Impeachment now certain

Without reposting walls of text, I repeat I never posted on here supporting Clinton. I may have pointed out that she was the lesser of two evils, although I don't think that I did.
As I have already listed many examples I'll just say again that Trump comes across as one of the most unpleasant people I have ever read about or seen on TV.
Several years ago the conservative people on here were on about the National Debt, and kicking the fiscal can down the road for future generations to cope with. Then Trump gets in and just tears up the rule book. What's your National Debt now? Easy to look good on credit.
The elitist tag may be appropriate, in that I do detect some possible personal snobbery, as to me Trump comes across as a "yob". Lots of money but no class or style. As a leader, no gravitas.

Daryl wrote:The elitist tag may be appropriate, in that I do detect some possible personal snobbery, as to me Trump comes across as a "yob". Lots of money but no class or style. As a leader, no gravitas.

He was just literally laughed out of Europe and is taking his ball and stomping home early after video of other world leaders incredulously laughing at his idiocy emerged...

And of course there's a tweet for everything...

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 06945?s=19

(This following having the entire UN laugh at him. And yes, it was *at* him)

gcomeau wrote:

Daryl wrote:The elitist tag may be appropriate, in that I do detect some possible personal snobbery, as to me Trump comes across as a "yob". Lots of money but no class or style. As a leader, no gravitas.

He was just literally laughed out of Europe and is taking his ball and stomping home early after video of other world leaders incredulously laughing at his idiocy emerged...

And of course there's a tweet for everything...

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 06945?s=19

(This following having the entire UN laugh at him. And yes, it was *at* him)

Careful. The ball that President Trump is taking home is NATO's balls. Trump could easily persuade a large majority of Americans to support withdrawing from NATO.

https://today.yougov.com/topics/politic ... about-nato

Keep in mind that this polling does NOT ask Americans the real question:

ARE YOU IN FAVOR OF AMERICA FIGHTING A NUCLEAR WAR WITH RUSSIA TO DEFEND UKRAINE (not a member of NATO), LATVIA, ESTONIA LITHUANIA or BULGARIA?

The polling would get very interesting if you asked Americans about fighting a nuclear war with Russia to defend Turkey if you reminded them that Turkey compromised any chance to pacify Iraq by refusing permission to deploy a heavy infantry division through Turkey after promising that they would. The polling would get even more interesting if you reminded Americans that Turkey enabled Saddam Hussein to violate sanctions by buying Iraqi oil. I suspect that Americans would almost universally oppose defending Turkey if you reminded them that Edrogen held US troops and US nuclear weapons hostage during the 2014 coup attempt and is still holding the nukes hostage.

What if you remind Americans that the US is the only country to invoke "an attack on one is an attack on all?"

TFLYTSNBN wrote:

gcomeau wrote:He was just literally laughed out of Europe and is taking his ball and stomping home early after video of other world leaders incredulously laughing at his idiocy emerged...

And of course there's a tweet for everything...

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 06945?s=19

(This following having the entire UN laugh at him. And yes, it was *at* him)

Careful. The ball that President Trump is taking home is NATO's balls. Trump could easily persuade a large majority of Americans to support withdrawing from NATO.

He could TRY. But Trump has spent his entire presidency trying to undermine confidence in NATO so what else would be new?

https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/04/04/how-does-america-feel-about-nato

Nice poll showing FAR more support than opposition to NATO... which you're showing us because...?

The polling would get very interesting if you asked Americans about fighting a nuclear war with Russia to defend Turkey

In other words, if you asked deliberately loaded and leading hypothetical to skew the answer the direction you want.

Yeah, that will tend to move polling numbers. Know what else we could ask? If they are in favor of maintaining the alliance structure which ONLY the US has ever called on for mutual defense purposes (following 9/11).

What the GOP just put up on the screen trying to make an argument about Hunter Biden in the impeachment hearing by claiming Neal Katyal said something:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EK9pHj8XkAA ... name=small

Claimed book content wrote:"Even former Solicitor General Neal Katyal, in his recent book titled "Impeach, The Case Aainst Donald Trump", writes the following:

"Is what Hunter Biden did wrong? Absolutely. Hunter Biden had no real experience in the energy sector, which made him wholly unqualified to sit on the board of Burisma. The only logical reason the company could have had for appointing him was his ties to Vice President Biden. This kind of nepotism isn't only wrong, it is a potential danger to our country, since it makes it easier for foreign powers to buy influence... No politician, from either party, should allow a foreign power to conduct this kind of influence peddling with their family members."

What his book actually says. See if you can spot the tiny little omission. I'll help with some bolding.

Actual book content wrote:"Is what Hunter Biden did wrong? Absolutely. Hunter Biden had no real experience in the energy sector, which made him wholly unqualified to sit on the board of Burisma. The only logical reason the company could have had for appointing him was his ties to Vice President Biden. This kind of nepotism isn't only wrong, it is a potential danger to our country, since it makes it easier for foreign powers to buy influence.

The thing is: it's not illegal. That's why Hunter Biden didn't hide his involvement with Burisma. And it's why president Trump's children - Ivanka, Don Jr., and Eric - continue to conduct business around the world with impugnity. as does president Trump's son in law, Jared Kushner, who works in the white House.

No politician, from either party, should allow a foreign power to conduct this kind of influence peddling with their family members."

As in, Katyal disapproves (quite rightly) of this kind of thing and thinks it should end, but specifically stated it was NOT illegal so was NOT grounds for Trump to be demanding an investigation. But from what the GOP is saying in the hearing you would think he said the opposite.

And of course the Fox News crowd aren't going to get the correction, just the GOP claim. So mission accomplished.

I do not think today's hearing helped either cause or changed anyone's mind.

Interesting tidbit about Biden, he has stated on video that he will not testify at Senate Impeachment Trial if called. Hey Joe, I sorry a hundred paid actors will not get to see a speech while you explain why you committed a quid pro quo. Remember what Joe said at the Council of Foreign Relations. You told the President of Ukraine to fire the Prosecutor that was investigating your son. You gave them 6 hours or they would lose a Billion dollars in aid.
We all can see why you do not want to testify at the Senate Impeachment Trial.

smr wrote:Interesting tidbit about Biden, he has stated on video that he will not testify at Senate Impeachment Trial if called. Hey Joe, I sorry a hundred paid actors will not get to see a speech while you explain why you committed a quid pro quo. Remember what Joe said at the Council of Foreign Relations. You told the President of Ukraine to fire the Prosecutor that was investigating your son. You gave them 6 hours or they would lose a Billion dollars in aid.
We all can see why you do not want to testify at the Senate Impeachment Trial.

Why in the Hell are the Democrats prosecuting Trump given this context? This continues to amaze me.

smr wrote:Interesting tidbit about Biden, he has stated on video that he will not testify at Senate Impeachment Trial if called. Hey Joe, I sorry a hundred paid actors will not get to see a speech while you explain why you committed a quid pro quo. Remember what Joe said at the Council of Foreign Relations. You told the President of Ukraine to fire the Prosecutor that was investigating your son. You gave them 6 hours or they would lose a Billion dollars in aid.
We all can see why you do not want to testify at the Senate Impeachment Trial.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:

Why in the Hell are the Democrats prosecuting Trump given this context? This continues to amaze me.

This will only pass if Republicans vote to impeach. As soon as this goes to the Senate, Dems lose control of the narrative. Nancy will let her Red State dems vote NOT to impeach. That will give her progressive wing people to blame AND keep the Republican Senate from looking into this.

I truly want the Republicans to vote to impeach and then as a block inform the public they want to give the President a chance to defend himself, since the Dems refuse to offer him that opportunity. Give the Republicans a chance to truly dig into the entire Ukraine affair and call all those Americans on Burisma's board: Biden's son, Kerry's step-son, Romney's associate and who knows who else. Before you know it, Pelosi's son's involvement in a Burisma competitor will also come out. Then Franklin-Templeton's role in $7.4bn of money laundering for corrupt Ukraine money will also get aired. The same Franklin Templeton with Democratic Party and Obama administration ties.

Dollars to donuts, there is not enough votes from Dems to send impeachment to the Senate for trial.