Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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


snitwitch

Recommended Posts

Everyone please, this is important!  You need to direct your full attention to Hunter Biden receiving $83k a month for 17 months.  That is way more than the average family makes!

 

* Pay no attention to the tens of millions the trump kids make, their non-government experience or their involvement with fraudulent organizations.  That's not relevant.

Edited by beef
  • Like 6
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, zoonation said:

I wish there was a camera showing the faces of the senators during this train wreck.

I liked this part

From November 2019 to 2019.  From May 2019 to November 2019.  From April 2019 to May 2019 to November 2019.  From April 2019 to November 2019.  Hunter Biden was unemployed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cap'n grunge said:

I'm still confused on this argument that POTUS due process rights were violated in the House impeachment proceedings. If the House proceedings are the indictment and the Senate proceedings are the trial, what rights does the POTUS have in the indictment process? Doesn't the indictment merely lay out a case to jurors whether to pursue legal actions against a defendant? Isn't the trial (Senate) where further witnesses, documents, and the square off between prosecution and the defense is supposed to take place? This outrage over process seems not grounded in reality to me. Am I misunderstanding what an indictment process is supposed to look like?

 

Also this blanket defense of executive privilege is BS and dangerous.

The house process is not an indictment process.  That was a made up narrative to justify cherry-picking testimony.  The house process was never intended to be this way and has never been applied this way.  The fact that this narrative has been proliferated demonstrates how far gone this has become.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Sam Quentin said:

The house process is not an indictment process.  That was a made up narrative to justify cherry-picking testimony.  The house process was never intended to be this way and has never been applied this way.  The fact that this narrative has been proliferated demonstrates how far gone this has become.

Andrew Johnson was impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors by congress three days after his dismissal of Secretary of War. One week later they added 11 charges. Are you saying that the house gathered every shred of evidence in that short time frame and the senate did no fact finding after the articles were presented to them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Bondi bites on the Biden Burisma brief, aka bat#### bull####tery.

So the PSF take is still that bribery, corruption, money laundering is a okay and investigating it is an impeachable offense?

In case you forgot:

1. Biden admitted on video of withholding a billion dollars in federal aid unless the prosecutor investigating Burisma was fired. "And sonova#####, they fired him" -- Joe Biden

2. Hunter Biden received millions of dollars from a Ukraine gas company under investigation for corruption, while his pops was in charge of US-Ukraine relations, bank statements and testimony verify this

3. The Obama White House held a meeting with Ukraine officials in January 2016 to discuss Burisma corruption, prosecution, and the conflict that Hunter Biden presented

4. Biden corruption is at the very core of the impeachment hearing. Either you think that a president is allowed to ensure federal aid is not being used improperly, or you think that someone is above the law because they are running for office

  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bozeman Bruiser said:

So the PSF take is still that bribery, corruption, money laundering is a okay and investigating it is an impeachable offense?

In case you forgot:

1. Biden admitted on video of withholding a billion dollars in federal aid unless the prosecutor investigating Burisma was fired. "And sonova#####, they fired him" -- Joe Biden

2. Hunter Biden received millions of dollars from a Ukraine gas company under investigation for corruption, while his pops was in charge of US-Ukraine relations, bank statements and testimony verify this

3. The Obama White House held a meeting with Ukraine officials in January 2016 to discuss Burisma corruption, prosecution, and the conflict that Hunter Biden presented

4. Biden corruption is at the very core of the impeachment hearing. Either you think that a president is allowed to ensure federal aid is not being used improperly, or you think that someone is above the law because they are running for office

Seems pretty cut and dry.  When does the investigation begin?  Three years and counting...

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, beef said:

Everyone please, this is important!  You need to direct your full attention to Hunter Biden receiving $83k a month for 17 months.  That is way more than the average family makes!

 

* Pay no attention to the tens of millions the trump kids make, their non-government experience or their involvement with fraudulent organizations.  That's not relevant.

Well, one cheated on his wife with his dead brother's widow, impregnated a stripper in the champagne room, was kicked out of the Navy for cocaine use, knocked up and married another gal who he had known for a few weeks, left his driver's license, a crack pipe, and his dead brother's AG badge in an abandoned rental car. And this qualified him for a board seat with a corrupt Ukraine gas company pulling in millions of dollars with literally zero in return, other than his last name.

The others have all managed to avoid getting arrested for college aged behavior in their 50's, and have a decade plus experience in international business. 

One of those is not like the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bozeman Bruiser said:

So the PSF take is still that bribery, corruption, money laundering is a okay and investigating it is an impeachable offense?

In case you forgot:

1. Biden admitted on video of withholding a billion dollars in federal aid unless the prosecutor investigating Burisma was fired. "And sonova#####, they fired him" -- Joe Biden

2. Hunter Biden received millions of dollars from a Ukraine gas company under investigation for corruption, while his pops was in charge of US-Ukraine relations, bank statements and testimony verify this

3. The Obama White House held a meeting with Ukraine officials in January 2016 to discuss Burisma corruption, prosecution, and the conflict that Hunter Biden presented

4. Biden corruption is at the very core of the impeachment hearing. Either you think that a president is allowed to ensure federal aid is not being used improperly, or you think that someone is above the law because they are running for office

jeez louise...

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bozeman Bruiser said:

Well, one cheated on his wife with his dead brother's widow, impregnated a stripper in the champagne room, was kicked out of the Navy for cocaine use, knocked up and married another gal who he had known for a few weeks, left his driver's license, a crack pipe, and his dead brother's AG badge in an abandoned rental car. And this qualified him for a board seat with a corrupt Ukraine gas company pulling in millions of dollars with literally zero in return, other than his last name.

The others have all managed to avoid getting arrested for college aged behavior in their 50's, and have a decade plus experience in international business. 

One of those is not like the other.

ah.  so nepotism is fine as long as you have experience.  got it.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Bozeman Bruiser said:

 

In case you forgot:

1. Biden admitted on video of withholding a billion dollars in federal aid unless the prosecutor investigating Burisma was fired. "And sonova#####, they fired him" -- Joe Biden

In case you forgot. It has been pointed out to you numerous times over the course of the past several months yet you and others keep repeating this LIE.

it is all very easily verified yet you refuse to look into this at all. The prosecutor who was fired was not I repeat not investigating the company.

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

:lmao:

If a More Sanctimonious Toad Than Kenneth Starr Ever Has Crawled Through American Politics... I’m hard-pressed to know who it was.

Quote

Speaking in the condescending tones of a Baptist preacher who you know has bondage gear stashed in a steamer trunk somewhere, Starr presumed to lecture the Senate on the parameters of its constitutional duties. It was altogether remarkable to hear the author of a soft-core-porn-novella of an impeachment report wax sententiously, and in cathedral tones, about being in “democracy’s ultimate court.” It was altogether remarkable to hear a guy who lost his job at Baylor University after he oversaw a period where the school's athletics department was plagued by sexual-assault allegations lecture a chamber full of lawyers about how precious due process is. 

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Love 2
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, zoonation said:

ah.  so nepotism is fine as long as you have experience.  got it.

:goodposting:

 

I wouldn't even entertain Bolton for Biden.  I don't know why the democrats aren't saying publicly they would trade Biden for Ivanka/Jr./Kushner to really drive home the point of how ridiculous it is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sheriff Bart said:

:goodposting:

 

I wouldn't even entertain Bolton for Biden.  I don't know why the democrats aren't saying publicly they would trade Biden for Ivanka/Jr./Kushner to really drive home the point of how ridiculous it is.

Because they know to not even give countenance to it.

  • Like 1
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sam Quentin said:

The house process is not an indictment process.  That was a made up narrative to justify cherry-picking testimony.  The house process was never intended to be this way and has never been applied this way.  The fact that this narrative has been proliferated demonstrates how far gone this has become.

Is this narrative better/worse/about the same as the Senate narrative of "it's on the house to provide the evidence, not the Senate" in your view?

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
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.   Restore formatting

  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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...