Unlike lying about having sex with someone not your wife.
Thank heavens Trump would never do such a thing.
wouldnt you say the abuse of the power dynamic between a sitting president and a 20 something year old intern is worse than lying about it*?
*under oath
The accusation is he withheld congressionally appropriated military aid funds to an ally in a war against one of our foes that has claimed over 10,000 lives, in order to achieve an electoral advantage. If you can't see that as far more of a "high crime and misdemeanor" than lying about sex there's no hope for this republic.
but the reality is that the funds went through and infact were increased, and the accusation of 'in order to' is a presumption of his intent without direct evidence.
get back to me when trump does something exciting, like arming terrorists and painting them as 'moderate rebels'
i dont think lying about sex is all that bad either considering everything else, even granting that perjury is an actual criminal offense, compared to the vague 'abuse of power' metric the democrats are banking on
Which one the story has changed through the years.
They wanted to impeach Trump since day one. So which story are we talking about?
The one that originated in July of this year, the one about which you said "If it went exactly as stated, and there was no hearsay, but there was true proof... I'd be demanding his resignation..."
And was there?
We disagree on that, but agreeing that it's a crime if it happened as described by numerous witnesses is a start in saving the country. Many do not agree that it's a problem even if that were the case. The GOP defense in the house consisted almost entirely of attacking the process rather than substantially defending Trump against the testimony.
The Biden accusation does not become true no matter how many times it's repeated. It's been definitively debunked. He was carrying out administration policy, not a personal agenda. Nor does the Kremlin propaganda about Ukraine hacking the election not them, which the GOP swallowed hook line and sinker.
We are only accustomed to dealing with like twenty online personas at a time so when we only have about ten people some people have to be strawmanned in order to advance our same relative go nowhere nonsense positions. -TheReal_ND
The one that originated in July of this year, the one about which you said "If it went exactly as stated, and there was no hearsay, but there was true proof... I'd be demanding his resignation..."
And was there?
We disagree on that, but agreeing that it's a crime if it happened as described by numerous witnesses is a start in saving the country. Many do not agree that it's a problem even if that were the case. The GOP defense in the house consisted almost entirely of attacking the process rather than substantially defending Trump against the testimony.
The Biden accusation does not become true no matter how many times it's repeated. It's been definitively debunked. He was carrying out administration policy, not a personal agenda. Nor does the Kremlin propaganda about Ukraine hacking the election not them, which the GOP swallowed hook line and sinker.
There is more proof that Biden was telling the president of Ukraine at the time to stop the investigation because his son was on the board of a company known for corruption... than actually having the backing of the president.
As for the reset, hearsay is not proof, hence why I asked you about was there?
wouldnt you say the abuse of the power dynamic between a sitting president and a 20 something year old intern is worse than lying about it*?
*under oath
The accusation is he withheld congressionally appropriated military aid funds to an ally in a war against one of our foes that has claimed over 10,000 lives, in order to achieve an electoral advantage. If you can't see that as far more of a "high crime and misdemeanor" than lying about sex there's no hope for this republic.
but the reality is that the funds went through and infact were increased, and the accusation of 'in order to' is a presumption of his intent without direct evidence.
get back to me when trump does something exciting, like arming terrorists and painting them as 'moderate rebels'
i dont think lying about sex is all that bad either considering everything else, even granting that perjury is an actual criminal offense, compared to the vague 'abuse of power' metric the democrats are banking on
Lying about sex to your friends is one thing, lying about it while in front of a grand jury... is something entirely different.
The Conservative wrote: Thu Dec 19, 2019 11:45 am
There is more proof that Biden was telling the president of Ukraine at the time to stop the investigation because his son was on the board of a company known for corruption... than actually having the backing of the president.
As for the reset, hearsay is not proof, hence why I asked you about was there?
No, there's not proof Biden was acting in self interest. He was transparently and provably acting for his government. I don't expect you to concede proof of Trump's actions, that would be too much, but do you still consider it a crime if true? Many of your fellows do not, including Mr Trump.
We are only accustomed to dealing with like twenty online personas at a time so when we only have about ten people some people have to be strawmanned in order to advance our same relative go nowhere nonsense positions. -TheReal_ND
The Conservative wrote: Thu Dec 19, 2019 11:45 am
There is more proof that Biden was telling the president of Ukraine at the time to stop the investigation because his son was on the board of a company known for corruption... than actually having the backing of the president.
As for the reset, hearsay is not proof, hence why I asked you about was there?
No, there's not proof Biden was acting in self interest. He was transparently and provably acting for his government. I don't expect you to concede proof of Trump's actions, that would be too much, but do you still consider it a crime if true? Many of your fellows do not, including Mr Trump.
What proof that you have that shows Biden as not working in his own self-interest? You do realize that those people who have an Impeaching Trump have contacts to Russian owned companies?
pineapplemike wrote: Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:10 am
absolute worst case scenario re: aid story, there's no fucking way it rises to the level of impeachment. and especially the second article "obstructing congress" or whatever, get real
Unlike lying about having sex with someone not your wife.
Thank heavens Trump would never do such a thing.
wouldnt you say the abuse of the power dynamic between a sitting president and a 20 something year old intern is worse than lying about it*?
*under oath
Is it as impeachable as withholding military aid in return for investigating a political opponent?
I'm not convinced that either is really at the level of an impeachment offense but if a blow job is then bribery sure as hell is.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
brewster wrote: Thu Dec 19, 2019 10:37 am
The accusation is he withheld congressionally appropriated military aid funds to an ally in a war against one of our foes that has claimed over 10,000 lives, in order to achieve an electoral advantage. If you can't see that as far more of a "high crime and misdemeanor" than lying about sex there's no hope for this republic.
An accusation with no evidence. There is ZERO proof that he did anything to achieve an electoral advantage. The is evidence however that the aid was sent and nothing was given in return that "achieved an electoral advantage".
Ironically, the best electoral advantage Trump is achieving is coming from the Democrats who continue to push this lie.
brewster wrote: Thu Dec 19, 2019 11:33 am
We disagree on that, but agreeing that it's a crime if it happened as described by numerous witnesses is a start in saving the country. Many do not agree that it's a problem even if that were the case. The GOP defense in the house consisted almost entirely of attacking the process rather than substantially defending Trump against the testimony.
Is a witness really a witness if they never actually witnessed anything?
The Conservative wrote: Thu Dec 19, 2019 11:45 am
There is more proof that Biden was telling the president of Ukraine at the time to stop the investigation because his son was on the board of a company known for corruption... than actually having the backing of the president.
As for the reset, hearsay is not proof, hence why I asked you about was there?
No, there's not proof Biden was acting in self interest. He was transparently and provably acting for his government. I don't expect you to concede proof of Trump's actions, that would be too much, but do you still consider it a crime if true? Many of your fellows do not, including Mr Trump.
Why was it important for the US government to get that prosecutor fired?
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur? - Axel Oxenstierna
Nie lügen die Menschen so viel wie nach einer Jagd, während eines Krieges oder vor Wahlen. - Otto von Bismarck
