Impeach. Don’t send it to Senate.

[Duck_walk]

Why send it to the senate when Mitch and Graham have already said there won’t be a real trial? Impeach him and then keep investigating and let more and more damaging info keep coming out all the way up to the election. Don’t let him claim he was exonerated. Make him suffer.

 

[Veerman_12]

Lol the Senate is rigged, but the House is impartial...

Do your jobs and quit being partisan hacks. Need to remove them all and start over.

 

[millerbleach]

How non partisan.

 

[3Rfan]

How non partisan.

You mean like McConnell and Graham?

 

[you_dont_know_me]

Playing keep away...classic.

What facts have been presented? What crimes have been listed?

NADA.

This is so much like "atheism" ---it isn't a non-biased thing...atheists are "anti-theists" just like Democrats are "anti-trumpers". Maybe New York and California could secede. That would make things a lot easier.

 

[Veer2Eternity]

Playing keep away...classic.

What facts have been presented? What crimes have been listed?

NADA.

This is so much like "atheism" ---it isn't a non-biased thing...atheists are "anti-theists" just like Democrats are "anti-trumpers". Maybe New York and California could secede. That would make things a lot easier.

Hard to get too much when the witnesses aren't allowed to testify.

Courts will have their say and then move on.

 

[Duck_walk]

Playing keep away...classic.

What facts have been presented? What crimes have been listed?

NADA.

This is so much like "atheism" ---it isn't a non-biased thing...atheists are "anti-theists" just like Democrats are "anti-trumpers". Maybe New York and California could secede. That would make things a lot easier.

Brilliant. How you going to fund the military? From the booming economies in Mississippi and Louisiana?

 

[you_dont_know_me]

Hard to get too much when the witnesses aren't allowed to testify.

Courts will have their say and then move on.

If you have no facts, how can you impeach? "We'll approve the bill, and then find out what's in it later"... If anyone says this is anything but a political play, they aren't being intellectually honest.

 

[you_dont_know_me]

Brilliant. How you going to fund the military? From the booming economies in Mississippi and Louisiana?

We'll just approve the law, then figure out the details later...or we'll impeach and find the facts later... haha.

 

[Duck_walk]

We'll just approve the law, then figure out the details later...or we'll impeach and find the facts later... haha.

hilarious

 

[you_dont_know_me]

hilarious

great counterpoint.

From a state by state and county by county viewpoint, the country is being held hostage by 2 states. Thankful there is an electoral college. It's crazy how smart those founding fathers were, and insightful.

 

[Duck_walk]

[

If you have no facts, how can you impeach? "We'll approve the bill, and then find out what's in it later"... If anyone says this is anything but a political play, they aren't being intellectually honest.

super projection on the intellectually dishonest front. Because you know it is not ok to enlist the help of a foreign government to dig up dirt to win an election. I know you know that. So acting like it is ok or like it didn’t happen is truly dishonest. And that is your argument

 

[you_dont_know_me]

[


super projection on the intellectually dishonest front. Because you know it is not ok to enlist the help of a foreign government to dig up dirt to win an election. I know you know that. So acting like it is ok or like it didn’t happen is truly dishonest. And that is your argument

No, not my argument. There is no facts that lead to what you are saying. Did the Bidens do something wrong? is it worth investigating...you just said it was.

Is there substantiated evidence it was for political gain?
Is there any firsthand black and white evidence it was for that motive?
I would agree there was political gain to be made from it. That would be dishonest, but there was no quid pro quo, and all first hand testimony says the opposite of the democrats rhetoric.

Would you agree that the Democrats were just waiting for a shred of anything to validate their only true mission...to remove a president? Can you agree to that?

Can you agree Pelosi is a Liar when she says she regrets impeaching Trump?

 

[you_dont_know_me]

(trump doesn't need any help to win this election)

 

[Duck_walk]

Is there substantiated evidence it was for political gain? That is like saying, I had that hidden camera set up in the girls locker room to catch a thief, not to see naked girls.

Why else would he only be interested in Biden corruption but not mention any other corruption in either phone call? Why did he say in front of the cameras that Ukraine and China should investigate the Bidens? THAT is direct evidence. It was clearly his motivation, unless you are lying to yourself.

“there was no quid pro quo”..... This is not what Sondland said. He claimed everyone in the room understood it. The ladies who testified backed up this premise. There might be ”direct evidence” if they question Pompeo, Pence, Mulvaney, etc etc. But someone blocked them. Why would he block them if they could exonerate him????????????

why were the funds not released until the whistle blowers complaint became public?


Would you agree that the Democrats were just waiting for a shred of anything to validate their only true mission...to remove a president? I will play your game: Do you have direct evidence Of this? Or just hearsay?

Can you agree Pelosi is a Liar when she says she regrets impeaching Trump? Do you have Direct evidence?

 

[Veerman_12]

Is there substantiated evidence it was for political gain? That is like saying, I had that hidden camera set up in the girls locker room to catch a thief, not to see naked girls.

Why else would he only be interested in Biden corruption but not mention any other corruption in either phone call? Why did he say in front of the cameras that Ukraine and China should investigate the Bidens? THAT is direct evidence. It was clearly his motivation, unless you are lying to yourself.

“there was no quid pro quo”..... This is not what Sondland said. He claimed everyone in the room understood it. The ladies who testified backed up this premise. There might be ”direct evidence” if they question Pompeo, Pence, Mulvaney, etc etc. But someone blocked them. Why would he block them if they could exonerate him????????????

why were the funds not released until the whistle blowers complaint became public?


Would you agree that the Democrats were just waiting for a shred of anything to validate their only true mission...to remove a president? I will play your game: Do you have direct evidence Of this? Or just hearsay?

Can you agree Pelosi is a Liar when she says she regrets impeaching Trump? Do you have Direct evidence?

I find it funny that you demand direct evidence, but are willing to present circumstantial evidence to "prove" your point. You wouldn't do well in court.

 

[you_dont_know_me]

Pelosi and the Democrats have been on record saying they wanted to impeach him over and over again. Pelosi is the only one who was trying to drag her feet on it.

In a court of law, since it is about "high crimes and misdemeanors" we have the ole and unfortunate innocent until proven guilty of due process. Democrats have circumvented that, and are forcing the issue. Why not take longer on the hearings? Why not allow the minority to call witnesses? There is nothing that has been presented that would hold up in a court of law. Nothing. No matter how much the dems say it's "clear" "rock solid" "obvious". They have nothing right now.

There is nothing fair about the House's process.

We can agree this is all setting a terrible precedent for the future.

 

[Veerman_12]

Pelosi and the Democrats have been on record saying they wanted to impeach him over and over again. Pelosi is the only one who was trying to drag her feet on it.

In a court of law, since it is about "high crimes and misdemeanors" we have the ole and unfortunate innocent until proven guilty of due process. Democrats have circumvented that, and are forcing the issue. Why not take longer on the hearings? Why not allow the minority to call witnesses? There is nothing that has been presented that would hold up in a court of law. Nothing. No matter how much the dems say it's "clear" "rock solid" "obvious". They have nothing right now.

There is nothing fair about the House's process.

We can agree this is all setting a terrible precedent for the future.

Next Democratic president who uses too many Executive Orders will be impeached on "Obstruction of Congress"...

 

[SadButTrue]

Next Democratic president who uses too many Executive Orders will be impeached on "Obstruction of Congress"...

Wake up fools trump has been setting many, many bad precedents for 3 years.

 

[Veerman_12]

Wake up fools trump has been setting many, many bad precedents for 3 years.

Ok

 

[Duck_walk]

I find it funny that you demand direct evidence, but are willing to present circumstantial evidence to "prove" your point. You wouldn't do well in court.

OMG. I was trying to show him how absurd the “there is no direct evidence” argument is.
Shoot me now.

 

[Duck_walk]

Pelosi and the Democrats have been on record saying they wanted to impeach him over and over again. Pelosi is the only one who was trying to drag her feet on it.

In a court of law, since it is about "high crimes and misdemeanors" we have the ole and unfortunate innocent until proven guilty of due process. Democrats have circumvented that, and are forcing the issue. Why not take longer on the hearings? Why not allow the minority to call witnesses? There is nothing that has been presented that would hold up in a court of law. Nothing. No matter how much the dems say it's "clear" "rock solid" "obvious". They have nothing right now.

There is nothing fair about the House's process.

We can agree this is all setting a terrible precedent for the future.

What? Pelosi did the exact opposite. Other Dems wanted to impeach him long ago and she was the one stopping them. Come on. Pay attention. She said he wasn’t worth it. She has tried to not impeach him all along.

 

[Veerman_12]

OMG. I was trying to show him how absurd the “there is no direct evidence” argument is.
Shoot me now.

Why so angry? I thought Christmas came early for you?

 

[3Rfan]

No, not my argument. There is no facts that lead to what you are saying. Did the Bidens do something wrong? is it worth investigating...you just said it was.

Is there substantiated evidence it was for political gain?
Is there any firsthand black and white evidence it was for that motive?
I would agree there was political gain to be made from it. That would be dishonest, but there was no quid pro quo, and all first hand testimony says the opposite of the democrats rhetoric.

Would you agree that the Democrats were just waiting for a shred of anything to validate their only true mission...to remove a president? Can you agree to that?

Can you agree Pelosi is a Liar when she says she regrets impeaching Trump?

I guess you don't recall Trump's acting chief of staff said in press conference that there was a quid pro quo and we should get over it because they do it all the time. Why would you need any more proof than that? Would be nice if someone would allow him to testify under oath about that.

 

[you_dont_know_me]

I guess you don't recall Trump's acting chief of staff said in press conference that there was a quid pro quo and we should get over it because they do it all the time. Why would you need any more proof than that? Would be nice if someone would allow him to testify under oath about that.

Would be nice if the Democrats had open hearings and transparency with the American public and allowed the minority to have a hearing too. But nah, gotta push your narrative and close your ears to the truth “la la la la, I can’t hear you...” shiff and Nadler

 

[you_dont_know_me]

I’m going to disengage on the topic. Apparently the houses’s case is so ironclad they aren’t going to send their orders over. Classic. Anyways. This conversation isn’t helping anyone. I’m out.

 

[you_dont_know_me]

I would love to meet and discuss in person sometime with you all. It would be quite the group I’d guess.

 

[Duck_walk]

I would love to meet and discuss in person sometime with you all. It would be quite the group I’d guess.

We could invite Impeached President of the United States ( IMPOTUS for short). Bahahahahaha Bahahahahaha Bahahahahaha

 

[Veerman_12]

We could invite Impeached President of the United States ( IMPOTUS for short). Bahahahahaha Bahahahahaha Bahahahahaha

 

[Duck_walk]

One day we will all look back on this era in disbelief. All of us.

 

[Veerman_12]

One day we will all look back on this era in disbelief. All of us.

There's a good chance I vote for him in 2020. House Democrats proved yesterday they're a far bigger threat to our Constitution and Republic than Trump is.

Still like Weld better, but the House overstepped.

 

[you_dont_know_me]

I still have zero evidence that you have ever been happy a day in your life outside of your political ideology advancing. You are the biggest curmudgeon on here. Nothing is good enough, you are the smartest dude on here. No one makes a good counter point, and you can’t even answer a question asked to you. The Cardinals always are doing it wrong, football coaches are doing it wrong.

You are seeking satisfaction in all the wrong places, and I did the same when I started to respond to this. Apologies to myself.

Your bias is as strong if not stronger than any other individual on here. I have yet to see you convert one person to your way of thinking in the years I’ve been on here. Keep up the good work. Everyone on here has made up their mind. Trump won’t be removed from office, and he will get re-elected when some male Caucasian socialist gets nominated for the Democratic Party. Your lack of self awareness or just general stubbornness is evident. When you don’t have an answer you just move the goalposts or laugh on your keyboard. I haven’t heard you give one person a concession of validity in a point when in debate.

I could go on, but it isn’t worth it. I have fallen to the level of insanity by engaging you. I’m sure you enjoyed it, so enjoy your early present from me.

Merry Christmas to all.

We could invite Impeached President of the United States ( IMPOTUS for short). Bahahahahaha Bahahahahaha Bahahahahaha

 

[Duck_walk]

I still have zero evidence that you have ever been happy a day in your life outside of your political ideology advancing. You are the biggest curmudgeon on here. Nothing is good enough, you are the smartest dude on here. No one makes a good counter point, and you can’t even answer a question asked to you. The Cardinals always are doing it wrong, football coaches are doing it wrong.

You are seeking satisfaction in all the wrong places, and I did the same when I started to respond to this. Apologies to myself.

Your bias is as strong if not stronger than any other individual on here. I have yet to see you convert one person to your way of thinking in the years I’ve been on here. Keep up the good work. Everyone on here has made up their mind. Trump won’t be removed from office, and he will get re-elected when some male Caucasian socialist gets nominated for the Democratic Party. Your lack of self awareness or just general stubbornness is evident. When you don’t have an answer you just move the goalposts or laugh on your keyboard. I haven’t heard you give one person a concession of validity in a point when in debate.

I could go on, but it isn’t worth it. I have fallen to the level of insanity by engaging you. I’m sure you enjoyed it, so enjoy your early present from me.

Merry Christmas to all.

You are the man!

 

[Veer2Eternity]

I would love to meet and discuss in person sometime with you all. It would be quite the group I’d guess.

You seem to be triggered by the facts.
Bye

 

[you_dont_know_me]

Not triggered. Disappointed and saddened. Maybe you feel the same way just based on conservative viewpoints. I’m around. We will just wait and see how it plays out. God is still on the throne. He works through immoral people and less immoral ones too. Merry Christmas.

 

[millerbleach]

I guess you don't recall Trump's acting chief of staff said in press conference that there was a quid pro quo and we should get over it because they do it all the time. Why would you need any more proof than that? Would be nice if someone would allow him to testify under oath about that.

Is that the 3R version??? Don't recall Mick ever saying THE quid pro quo ever happened.

 

[3Rfan]

Would be nice if the Democrats had open hearings and transparency with the American public and allowed the minority to have a hearing too. But nah, gotta push your narrative and close your ears to the truth “la la la la, I can’t hear you...” shiff and Nadler

You people can't be this silly. What went on in the house is what is supposed to go on in the house, it is NOT a trial! It was done by the same rules as the Clinton impeachment. The difference is they already had an independent prosecutor to do the fact finding before they had the hearings. In this case the committee had to do their own fact finding. How many closed door hearing did the pubs have over Benghazi? It went on for years!!! Trump ain't seen anything like the Clinton's had to deal with over the years.

 

[3Rfan]

Is that the 3R version??? Don't recall Mick ever saying THE quid pro quo ever happened.

I guess that's because you don't ever watch TV. You can scream about what network I saw that on if you want but it is on tape and there NO denying it happened. He did it in a press conference in the WH house briefing room, I'm sure with all your technical prowess you can look it up.

 

[millerbleach]

I guess that's because you don't ever watch TV. You can scream about what network I saw that on if you want but it is on tape and there NO denying it happened. He did it in a press conference in the WH house briefing room, I'm sure with all your technical prowess you can look it up.

He didn't say Trump had a quid pro quo with Ukraine to get dirt on the Bidens....period. He said we have quid pro quos all the time, which is accurate. You libs twist everything.

 

[3Rfan]

He didn't say Trump had a quid pro quo with Ukraine to get dirt on the Bidens....period. He said we have quid pro quos all the time, which is accurate. You libs twist everything.

What else do you think he was taking about? He was asked if there was a quid pro quo on the call and he said yes and went on with his tirade about getting over it.