Pretty insane but I guess it's all part of that 5D-chess or whatever that Trump plays.

Republicans, led by Representative Matt Gaetz with Trump's acknowledgment and blessing, stormed into the Intelligence Committee’s Secure Compartmented Information Facility underneath the Capital today.  Dozens of them arrived with their cell phones on and recording.  This is a blatant violation of national security.  Every member of Congress knows the protocols and policies regarding electronics and this room.  It is a black out room designed for accessing and viewing sensitive information.  Every attendee is supposed to check in their phones and other electronics in the lobby prior to entry to prevent data from being transmitted out from potentially compromised devices. 

Why did they storm that room, you ask?  Because Gaetz and others wanted to intentionally disrupt the deposition of a pentagon official about Ukraine and foreign policy as part of the ongoing impeachment inquiries.  Depositions, testimonies and interviews are often conducted in this room for security and privacy reasons.  

These Republicans also pulled this stunt to rouse their party supporters who falsely believe these impeachment inquiries are both illegal and led by only Democrats.  I'll address these falsehoods separately: 

1). There 3 committees in Congress that are conducting these inquiries.  All 3 are bi-partisan.  Any Republican on the party that is on the committee is fully authorized to be in on the process...and they have been since the beginning.  

2. These are inquiries, not the impeachment trial itself.  It's akin to a Grand Jury for criminal cases.  Prosecutors begin their investigation with interviews, depositions, etc...all in secret prior to an actual indictment.  If the prosecutor finds during this phase that they have a solid criminal case with viable charges, then they will call for the arrest and press charges.  Then the public trial begins. The impeachment proceedings are in that same pre-trial phase.  It is not meant to be public yet as that could compromise the integrity of the case itself.  Especially since Trump has already threatened the whistleblower.

To sum up, nearly 30 Republican lawmakers violated national security at the blessing of the President to obstruct justice on the case investigating said President. 

If it can't happen then why all the smearing that Trump wants to hold the event at Doral? Are the entire MSM idiots who don't know this either? Has Trump actually held any events at his properties yet? If not, then wouldn't this also be hypothetical? Randomly walking into a store and stealing doesn't make sense. It would be ok if a family member or friend, etc, owned the store, and knew you and some friends were taking something because you were up front about it, and if it would be good relations for future business for the community. If that's not acceptable, then that's just as much their own fault for letting you all take stuff without consequence.

Smearing, WHAT.  Do you even know what the heck you are talking about.  Its against the law, there is no smearing.  Do you not understand this very basic concept.  I will say it again because you seem to have jumped into an alternate universe where doing things that is against the law is ok.  You are basically trying to defend something that is against the law because Trump wanted to do it.  This is really making you look bad.

If you want to look at it that way that's your choice, but once you start saying let's go more specifically by what Trumps says, now you're opening an entire can of worms. Trump says all kinds of stuff and clearly for many different reasons. While sometimes his words are up front and in your face, other times they are clearly B.S, or him trolling, sometimes extremely discreetly, or many others. It could be a lot of things and nobody knows exactly the game that's being played right now, if it's even just one game. As for the U.S, is at least partially for hire, the rest of the world has thought this for a long time now, so it's nothing new, Trump just is more up front about it vs previous Presidents.

Yes, yes, we know, he is playing 3D chess while everyone else is playing checkers.  Yes, the US being partially for hire is one thing, selling our our allies for money is another.  Still no matter how you try to play this case it still leaves a very dark stain for anyone willing to trust the US.

It's hypothetical but useful in making the point. You think America is going to rely on someone else to guard S.A. while that oil is backing U.S. currency? You say someone will step up and help S.A.? Well then why hasn't anyone stepped up and helped the Kurds? It's almost as if there's so much help the world doesn't know what to do with it all, and America doesn't need to worry and can go home, period. Deploying more troops to S.A, while also remaining in Syria, wouldn't be less world policing though. It would certainly look like more world policing that's for sure.

Who exactly was the Kurds allies with.  You continue to miss this point and ignore it.  Its almost as if Trump made sure no one else could help since he up and left without any real notice to anyone else besides Turkey.  Who cares if it looks like more world policing when you are selling out your allies for a buck.  

Well there's no doubt, that there are a lot more countries and people who would've liked America's help over the decades, who've paid the price and lost lives because America didn't help. There's also little doubt that one way or another, that help would have benefited America in some small way, and yet they didn't help. Maybe because it might also cause negative reactions from other countries that America has to consider? Maybe because eventually using those favors, as leverage, aren't allowed anymore, apparently? What about Hong Kong right now? Isn't America ashamed those people are crying out for your help and your basically just sitting there watching? Is it America's job to police the world? America decided not to become the new British Empire for good reason.

Who cares about what others would like or not.  We are talking about people we made allies to not some hypothetical case where some others would like our help.  We are talking about already made allies.  Really this last paragraph is just a big pile of nothing.  How is Hong Kong the same has Syria.  Basically you are just throwing a bunch of junk against the wall hoping for something to stick.

Smearing, WHAT.  Do you even know what the heck you are talking about.  Its against the law, there is no smearing.  Do you not understand this very basic concept.  I will say it again because you seem to have jumped into an alternate universe where doing things that is against the law is ok.  You are basically trying to defend something that is against the law because Trump wanted to do it.  This is really making you look bad.

Yes, yes, we know, he is playing 3D chess while everyone else is playing checkers.  Yes, the US being partially for hire is one thing, selling our our allies for money is another.  Still no matter how you try to play this case it still leaves a very dark stain for anyone willing to trust the US.

Who exactly was the Kurds allies with.  You continue to miss this point and ignore it.  Its almost as if Trump made sure no one else could help since he up and left without any real notice to anyone else besides Turkey.  Who cares if it looks like more world policing when you are selling out your allies for a buck. 

Who cares about what others would like or not.  We are talking about people we made allies to not some hypothetical case where some others would like our help.  We are talking about already made allies.  Really this last paragraph is just a big pile of nothing.  How is Hong Kong the same has Syria.  Basically you are just throwing a bunch of junk against the wall hoping for something to stick.

Smearing, WHAT. This is really making you look bad.

This sounds awfully familiar...

Well if the shoe fits....

Still no matter how you try to play this case it still leaves a very dark stain for anyone willing to trust the US.

Play this? I'm just pointing out what might be the case since it's not all that clear to either of us. I don't remember pointing out how what Trump is doing is the right thing, and obviously this move isn't something that's going to add trust to U.S. military backing or intervention. Now coincidentally, if your agenda was to do less world policing, this is the kind of thing that would help in a way, by causing nations to second guess whether or not they want the American's help in the first place. 

Lol, so what you are basically saying is that you do not want to take a stance either way.  You are trying to play the middle so you can act non committal.  Ok, if that is how you want to play your statements but I highly doubt anyone is buying it.  Even if you were trying to do less world policing, hanging your allies to die would never be considered as a way to do it when you are only shuffling troops from one area to the next.  You continue to forget that it was the US that needed help.  It was a mutual agreement between 2 parties.  Really, I have no clue what you are trying to say.

Who exactly was the Kurds allies with.

ISIS was only a problem for the U.S? By taking down ISIS, it only helped America and nobody else? If it did help other nations who were dealing with terror attacks due to ISIS extremism, wouldn't it make sense for them to step in now, since they haven't bothered at all? If you want to say the U.S. is selling the Kurds out, then so has everyone else who's benefited from the fall of ISIS, for a while now. Is it ok for some to ignore it completely, and let others take all the blame?

Who made allies of the Kurds.  Really, is it that hard to understand that very simple concept.  Did we or did we not make allies of them, arm them and also work with them to secure the region.  If we did those things then stop trying to add anyone else to the equation.  If you care about what other nations do that is fine, I care about the nation I live in and what it does.  I can see you at work when something goes down where it was your fault.  You would be looking to pull everyone around you to share your blame then owning up to your own fault.

Who cares about what others would like or not.

Great, so you're now in agreement with Trumps supporters. Screw the rest of the world and let them fend for themselves. No more help from this point forward. If America has only few, if no more allies, then there's no real reason to help anyone else again. Problem solved right? Hong Kong isn't exactly the same obviously, as no other situation ever is, but their way of life is being threatened by China, most importantly democracy, which the U.S. holds dear, and they are doing squat to help. Hong Kong was until fairly recently, part of the British Empire, who is an ally of America, so why isn't America doing what they can to help? Just because Britain isn't backing Hong Kong anymore, the U.S. just drops them as an ally as well? Is this why nobody else will help the Kurds, because the U.S. has backed off so everyone else just follows suit?

It was you who brought up a situation that has nothing to do with what is being discussed.  Its this faulty logic of yours where you cannot concentrate on the topic but seek to add unrelated incidents into the discussion for no other reason then to confused the issues.  You are doing it again which and this paragraph is a waste.  If you want to talk about Hong Kong and that particular incident then use another topic instead of waffling on what we are currently discussion.  Neither situation are the same nore are the context.

It was you who brought up a situation that has nothing to do with what is being discussed.  Its this faulty logic of yours where you cannot concentrate on the topic but seek to add unrelated incidents into the discussion for no other reason then to confused the issues.  You are doing it again which and this paragraph is a waste.  If you want to talk about Hong Kong and that particular incident then use another topic instead of waffling on what we are currently discussion.  Neither situation are the same nore are the context.

You just did the exact thing he accused you of doing.  That's amazing.

You just did the exact thing he accused you of doing.  That's amazing.

It has to be a joke, right? Its too perfect.