|
Post by Maxperson on Oct 29, 2019 12:35:11 GMT
Nah. The right is incensed at the frivolity of this impeachment at this point. Anger is a much better motivator, so the left at this point stands to lose more than it will gain. Just like the right did with Clinton's impeachment. The Democrats were morons not to investigate and come up with hard evidence(if they could) first. The frivolous investigation into Banghazi paid political dividends to Republicans. I see no reason why a serious investigation won't do the same for Dems. To be continued. Feel free to look stupid and continu saying Ukraine is a nothing burger and it will be the end of Dems. This conversation is going in circles and your dumb. I'm out. For a bit you were actually having a conversation. It was very unlike you. The meds wear off?
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on Oct 29, 2019 15:25:48 GMT
The frivolous investigation into Banghazi paid political dividends to Republicans. You're a moron. The incessant droning on and on about Benghazi droze moderate unaffiliateds to look at the Repubs like they were morons. Just like the incessant and pointless "Russia Collusion" drove them to see the Dems as morons. This is just another check mark in the box labeled "Another 5 years".
|
|
|
Post by Kzach on Oct 29, 2019 15:40:57 GMT
The frivolous investigation into Banghazi paid political dividends to Republicans. You're a moron. The incessant droning on and on about Benghazi droze moderate unaffiliateds to look at the Repubs like they were morons. Just like the incessant and pointless "Russia Collusion" drove them to see the Dems as morons. This is just another check mark in the box labeled "Another 5 years". Right. Cause it really helped Clinton get elected... idiot.
|
|
|
Post by Scarbonac on Oct 29, 2019 16:58:56 GMT
Quid pro quo on behalf of the People, the Nation, or the World are all justifiable. Quid pro quo for the President' political benefit? Using tax dollars to lean on another world leader for a "favor" to Individual One? Fuck no. Agreed. There is no hard evidence one way or the other that has come out, though. That's the problem here. Ahh, the tolerant and inclusive left at its finest. "Tolerance" doesn't extend to willful boneheadedness.
|
|
|
Post by Scarbonac on Oct 29, 2019 17:08:41 GMT
They impeached Clinton for lying about a blowjob. Because he lied under oath. About getting a hummer in the Oval Office, which, I don;t think is a crime. About getting a consensual hummer from a groupie in the Oval Office. About getting a freely-given enthusiastic hummer the the- you get the picture. It was a bullshit ginned-up reason for a phony-AF Impeachment.
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on Oct 29, 2019 17:29:37 GMT
Because he lied under oath. About getting a hummer in the Oval Office, which, I don;t think is a crime. About getting a consensual hummer from a groupie in the Oval Office. About getting a freely-given enthusiastic hummer the the- you get the picture. It was a bullshit ginned-up reason for a phony-AF Impeachment. Look, stop being a stupid sack of shit like kzach for 5 minutes and pay attention: Clinton was charged with sexaul harrassment in the work place. He lied under oath and used his position of power (as someone's boss) to coerce them into lying for him during this trail. Then, later, he was impeached for ... wait for it, lying under oath and obstructing justice. No one (except screeching stupid religioustards) care that he got a hummer (for promises he never wanted to keep) while in the oval office. What they cared about was that the President of the United States lied under oath and obstructed justice... you know almost the same damn crimes you're crying about Trump 'getting away with'. So don't kid yourself, you're upset when it happened to a Dem, but happy when it happens to a Repub. Personally, I think Clinton should have fessed up at the initial sexaul harrassment trial, said "Yeah, she was totally into blowing the President!" Red blooded men everywhere would have high fived him, women would have whined (as women are want to do) and no one would have cared. No impeachment bullshit would have come of it.... but nooooo, he went an lied. Under oath. Like a dumb sack of shit. And ran around trying to desperately cover his tracks like guy caught with his dick in her cookie jar and vindictive wife comin in the door... Though, with Hillary's body count, denial may have been the only thing that kept him alive.
|
|
|
Post by Kzach on Oct 29, 2019 17:40:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on Oct 29, 2019 18:33:40 GMT
I'm amazed, once again, at Nazi Eeyore's leap in logic to down play Trump's corruption. You should be more amazed at your ability to dive so deep up your rabbit hole. Since I'm not talking about Trump in that fashion. Under oath! That's teh only 'downplaying' going on here. Trump's been reelected already? Or are you failing to English again? Are you sure you aren't french? Getting your "Quebecky" and your "Aussie" socks mixed up are you?
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Oct 29, 2019 22:23:49 GMT
The only reason why we haven't gotten Trump to lie under oath is he refuses to be under oath for a talk. Once he opens his mouth under oath, they'll get him for lying.
He won't be able to help himself.
|
|
|
Post by superfriend1488 on Oct 30, 2019 0:25:51 GMT
Funny how all of this theater is timed with al-Baghdadi's death. Almost as if the deep state knew it was coming and the right people testified at the right moment to undermind the death of an islamist. Almost.
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Oct 30, 2019 0:46:12 GMT
Agreed. There is no hard evidence one way or the other that has come out, though. That's the problem here. Ahh, the tolerant and inclusive left at its finest. "Tolerance" doesn't extend to willful boneheadedness. So tolerance = only people who agree with us. Got it.
|
|
|
Post by mustrumridcully on Oct 30, 2019 9:56:31 GMT
Funny how all of this theater is timed with al-Baghdadi's death. Almost as if the deep state knew it was coming and the right people testified at the right moment to undermind the death of an islamist. Almost. Or how convenient it is that al-Baghdadi's death is announced when Trump has to deal with domestic problems and backlash for withdrawing troops from Syria and giving Russia and Turkey a free hand in how to deal with the Kurds. A miltary success is certainly convenient for him now.
Of course, I am not really sure how many people even cared about this in the first place. Didn't the Russians already report him dead a few years back?
Sometimes, things happen without any deeper connection.
|
|
|
Post by superfriend1488 on Oct 30, 2019 12:10:09 GMT
Funny how all of this theater is timed with al-Baghdadi's death. Almost as if the deep state knew it was coming and the right people testified at the right moment to undermind the death of an islamist. Almost. Or how convenient it is that al-Baghdadi's death is announced when Trump has to deal with domestic problems and backlash for withdrawing troops from Syria and giving Russia and Turkey a free hand in how to deal with the Kurds. A miltary success is certainly convenient for him now.
Of course, I am not really sure how many people even cared about this in the first place. Didn't the Russians already report him dead a few years back?
Sometimes, things happen without any deeper connection.
It shows Trump has leadership. Killing Muslims who threaten our nation is an act of courage in these dark times. Trump is standing up to progressives, Muslims, feminists, Mexicans, Demorats, and others, to protect us and put the US back on the right tracks. Impeaching Trump is an act against the US and its people.
|
|
|
Post by Libtard on Oct 30, 2019 13:30:18 GMT
Having declared your intention to piss off SJWs in the introductory thread, this is a rather dull opening troll.
Perhaps something a little more nuanced?
|
|
|
Post by superfriend1488 on Oct 30, 2019 14:29:36 GMT
Having declared your intention to piss off SJWs in the introductory thread, this is a rather dull opening troll. Perhaps something a little more nuanced? The truth is enough to piss off progressives. No need for trolling.
|
|