Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Impeachment Thread


Impeachment  

198 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Donald Trump be impeached for obstruction of justice?



Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, spjunkies said:

 

Just stop, you know deep down in your soul this is BS, but you'll never admit it.

 

Your position is foolish, Obama hunted down leakers and folk subverting him.

 

They are not whistleblowers

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Skintime said:

trump along with those that continue to support him are the scum of the earth!

Right and they also got him voted in so the scum of the earth is still better than your or I....wake up from your fantasy land these people have a solid chance to get him in again and you my friend will be screaming scum of the earth for 4 more years....

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, CjSuAvE22 said:

I dont understand some of you u guys really think its a joke and a done deal that he will be voted out of office....my question to you all is WHO is going to beat him....?


We hope that there is enough human decency to do the job. We will see if the scum outweighs it and we are forced to truly say goodbye to the great experiment that was America 

Edited by Momma There Goes That Man
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, CjSuAvE22 said:

I dont understand some of you u guys really think its a joke and a done deal that he will be voted out of office....my question to you all is WHO is going to beat him....?

 

 

that's not reflective of the tone in  here at all, so is it a troll? :)

 

since your drive by a week or so ago you've been on troll watch ^_^

 

most of the lefties in here are pretty worried and unsure if you'd been reading or engaging

 

i suggest not dropping in randomly as a newer guy into the political  threads just  to post out your ass because these days you won't last long

 

participate with providing your own positions and arguments on the topic of the threads you choose to post in---offer some substance, not just reactions to others

 

definitely don't drop in every now and then just to lecture or scold :) 

 

 

(don't reply to this post; just read and heed)

 

p.s. your most recent post just landed---it's not going in the right direction---it starts out somewhat incoherent or at least vague and the "fantasy land" deal is gratuitous---get it figured out....you're not that far off if you just drop any "internet" games (i'm intolerant of them) and play it straight

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump is definitely a formidable incumbent but i think plenty of americans have had enough.  My take is that if enough people vote America can overcome the cheating **** and his cult. 
 

Not the best start for the dems in iowa but that will be long forgotten in a day or two. 
 

The wild card in all this is what we learn about the ukraine scheme, or the other ongoing schemes that he is engaging in over the coming weeks and months. 
 

We can also count on some concern from collins at some point!
 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Your position is foolish, Obama hunted down leakers and folk subverting him.

 

They are not whistleblowers

 

 

 

there's some truth in that post and certainly no shortage of weaknesses :)

 

but i'll leave any expansion on that to the foolish :D

 

i'm ready to listen to some tunz and engage in relaxation

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whistle Blower report, every witness corroborates the whistle blower, Mulvaney admits to Quid Pro Quo, says "get over it" Sonland says "Quid Pro Quo" etc etc etc etc etc.....x100

 

Trump Supporters, "Zero evidence presented"

 

Trump Fires Yovanovitch, because Guiliani alone says she was being a meanie based on nothing else presented so far.

 

Trump Supporters, "Good enough for me, she deserved it because of what Guiliani said that she said"

 

We can clearly see a double standard here in when these people require actual evidence versus when they will just deny all evidence presented. 

 

Oddly I didn't see Jim Jordan chime in to defend Yovanovitch by saying "hearsay" 100 times.

 

52 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Your position is foolish, Obama hunted down leakers and folk subverting him.

 

They are not whistleblowers

 

 

 

Selectively leaking information due to political disagreements is very different than sounding the alarm on actions that someone in good faith believes are violating the law, yes?  If Trump is merely going after people leaking information for political points/issues, then I would probably sign off on it, but that isn't what Trump is doing and you know it.

Edited by NoCalMike
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

 

 

Selectively leaking information due to political disagreements is very different than sounding the alarm on actions that someone in good faith believes are violating the law, yes?  If Trump is merely going after people leaking information for political points/issues, then I would probably sign off on it, but that isn't what Trump is doing and you know it.

 

Would you continue to keep people doing either in positions of privilege?

 

 

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

Would you continue to keep people doing either in positions of privilege?

One of them, yeah. I know you faux Republicans have a hard time discerning who should and shouldn’t be allowed to remain in their positions.


 

edit: In case you’re not sure, which I assume is a possibility since you had to ask, it’d be the guy who was sounding the alarm on actions that he believed, in good faith, were violating the law.

Edited by Sacks 'n' Stuff
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Would you continue to keep people doing either in positions of privilege?

 

 

 

In a just world, the guy in the position to make that decision would be the one not being kept.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

 

On a related note, have you checked your house for gas leaks lately?

 

 

yes, among other things.

😎

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, twa said:

 

Your position is foolish, Obama hunted down leakers and folk subverting him.

 

They are not whistleblowers

 

 

 

Vindman was subpoenaed by Congress and testified.  POTUS is justified in punishing individuals for truthfully testifying before Congress?  You're claiming that Obama did the same thing? (I'm aware of no such instance)

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bearrock said:

 

Vindman was subpoenaed by Congress and testified.  POTUS is justified in punishing individuals for truthfully testifying before Congress?  You're claiming that Obama did the same thing? (I'm aware of no such instance)

 

Obama aggressively pursued leakers and people subverting him....those he didn't fire in the beginning that is.

 

I find your phrasing suspect....but good try.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Obama aggressively pursued leakers and people subverting him....those he didn't fire in the beginning that is.

 

I find your phrasing suspect....but good try.

I find your phrasing suspect.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Obama aggressively pursued leakers and people subverting him....those he didn't fire in the beginning that is.

 

I find your phrasing suspect....but good try.

 

That was a response to people criticizing Trump's action regarding Vindman right?  At least that's what I followed from the exchanges.  Or are you talking about something else?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CjSuAvE22 said:

I dont understand some of you u guys really think its a joke and a done deal that he will be voted out of office....my question to you all is WHO is going to beat him....?

A Big Mac, Cheeseburger, His ****ty steaks, etc...  when he chokes on them.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm not watching the whole thing through, but seeing a fair amount

 

off the top from what i saw, amy had a strong performance, hope she can last...warren seemed solid.....bernie was too....yang still makes some interesting points but is getting a little shakier---there's a growing sensation of "you're a worthwhile novelty diversion but the intrigue is starting to lessen and no one ever really thought you'd even get close to having a shot for real"---i looked at biden objectively at first, then later "tried" to actually like him more as a candidate but i don't see it...he was louder but he's just too dull, slow, and tired...at this time i think he needs to go as gracefully and soon as possible...pete took hard shots on the big money donors and race issues with some fairly decent rebuttals on the donors but weak on handling the racial issues...he did pretty good otherwise most of the time, but he has real work there to do...tom faded....i feel funny criticizing any of them as too weak a candidate given don's word salads and ignorant/bizarre/malevolent behaviors and he got elected potus

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Jumbo locked this topic
  • Jumbo unlocked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...