The Impeachment of President Trump

It's hard for me to take your comments serious (vapid) when I look at your avatar, but I'll try.

Why does it bother you so? I'm not voting for Trump, I'm just not thrilled about the current Democratic selection. That's hardly worth commenting on.

You strike me as someone who acts as if you are delivering a monologue on your late night talk show except that you have no late night talk show and barely any audience here.

Perhaps you see yourself as a columnist who should be admired for your dry wit and erudite delivery but then again, you are here, on a low volume crank forum. I'd suggest it's just delusion but maybe it's even less than that?

At the least it's probably time for a new avatar and maybe even time for a more succinct and less pretentious writing style. I don't know, what do you think? Then again, why not write a page where a paragraph would do. Perhaps it is time to bring back the ramble so continue if that's your thing.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Is anyone else here watching the impeachment hearings?
Your take?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

news says stone is found guilty of witness tampering and lying to congress and some other stuff.

and that he may have committed contempt of court & breaching a court order by speaking to alex jones the conspiracy theorist crack pot

judge didnt remand him which is interesting
probably cost soo much its cheaper to wait until sentencing.

i would think witness tampering would have some pretty serious jail time considering it undermines the entire judicial and democratic system of law.

i wonder how much the tax payers will be paying to keep him locked up in some 5 star country club and pay for all his medical bills.

will he get better free health care than poor convicted prisoners ?

i wonder if house arrest with an ankle bracelet (not allowed to leave his own house & cant have visitors) at his own expense might be a better option so the working class tax payers who cant afford to give medical treatment to their own kids dont have to pay for his gold plated bandaids & special meals

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

fyi
your condemned by praise doesn't really sound genuine...

democrats by party affiliation maybe
but are they real democrats or just liberal conservatives playing both sides pandering to the independent vote for business owners ?
irony when you apply marketing psychology to the mix
it clearly shows a lack of ability to deliver a solid product when the consumer is given too many choices
all be that a false narrative applied to garner click bait. it still applys to a polarized forced situation
that is a little of the confusion around insular dictatorship apologists and liberal independence ideology
how many different set of morals and systems do they really have to deliver what the supposed uninformed voter wants ?

the old narrative you are offering of "there must be only 1 alpha dog"
is a bit of an old worldy ideology
im not sure that rings true with modern young voters.

who are the swing voters ?
old or young ?
mostly old mainstream conservative anti government types who swing vote for tax cuts and patriotic symbolism(in place of culture as they be-moan the new equality concepts of modern civil liberties).

its a bit of a crack pot reality
how do you draw a collective sense of moral compass that delivers its own democracy to those who dont really agree on morals ?

it looks like the "both-sides" play will be the next media message.

 

Then you should ignore my post. That would be wise. No? OK . . . .

"Real" democrats are liberal conservatives, conservative liberals, people who think taxes AND the deficit are too high, people who like small government but want it to be more effective, people who are 100% against abortion but don't think it should be illegal . . . . basically anyone who thinks that the democratic party is more in line with their values than the republican party. Even if it's slightly.

I don't really trust people who have no independent platform and just reuse a party's.

 

is equal to 100% against religion but think it shouldn't be illegal

i am well aware the pot is spiked

there is no political group of anti-abortionists who are also anti-death penalty

this clearly shows they are not pro life but pro ideological dictatorship

this is not a secular value
so war is the only outcome... one religion Vs another
you think that is not obvious ?
proclaiming war upon others ideologically ?

(i wonder why i bother sometimes but i need the typing practice)

 

question:
How, exactly, was Yovanovitch smeared?
...............
She quite obviously was not literally "knee capped"
So, one wonders about her use of the language.

 

They said that she was doing a bad job so they could let her go so that they could continue with their corruption attempts.

 

That's it?
That is the alleged smear campaign?

 

OK, continue to play dumb. I'm out.

 

or
You could expand on your:

or
Is that all you know of the subject?

...............................
imho
calling

a smear campaign is not just silly
if that is all
it also victimizes those who have been victimized by real smear campaigns.

 

"Bad news"
"she’s going to go through some things"
"Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad"
"We need less of these jokers as ambassadors"

 

So
That's it?
That's all there is?
That is the total of the "smear campaign"?

 

Nope. You just asked how she was smeared. Those are some examples of how she was smeared.

 

Do you have more?

 

Sure. Here are two more:

FOX News: " The current United States ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, has bad-mouthed the President of the United States to Ukrainian officials." (not true, of course)
"the U.S. ambassador had told him not to pursue certain cases" (also not true.)

 

so
you put these 2 on fox, not trump?

 

Almost the opposite. There's evidence that Trump saw the FOX News story and started his smear campaign.

 

Common source.
Trump and Fox are from the same feed.

By Giuliani's crowd spreading rumors, apparently. Among others, possibly.

Bullshit.
She was damaged enough to cover Trump's removal of her. That is recorded fact.
If you need details, look 'em up.

So you're not voting against Trump, unless "the Democrats" present a properly organized and polished theatrical event for you to approve. "The Democrats" - whoever you are talking about - must earn your vote. Others, not so much.
That's what they all said, last time Trump managed to suppress Democratic turnout and steal an electoral college win from a minority of the votes.

 

You like to create your own reality regardless of what anyone says. That's cute PeeWee but that's distorting the facts as much as those you rail against.

I'm not voting for Trump under any circumstances. I will be voting for the Democratic nominee. I'd like to see a really strong nominee that can win so there is no scenario where Trump can squeak though.

I think Biden is too old and goofy. Saunders and Warren are too far left for me economically but I would still vote for them if nominated. I'd prefer Mayor Pete although I have a hard time seeing a 37 year old getting enough votes to win.

Feel free to turn those comments into anything that fits your ridiculous world view.