I predict Gary Chase will be very distraught in a few weeks. I guess then he'll shift to the "republican sham" narrative.
***** OFFICIAL TRUMP IMPEACHMENT THREAD *****
989,629 Views |
9220 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by Pizza
I keep hearing this "he's dumb" comment from this imbecile Chance. Go watch any interview he gave in the late 80's early 90's (when the press/celebrities adored him) and he's thoughtful, well spoken and gives insightful comments.RGLAG85 said:You're so ****ing delusional! The outcome had been decided for a long time no matter how much unsubstantiated crap your leftist overlords can throw at it. And the voting public has grown overwhelmingly disinterested in the antics and the election outcome has been cast.Chance Chase McMasters said:Bo Darville said:Chance Chase McMasters said:
Trump's TDLR defense: the constitution is unconstitutional.
Bolton should be Trump's star witness if he's innocent. Trump would saw off his left nut to keep him from testifying. That tells us all we need to know.
Why would he do that? There's a 100% chance the senate is going to exonerate him anyway.
Because Trump also cares(logically) about public perception, his legacy, and the upcoming election.
If the trial is viewed as a sham designed to protect a guilty person, like Nixon, his whole party will get killed along with him. Republicans can do better, much better. This guy is a pathetically dumb corrupt charlatan.
Were his daddy not a billionaire, he'd be selling used cars in Trenton. And we never would have heard of him.
Keep up the good fight though sweetie! Lol
He also espouses the same views he expresses today. For instance, making other countries pay their fair share for the defense we provide them.
To me it says a lot more about the person making the snide comment than Trump himself.
He also makes comments that Trump supporters live in an insulated bubble filled with Breitbart, Fox etc. I don't read Breitbart (never have) and rarely watch Fox. To me the insulated bubble is the media which has been hijacked by the DNC but don't worry, that bubble will finally burst this November.
Gary would have said he was absolutely against it. I guess chase is your not so libertarian username.
Rockdoc said:
I predict Gary Chase will be very distraught in a few weeks. I guess then he'll shift to the "republican sham" narrative.
No way. He just doesn't like trump and is totally a libertarian independent remember?
Gary is the libertarian. Not sure about chase.
He also has given 6 figures to the Republican party over the years...probably directly to the RINO's if I had to guess. Oh wait, that assumes he gave that much money but can't afford premium...makes sense.Bo Darville said:Rockdoc said:
I predict Gary Chase will be very distraught in a few weeks. I guess then he'll shift to the "republican sham" narrative.
No way. He just doesn't like trump and is totally a libertarian independent remember?
Whoa, 25% of MSNBC viewers believe there was nothing wrong?captkirk said:Wrong doesn't equal impeached. Your skull is thicker than a cinder blockChance Chase McMasters said:
The weird thing about this thread and this board is the general consensus that this is a total witch hunt with no evidence. And only the fringiest of lunatics, the 5% of the hard left are buying it. Any posting of new evidence or news from reputable sources is immediately dismissed.
If you cocoon yourself off on this board, alt/right reddit, and Breitbart, you might miss something.
That means like well over half the country thinks there was nothing wrong.
Not even MSNC can spin it as a consensus.
It's MSNPC but your point still stands.Gigem314 said:Whoa, 25% of MSNBC viewers believe there was nothing wrong?captkirk said:Wrong doesn't equal impeached. Your skull is thicker than a cinder blockChance Chase McMasters said:
The weird thing about this thread and this board is the general consensus that this is a total witch hunt with no evidence. And only the fringiest of lunatics, the 5% of the hard left are buying it. Any posting of new evidence or news from reputable sources is immediately dismissed.
If you cocoon yourself off on this board, alt/right reddit, and Breitbart, you might miss something.
That means like well over half the country thinks there was nothing wrong.
Not even MSNC can spin it as a consensus.
TurkeyBaconLeg said:
Trump legal team responds to House Brief with a damning 6 page rebuttal
[url=https://twitter.com/maggienyt/status/1218665945595613189?s=21]
[/url]
Oh, look! Trump is once gain OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE by offering up a defense!1!!!11
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
/LeftBrains
backintexas2013 said:
Gary is the libertarian. Not sure about chase.
I guess it depends on who he logs in as.
backintexas2013 said:
Gary is the libertarian. Not sure about chase.
Same poster
I know but Gary always posts on anything about tariffs so he can show how libertarian he is. Chase only posts because of TDS
Okay, exactly how is this going to work while Nadler is in the Senate for the impeachment trial as a House Manager?
I don't remember but did Nancy's weird resolution that wasn't a formal impeachment inquiry name the Foreign Affairs Committee as one charged with impeachment investigational authority?Quote:
Yet even if McConnell has his way and prevents new witnesses from appearing, they may find a stage in the House, where a number of Democrats are already advocating for their testimony if they're silenced by the Senate.
"We would be remiss in the House of Representatives not to follow this trail to its conclusion. And Parnas has emerged as an important figure in this criminal conspiracy to force or coerce a foreign government to help Trump's reelection campaign," said Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), a member of the Judiciary Committee, which drafted the impeachment articles late last year.
With Democrats hoping to maximize the pressure on Senate Republicans through the trial phase, Judiciary members have not discussed that strategy in any depth, Johnson emphasized. But it's likely to gain favor with committee leaders, he said, if Senate Republicans deny new and willing witnesses a voice.
"They have their eye on it," Johnson said.
LINKQuote:
Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which had some jurisdiction over Trump's impeachment, stopped just short of saying Democrats would summon relevant witnesses if the Senate does not. But he left the door wide open to doing so, vowing that Democrats will charge ahead with their Ukrainian investigation "if we're feeling that we're being played and that they're not being forthcoming with the truth."
"We're not going to just say, 'OK, we've disposed of it and now the ball's in their court and there's nothing left for us to do.' I think quite the contrary," Engel said. "The more we hear, and the more things come out, the more resolute we are to make sure that we're dealing with the truth, and that it's not being swept under the rug."
captkirk said:Wrong doesn't equal impeached. Your skull is thicker than a cinder blockChance Chase McMasters said:
The weird thing about this thread and this board is the general consensus that this is a total witch hunt with no evidence. And only the fringiest of lunatics, the 5% of the hard left are buying it. Any posting of new evidence or news from reputable sources is immediately dismissed.
If you cocoon yourself off on this board, alt/right reddit, and Breitbart, you might miss something.
Most on this board won't even admit that. There's a weird alternate universe pretending he did nothing wrong and this is actually helping him. It's not.
You got banned for calling people ****** and you are questioning others.
Why should they. Since when has your party ever done anything the Republicans want? This seditious rejection of an election has been underway since the morning it was called. Washington Post was flapping gums in an article about impeachment the same day.Chance Chase McMasters said:
Odds go down if Bolton testifies. Republicans are running a risk here if they run a sham trial and quickly acquit. More will come out and they don't even know what they're covering up yet.
Nixon defenders were making the same dumb claims in '74. NDS, stupid libs, sham impeachment, unconstitutional, "no evidence", right up til he resigned.
They got slaughtered in the next election because they were seen abetting corruption. Republicans would be much better off just flushing this turd and move on.
This is not the 70's. --- This is more like the 90's -- 2000's ---- as the Democrat voters expected their Senators to drop-kick Clinton's, so do ours expect regarding this sham coup. Regardless if it has found some letter-of-the-law violation after three years of a witchhunt.
I guess they missed the first sentence of Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 6 of the US Constitution:aggiehawg said:
Okay, exactly how is this going to work while Nadler is in the Senate for the impeachment trial as a House Manager?I don't remember but did Nancy's weird resolution that wasn't a formal impeachment inquiry name the Foreign Affairs Committee as one charged with impeachment investigational authority?Quote:
Yet even if McConnell has his way and prevents new witnesses from appearing, they may find a stage in the House, where a number of Democrats are already advocating for their testimony if they're silenced by the Senate.
"We would be remiss in the House of Representatives not to follow this trail to its conclusion. And Parnas has emerged as an important figure in this criminal conspiracy to force or coerce a foreign government to help Trump's reelection campaign," said Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), a member of the Judiciary Committee, which drafted the impeachment articles late last year.
With Democrats hoping to maximize the pressure on Senate Republicans through the trial phase, Judiciary members have not discussed that strategy in any depth, Johnson emphasized. But it's likely to gain favor with committee leaders, he said, if Senate Republicans deny new and willing witnesses a voice.
"They have their eye on it," Johnson said.LINKQuote:
Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which had some jurisdiction over Trump's impeachment, stopped just short of saying Democrats would summon relevant witnesses if the Senate does not. But he left the door wide open to doing so, vowing that Democrats will charge ahead with their Ukrainian investigation "if we're feeling that we're being played and that they're not being forthcoming with the truth."
"We're not going to just say, 'OK, we've disposed of it and now the ball's in their court and there's nothing left for us to do.' I think quite the contrary," Engel said. "The more we hear, and the more things come out, the more resolute we are to make sure that we're dealing with the truth, and that it's not being swept under the rug."
Quote:
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.
If I smoked pot, I'd REALLY like to try some of the stuff you partake of...Chance Chase McMasters said:TurkeyBaconLeg said:You have to be one of the worst political analyzers on this board. Trump isn't going to be convicted no matter who is called in as a witness. Your entire thought process is just stupid with zero chance of any of it happening.Chance Chase McMasters said:
Odds go down if Bolton testifies. Republicans are running a risk here if they run a sham trial and quickly acquit. More will come out and they don't even know what they're covering up yet.
Nixon defenders were making the same dumb claims in '74. NDS, stupid libs, sham impeachment, unconstitutional, "no evidence", right up til he resigned.
They got slaughtered in the next election because they were seen abetting corruption. Republicans would be much better off just flushing this turd and move on.
Trump is on his way to victory in 2020 and there is nothing that is going to stop him from what many are predicting as an easy win. I don't know of any Trump voter in 2016 that is not going to vote for him again in 2020. With the massive Trump success in the economy, trade and everything else, Trump has picked up countless other non-Trump 2016 voters. With all the BS that the DEMS have pulled, there is a very good chance that they lose the House. The entire DEM party is so left-leaning that they are F--cked.
Every time you post, I just laugh at you because your logic so convoluted. But, please keep posting. I can always use a good laugh.
You. Mad. LOL.
I'll lay out another scenario for you that's plausible. Bolton testifies. Trump's guilt is absolutely determined.
The Senate delivers over 50 impeach votes but not 2/3 needed to convict. More fallout from the scandal drips out for the next 9 months. Some Republicans start to call for him to resign because he's killing their campaign, he refuses.
Republicans are seen as abetting corruption. They and Donald get landslide crushed like Nixon's party did in '74.
Not a chance. No one is going to care about any scandal that much because your party is running on confiscatory socialism and taking jobs Trump has created away throughout the country to cater to a bogus international climate agenda that wants to gut energy independence, regress standard of living, force people to live in certain kinds of homes, and take guns away while leaving the streets lawless and the borders open. Even "moderate" (hah, an Obamian) - Biden has affirmed will sacrifice jobs for that fraud.Quote:
I'll lay out another scenario for you that's plausible. Bolton testifies. Trump's guilt is absolutely determined.
The Senate delivers over 50 impeach votes but not 2/3 needed to convict. More fallout from the scandal drips out for the next 9 months. Some Republicans start to call for him to resign because he's killing their campaign, he refuses.
Republicans are seen as abetting corruption. They and Donald get landslide crushed like Nixon's party did in '74.
No scandal can hold a candle to that destructive platform.
Schiff4brains is at it again.
So a closed hearing on sensitive intelligence matters is now obstruction? And what do Iran, Russia and North Korea have to do with the articles of impeachment?
LINKQuote:
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said Sunday that the U.S. intelligence community is beginning to withhold documents on Ukraine from Congress as lawmakers prepare for the impeachment trial of President Trump.
"They appear to be succumbing to pressure from the administration," Schiff said on ABC's "This Week."
"The NSA, in particular, is withholding what are potentially relevant documents to our oversight responsibilities on Ukraine but also withholding documents potentially relevant that the senators might want to see during the trial," he added, referring to the National Security Agency.
Schiff, who was selected by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) as the lead impeachment manager, added that there are signs that the "CIA may be on the same tragic course." He called on the intelligence community to "resist" pressure from an administration that fears documents on Ukraine "incriminate" it.
The California congressman made the comments after being questioned about a Politico report that said intelligence officials were pushing House and Senate Intelligence committees to forgo the public portion of an annual briefing on world security threats.
The request was reportedly made in an effort to avoid the prospect of top officials publicly disagreeing with Trump on matters related to Iran, Russia and North Korea.
"Unfortunately, I think those reports are all too accurate," Schiff said. "The intelligence community is reluctant to have an open hearing, something that we had done every year prior to the Trump administration, because they're worried about angering the president."
The NSA referred The Hill to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) when reached for comment.
"The Intelligence Community is committed to providing Congress with the information and intelligence it needs to carry out its critical oversight role," Amanda J. Schoch, a spokeswoman for ODNI, said in a statement. "The IC is working in good faith with [the House Intelligence Committee] to respond to requests on a broad range of topics and will continue to do so."
So a closed hearing on sensitive intelligence matters is now obstruction? And what do Iran, Russia and North Korea have to do with the articles of impeachment?
You are absolutely delusional if you think there's going to be masses of voters dumping Donald to pull the lever for the subhuman garbage infecting the Democrat party. Even if it were proven 100% with out a doubt Donald was trying to influence the election (there's zero proof of that), it would pale in comparison to the behavior of the Democrats.Chance Chase McMasters said:TurkeyBaconLeg said:You have to be one of the worst political analyzers on this board. Trump isn't going to be convicted no matter who is called in as a witness. Your entire thought process is just stupid with zero chance of any of it happening.Chance Chase McMasters said:
Odds go down if Bolton testifies. Republicans are running a risk here if they run a sham trial and quickly acquit. More will come out and they don't even know what they're covering up yet.
Nixon defenders were making the same dumb claims in '74. NDS, stupid libs, sham impeachment, unconstitutional, "no evidence", right up til he resigned.
They got slaughtered in the next election because they were seen abetting corruption. Republicans would be much better off just flushing this turd and move on.
Trump is on his way to victory in 2020 and there is nothing that is going to stop him from what many are predicting as an easy win. I don't know of any Trump voter in 2016 that is not going to vote for him again in 2020. With the massive Trump success in the economy, trade and everything else, Trump has picked up countless other non-Trump 2016 voters. With all the BS that the DEMS have pulled, there is a very good chance that they lose the House. The entire DEM party is so left-leaning that they are F--cked.
Every time you post, I just laugh at you because your logic so convoluted. But, please keep posting. I can always use a good laugh.
You. Mad. LOL.
I'll lay out another scenario for you that's plausible. Bolton testifies. Trump's guilt is absolutely determined.
The Senate delivers over 50 impeach votes but not 2/3 needed to convict. More fallout from the scandal drips out for the next 9 months. Some Republicans start to call for him to resign because he's killing their campaign, he refuses.
Republicans are seen as abetting corruption. They and Donald get landslide crushed like Nixon's party did in '74.
We know for a fact that the Democrats are abusing their constitutional power to influence the election via impeachment, use a corrupt press as their propaganda machine to influence all elections, and in 2016 abused the fisa court process in an attempt to influence that election and start a sham investigation into a duly elected president.
American voters are now privy to information outside of the highly partisan MSM narratives, which means all but the most extreme leftists are aware of just how degenerate the Democrats have become.
Democrats are bad people and no matter how bad you think the Don is, most recognize that the Democrats are far worse and that their policy positions are anti liberty.
Don't do that, I think it's laced with bad LSD. You might end up in the looney bin!Ag with kids said:If I smoked pot, I'd REALLY like to try some of the stuff you partake of...Chance Chase McMasters said:TurkeyBaconLeg said:You have to be one of the worst political analyzers on this board. Trump isn't going to be convicted no matter who is called in as a witness. Your entire thought process is just stupid with zero chance of any of it happening.Chance Chase McMasters said:
Odds go down if Bolton testifies. Republicans are running a risk here if they run a sham trial and quickly acquit. More will come out and they don't even know what they're covering up yet.
Nixon defenders were making the same dumb claims in '74. NDS, stupid libs, sham impeachment, unconstitutional, "no evidence", right up til he resigned.
They got slaughtered in the next election because they were seen abetting corruption. Republicans would be much better off just flushing this turd and move on.
Trump is on his way to victory in 2020 and there is nothing that is going to stop him from what many are predicting as an easy win. I don't know of any Trump voter in 2016 that is not going to vote for him again in 2020. With the massive Trump success in the economy, trade and everything else, Trump has picked up countless other non-Trump 2016 voters. With all the BS that the DEMS have pulled, there is a very good chance that they lose the House. The entire DEM party is so left-leaning that they are F--cked.
Every time you post, I just laugh at you because your logic so convoluted. But, please keep posting. I can always use a good laugh.
You. Mad. LOL.
I'll lay out another scenario for you that's plausible. Bolton testifies. Trump's guilt is absolutely determined.
The Senate delivers over 50 impeach votes but not 2/3 needed to convict. More fallout from the scandal drips out for the next 9 months. Some Republicans start to call for him to resign because he's killing their campaign, he refuses.
Republicans are seen as abetting corruption. They and Donald get landslide crushed like Nixon's party did in '74.
That's great to see. Because it reflects common sense--Utah was one of the first states called for President Trump in 2016. It makes sense they would have no use for Romney's drift toward being a Democratic Party enabler.TurkeyBaconLeg said:
Are there any idiots on this thread that actually believe the GOP will turn on Trump?
Featured Stories
See All
Around CFB: Army, Notre Dame meet under a blue-gray November sky
by Olin Buchanan
9:59
4h ago
491
5:25
3h ago
884