By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Why are democrats wasting time with Trump's impeachment?

thismeintiel said:
It's pretty simple really. They're scared to death that he's going to win in 2020 because their candidates aren't very good. So they're going to use the full force of the media and this ridiculous impeachment, with nothing but hearsay and presumptions as their evidence, to try and get him out of office before they have to actually let the American people decide who's president.

ok... I've been longing to catch a republican...

sir, do you know exactly what the president did?

you do know he ask foreign country to investigate a political rival? and you know that illegal right?

I need an answer sir.



Around the Network
thismeintiel said:

1). Except Obama/Biden actually did bribe the Ukraine government by withholding federal aid unless they fired the AG who was going to be investigating Biden's son and the company he worked for.  Biden bragged about it on TV. Reps didn't bring them up on impeachment charges.

Now, Dems are proceeding on a case built on hearsay and people's feelings, something that would lose in a real court, because they are frightened of 2020. It's just going to be fun watching the Senate get ahold of this, because they will 2). call people and ask questions the Dems are afraid of hearing the answers from/to. Congress politicians who are running will have to put the campaign on hold. And we'll have it officially that the "whistleblower" is Eric Ciaramello, a political hack within the CIA.

If the Dems were smart, they wouldn't vote to proceed to an actual trial. They've already had two break ranks and say that this case shouldn't have even moved forward.

1). This is why we are having these hearings.  Because you have it frikkin backwards.  They (Along with Ukraine itself, the UE, Canada, the World Bank, the IMF, and others) wanted prosecutor Shokin removed NOT because he was investigating Burisma but because he STOPPED investigating Burisma. Shokin halted all the federal corruption cases because he was getting money to stop the cases.

Hunter Biden wasn't even with Burisma at the time of the opening of the investigation anyway.

2). You mean all the people the House has already subpoenaed who have failed to show?  By the way, that is called Contempt of Congress (2 U.S.C. § 192 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 2. The Congress § 192. Refusal of witness to testify or produce papers).  It is punishable by a year i prison and a $100,000 fine for each infraction.  It will also be listed as Obstruction of Justice on the Articles of Impeachment.  It's what they got Nixon on.

Last edited by SpokenTruth - on 22 November 2019

Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

I identify as a Democrat and I wish the party will just focus on what the plans are going forward. Spending the better part of four years attacking Trump is no better than when Republicans spent eight years attacking Obama.

I'm tired of it.



Twitter: @d21lewis

Fairly easy answer. Sunlight is the ultimate disinfectant.
Even easier answer: Because republicans are constantly making things worse for them.

Example: Elise Stefanik. She could have easily won her seat. No one knew her, and absolutely no one know the person challenging her.
In 6 hours Her opponent got 100K in donations.
By the next day? 300K and 140k+ followers.
After that? 900K and 228K + followers.

She was at 4K followers - she is not at 263 followers, and raised over a million.

And that is just one example.



  • Deadliest mass shooting by an individual in US history (10/01/2017)
  • Deadliest high school shooting in US history (02/14/2018)
  • Deadliest massacre of Jews in US history (10/27/2018)
  • Political assassination attempt of TWO former presidents(and 10+ other people)  (10/23/2018 - and beyond)
SpokenTruth said:

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman:
Background: Army Officer, Purple Heart recipient for armed combat in Iraq, numerous commendations and meritorious medals, Foreign Area Officer for U.S. embassies in Ukraine and Russia, Military Affairs Officer for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, delegation for the National Security Council to Ukraine.
Relevance: Was one of several that personally listened in on the infamous phone call between Trump and Ukrainian president Zelensky.
Statements: "What I heard was inappropriate and I reported it […] out of a sense of duty," because "the connection to investigate a political opponent was inappropriate and improper."

"...in order to get the White House meeting, President Zelensky would have to deliver these investigations."

Jennifer Williams:
Background: Bachelor's Degree in international security from Georgetown University, Master's degree in public policy from Princeton University, political appointee to the Secretary of Homeland Security by former President Bush, 13 years at the Department of State for Middle East and Near Eastern Affairs, special advisor to Vice President Mike Pence on European and Russian affairs.
Relevance: Williams accompanied Pence to Poland to meet with Zelensky regarding the $400 million in military aid and she was also one of several that personally listened in on the phone call between Trump and Zelensky.
Statements: "[the call] involved discussion of what appeared to be a domestic political matter."

Gordon Sondland:
Background: Hotel real estate businessman, Oregon liaison to the White House, appointed a member of the Commission on White House Fellows by former president Bush, worked on Mitt Romney's presidential transition team, donated $1 million to Trump's inaugural committee, appointed by Trump as U.S. ambassador to the European Union.
Relevance: Worked directly with Trump, Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Rick Perry, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton on Ukrainian matters.
Statements: "[Coordinated] at the express direction of the president of the United States."

“[We] worked with Mr. Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine matters at the express direction of the president of the United States.”

"I know that members of this Committee have frequently framed these complicated issues in the form of a simple question: Was there a ‘quid pro quo? As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting, the answer is yes.”

"Mr. Giuliani’s requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for President Zelensky. Mr. Giuliani demanded that Ukraine make a public statement announcing investigations of the 2016 election/DNC server and Burisma. Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the President of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the President."

“Everyone was in the loop. It was no secret.”

“They knew what we were doing and why.” "My lawyers and I have made multiple requests to the State Department and the White House for these materials. Yet, these materials were not provided to me. They have also refused to share these materials with this committee.”

“Simply put, we played the hand we were dealt. We all understood that if we refused to work with Mr. Giuliani, we would lose an important opportunity to cement relations between the United States and Ukraine. So we followed the president’s orders.”

“Ukrainians needed those funds to fight against Russian aggression. I tried diligently to ask why the aid was suspended, but I never received a clear answer.”

“In the absence of any credible explanation for the suspension of aid, I later came to believe that the resumption of security aid would not occur until there was a public statement from Ukraine committing to the investigations of the 2016 election and Burisma, as Mr. Giuliani had demanded.”

What you got, Snoopy?

The first one was their star "witness," who actually witnessed nothing.  The 2nd is their most credible witness, the only one who had any first hand interactions with Trump concerning this matter.  Both of their arguments were torn to pieces.

AbrahamHamdan said:
thismeintiel said:
It's pretty simple really. They're scared to death that he's going to win in 2020 because their candidates aren't very good. So they're going to use the full force of the media and this ridiculous impeachment, with nothing but hearsay and presumptions as their evidence, to try and get him out of office before they have to actually let the American people decide who's president.

ok... I've been longing to catch a republican...

sir, do you know exactly what the president did?

you do know he ask foreign country to investigate a political rival? and you know that illegal right?

I need an answer sir.

Well, if you want to believe the Dems argument that is completely based on presumptions and feelings, not evidence, you can believe in anything you want.  However, if you just want to look at the actual evidence given, that never happened.  The truth is, the Dems are scared to death about 2020.  That's why, just one year out from an election where the people could vote him out if they believe this stuff happened, they are pursuing impeachment.  They are afraid of 100s of thousands, maybe millions, of people like me, Never Trumpers who wouldn't vote for him in 2016, but will vote for him this time.  And his growing support among Black Americans.



Around the Network
d21lewis said:
I identify as a Democrat and I wish the party will just focus on what the plans are going forward. Spending the better part of four years attacking Trump is no better than when Republicans spent eight years attacking Obama.

I'm tired of it.

yeah, but this is democracy at stake here..

Trump is acting like dictator.. he wants to treat whistle blowers as spies, he keep saying the media is the enemy of the people... Hilter did the exact same thing.

on top of all that, he is inviting foreign countries to middle in our affair?! this need to fucking stop. 



LudicrousSpeed said:
If a Democrat were in office and did the same thing Trump did then Republicans would be doing the same shit Democrats are. And just like we currently have Republicans crying like bitches about how unfair the process is and etc etc you’d have Democrats crying the same shit. As bad as they want to appear superior to one another they are just different sides of the same shit smeared coin.

Trump fucked up. Not surprising, he’s literally a piece of shit.

Exactly! 



thismeintiel said:

Video 1:

Jim Jordan makes for a horrible lawyer. William Taylor was not part of the back channel miscommunication group bestrewn the US and Ukraine. Asking him about being part of it was already known. He's asking questions we all already know the answers to as though it were new. Here's where that works. YOU didn't know. You're news outlet of choice has ignored that this whole time so to you this is a big deal. Taylor's purpose in this hearing was for pre-text for future testimony by Sondland and Homles and corroboration of previous private testimony by Sondland. But Jim Jordan sure as hell isn't going to tell you that.  And Taylor was never a "star" witness as you should now understand given the purpose I just told you about...that Jim Jordan didn't.

The 3 meetings between Taylor and Ukrainians. Again, given that Taylor was not part of the back channel group, why in the hell would Ukraine openly discuss it with Taylor? Jim Jordan asking this question makes me question his understanding of anything going on.

Jordan quotes Taylor, "My clear understanding was security assistance money would nto come until President Zelensky committed to pursue the investigation." Now Jordan claims his understanding is wrong because Zelensky never made such an announcement despite getting the funds on Sept 11.

But when was the whistleblower report filed? August 12.

So let me get this straight. Jim Jordan thinks that we are supposed to believe that Trump is still going to withhold aid and wait for Zelensky to make a public statement about the very thing the whistleblower report complains about? That whole line of questioning and his conclusion was predicated on ignorance and a deficiency in logic.

I'll do video 2 next.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

I think there are several reasons. First, Democrats are deathly afraid that Trump is going to get reelected next year, second they hate Trump's guts so it feels good to try to "stick it to him". Ironically, this is going to help Republicans in 2020, especially in the house.

There was not one single witness that directly heard Trump demand that the aid be withheld until they investigated Biden. Not a single one. It was all hearsay, assumptions and guesses. You don't impeach a president on hearsay, assumptions and guesses.



Because "I would like you to do us a favor though"