Mega-Thread: Impeachment Proceedings & Inquiry of Trump

[Bodakane]

"You are all TDS induced idiots". Now that's not what I am thinking, but things like that don't offer anything to the debate. Nor does your continuous failing to read what I post and reacting to it.

Don;t tell me about adding or detracting form a debate, you are here on burner account and refuse to answer simple fucking questions. You don't deserve respect. You are a coward and a troll.

[MasterK]

This whole conversation is a good example what happened in this impeachment process: people not listening, having their opinion ready. People willfully misrepresenting what others say. People repeating the "party line" ad nauseum. Calling me out on saying not following due process, making it as if i said they breached the law which is something totally else.

- - - Updated - - -

Don;t tell me about adding or detracting form a debate, you are here on burner account and refuse to answer simple fucking questions. You don't deserve respect. You are a coward and a troll.

No personal attacks indeed. I have no other account here, I answer the questions but you refuse to read. Or maybe what I say is too difficult for you, but then say so and I will explain more clearly?

[Skroe]

Guys don’t engage. Report and move on. Seriously. You know it’s a burner. You know their game. Don’t validate it. It’s infraction bait.


We win tonight. Let’s all be here to savor our victory.

[Shadowferal]

This whole conversation is a good example what happened in this impeachment process: people not listening, having their opinion ready. People willfully misrepresenting what others say. People repeating the "party line" ad nauseum. Calling me out on saying not following due process, making it as if i said they breached the law.

Maybe if you replied as if you knew anything about what's going on...

[nonameelf]

Calling me out on saying not following due process, making it as if i said they breached the law which is something totally else.

What due process was ignored? Trump has not been arrested and the trial has not started yet.

[MasterK]

What due process was ignored? Trump has not been arrested and the trial has not started yet.

The fact that you think due process can only be followed when somebody has been arrested and is on trial, says enough...

[Shadowferal]

The fact that you think due process can only be followed when somebody has been arrested and is on trial, says enough...

great...another russian bot...just go away.

[nonameelf]

The fact that you think due process can only be followed when somebody has been arrested and is on trial, says enough...

So, you don't have an answer. Got it.

[Ausr]

Stop touching the poop, report the burner account and don't respond.

[MasterK]

Stop touching the poop, report the burner account and don't respond.

great...another russian bot...just go away.

Funny, ignoring contents only offering insults.

I don't know if you are still following the hearings, but it's nothing more than an early election campaign (or more anti-election).

- - - Updated - - -

So, you don't have an answer. Got it.

Answer already given...

[Somewhatconcerned]

If you really believe that then you should be cheering since it guarantees your guy will win, If impeachment is so good for Trump why are all of you including him so worked up? you should be dancing with joy.

No, it's my continued displeasure with how the Democrats are IMO mishandling the last 3 years. Winning in 2020 would have been a slam dunk if they just let Trump self destruct but the Dems seem intent on snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

[Vago]

So you believe the president should be impeached. There not grey area here. Should the president be impeached or or? Did the president commit Bribery? You’re saying he didnt.


What’s the law the Democrats breached?

Actually there is a grey area here in my opinion simply because impeachment does not equal removal of office. Now I can sit here and say that I also think this process was a sham. I can also say that while people can put 2 and 2 together and come to a conclusion that Trump was ordering a quid pro quo hell it even sounds to me like he did, the issue here is the burden of proof. In my opinion we don't have that, we have hearsay with no first hand fact witness that I've heard. Now he did openly tell two other countries they should also investigate Binden, and maybe they should, but to me that is below a President of the United States and flat out wrong. So I'll give you a grey area, I believe he did it, I believe he should be impeached but I do not believe he should be removed from office. To me we don't have enough actual proof of the crime accused to remove

[nonameelf]

Answer already given...

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

What part of this was violated? He is not being held, he is not being tried twice for the same offense, he's not being compelled to witness against himself, he is not being deprived of life, liberty, or property.

Literally none of that is being violated. So please, tell me what part is being violated.

[Moonstream]

GoP = parade of angry old white people. I know it's been mentioned a few times already, but it's worth repeating again. It's one of the most striking points I've witnessed for this whole hearing; watching one after the other come up there and shake their fists.

[nonameelf]

In my opinion we don't have that, we have hearsay with no first hand fact witness that I've heard.

You haven't been paying attention then. Every witness called except the legal experts were first hand witnesses to different parts of the Ukraine thing.

[MasterK]

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

What part of this was violated? He is not being held, he is not being tried twice for the same offense, he's not being compelled to witness against himself, he is not being deprived of life, liberty, or property.

Literally none of that is being violated. So please, tell me what part is being violated.

You searched and found the definition that's just not refuting anything I said. An example: the secret hearings where members of the opposing party were not welcome?

[Vago]

You haven't been paying attention then. Every witness called except the legal experts were first hand witnesses to different parts of the Ukraine thing.

I've watched a bunch of it, yes they all were part of different Ukraine things but none of them were actually in the room or had first hand account of being told this is exactly why he is doing what he is doing. Most of what I heard was them basically referring back and forth with the 17 witnesses about conversations they had with one another. It is my understanding the no one, still, knows exactly why (actually been told the reason why regardless of why you believe) the military funds were held. But if I missed the actual first hand account then I degrees

[Zan15]

Again, READ! I am saying the whole process has been a sham.

what law was broken? Breached?

[MasterK]

You haven't been paying attention then. Every witness called except the legal experts were first hand witnesses to different parts of the Ukraine thing.

First hand witnesses? NONE! Funny how you think to attack me on everything, but this takes the cake.

- - - Updated - - -

what law was broken? Breached?

Last time, where did I say a law was broken or breached?

lol, again a referral to WWII. He should have asked while being in Belgium and Luxembourg what the people think about this process.

[Belize]

Guys, lets not waste anymore server space by replying to an obvious sockpuppet who's not interested in telling the truth.