***** OFFICIAL TRUMP IMPEACHMENT THREAD *****

989,148 Views | 9220 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by Pizza
rwpag71
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Just to establish a base line that can be referred to at the end of the Senate process:
The RCP average to remove Trump from office is now 47.3%. At 538 that number stands at 46.9%.
captkirk
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
titan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
S
rwpag71 said:

Just to establish a base line that can be referred to at the end of the Senate process:
The RCP average to remove Trump from office is now 47.3%. At 538 that number stands at 46.9%.
What does that refer to? Actually there could be general public agreement, and the Senate can still acquit. Its really up to the Senate. Nothing binds their actions per-se.

Chris Matthews take there is interesting, and he is making sense. It definitely is a nonsense thing to Main Street if there is no crime. And his angle that Starr actually reminds of another politicized impeachment rather than damaging Trump, has a ring to it.
rwpag71
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
titan said:

rwpag71 said:

Just to establish a base line that can be referred to at the end of the Senate process:
The RCP average to remove Trump from office is now 47.3%. At 538 that number stands at 46.9%.
What does that refer to? Actually there could be general public agreement, and the Senate can still acquit. Its really up to the Senate. Nothing binds their actions per-se.
Just two compilations of polls reflecting public opinion at start of trial. Let's see if there is any movement as a result of the trial.
Rapier108
How long do you want to ignore this user?
rwpag71 said:

Just to establish a base line that can be referred to at the end of the Senate process:
The RCP average to remove Trump from office is now 47.3%. At 538 that number stands at 46.9%.
Considering how many polls are polling 50% or higher Democrat, I would not put much faith in anything RCP is doing given the garbage polls out there.
titan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
S
Rapier108 said:

rwpag71 said:

Just to establish a base line that can be referred to at the end of the Senate process:
The RCP average to remove Trump from office is now 47.3%. At 538 that number stands at 46.9%.
Considering how many polls are polling 50% or higher Democrat, I would not put much faith in anything RCP is doing given the garbage polls out there.
Think of the Virginia demonstrations yesterday.

I don't think polls come close to capturing the anti-Left current that exists now that their agenda is fully known. Polls on details here and there are not going to indicate much.
Chance Chase McMasters
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FriscoKid said:

How are those receipts coming? You I put a lot of hoped the story would go away.
Lev's receipts were just shown as evidence in the impeachment trial of Donald J Trump. He's being tried in the United States Senate for corruption, high crimes, and misdemeanors.
Chance Chase McMasters
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hbtheduce said:

titan said:

Oh, think see the distinction you are trying to make. For something to be unconstitutional doesn't require that it also be a crime.

It just is ruled unconstitutional ---not necessarily unlawful. This in the sense it is not about law but limits. Is that it?


It's even more fundamental than that. "A Law" has a definition. By definition, the constitution is not a law. Its two
different systems run and put into place by two different branches of government, voted on by two different groups, and governs two different groups.

Which is why chance is in a rhetorical pickle. Violating a law is a crime, by definition.
Violating the constitution is unconstitutional, by definition.

The other pickle he is in: Trump "violated" the constitution according to him. Fine but so has every president, and every congress, and every state since the founding. Which makes the grounds for removal look ****ing pathetic, which is why many constitutional scholars think there should be actual violations of laws and statutes. Even then it should be "high crimes" at the level of bribery or treason.

Giving away a state to another country probably would reach the level of treason, but is closer to sedition. But it's an extreme case he had to jump to, because the "violation of trust" amounts to not giving millions of dollars to a Historically corrupt country. WGAS. Obama droned American citizens fighting for ISIS. Who cares about a rounding error for Ukraine.

Sorry for bleeding all over this thread. But it's simple stuff.
You don't sound like a constitutional lawyer. Here's the opinion of 500.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2019/12/09/more-than-five-hundred-law-professors-write-a-letter-favoring-impeachment-what-effects-will-it-have/#4bd334cd37d9

Can you find one that says a statutory federal law must be violated in order for an impeachable offense to have been committed?
EKUAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Blah, blah, blah....

Isn't Lev charged with lying?

Chance Chase McMasters
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Seized digital images of encrypted messages don't lie.
EKUAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Chance Chase McMasters said:

Seized digital images of encrypted messages don't lie.


Yeah, they do. You can create them. I know of people convicted of theft for creating fake receipts to back claims.
e=mc2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Chance Chase McMasters said:

Seized digital images of encrypted messages don't lie.
But you do. Every damn time you post.
EKUAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So Chase, how much you being paid to troll a politics board of a school, as far as I can tell, you didn't attend? Or did your AG Tag profile get permabanned?
Rockdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
e=mc2 said:

Chance Chase McMasters said:

Seized digital images of encrypted messages don't lie.
But you do. Every damn time you post.

That's why he left the other thread. He got run out for lying.
hbtheduce
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Chance Chase McMasters said:

hbtheduce said:

titan said:

Oh, think see the distinction you are trying to make. For something to be unconstitutional doesn't require that it also be a crime.

It just is ruled unconstitutional ---not necessarily unlawful. This in the sense it is not about law but limits. Is that it?


It's even more fundamental than that. "A Law" has a definition. By definition, the constitution is not a law. Its two
different systems run and put into place by two different branches of government, voted on by two different groups, and governs two different groups.

Which is why chance is in a rhetorical pickle. Violating a law is a crime, by definition.
Violating the constitution is unconstitutional, by definition.

The other pickle he is in: Trump "violated" the constitution according to him. Fine but so has every president, and every congress, and every state since the founding. Which makes the grounds for removal look ****ing pathetic, which is why many constitutional scholars think there should be actual violations of laws and statutes. Even then it should be "high crimes" at the level of bribery or treason.

Giving away a state to another country probably would reach the level of treason, but is closer to sedition. But it's an extreme case he had to jump to, because the "violation of trust" amounts to not giving millions of dollars to a Historically corrupt country. WGAS. Obama droned American citizens fighting for ISIS. Who cares about a rounding error for Ukraine.

Sorry for bleeding all over this thread. But it's simple stuff.
You don't sound like a constitutional lawyer. Here's the opinion of 500.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2019/12/09/more-than-five-hundred-law-professors-write-a-letter-favoring-impeachment-what-effects-will-it-have/#4bd334cd37d9

Can you find one that says a statutory federal law must be violated in order for an impeachable offense to have been committed?

You are still avoiding the issues. Impeach the president for whatever you can dream up. But don't call the crimes, don't falsely equate the constitution with the law, and don't expect half the country to agree with the partisan interpretation of the constitution provided by Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff.

rwpag71
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
OK, I have finally figured out when Schiff is lying. His eyes bug out.
Chance Chase McMasters
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Constitution is law. The supreme law of the land.
Article VI Clause II
Quote:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land


e=mc2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Rockdoc said:

e=mc2 said:

Chance Chase McMasters said:

Seized digital images of encrypted messages don't lie.
But you do. Every damn time you post.

That's why he left the other thread. He got run out for lying.
Yep. And he won't stop because he's morally bankrupt.
Chance Chase McMasters
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rockdoc said:

e=mc2 said:

Chance Chase McMasters said:

Seized digital images of encrypted messages don't lie.
But you do. Every damn time you post.

That's why he left the other thread. He got run out for lying.


Citation needed.
Rockdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Go read it
Chance Chase McMasters
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

won't stop because he's morally bankrupt.

Citation needed from you too.

And.....
Chance Chase McMasters
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rockdoc said:

Go read it


Can't provide citation. Like I thought.

I'm not going to go hunting and guess what you found interesting. There's 250+ pages.
e=mc2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Chance Chase McMasters said:

Quote:

won't stop because he's morally bankrupt.

Citation needed from you too.

And.....

You lie on every post so there's really no need. All anyone needs to do is click your profile and read the lies. It must be awesome to be known for being dishonest!
Rockdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Not 250 pages
Chance Chase McMasters
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

You lie on every post

Citation needed.

Aren't you a Trump supporter? Does lying bother you? It bothers me.
Rockdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Chance Chase McMasters said:

Quote:

You lie on every post

Citation needed.

Aren't you a Trump supporter? Does lying bother you? It bothers me.

Hearing lies or telling lies?
Chance Chase McMasters
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Post a link or a quote if you even know how. This thread and the other ones are 250+ pages. I don't even know what "other" thread you're talking about.

I don't know what uncomfortable fact you don't like, therefore call It a lie.
Maroon Dawn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Just a few more days and Gary Chance disappears forever

Still going to bump every stupid thing you've said for 200 pages
Chance Chase McMasters
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You guys can't even find one "lie". Rockdoc might be an actual rock. It can't post quotes or links.
Rockdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Haha. May be a rock, but not a sock. Poor dude.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hmmm.

BuddysBud
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Maroon Dawn said:

Just a few more days and Gary Chance disappears forever

Still going to bump every stupid thing you've said for 200 pages


He'll be back, just under a different name.
Just wait until the next BS accusation from the Dems.
aggieforester05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Chance Chase McMasters said:

Quote:

You lie on every post

Citation needed.

Aren't you a Trump supporter? Does lying bother you? It bothers me.


Yet you support the lying Democrats in this endeavor? Hypocrite!
Chance Chase McMasters
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I support Justin Amash and other liberty minded conservatives. I also support him in this endeavor. Getting a corrupt lying charlatan out of the WH.
Wildcat
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Misread
First Page Last Page
Page 240 of 264
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.