Page 11 of 33 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 325

Thread: The obvious has been officially confirmed ...

  1. #101
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    18,042
    Amen (Given)
    5849
    Amen (Received)
    6521
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    No MM. There is no legitimate reason for POTUS to hold up security funds for Ukraine allocated by Congress over not investigating Joe Biden's son. There are plenty of (illegal) reasons for Donald Trump to hold up security funds for the Ukraine over not investigating Joe Biden's son.
    Before you start tossing around allegations like that, you might want to get your facts straight first, bucko.

    “The money that was held up had nothing to do with Biden,” [White House Chief of Staff Mick] Mulvaney said.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...to-dnc-server/

    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  2. #102
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,111
    Amen (Given)
    1762
    Amen (Received)
    1505
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Before you start tossing around allegations like that, you might want to get your facts straight first, bucko.

    “The money that was held up had nothing to do with Biden,” [White House Chief of Staff Mick] Mulvaney said.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...to-dnc-server/

    And you might want to get your head out of the propaganda bubble once in a while and take a peek to see what the actual facts are. Apparently you missed ambassador Taylor's testimony today!

  3. #103
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    6,149
    Amen (Given)
    360
    Amen (Received)
    1669
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Before you start tossing around allegations like that, you might want to get your facts straight first, bucko.

    “The money that was held up had nothing to do with Biden,” [White House Chief of Staff Mick] Mulvaney said.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...to-dnc-server/

    Independent testimony from those directly involved and not beholden to trump says otherwise.

    Jim
    He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

    "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

  4. #104
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    18,042
    Amen (Given)
    5849
    Amen (Received)
    6521
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    Apparently you missed ambassador Taylor's testimony today!
    You mean the testimony where Mr. Taylor said, and I quote:

    According to Mr. Morrison, President Trump told Ambassador Sondland that he was not asking for a "quid pro quo".

    Is that the testimony you're referring to?

    And from the honorable Rep. John Ratcliffe:

    At the end of the day, this was about quid pro quo and whether or not the Ukrainians were aware that military aid was being withheld, and on that most important issue, neither this witness nor any other witness has provided any evidence that there was a quid pro quo, or any evidence that the Ukrainians were aware that military aid was being withheld on July 25th, and unless and until they bring in a witness who is willing to say that there was knowledge by someone that speaks Ukrainian to that fact, a quid pro quo is legally impossible.

    [...]

    Ambassador Taylor again, today, I found him to be very forthright. He had very strong opinions on Donald Trump’s approach to foreign policy. But, again, the mainstream media reporting that he provided evidence of a quid pro quo involving military aid is false. I questioned him directly on that. And under Adam Schiff’s rules I can’t tell you what he said but I can tell you what he didn’t say. Neither he or any other witness has provided testimony that the Ukrainians were aware that military aide was being withheld. You can’t have a quid pro quo with no quo!

    [...]

    The prosecution is missing an essential element of their case: there is no quid pro until someone from the Ukraine says we knew that military aide was being withheld during that July 25th call, and that testimony hasn't come, and it's not coming.

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com...omment-page-1/

    Last edited by Mountain Man; 10-22-2019 at 08:30 PM.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  5. #105
    tWebber NorrinRadd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Wayne Township, PA
    Faith
    Full Gospel Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,999
    Amen (Given)
    3321
    Amen (Received)
    771
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    ...or because it's in their best political interest...

    Impeachment is, after all, an entirely political process.
    I'm not sure if you're being serious or sarcastic.

    Legal experts -- Dersh, at the very least -- have noted that the Framers were concerned that it *not* be a "political" process, at least in the *partisan* sense, else it effectively makes the Executive branch subordinate to the Legislative branch, obviating separation of powers and remaking our system into a de facto parliamentary system which it was never intended to be.
    Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

    Beige Nationalist.

    "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

  6. #106
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    56,558
    Amen (Given)
    12288
    Amen (Received)
    26294
    Quote Originally Posted by NorrinRadd View Post
    I'm not sure if you're being serious or sarcastic.
    Quite serious.

    Legal experts -- Dersh, at the very least -- have noted that the Framers were concerned that it *not* be a "political" process, at least in the *partisan* sense, else it effectively makes the Executive branch subordinate to the Legislative branch, obviating separation of powers and remaking our system into a de facto parliamentary system which it was never intended to be.
    Regardless what the framers intended, it has become a political weapon. A case in point is the way the Democrats are handling the "official" beginning of the impeachment proceedings. They can't even decide what to call it, and can't go for a full vote of the House to proceed because they want to provide cover for Democrats in some districts NOT to be on the record as being "for" impeachment. And for political reasons.

    If there are grounds for impeachment, the political calculation comes in - "what if we vote to impeach in the House, but we know the Senate will not convict"....

    It's entirely political. It's certainly not a "legal" proceeding.
    Every problem is the result of a previous solution.

  7. #107
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,111
    Amen (Given)
    1762
    Amen (Received)
    1505
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Quite serious.



    Regardless what the framers intended, it has become a political weapon. A case in point is the way the Democrats are handling the "official" beginning of the impeachment proceedings. They can't even decide what to call it, and can't go for a full vote of the House to proceed because they want to provide cover for Democrats in some districts NOT to be on the record as being "for" impeachment. And for political reasons.

    If there are grounds for impeachment, the political calculation comes in - "what if we vote to impeach in the House, but we know the Senate will not convict"....

    It's entirely political. It's certainly not a "legal" proceeding.
    Calling it political, doesn't change the underlying facts of the investigation. It's when you don't have the facts on your side that you argue process!

  8. #108
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    56,558
    Amen (Given)
    12288
    Amen (Received)
    26294
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    Calling it political, doesn't change the underlying facts of the investigation.
    Never said it did, Jim. And I'm not "calling" it political for any other reason than that's what it has become.

    It's when you don't have the facts on your side that you argue process!
    I thought we were buds now, Jim? I'm not "arguing" anything. It is what it is. If Trump is guilty of something for which he needs to be impeached, let the process play out, whatever it is.

    What, exactly, is your point?
    Every problem is the result of a previous solution.

  9. #109
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    18,042
    Amen (Given)
    5849
    Amen (Received)
    6521
    Quote Originally Posted by JimLamebrain View Post
    It's when you don't have the facts on your side that you argue process!
    Is that why Democrats are cavalierly inventing their own impeachment process with secret hearings, because the facts aren't on their side?
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  10. Amen RumTumTugger amen'd this post.
  11. #110
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,111
    Amen (Given)
    1762
    Amen (Received)
    1505
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Is that why Democrats are cavalierly inventing their own impeachment process with secret hearings, because the facts aren't on their side?
    What exactly do you mean by secret hearings, MM. Are you under the impression that there are no republicans at the hearings asking questions of the witnesses? Is that it?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •