TexasTiger 12,963 Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 2 hours ago, Proud Tiger said: Whether he can or can't is another dodge. The question on the table is HAS he. I say no. Do you have evidence he has. You say no. I say there's an investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted December 5, 2017 Author Share Posted December 5, 2017 59 minutes ago, TexasTiger said: You say no. I say there's an investigation. Of course there is but my ONLY point is nothing has surfaced yet. Can we agree on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumps 3,704 Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 It sure is interesting that NO ONE is talking about collusion anymore. Is the new focus on OBSTRUCTION because there is no collusion or did Trump do both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,963 Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 11 minutes ago, Grumps said: It sure is interesting that NO ONE is talking about collusion anymore. Is the new focus on OBSTRUCTION because there is no collusion or did Trump do both? I think there's increasing evidence of collusion, but that may be less of a purely legal matter which is what a prosecutor looks for. A robust congressional investigation can look more easily at threats to our democratic process. But they're cowards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,963 Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 1 hour ago, Proud Tiger said: Of course there is but my ONLY point is nothing has surfaced yet. Can we agree on that? Hardly. But let the process play out. You're trying to call a game of five card stud by what's showing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,963 Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 Nixon's impeachment charges: http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/history/johnson/rnimparticles.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,963 Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 Lots of evidence between Trump and Russia. http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/12/04/the-evidence-is-damning-what-team-trump-knew-and-when-flynn-guilty/amp/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,963 Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 A more respected Constitutional expert: https://mobile.twitter.com/tribelaw/status/937930200578273280 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,431 Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 5 hours ago, TexasTiger said: Lots of evidence between Trump and Russia. http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/12/04/the-evidence-is-damning-what-team-trump-knew-and-when-flynn-guilty/amp/ There are so many half-truths and mischaracterizations in that article, it is simply stunning. If you dont "ASSUME" half of what they say and make them "PROVE" their assumptions, there isnt even a story here. "WIKILEAKS was working for the Russians?" Prove it! Wikileaks, et al, strenuously deny it. That is just one of a dozen or so leaps of faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,963 Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 2 hours ago, DKW 86 said: There are so many half-truths and mischaracterizations in that article, it is simply stunning. If you dont "ASSUME" half of what they say and make them "PROVE" their assumptions, there isnt even a story here. "WIKILEAKS was working for the Russians?" Prove it! Wikileaks, et al, strenuously deny it. That is just one of a dozen or so leaps of faith. You clearly haven't followed this objectively or closely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,431 Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 9 hours ago, TexasTiger said: You clearly haven't followed this objectively or closely. The delusion is strong with this one. Tex, i have followed this much closer than you have, that is the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFAN78 3,911 Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 Another story for Tex. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2017/12/05/the-quest-for-collusion-is-over-as-the-desperate-shriek-for-impeachment-begins/?utm_term=.28f4a3934833 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 11,158 Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 3 hours ago, AUFAN78 said: Another story for Tex. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2017/12/05/the-quest-for-collusion-is-over-as-the-desperate-shriek-for-impeachment-begins/?utm_term=.28f4a3934833 Ed is punching so many strawmen here, we're all likely to get hay fever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFAN78 3,911 Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 33 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said: Ed is punching so many strawmen here, we're all likely to get hay fever. Strawmen? I'm not so sure. Could impeachment happen? I'll await mid-terms and decide. One thing I won't do is get swept up in the current media cavalcade. They lied so much the last year it would be fruitless to do so. In the meantime, I'll just drive by occasionally for a laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,431 Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Headlines 2016: "HRC to WIN in 320 Electoral Vote Rout!" "This Race is Over!" "HRC will Win by a Comfortable margin, almost a Landslide!" HRC Loses.... "RUSSIANS!!!!!!!" ANYONE ELSE SEE A PATTERN THERE? The same press that got the 2016 Election so wrong is now seeing their post-election feel-good narrative go up in smoke. It is no longer about the NEWS, it's about the NARRATIVE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.