List of Trump's crimes?

[JimL]

This coming from the guy who still hasn't figured out that Rachael Maddow lied to him about Russian collusion.

I didn't need Rachel Maddow to recognize the corruption, collusion, and obstruction of the Trump campaign. Trump was right out front about that, "Russia if your listening..........." and the Trump Tower meeting with the Russians, and Trump's false letter about the purpose of the Trump Tower meeting, and Manafort's giving polling and tagrgeting data to Russian operatives, Papadopolous admissions, not to mention the many secret meetings between Trump officials and Russians. And then of course you have the continued obstruction of the investigation by Trump in an attempt to keep you idiots from not being able to make up excuses for it all in your own feeble minds.

[JimL]

Democrats are making a good case for severely curtailing Congressional oversight.

The wannabe dictator loves and laughs at you.

[oxmixmudd]

Yes, sir, rrom even before Trump was inaugurated.



Balderdash. The MSM, the publicity arm of the DNC, won't allow that to happen. It is what it is.

And that is where you have completely lost the capacity to process reality as it relates to Donald Trump. If you believe the MSM is out to get him, then you need to also believe the GOP is massively covering for him, hiding what he has done as best they can.

The sad thing is, what Trump has done is so obvious the only reason the GOP etc can be successful is that you and so many others have chosen to allow them to. To believe what they say regardless of how absurd or unlikely it is to be true.

[JimL]

And that is where you have completely lost the capacity to process reality as it relates to Donald Trump. If you believe the MSM is out to get him, then you need to also believe the GOP is massively covering for him, hiding what he has done as best they can.

The sad thing is, what Trump has done is so obvious the only reason the GOP etc can be successful is that you and so many others have chosen to allow them to. To believe what they say regardless of how absurd or unlikely it is to be true.

Unfortunately, I don't think that they really believe what the propagandists tell them, I think that they know Trump is corrupt, that he violated the Constitution thinking he could get away with it, and they just don't care. In other words, I think they're actually complicit in the cover-up. It's either that, or they are really, really dumb, and the latter doesn't appear to be the case.

[Cow Poke]

And that is where you have completely lost the capacity to process reality as it relates to Donald Trump.

Not in the least.

If you believe the MSM is out to get him,

You don't?

then you need to also believe the GOP is massively covering for him, hiding what he has done as best they can.

I've been pretty fair, Ox - I think both sides are doing everything they can to make this as political as possible, and to keep their own party in power.

The sad thing is, what Trump has done is so obvious the only reason the GOP etc can be successful is that you and so many others have chosen to allow them to.

Well, I'm an Independent, so I'm not responsible for what the GOP does. You might want to work on that sentence structure, though, cause I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

To believe what they say regardless of how absurd or unlikely it is to be true.

I have no idea what you're talking about, Jim - sounds like you're parroting JimL.

[rogue06]

No, she was not. She was asked about her "feelings" only when informed that Trump was tweeting about her while she was testifying. She was specifically asked "what effect do you think that has on other witnesses’ willingness to come forward and expose wrongdoing? She responded "Well, it's very intimidating". A reasonable response to overt witness intimidation by the president. Only an 'Evangelical Trumpster' like you would think otherwise.

Right after she admitted that she had no personal knowledge of the phone call or anything else for that matter (she was already gone well before any of this started to happen) it turned into a gripe session where a disgruntled employee was given an opportunity to vent her spleen and tell everyone what a great job she did and what a meanie Trump was for firing her^[1]. This led to more than one pundit (from both sides of the aisle) asking why did she even testify -- especially after Schiff made a point of saying that he would not allow anyone to testify that didn't have direct, personal knowledge of the particulars of this case. Then again, nearly none of the witnesses called met that criteria.




1. Which is his right to do. Obama, for instance, fired every single Ambassador that Bush had appointed -- which was his right to do as well. Trump was under no obligation to keep Yovanovitch, an Obama appointee.

[oxmixmudd]

Not in the least.



You don't?



I've been pretty fair, Ox - I think both sides are doing everything they can to make this as political as possible, and to keep their own party in power.



Well, I'm an Independent, so I'm not responsible for what the GOP does. You might want to work on that sentence structure, though, cause I'm not sure what you're trying to say.



I have no idea what you're talking about, Jim - sounds like you're parroting JimL.

I'm watching you going along with nearly everything fox or breitbart (at least as posted by mm) has said/is saying regarding the impeachment hearings or any news story surrounding Trumps attempts to get dirt on Biden through ukraine. You are not offering any evidence of independent thought, nor have you challenged even the most ridiculous 'defences' that have been made. That is the evidence for my conclusion - I do know what I'm talking about.

[Mountain Man]

The wannabe dictator loves and laughs at you.

Are referring to the guy with a pen and a phone?

[Cow Poke]

I'm watching you going along with nearly everything fox or breitbart (at least as posted by mm) has said/is saying regarding the impeachment hearings or any news story surrounding Trumps attempts to get dirt on Biden through ukraine. You are not offering any evidence of independent thought, nor have you challenged even the most ridiculous 'defences' that have been made. That is the evidence for my conclusion - I do know what I'm talking about.

I'm just not totally absolutely absorbed with Trump like you are, Jim.

As I've said before, I trust the Lord to work this all out.

[Mountain Man]

...Trumps attempts to get dirt on Biden through ukraine.

Why do you continue to parrot this lie? At no point has it been shown, even through third- and forth-hand testimony, that Trump was trying to get "dirt". He simply asked Zelensky to look into something that Biden himself openly bragged about on camera, so it's not even a question of whether or not Biden did it but whether or not it was criminal.

Biden: 'I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and, uh, uh, Yanukovych that they would take action against the state prosecutor, and they didn't. So they said- they had- they were walkin' out to the press conference, and I said, "Nah, I'm not gonna- or we're not gonna give you the billion dollars." They said, "You have no authority. You're not the president. The president said-" I said, "Call him." And I said, "I'm telling you, you're not gettin' a billion dollars." I said, "You're not gettin' the billion, I'm gonna be leaving here-" I think it was, what, six-hours? I look- I said, "I'm leaving in six-hours. If the prosecutor's not fired, you're not gettin' the money." Oh, son of a [blank]... got fired!'

[rogue06]

Democrats are making a good case for severely curtailing Congressional oversight.

That would be a shame as IMHBAO Congress has ceded too much power to the Presidency over the last few decades.

[rogue06]

This coming from the guy who still hasn't figured out that Rachael Maddow lied to him about Russian collusion.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41146[/ATTACH]

smiley point&laugh.gif

[Mountain Man]

That would be a shame as IMHBAO Congress has ceded too much power to the Presidency over the last few decades.

Curiously, I've read other opinions recently saying that the Executive branch has ceded too much power to Congress over the last few decades!

[seanD]

Why do you continue to parrot this lie? At no point has it been shown, even through third- and forth-hand testimony, that Trump was trying to get "dirt". He simply asked Zelensky to look into something that Biden himself openly bragged about on camera, so it's not even a question of whether or not Biden did it but whether or not it was criminal.

Biden: 'I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and, uh, uh, Yanukovych that they would take action against the state prosecutor, and they didn't. So they said- they had- they were walkin' out to the press conference, and I said, "Nah, I'm not gonna- or we're not gonna give you the billion dollars." They said, "You have no authority. You're not the president. The president said-" I said, "Call him." And I said, "I'm telling you, you're not gettin' a billion dollars." I said, "You're not gettin' the billion, I'm gonna be leaving here-" I think it was, what, six-hours? I look- I said, "I'm leaving in six-hours. If the prosecutor's not fired, you're not gettin' the money." Oh, son of a [blank]... got fired!'

Even if Biden's intention was to get a corrupt prosecutor fired (which is the lie the MSM and left propagate to justify this), I'm not sure it's lawful for Biden to even arrange a quid pro quo this way. But I admit I'm ignorant about the law here. Wouldn't he have to notify the House to do this?

[JimL]

Why do you continue to parrot this lie? At no point has it been shown, even through third- and forth-hand testimony, that Trump was trying to get "dirt". He simply asked Zelensky to look into something that Biden himself openly bragged about on camera, so it's not even a question of whether or not Biden did it but whether or not it was criminal.

Biden: 'I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and, uh, uh, Yanukovych that they would take action against the state prosecutor, and they didn't. So they said- they had- they were walkin' out to the press conference, and I said, "Nah, I'm not gonna- or we're not gonna give you the billion dollars." They said, "You have no authority. You're not the president. The president said-" I said, "Call him." And I said, "I'm telling you, you're not gettin' a billion dollars." I said, "You're not gettin' the billion, I'm gonna be leaving here-" I think it was, what, six-hours? I look- I said, "I'm leaving in six-hours. If the prosecutor's not fired, you're not gettin' the money." Oh, son of a [blank]... got fired!'

Duh, Poroshenko himself recognized that Biden didn't even have such authority, and Biden agreed with that saying it was the Presidents demand, not his own, and then told them to call him, meaning call Obama. Besides, you're not helping the President here, you're admitting that while the military aid was being withheld, Trump was asking for a foreign investigation into his political rival.