Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Impeachment Thread


No Excuses

Impeachment  

198 members have voted

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



Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

I’m having a difficult time reconciling  that with the fact that everything he’s reported that we know about has been confirmed and nothing that he reported has been disproven?

 

It’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard in my life. Considering their usual spin, that this is the point they are choosing to work with shows how desperate and backed into a corner they are. 

 

Its the equivalent of 5 different people separately coming up to you and saying “I saw Jon kill Steve with an axe yesterday” and you going to the police with that information. Are the police expected to laugh in your ****ing face because it’s second hand information or maybe go pay Steve a visit and see if he has an axe in his skull? 

 

They do that, Steve’s dead and they find a video recording of Jon doing it. Yeah but it all started over second hand information. “This guy didn’t even see the murder happen how much credibility can he have!”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

It’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard in my life. Considering their usual spin, that this is the point they are choosing to work with shows how desperate and backed into a corner they are. 

 

Its the equivalent of 5 different people separately coming up to you and saying “I saw Jon kill Steve with an axe yesterday” and you going to the police with that information. Are the police expected to laugh in your ****ing face because it’s second hand information or maybe go pay Steve a visit and see if he has an axe in his skull? 

 

They do that, Steve’s dead and they find a video recording of Jon doing it. Yeah but it all started over second hand information. This guy didn’t even see the murder happen how much credibility can he have! 

Where the hell do you get off trying to bring logic into a GOP argument?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

I don’t know about that. There’s really some stiff competition for that title. Bonus points for being POTUS though so I guess he’s part of the conversation.

 

True but im counting on Trump only getting worse from here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, kfrankie said:

 

Maybe if you actually read it you would understand why I used the term so frequently.

 

Actually I did read it. I wasn’t overwhelmed by your argument. I was struck, though, by how you picked up Trump’s favorite phrase in this post and in previous ones, the one he’s used repeatedly to disparage the investigation.

 

And it brought to mind how insidiously a person with a large megaphone can inject propaganda into the public discourse.  I used your postings to make that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

I’m having a difficult time reconciling  that with the fact that everything he’s reported that we know about has been confirmed and nothing that he reported has been disproven?

 

you would be mistaken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FrFan said:

Just checking as a foreigner if I may have missed something about the impeachment process

 

It's not just you, most people havent "gotten it" yet that if the Repubs just stonewall and refuse to act, nothing happens.

 

They wont act

 

They cant

 

They're glued to the tarbaby and get that 20 years in Allentown might be the friendliest option available.

 

They will ride it all the way down in flames

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dan T. said:

 

Actually I did read it. I wasn’t overwhelmed by your argument. I was struck, though, by how you picked up Trump’s favorite phrase in this post and in previous ones, the one he’s used repeatedly to disparage the investigation.

 

And it brought to mind how insidiously a person with a large megaphone can inject propaganda into the public discourse.  I used your postings to make that point.

And you did a great job of doing so. 

13 minutes ago, twa said:

 

LOL @ Obama trying to be a traitor too. You fools have nothing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing that Obama didn't talk or try to strongarm foreign leaders to provide dirt on his political opponents.

 

I want to add that Pelosi was smart to wait until Trump actually broke federal laws and then tried to cover it up by giving Trump enough room so his arrogance and hubris led him to think he was above the law. He's not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

I'm guessing that Obama didn't talk or try to strongarm foreign leaders to provide dirt on his political opponents.

 

I want to add that Pelosi was smart to wait until Trump actually broke federal laws and then tried to cover it up by giving Trump enough room so his arrogance and hubris led him to think he was above the law. He's not.

 

I wouldn't rush to hand Nancy the 4-D Grand Master trophy. I'd assume her unwillingness to proceed comes from reading polling data, and absolutely nothing else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, twa said:

 

 

As Rice noted, they moved call transcripts to those servers when there was a legitimate national security classification reason for doing it. Team Trump did it because of purely political implications and because they didn't want anyone to hear Trump trying to extort a foreign leader so he could get a leg up on one of his possible future opponents for POTUS. Also, who knows what other stuff is there since they apparently did the same with conversations with Putin and Saudi Arabia. 

 

But you knew that.

 

However please, keep trying. It's at least somewhat amusing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...