaged in bribery, treason, and/or any other impeachable offences

All of them answered 'no'

The Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) are fulminating over Sondland mentioning a quid pro quo, but there is no proof that this was specifically linked to investigating burisma and/or the bidens.  There is plenty of evidence though that Trump was concerned about corruption generally, and asking for that to be investigated is perfectly legitimate 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.news.com.au/finance/business/media/king-of-the-selfown-tv-host-mocked-after-attempt-to-disprove-trumps-phone-theory-with-call-to-mum-fails/news-story/0064b01ebf91d8aa2722884d630a5bd9

CNN host Chris Cuomo was mocked on Thursday after his attempt to disprove US President Donald’s Trump’s theory about how phones work backfired on live television.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pelosi announces that House Democrats are pushing ahead with impeachment

It's always fun watching far-left political parties trying to punch themselves in the balls as hard as possible 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

Pelosi announces that House Democrats are pushing ahead with impeachment

It's always fun watching far-left political parties trying to punch themselves in the balls as hard as possible 

It’s more fun watching the world leaders laugh at Trump and what a fool he is at NATO, then him taking off, sulking back home because he is way out of his depth and they are playing him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Nath. said:

It’s more fun watching the world leaders laugh at Trump and what a fool he is at NATO, then him taking off, sulking back home because he is way out of his depth and they are playing him.

It goes without saying that most things would be more fun for you to watch than the Democrats ingesting themselves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t care too much about dems, GOP, left, right......I just want to see a serial criminal, liar, cheater & dirtbag in jail where he belongs.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But I do think that the GOP are looking more like fools with their carry on trying to deflect. While the drums are following procedures (set by GOP) calmly gathering the info, while trump continues to commit obstruction of justice.....an impeachable offence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nath. said:

But I do think that the GOP are looking more like fools with their carry on trying to deflect. While the drums are following procedures (set by GOP) calmly gathering the info, while trump continues to commit obstruction of justice.....an impeachable offence.

lol

Obstruction of justice how?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

lol

Obstruction of justice how?

Lol

start with that phoney executive whatever he called it to prevent all witnesses from testifying......and was laughed out of court. But he is still trying it on, so has been noted in articles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nath. said:

Lol

start with that phoney executive whatever he called it to prevent all witnesses from testifying......and was laughed out of court. But he is still trying it on, so has been noted in articles.

Which court was it laughed out of?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in the meantime he’s gone all grandpa Simpson waffling about tap pressure and flushing toilets.

Dementia might get him before the impeachment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

So, it wasn't laughed out of any court then, and you were talking out of your arse

As a typical trumper I understand you don’t do any balanced reading and wasn’t going to bother doing the leg work for you again, but here you go....

show_public_doc?2019cv2379-46

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I was was incorrect, he wasn’t claiming ‘executive something’ (nothing about him is executive), he was claiming absolute immunity 😂😂

which the judge describes as “baseless,” “a fiction that has been fastidiously maintained over time through the force of sheer repetition,” and as an idea that “simply has no basis in the law.”

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/11/mcgahn-testify-subpoena-absolute-immunity-ruling/amp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nath. said:

And I was was incorrect, he wasn’t claiming ‘executive something’ (nothing about him is executive), he was claiming absolute immunity 😂😂

which the judge describes as “baseless,” “a fiction that has been fastidiously maintained over time through the force of sheer repetition,” and as an idea that “simply has no basis in the law.”

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/11/mcgahn-testify-subpoena-absolute-immunity-ruling/amp

Perhaps you should wait and see how the appeal goes before you get too excited 

In any case, asking the judiciary to rule on bullshit subpoenas issued by blatantly partisan legislative committees is not obstruction of justice 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nath. said:

Dementia Donnie.....

 

OMG.  How awful 

Much more awful than third trimester abortions, that's for sure 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

OMG.  How awful 

Much more awful than third trimester abortions, that's for sure 

The guy probably doesn't know what trimester means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...