What is the end game?

The Constitution is more important than the ramifications.

Pelosi didn't want to go down the impeachment road for the very reasons that you mention. Additionally, if the House impeaches him but he is acquitted in the Senate, it could help trump. But it doesn't matter. You can't allow a criminal president to go unchecked.

Everyone who ever took the oath to serve, swore to defend the Constitution against domestic enemies like trump, WITH THEIR LIVES.

 

Here's a reminder http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/what-is-the-end-game.564200/page-3#post-1071154260

 

I would consider that a dirty trick. We don't want to become Mitch McConnell.

 

Uhmmm... yes it is. It's a logical fallacy that belongs to the general category of "Changing the Subject" fallacies.

Shuh' t'ing bawsss....

...Intentional strawmanning is usually done with a certain goal in mind, including:

1. Avoiding real debate against an opponent's real argument, because the misrepresenter risks losing in fair debate
2. ...

​

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Straw_man

2. Strawman Argument

...Instead of contending with the actual argument, he or she attacks the equivalent of a lifeless bundle of straw, an easily defeated effigy, which the opponent never intended upon defending anyway.
​

https://thebestschools.org/magazine/15-logical-fallacies-know/

Straw Man: the author attacks an argument different from (and weaker than) the opposition's best argument
​

http://linguistics.byu.edu/classes/elang410am/fallacies.pdf

Anyway.... Too many posts, and you still refuse to address my real point. Not the "judicial system"... but restoring the rule of law to the Office of the President of the United States by using the constitutional process of Impeachment.

 

Right - and I did no such thing. I merely refuted your claim - that getting rid of Trump would restore the rule of law - by pointing out that our Justice system has was violating the Rule of Law prior to Trump and will continue to do so after Trump.

You then proceeded to put words in my mouth - accusing me of positions I did not say or imply - and then attacked that lifeless bundle of straw.

 

Uhmmm "coup"? Do you know what that word means? Look it up!

Hint: it does not mean that Mike Pence becomes President. Unless Mike Pence were the one orchestrating the "coup"

I know what your problem is. It's not simply that your ideology is misguided. It's that your vocabulary needs some... "polishing". The word "treason" is defined in the Constitution. That's where you need to look that one up. Unless you don't believe in the Constitution, of course. In which case, I can't help you.

 

Ah... of course. The ol' "I'm rubber, you're glue" defense. Sorry but, even though it might have worked for you in kindergarten, it's not going to save your guy form the judgement of people who long ago stopped believed that covering your ears and saying "nanananna..., I can't hear you" changes reality.

 

This is the strawman I'm referring to.

But the first one is too. This thread is not about the Justice System breaking the law (whatever that means). It's about Trump breaking the law.

 

First, they are dragging Trump through the mud because he deserves it. I don't hear you defending Trump in the impeachment inquiry. Like all of Trump's fans, you are avoiding the evidence, not challenging it.

Secondly, the Dems are dragging Trump through the mud because they want to defeat him come next November.

 

The Republican talking points to defend Trump are all over the various networks. This is the perfect thread for Trump's supporters to use those talking points.

But they have not. Moreover, I can't find them anywhere.

Why aren't Trump supporters using the Republican talking points to defend Trump? One answer is, they are useless. Those talking points will be overwhelmed by the mounting evidence, and, in one case, a talking point is ridiculous. It assumes that someone other than Trump is responsible for foreign affairs in the White House.

Conclusion: Trump's fans are smart enough to know the talking points are useless. I wonder when House Republicans will come to that conclusion.

 

Because simply campaigning doesn't work for the left.

 

The evidence suggests that there are different interpretations of Ukrainian foreign policy.

 

2018, bro.

 

The conversation is 2020 bro.

 

LOL the House?!

 

I'm no Trump fan, didn't vote for him either.. or Hitlery for that matter.. but what evidence?

His doing his job?

The fact that someone MIGHT end up being a political rival, doesn't remove presidential responsibility to avoid aiding corrupt nations, or to avoid seeking the truth, regarding possible aid in that corruption by a U.S. Citizen.

 

This part is true. It's the only strategy they have because their policies are total unadulterated crap

 

So the dems are trying to affect the outcome of our elections?

 

There you go. You admit the rule of law will not be restored.

 

Yes

My Russian buddy refused to sell them thr dirt he had on Trump.

 

This is what globalism has done.

 

Honestly, I don't trust Pence. He makes my spidey senses tingle. I like to watch Pence while Trump is speaking when they're together, and I can see his wheels turning. Nope, I don't trust Pence.

I bet Trump doesn't trust him either, but he had to chose him as VP for some game of thrones type reason.

 

I don't see you challenging the evidence against Trump. Why? Because it is overwhelming?

The Democrats are just telling the truth, and you can't question what they are saying in the impeachment inquiry.

You are not alone. In the thread entitled "To impeach or not to impeach, that is the question" Trump's fans are avoiding the evidence along with everything else. They find other things to talk about.

 

Pence is an idiot. What did you expect? Trump made the selection.

 

What evidence? The schifty leaks?