What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

***Official Donald J. Trump Impeachment (Whistleblower) Thread*** (12 Viewers)

BladeRunner said:
We're back to "we lost in 2016 and our ego can't handle it so let's say Trump is a dictator".

Or, "Hitler once fired someone so Trump is like a dictator."
Click to expand...
He isn’t a dictator yet because the Republicans are willingly doing his bidding.  Until they give him carte blanche but then it will be too late.

 
KPD said:
He isn’t a dictator yet because the Republicans are willingly doing his bidding.  Until they give him carte blanche but then it will be too late.
Click to expand...
This moment is waaaaaasy closer than Rs are able to admit unfortunately.

 
I will admit he hasn’t gone Putin yet and starting assassinating his rivals, but they all start the path somewhere.  Firing all dissenters, getting total loyalty from half the govt isn’t a bad start.

 
So the Rs want to be in charge. Why is Trump the guy to fall in line behind?  He doesn’t represent the values most Rs have.  I’ve read Joe’s link, but seriously, there are a thousand people more qualified and more moral to carry the banner.  I have a million times more respect for a R that stands up for what is right than those who toady up to Trump just to win another 2 years.

 
KPD said:
What is the reason to not identify them?  Like I said, the people that might take Trump’s words to violence already “know” who they are and nothing to my knowledge has been done.  Trump could decide to fire this person tomorrow before their identity is “known” and then the protections wouldn’t apply.
Click to expand...
Ask Sondland, the Vindman brothers and Yovanovitch.  To start, there's plenty more. 

 
KPD said:
Sure let’s let the president act like a king.  No accountability for any action.  Over the top.  Ok.
Click to expand...
No one is doing that and certainly not the House.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brad Pitt at the Oscars:

"They told me I only have 45 seconds up here, which is 45 seconds more than the Senate gave John Bolton this week. I'm thinking maybe Quentin does a movie about it. In the end, the adults do the right thing."

 
  • Love
Reactions: JAA
squistion said:
Brad Pitt at the Oscars:

"They told me I only have 45 seconds up here, which is 45 seconds more than the Senate gave John Bolton this week. I'm thinking maybe Quentin does a movie about it. In the end, the adults do the right thing."
Click to expand...
Oh, well.  If Brad Pitt says it then we must believe it!

Any other celebrities you follow that we should listen to?  ;)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion said:
Brad Pitt at the Oscars:

"They told me I only have 45 seconds up here, which is 45 seconds more than the Senate gave John Bolton this week. I'm thinking maybe Quentin does a movie about it. In the end, the adults do the right thing."
Click to expand...
c'mon  brad pitt?   c'mon, who cares?

 
Good luck winning the independent vote for Trump.  He is a bully, sexual predator, serial liar, and is completely unfit for office.  Running him fo re-election is surrendering to Ds for 4 years.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zftcg said:
I will say I don’t put a lot of stock in what Senators said. They all started with the presumption that they would vote for acquittal and worked backwards based on their temperament and “brands”. Alexander was no more likely to call it a witch hunt than Tom Cotton was to criticize Trump’s behavior. 
Click to expand...
Truly gutless performance by all.  

 
Insomniac said:
Between the no indictment policy and the total ineffectiveness of the Constitutional impeachment process we now have a system where the POTUS is above the law. The problem isn't  the liklihood of Trump abusing his powers, everyone who comes after will have the same ability.
Click to expand...
Yup.  This is what the right is completely missing in their frenzied jubilation.  They are going to  squeal if and when the show is on the other foot.  On the other hand, universal healthcare will be only one signature away from being a reality.  

 
BladeRunner said:
The difference is Bernie actually IS a socialist.  He's literally defended Castro and Ortega.  Took his honeymoon in Russia.  Also, he literally said it himself so no one is fear-mongering.

Warren is adopting almost all of his positions, so not sure how you can ignore that either.

Not really the same thing, IMO.
Click to expand...
Many people defended many sides.  

 
BladeRunner said:
Uhmmm, no.  This sounds a bit like someone is assuming way too much.
Click to expand...
This is a direct quote from a letter that I received from Pat Toomey (R- PA) last week: 

"The president's actions were not "perfect." Some were inappropriate. But the question for the Senate was not whether his actions were perfect, but if they constituted impeachable offenses that justified removing a president for the first time and forbidding him from ever holding office."

Toomey's opinion is that the Democrats made a "...faulty claim that the only possible motive for his actions was his personal political gain. In fact, there are also legitimate national interests for seeking investigations into apparent corruption, especially when taxpayer dollars are involved."   

I personally think this is hogwash:  it was patently obvious that Trump had little or no concern of corruption in Ukraine in his first two years of office and that the only "corruption" Trump's personal lawyer was investigating pertained to the Bidens, his perceived political opponent in the 2020 election.

Toomey went onto quote none other than Joe Biden in his letter:  

"Vice President Biden stated during President Clinton's impeachment trial, "the Constitution sets the bar for impeachment very high." A president can only be impeached and removed for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." While there's debate about the precise meaning of this phrase, it's clear that impeachable conduct must be comparable to the serious offenses of treason and bribery.

The Constitution sets the impeachment bar so high for good reasons. Removing a president from office, and forbidding him from seeking future office, overturns the results of the last election and denies Americans the right to vote for him in the next one. The Senate's impeachment power essentially allows 67 senators to substitute their judgment for that of millions of Americans.

Vice President Biden's framework for judging an impeachment was right then and it is right now."

So Toomey's position is that Trump's actions were "inappropriate" but did not warrant his removal of office.  

 
msommer said:
Did the senate hear testimony from John Bolton?

AFAICT Mr Pitt seems to have stated a fact
Click to expand...
Yawn.  Who watches the Oscars anyways?

Who cares what these pretentious, hypocritical, preaching morons think anyways?  If you're hanging your justification for politics on actors, then I would say you need to get out more.  Enjoy life instead of being bitter, jaded and full of hate.

 
Jackstraw said:
“HE’S NOT HITLER!” is not the defense of an American President I’d thought I’d see in my lifetime.
Click to expand...
Actually, there is not a single President in your lifetime who hasn’t been compared to Hitler. 

 
Godsbrother said:
This is a direct quote from a letter that I received from Pat Toomey (R- PA) last week: 

"The president's actions were not "perfect." Some were inappropriate. But the question for the Senate was not whether his actions were perfect, but if they constituted impeachable offenses that justified removing a president for the first time and forbidding him from ever holding office."

Toomey's opinion is that the Democrats made a "...faulty claim that the only possible motive for his actions was his personal political gain. In fact, there are also legitimate national interests for seeking investigations into apparent corruption, especially when taxpayer dollars are involved."   

I personally think this is hogwash:  it was patently obvious that Trump had little or no concern of corruption in Ukraine in his first two years of office and that the only "corruption" Trump's personal lawyer was investigating pertained to the Bidens, his perceived political opponent in the 2020 election.

Toomey went onto quote none other than Joe Biden in his letter:  

"Vice President Biden stated during President Clinton's impeachment trial, "the Constitution sets the bar for impeachment very high." A president can only be impeached and removed for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." While there's debate about the precise meaning of this phrase, it's clear that impeachable conduct must be comparable to the serious offenses of treason and bribery.

The Constitution sets the impeachment bar so high for good reasons. Removing a president from office, and forbidding him from seeking future office, overturns the results of the last election and denies Americans the right to vote for him in the next one. The Senate's impeachment power essentially allows 67 senators to substitute their judgment for that of millions of Americans.

Vice President Biden's framework for judging an impeachment was right then and it is right now."

So Toomey's position is that Trump's actions were "inappropriate" but did not warrant his removal of office.  
Click to expand...
If he has questions about motive why did he want to hear from witnesses that could clear this up?

 
Eisenhower - probably

Kennedy - Less likely, perhaps

Johnson - Probably

Nixon - Very likely

Ford - Not Jerry

Carter - I'm guessing not so much

Reagan - Sure, by his detractors.  Of course by his detractors, ones supports rarely make such a comparison.

Bush - Sure

Clinton -  Lots of negative comparisons but Hitler?  Since we are entering the age of hyperbole I suppose so.

Bush -  More Curious George comparisons but sure.

Obama - Way more Muslim world dictator comparisons.  If he was compared to Hitler I bet those doing so amended the comparison with "black".

Trump - Certainly

 
Drunken Cowboy said:
If he has questions about motive why did he want to hear from witnesses that could clear this up?
Click to expand...
In my opinion Mr Toomey knows full well what motivated Trump to withhold Ukrainian aide.  His argument is the House Democrats didn't prove it and even if they could have it still wouldn't have warranted removal.  Therefore additional witnesses were not necessary.

 
BladeRunner said:
Yawn.  Who watches the Oscars anyways?

Who cares what these pretentious, hypocritical, preaching morons think anyways? If you're hanging your justification for politics on actors, then I would say you need to get out more.  Enjoy life instead of being bitter, jaded and full of hate.
Click to expand...
Yeah, silly actors with their political preaching.

I much prefer a Reality TV star to tell me what I should think politically than one who only does movies.

 
Weebs210 said:
Can we lock this thread? It's over. Trump was aquitted. Move on to your next sham investigation.
Click to expand...
Yup, the "sham investigation" where the Senate didn't want to hear from an ex-cabinet member professing to have info on the subject.  Sham investigation, whitewash, cover-up, they all work.  

 
Weebs210 said:
Trump was aquitted. Move on to your next sham investigation.
Click to expand...
To make sense of the 'impeachment talk started in 2016' claim, you have to realize that during the campaign Trump always made clear that he was not going to adhere to constitutional norms and standards. His protestations that troops should be allowed to do war crimes is one example (and that came to light recently with the Gallagher case), I suppose another was his complete lack of knowledge or understanding of key American history and the Constitution was another (and anecdotal evidence continues to arise), and for many Trump supporters that was a feature of his presidency, something they wanted. - So yeah I'm afraid this is the kind of president we have and as he continues to run afoul of the Constitution and the law he will continue to be called to account for it. It's bound to happen not later but soon, very soon, or even now.

 
BladeRunner said:
Yawn.  Who watches the Oscars anyways?

Who cares what these pretentious, hypocritical, preaching morons think anyways?  If you're hanging your justification for politics on actors, then I would say you need to get out more.  Enjoy life instead of being bitter, jaded and full of hate.
Click to expand...
About 30 million people. 

 
BladeRunner said:
Yawn.  Who watches the Oscars anyways?

Who cares what these pretentious, hypocritical, preaching morons think anyways?  If you're hanging your justification for politics on actors, then I would say you need to get out more.  Enjoy life instead of being bitter, jaded and full of hate.
Click to expand...
I didn't. And in the next post from the one you answered you could see that I don't care what Brad Pitt says.

But you reacted quite a bit to the soundbite. To the point where you first challenged the veracity of the statement (it was true) and then obliquely attack the person pointing that out to you.

That's interesting. 

 
Mr. Ham said:
Reince Priebus already established the, yeah but we lie to the press all the time defense. Lindsay will simply fall back on this acknowledgement that anything at any time may just be bull#### meant to score political points with a base.
Click to expand...
They're like a bad gangster movie.  "Oh yeahs, whats a you gonna do about it!? Nuttin' that's what!". 

 
In a court filing Monday evening, prosecutors recommended to a federal judge that former Trump associate Roger Stone serves seven to nine years in prison for lying to Congress and witness tampering during the Russia probe.

“Roger Stone obstructed Congress’ investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, lied under oath, and tampered with a witness,” prosecutors wrote in the filing. “And when his crimes were revealed by the indictment in this case, he displayed contempt for this Court and the rule of law. For that, he should be punished in accord with the advisory Guidelines.”
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

timschochet
New York Magazine: Donald Trump is running for President again.
9 10 11
Replies
522
Views
12K
BladeRunner
BladeRunner
dozer
****Official DOJ Investigation into Trump, Fake Electors, Fraud, Etc.****
5 6 7
Replies
348
Views
11K
Sabertooth
Sabertooth
knowledge dropper
***OFFICIAL Trump vs. DeSantis Thread***
2 3 4
Replies
197
Views
5K
timschochet
timschochet

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 12 (members: 0, guests: 12)
Top