Null



Sign in to follow this  
homersapien

Republicans won’t impeach Trump. But they should punish him.

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

Seriously? 

You don't think asking a foreign government to investigate a personal political opponent - withholding critical U.S. military aid as leverage - is not an impeachable offense?

If Obama had done this, he should have been impeached also.

Is there no limit to partisanship?  What kind of country are we becoming??

This incident alone proves the danger associated with normalizing deviance.

His opinion would differ if a Dem had done it or if it were another country he felt differently about.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




1 hour ago, bigbird said:

A response to you about this subject is an exercise in futility. Your partisanship overpowers any possible dialogue or logic. You are not open to any possibility of an opposing view.

That's just BS bird.  You are avoiding debate.

Asking a foreign government to investigate a personal political opponent - even without withholding critical U.S. military aid as leverage - is an impeachable offense.

That's true no matter who is president.  It's an empirical standard about the acceptability of a specific action by our president.  It is in no way partisan.

Now you can argue 1) that an unreasonable standard - i.e.: we should permit such behavior,  or 2) Trump didn't do that.  But avoiding the debate by dismissing it as a partisan position is copping out.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, homersapien said:

That's just BS bird.  You are avoiding debate.

Asking a foreign government to investigate a personal political opponent - even without withholding critical U.S. military aid as leverage - is an impeachable offense.

That's true no matter who is president.  It's an empirical standard about the acceptability of a specific action by our president.  It is in no way partisan.

Now you can argue 1) that an unreasonable standard - i.e.: we should permit such behavior,  or 2) Trump didn't do that.  But avoiding the debate by dismissing it as a partisan position is copping out.

 

No, I'm avoiding debate with you. There is no point in it. Nothing stated against your position will be considered. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, homersapien said:

Jesus :no:

It's no wonder lawyers have such a bad reputation.  So many lack any respect for the law, much less ethical behavior.

????????????

Talk about an irrelevant and cowardly statement. This only serves to underscore your remarkable ineptitude. I cannot honestly say I expect more from you. 

Surprise me and try to do better. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bigbird said:

A response to you about this subject is an exercise in futility. Your partisanship overpowers any possible dialogue or logic. You are not open to any possibility of an opposing view.

Look at his response to my simple comment from this morning. Maybe the pain pills are doofing him up, but then again maybe not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, homersapien said:

A laughing icon is not a response bird.  It's evading the question.

Guess our pal ICHY is the master of evasion. Wouldn't you agree Brother Homer?  

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

His intent was to focus on corruption Brother Homer.

BS. 

His intent was to 1) reinforce the Russian (misinformation) theory that it was Ukraine that interfered in the 2016 election instead of  Russia and 2) get Ukraine to make a public announcement they were investigating Hunter Biden.

The last thing Trump wants to do is focus on corruption in general, for obvious reasons.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, homersapien said:

Seriously? 

You don't think asking a foreign government to investigate a personal political opponent - withholding critical U.S. military aid as leverage - is not an impeachable offense?

If Obama had done this, he should have been impeached also.

Is there no limit to partisanship?  What kind of country are we becoming??

This incident alone proves the danger associated with normalizing deviance.

Yeah homes, Biden is off limits to corruption charges since he is running for president. :ucrazy:

Edited by AUFAN78

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, homersapien said:

BS. 

His intent was to 1) reinforce the Russian (misinformation) theory that it was Ukraine that interfered in the 2016 election instead of  Russia and 2) get Ukraine to make a public announcement they were investigating Hunter Biden.

The last thing Trump wants to do is focus on corruption in general, for obvious reasons.

 

So you are still hung up on the "Russia Collusion"?  Like a scratched old 45 record disc. 

The Biden's need to be investigated and you know it

When it comes to corruption how many people have been "investigated" as much as President Trump? Use your brilliant mind Brother Homer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Yeah homes, Biden is off limits to corruption charges since he is running for president. :ucrazy:

Where did I say that?  :dunno:

I didn't.  No politician - from either side - is above the law, including Biden.

That's a pathetic post.

Edited by homersapien

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

So you are still hung up on the "Russia Collusion"?  Like a scratched old 45 record disc. 

The Biden's need to be investigated and you know it

When it comes to corruption how many people have been "investigated" as much as President Trump? Use your brilliant mind Brother Homer.

That's right, change the subject. <_<

You cultists have no argument so all you can do is obfuscate.

I have no problem with investigating the Bidens.  I don't support Biden mainly because he tolerated his son taking the Burisma job. It was a stupid, unforced error.  But even so, no one has been able to say anything beyond the fact it "looks" bad.  But investigate it, I don't care.

Trump is the most corrupt president in modern history - maybe in all of our history.  And he's getting a pass for most of it - blatantly violating the emoluments clause, Ivanka, etc.  He's normalized corrupt behavior and the country will be worse off for it. 

And the Mueller report didn't exonerate Trump. That's a lie.  Educate your ignorant self.

Trump was not exonerated by my report, Robert Mueller tells Congress

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49100778

 

Edited by homersapien

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

????????????

Talk about an irrelevant and cowardly statement. This only serves to underscore your remarkable ineptitude. I cannot honestly say I expect more from you. 

Surprise me and try to do better. Thanks.

You essentially endorsed the proposition that what Trump did - unilaterally withholding critical military aid to an ally in order to coerce them to investigate a personal political rival - as nonimpeachable.

That's a position which is devoid of objective ethical standards. It's purely partisan. Had Obama or Clinton done this, I am confident you would take the opposite position.

(And even though this is the trash talk forum, I will refrain from the ad hominem attacks and focus on the argument.)

Edited by homersapien

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just curious here:

What is HRC and the DNC paying almost $12M for a British National to go and talk with Russian Nationals about Trump and a couple of hookers pissing in the wind, so to speak?

There was nothing backed up that Mueller found. We arent even sure if the FISA Warrants will stand up. 

If tomorrow  SCOTUS said that the FISA warrants were granted because of distortions of truth concerning  the dossier being a source for evidence for warrants, what will the nation do? In a courtroom, the DA just lost any evidence if they ever had any of anything other than hearsay and innuendo. What will the media and the talking heads say then?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, homersapien said:

Where did I say that?  :dunno:

I didn't.  No politician - from either side - is above the law, including Biden.

That's a pathetic post.

You stated "You don't think asking a foreign government to investigate a personal political opponent"  which is to imply he is off limits. Well he isn't. That he is a potential rival is irrelevant. All corruption should be investigated. Your weaseling is embarrassing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, homersapien said:

You essentially endorsed the proposition that what Trump did - unilaterally withholding critical military aid to an ally in order to coerce them to investigate a personal political rival - as nonimpeachable.

That's a position which is devoid of objective ethical standards. It's purely partisan. Had Obama or Clinton done this, I am confident you would take the opposite position.

(And even though this is the trash talk forum, I will refrain from the ad hominem attacks and focus on the argument.)

In other words, you ardently disagree with my extremely brief assessment of Bird’s post:

“Your opinion is spot on.” 

That’s fine with me. But your expression of that disagreement was unnecessarily acrimonious. It dissuades the recipient from engaging in a meaningful exchange, an exchange that you ostensibly want.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2019 at 9:40 AM, homersapien said:

And the Mueller report didn't exonerate Trump.

Then why have you people drummed the "bribery" nonsense? 

BTW, thanks for agreeing with President Trump for once. Did not realize you had it in you Brother Homer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2019 at 6:24 PM, NolaAuTiger said:

In other words, you ardently disagree with my extremely brief assessment of Bird’s post:

“Your opinion is spot on.” 

That’s fine with me. But your expression of that disagreement was unnecessarily acrimonious. It dissuades the recipient from engaging in a meaningful exchange, an exchange that you ostensibly want.

 

That's fair.  I tend to overreact when I am in pain.  I apologize.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2019 at 5:45 PM, AUFAN78 said:

You stated "You don't think asking a foreign government to investigate a personal political opponent"  which is to imply he is off limits. Well he isn't. That he is a potential rival is irrelevant. All corruption should be investigated. Your weaseling is embarrassing.

That's some ridiculously delusional spin. 

Sondland Pressed Ukraine to Smear Biden at Trump’s Direction, Diplomat Says

https://theintercept.com/2019/11/21/sondland-pressed-ukraine-smear-biden-trumps-direction-diplomat-says/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

Then why have you people drummed the "bribery" nonsense? 

BTW, thanks for agreeing with President Trump for once. Did not realize you had it in you Brother Homer.

That makes no sense.

The fact that Democrats chose not to pursue obstruction charges supported by the Mueller report has nothing to do with their pursuing bribery charges in the Ukraine incident.  The former case would be more difficult to prove - for several reasons, mostly involving the complexity - compared to the bribery charge as clearly demonstrated in Ukraine.

After all, you refuse to recognize the obvious reality of the latter.  I don't know how you can live with yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, homersapien said:

That's some ridiculously delusional spin. 

Sondland Pressed Ukraine to Smear Biden at Trump’s Direction, Diplomat Says

https://theintercept.com/2019/11/21/sondland-pressed-ukraine-smear-biden-trumps-direction-diplomat-says/

 

 

Trying to decide the turkey of the day is difficult. You or Tex ? Frankly it's a tossup at present. LOL

Regardless, I hope you and yours have a wonderful Thanksgiving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2019 at 5:45 PM, AUFAN78 said:

You stated "You don't think asking a foreign government to investigate a personal political opponent"  which is to imply he is off limits. Well he isn't. That he is a potential rival is irrelevant. All corruption should be investigated. Your weaseling is embarrassing.

There are procedures for investigating any corruption associated with Hunter Biden in Ukraine.

Biden is not off-limits.  He is subject to any sort of investigation that proceeds according to established procedures.

That's not the same as Trump arbitrarily targeting the son of a politial rival as the subject of an investigation by Ukraine as a cost of receiving military aid or a white house meeting.  Asking Ukraine - who is indebted to the U.S. and desperately needs our support would be inherently corrupt.

Start with with our own FBI if you want to investigate Biden.

You have to really twist your sense of ethics - assuming you have one - in coming up with these tortured excuses for Dear Leader Salty. You sound like 78, who is totally clueless. 

I guess I overestimated you.

Edited by homersapien

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, homersapien said:

There are procedures for investigating any corruption associated with Hunter Biden in Ukraine.

Biden is not off-limits.  He is subject to any sort of investigation that proceeds according to established procedures.

That's not the same as Trump arbitrarily targeting the son of a politial rival as the subject of an investigation by Ukraine as a cost of receiving military aid or a white house meeting.  Asking Ukraine - who is indebted to the U.S. and desperately needs our support would be inherently corrupt.

Start with with our own FBI if you want to investigate Biden.

You have to really twisting your sense of ethics - assuming you have one - in coming up with these tortured excuses for Dear Leader Salty. You sound like 78, who is totally clueless. 

I guess I overestimated you.

So we are going to give you a pass here as we understand you are on drugs. Get well soon. Happy Thanksgiving!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, homersapien said:

That makes no sense.

The fact that Democrats chose not to pursue obstruction charges supported by the Mueller report has nothing to do with their pursuing bribery charges in the Ukraine incident.  The former case would be more difficult to prove - for several reasons, mostly involving the complexity - compared to the bribery charge as clearly demonstrated in Ukraine.

After all, you refuse to recognize the obvious reality of the latter.  I don't know how you can live with yourself.

It makes sense and the "bribery" is laughable Brother Homer.

I sincerely hope you had wonderful Thanksgiving and that the knee rehab is going well.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this