What scares me; impeachment

[John Smith]

I can understand partisan bickering, up to a point.

I would like to think, however, that EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS would be outraged by any president blanketly defying/ignoring congressional subpoenas.

That should be a WALL between the branches that cannot be breached.

Allowing that wall to be torn down does not bode well for our future.

I'm made this point to my Republican congressman, and in a letter to our state's largest paper. I hope others do the same. Congress CANNOT do its job if it cannot get the information.

[Jim Mahan]

Or his cow did...

Not like the timing is significant. Notice today's White House meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov on the day the impeachment articles will be voted on in the full House. Nunes is maybe planning another trip to Russia. What's the Russian word for cow?

[TomF]

FBI Director Wray has weighed in last night. Asserted on camera that the FBI has no information whatsoever that Ukraine made any attempts to influence the 2016 election, and that citizens need to exercise critical thinking about the information they're being fed. This on the heels of also defend the FBI membership recently against the allegation that the organization is riddled with bad actors and partisan Deep State hacks.

Merited a warning tweet from POTUS this morning even, delivered in real time while CNN anchors were reporting on Wray's comments. Which, in this environment, should be seen as a badge of honour not unlike being wounded in the line of duty.

Wray's comments will provide some cover for Republicans who want to dissent and return to a more fact-based world, which is (I hope) part of Wray's objective.

[Keith Wilson]

Any bets on how long it will be before skaraborgcraft posts something to discredit the FBI, with a somewhat random list of all the bad things they've done over the past 70 years, the underlying idea being that any trust in any institution, or even the very idea of the rule of law, is hopeless naivete?

[skaraborgcraft]

I will take that bet. I dont need to post anything to discredit them. Just read the IG report. What do i win, a bridge or fluffy unicorn?

[Tom Montgomery]

.
Did you read the version of the IG report that was given to Trump?

President Trump lashed out Tuesday morning at FBI Director Christopher A. Wray, suggesting that “he will never be able to fix the FBI” based on his reaction to a Justice Department inspector general’s report examining the bureau’s investigation of Trump’s 2016 campaign.

“I don’t know what report current Director of the FBI Christopher Wray was reading, but it sure wasn’t the one given to me,” Trump tweeted. “With that kind of attitude, he will never be able to fix the FBI, which is badly broken despite having some of the greatest men & women working there!”

The 434-page report rebutted conservatives’ accusations that top FBI officials were driven by political bias to illegally spy on Trump advisers as part of the probe into Russian election interference, but it also found broad and “serious performance failures” requiring major changes.

In a statement Monday, Wray, a Trump appointee, said he had ordered more than 40 corrective steps to address the report’s recommendations,” adding that he would not hesitate to take “appropriate disciplinary action if warranted.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...d9e_story.html

[Art Haberland]

I will take that bet. I dont need to post anything to discredit them. Just read the IG report. What do i win, a bridge or fluffy unicorn?

Did you by chance breeze through it?

[Keith Wilson]

Originally Posted by skaraborgcraft . . . Just read the IG report.

Yeah, right. All 434 pages. Pull the other one, tovarisch.

[Durnik]

Or his cow did...

Jim, Bro! Man, do I look forward to your posts!

John, all.. ('cept maybe Jim and some few others)..

We're sitting on the edge of 2020, it's way too late to 'wake up and smell the coffee', let alone, 'take out a loan and buy a clue'. Your country, My country, was sold out long ago. Next to no congress critters are not on the 'same side as iDJT'.. and yes, that includes your beloved traitoress'/traitors HRC/Biden/Pelosi/Schumer et al - who never met corporate greed/excess or 'management of the masses thru propaganda/economic straits' (bread & circus comes back 'round!) they didn't like.

The two questions - in order - are, will people realize this? (I'm not holding my breath) - and will they do anything about it. News flash - the voting system got us here.. and as Einstein said - "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them".

[John of Phoenix]

“I don’t know what report current Director of the FBI Christopher Wray was reading, but it sure wasn’t the one given to me,” Trump tweeted.

"We create our own reality" then give it to cadet bone spurs to make him look like a moron.

[Art Haberland]

“I don’t know what report current Director of the FBI Christopher Wray was reading, but it sure wasn’t the one given to me,” Trump tweeted.

"We create our own reality" then give it to cadet bone spurs to make him look like a moron.

The one he was given was a picture book, it's already been stated many times he doesn't like to read.

[Osborne Russell]

Any bets on how long it will be before skaraborgcraft posts something to discredit the FBI, with a somewhat random list of all the bad things they've done over the past 70 years, the underlying idea being that any trust in any institution, or even the very idea of the rule of law, is hopeless naivete?

Yes, and to what end? To urge us to redress the historical injustices to Native Americans? Or what about . . . shucks, there's a whole list.

Because he knows that we are going to force Russia out of Ukraine and out of Georgia; and keep them out of the Baltic states.

[Osborne Russell]

"I don’t know what report current Director of the FBI Christopher Wray was reading, but it sure wasn’t the one given to me . . . ”

current Director of the FBI

current

[AlanMc]

let's assume that there IS a wall and that's it's operating exactly as it should be. that if there was some impeachable offense that the president would be removed. but if/when that doesn't happen in this case, then all you're left with is "it was just partisan bickering". will you be happy either way? probably not.

[skaraborgcraft]

Yes, and to what end? To urge us to redress the historical injustices to Native Americans? Or what about . . . shucks, there's a whole list.

Because he knows that we are going to force Russia out of Ukraine and out of Georgia; and keep them out of the Baltic states.

Man, this is so old. Let me ask you, why do you think i would think that? Simple question....

[John Smith]

All of this is important, but all of it is relatively easy to distort.

The blanket refusal to honor congressional subpoenas is hard to distort. It is something NO MEMBER OF CONGRESS should tolerate.

That, by itself, seems a reason to throw Trump out. WHY would any member of congress concede this power to any president?

And, they have tangible evidence in the form of a letter that, politely, tells congress to 'shove it".

[George Jung]

let's assume that there IS a wall and that's it's operating exactly as it should be. that if there was some impeachable offense that the president would be removed. but if/when that doesn't happen in this case, then all you're left with is "it was just partisan bickering". will you be happy either way? probably not.

Anyone with a functioning brain knows trump/Republican Congress is guilty and corrupt as hell. Therein, the problem. Impeachment/conviction requires an honest assessment and action - and that's not going to happen.

[John of Phoenix]

Yes, and to what end? To urge us to redress the historical injustices to Native Americans? Or what about . . . shucks, there's a whole list.

Because he knows that we are going to force Russia out of Ukraine and out of Georgia; and keep them out of the Baltic states.

Well, not anytime soon. Not with cadet bone spurs at the reigns [spelling is correct].

[John Smith]

Anyone with a functioning brain knows trump/Republican Congress is guilty and corrupt as hell. Therein, the problem. Impeachment/conviction requires an honest assessment and action - and that's not going to happen.

Probably true, but how in hell do Republicans concede to the presidency the authority to defy congressional subpoenas? While I don't agree with their position on the other stuff, this seems to be a line in the sand no congressman or senator would allow to be erased. This should be a damned wall.

[AlanMc]

Anyone with a functioning brain knows trump/Republican Congress is guilty and corrupt as hell. Therein, the problem. Impeachment/conviction requires an honest assessment and action - and that's not going to happen.

nah. everyone with partisan blinders on thinks he's "guilty as hell" or isn't. it's kind of hard to know you have the blinders on when you, erm, have blinders on. so right now you're looking at ALL OF ONE SIDE saying one thing, and ALL OF THE OTHER SIDE saying the opposite. back up just a little bit and look at that scenario. does that sound like mass corruption only on one side of the aisle, or maybe.... juuuuuuuust maybe does it sound like partisan horse poo?

[George Jung]

You are, apparently, an honest sort, Mr. Smith, and as such, have been denied membership in the Trump party. That is all.

[George Jung]

nah. everyone with partisan blinders on thinks he's "guilty as hell" or isn't. it's kind of hard to know you have the blinders on when you, erm, have blinders on. so right now you're looking at ALL OF ONE SIDE saying one thing, and ALL OF THE OTHER SIDE saying the opposite. back up just a little bit and look at that scenario. does that sound like mass corruption only on one side of the aisle, or maybe.... juuuuuuuust maybe does it sound like partisan horse poo?

There's that darn 'false equivalence' again. No, Al - facts are stubborn things. You can have your own opinion (and do, in a partisan fashion). You don't get your own 'facts.'

[oznabrag]

Any bets on how long it will be before skaraborgcraft posts something to discredit the FBI, with a somewhat random list of all the bad things they've done over the past 70 years, the underlying idea being that any trust in any institution, or even the very idea of the rule of law, is hopeless naivete?

Looks like it took a whole ten minutes.

[Keith Wilson]

nah. everyone with partisan blinders on thinks he's "guilty as hell" or isn't. it's kind of hard to know you have the blinders on when you, erm, have blinders on. so right now you're looking at ALL OF ONE SIDE saying one thing, and ALL OF THE OTHER SIDE saying the opposite. back up just a little bit and look at that scenario. does that sound like mass corruption only on one side of the aisle, or maybe.... juuuuuuuust maybe does it sound like partisan horse poo?

Your description is accurate enough, but both sides can't be right (although they both could be wrong). One cannot judge facts by looking at how people are taking sides and yelling about it. One has to look at the evidence. I suggest you do that.

[John Smith]

There's that darn 'false equivalence' again. No, Al - facts are stubborn things. You can have your own opinion (and do, in a partisan fashion). You don't get your own 'facts.'

That used to be true. Today, it appears, people are entitled to their own facts.

[Ted Hoppe]

We already know the parable. Trump always wins when other lose sight. Trump will prevail in this too.

5C330894-F574-46E8-8D7C-579F80A1F967.jpg

We can expect a stronger imperial president going forward. Foreign influence and unrestricted money exposed as the fraud now becomes legitimate contributions. The checks and balances as we understood it will be eroded. Oversight of executive branch of government as we have understood it will be changed forever in favor of those in power.

[skaraborgcraft]

Looks like it took a whole ten minutes.

Yeah i was busy polishing Vlads shoes......sorry about that, i will try to be more responsive in future.....

[John Smith]

Trump's entire history is a con job.

[AlanMc]

Your description is accurate enough, but both sides can't be right (although they both could be wrong). One cannot judge facts by looking at how people are taking sides and yelling about it. One has to look at the evidence. I suggest you do that.

nah. there's all kinds of things that are left to interpretation. why else would people freak out of USSC nominees? they're afraid a new court will interpret things in a way they don't like. same going on here. people are left to interpret if what t-rump did was a crime. and if at the end of the day we're dead split along party lines, then i would venture to say there wasn't a clear cut crime committed. and then you'll still be on your partisan side jumping up and down saying it was, and t-rumpers will do the same saying it wasn't.

[John of Phoenix]

Sweet Mother of God reds are Stupid.

[Osborne Russell]

. . . and if at the end of the day we're dead split along party lines, then i would venture to say there wasn't a clear cut crime committed.

That makes sense! If the bank robbers aren't convicted, there was no robbery! Get back to kitchen table issues!

p.s. whether a crime was committed is not the issue.

[Durnik]

why else would people freak out of USSC nominees?

Based simply on what is known, Kavanaugh should have been disbarred as a lawyer, never mind appointed to SCOTUS. That Kennedy obviously capitulated to.. being politic, manipulation makes it worse.. and that was the easy one.

[AlanMc]

That makes sense! If the bank robbers aren't convicted, there was no robbery! Get back to kitchen table issues!

p.s. whether a crime was committed is not the issue.

uh, ok.

[AlanMc]

Based simply on what is known, Kavanaugh should have been disbarred as a lawyer, never mind appointed to SCOTUS. That Kennedy obviously capitulated to.. being politic, manipulation makes it worse.. and that was the easy one.

who is talking about kav?

[oznabrag]

uh, ok.

Impeachment is not a criminal proceeding.

You really should try to comprehend this.