What is the end game?

See post 174 for the evidence.

 

There is no evidence.

I'm done with this, and you. Y'all live in your masturbatory fantasy land.

 

That is also true of most Trumpets. The only way to stay loyal to Trump is to avoid reality.

You just proved it. Thank you.

I feel sorry for you people.

 

Don't feel sorry for me. The clown show today proved my reality.

 

What's wrong with saying your hero is Goebbels? You posted him like he was important, not me. If you didn't think he was important, intelligent, interesting, and hurtful to your target, you wouldn't have used him in your post.

 

Disingenuousness is highly respected by the left. Good job.

Where are these refutations of your actual opinions? I don't see them.

 

First off, you should educate yourself as to what the commonly held definition of a high misdemeanor was, back when they wrote the Constitution.

In Nathan Bailey’s Etymological Dictionary of 1721:

MISDEMEANOR a behaving of one’s self ill; an Offence or Fault

High MISDEMEANOR, a Crime of a heinous nature, next to high Treason​

Samuel Johnson’s dictionary from 1755 showed that misdemeanor by itself (as opposed to high misdemeanor) referred to a less serious offense:

MISDEMEANOR. Offence; ill behavior; something less than an atrocious crime​

Secondly, the president of Ukraine has said in multiple interviews that he was not coerced, that there was no quid pro quo, there were no conditions tied to US aid.

This is nothing but the faux Trump-Russian collusion 2.0. TDS has convinced dems that up is down, and black is white, and no amount of fact based evidence will sway them.

We have the evidence of the transcript, we have the evidence of President Zelensky's own word. We simply do not need to hear from hearsay witnesses, nor do we need to hear from people with corrupted memories claiming they heard the exact opposite of what the evidence shows us.

 

Whose law? They aren't following the law. Pelosi just said, paraphrasing, if Trump has proof of his innocence, he should bring it forward. So, they are breaking the law by not believing they must prove his guilt with evidence beyond reasonable doubt.

Hey, I know they are like a fox in a hen house right now. The issue is, they aren't even trying to follow the law and some of them know better, though most do not.

How can a former bar tender have any clue about the law? This whole thing is a joke, but it shows how poorly they think of the regular citizens of the USA. They believe they can sell them anything.

Are you on the left going to let them treat you this way? I thought you were less naïve.

 

Because it's great Publicity for both the corrupt MSM { who profit
by selling Anti-Trump anything } and also the craven Party the MSM
is dedicated to { Democrats }.That's the untold story on Quid Pro Quo.
Democrats and especially the Clintons lived for Quid Pro Quo.
Couldn't manage a single day w/o some form of Pay-to-Play.
Then along comes this guy { Non-politician } and blows apart all
these toadies swamp dreams.Even making sure to not take a
Presidential Salary.Is losing Net Worth as POTUS.
Obama and then Clintons Enrichened themselves exclusively
thru their political standing.
Therefore the need to get rid of the guy who exposed their little
fraud { Enriching oneself via political positioning }.Taking On the
Swamp and all it's ramifications.

 

How much more brave can one be than run to the Ignore feature.

 

My assumption is this is why they want globalism so badly. They want to control all other countries and make these deals with them to enrich themselves behind our backs. This is, in my belief, a major reason they want Trump out. He is exposing things like the Bidens and they cannot tolerate that if they want to continue making money and stay in politics. They cannot let that secret out.

Since this has all gone on, mostly, they seem to charge the president with things they do. It's like they were trying to show the public that their behavior is normal.

 

If Trump is soooo bad, then, as you said, a good Democratic Party candidate would defeat Trump.

 

If he ignores you, doesn't he still see your posts? Isn't all that happens is he is not bothered with notices if you type a reply to his post? I don't know, just asking.

 

No. They can see your posts and quote them, if you have someone ignored.

LOL I had someone (this thread I believe) boldly state they were ignoring me for whatever reason.... but I had already ignored them days ago.

The function needs to be upgraded to block, like FB

 

The rule of law restored. Now that was funny. Were you worried about the rule of law under Obama, ever hear of Fast and Furious, Bengahzi, IRS Scandal, spying on reporters, how about quid pro quo in Ukraine by Biden....on and on......oh wait, my bad, Biden told us that Obama never had a single scandal, how foolish of me.

 

..and Obama never violated the Constitution and appointed people as a recess appointment while the Senate was still in session, nor enacted DACA all by his lonesome, as if he were Congress and the Executive all wrapped up in one.

 

this makes absolutely no sense. Why release the Ukrainian aid? Who? You mean Biden who make it conditional upon not investigating his corruption?

Trump? You make no sense.

 

Actually if you want to know what the Constitution means by high crimes and misdemeanors you have to go back to the writing of the founders.

And while you can claim incorrectly that events actually testified to are hearsay you might just want to reread the memo of Trump’s phone call and let us know what “ I need a favor though means” of course look up the definition of though first.

 

Gee you forgot that what was being talked about was “ high crimes and misdemeanors” Nice try though.

 

Trump's ultimate crime wasn't anything illegal in the traditional sense. What he did was beat Hillary Clinton. They were told her winning the Presidency was assured, and when it didn't happen they lost their ****.

 

I pointed out that a high misdemeanor would be just below the crime of treason. I fail to see the point your are trying to make.

 

The dems articles for impeachment amount to:

1) We lost the 2016 presidential election to Trump
2) We can't beat Trump in the 2020 presidential election

 

I have read it. The topic where "do me a favor" was cited, was Trump asking for Ukraine's help trying to determine what election interference took place in 2016. I thought you folks wanted to investigate 2016 election interference.

 

Please quote him doing that or stop posting it.

 

Hearsay is NOT evidence.