Mega-Thread: Impeachment Proceedings & Inquiry of Trump

[Kokolums]

Your point? Because nothing from a fucking opinion article means anything except to the highly gullible people like you.

Where is your article showing that rank and file will support Trump. You have none. I know. Because its a lie.

[Orbitus]

Where is your article showing that rank and file will support Trump. You have none. I know. Because its a lie.

Will support Trump? Because, you just tried, and again, I don't think they are that stupid to follow a fucking TRAITOR.

[Kokolums]

See there. People ask me for links. I post a link. And of COURSE it does no good. They will immediately say I'm still wrong and ignore me.

- - - Updated - - -

Will support Trump? Because, you just tried, and again, I don't think they are that stupid to follow a fucking TRAITOR.

See, you have no articles, no anything to support your opinion. All you have is ad hominem fallacies calling the idea stupid and calling me a traitor.

[Skroe]

Will support Trump? Because, you just tried, and again, I don't think they are that stupid to follow a fucking TRAITOR.

Going to recommend you stop replying to him. He's trying to bait-and-report.

[Orbitus]

See there. People ask me for links. I post a link. And of COURSE it does no good. They will immediately say I'm still wrong and ignore me.

- - - Updated - - -



See, you have no articles, no anything to support your opinion. You're done.

You posted a fucking opinion article that has no backing other than her asking a few people. That isn't indicative of the majority, that is nothing. So, I have just as much evidence of my claim as you do. But I will actually go with reality, not fucking conspiracy bullshit like you are. Because I doubt that our service men and women would willingly side with enemies to this nation.

[Kokolums]

You posted a fucking opinion article that has no backing other than her asking a few people. That isn't indicative of the majority, that is nothing. So, I have just as much evidence of my claim as you do. But I will actually go with reality, not fucking conspiracy bullshit like you are. Because I doubt that our service men and women would willingly side with enemies to this nation.

Psh. The daily beast is an award winning online journalism site. You've got nothing to support your opinions and so you need to attack me and the Daily Beast apparently. Look, if you can't produce anything to support your views, why not give it a rest.

[Skroe]

You posted a fucking opinion article that has no backing other than her asking a few people. That isn't indicative of the majority, that is nothing. So, I have just as much evidence of my claim as you do. But I will actually go with reality, not fucking conspiracy bullshit like you are. Because I doubt that our service men and women would willingly side with enemies to this nation.

They will stay uninvolved and out of civilian affairs. The Guardians of American Democracy will burnish their historic reputation once again by doing what Putin's United Russia-ran Thug Military and the Chinese Communist Military would never do, which is let the law and the process decide.

Removal of Donald Trump by the Constitutional process would be one of our nation's finest hours, particularly for the military which stays out of it, which is historically not a thing in the history of the world. The apolitical Armed Forces in the modern sense an American invention that we exported. It will illustrate for all the world to see that we're not speaking bullshit when we say we're a nation of laws, and the law is what decides, not men.

I eagerly await the moment of reckoning. It will be a moment for all Americans to be proud of for decades to come. One cannot be redeemed if one does not fall first. And we have fallen so very far.

[Orbitus]

They will stay uninvolved and out of civilian affairs. The Guardians of American Democracy will burnish their historic reputation once again by doing what Putin's United Russia-ran Thug Military and the Chinese Communist Military would never do, which is let the law and the process decide.

Removal of Donald Trump by the Constitutional process would be one of our nation's finest hours, particularly for the military which stays out of it, which is historically not a thing in the history of the world. The apolitical Armed Forces in the modern sense an American invention that we exported. It will illustrate for all the world to see that we're not speaking bullshit when we say we're a nation of laws, and the law is what decides, not men.

I eagerly await the moment of reckoning. It will be a moment for all Americans to be proud of for decades to come. One cannot be redeemed if one does not fall first. And we have fallen so very far.

Yeah, I don't understand how the military would willingly side with someone that just stabbed our allies in the back that they have fought alongside for the last few years since ISIS formed. Just so Trump could keep his tower in Istanbul, and send them to help the murderous pieces of shit that probably bombed themselves in Saudi Arabia. Where Trump also gets a ton of money from.

[Orbitus]

This is all secondary. I cannot even believe you are engaging in that reasoning. The military will not do a coup (which is what was suggested) because if the military does a coup, it's dead. Every person remotely involved would be a traitor and everyone who doesn't actively try to stop them will have ended their careers. No longer will the people of the US treat the military with respect, no longer will they be untouchable by culture which always try to make a divide between the establishment and the troops. They will become the enemy of the people.
WHO DOES THAT?

Conspiracy theorists and gullible morons? That is the only answer I have. I mean, look at the people that Trump has inspired to do domestic terrorist attacks.

[Levelfive]

You posted a fucking opinion article that has no backing other than her asking a few people. That isn't indicative of the majority, that is nothing. So, I have just as much evidence of my claim as you do. But I will actually go with reality, not fucking conspiracy bullshit like you are. Because I doubt that our service men and women would willingly side with enemies to this nation.

Yes, people in the military generally support Republicans, great essay he shared. Beyond that, his personal leap from their political support to speculating wildly that it necessarily presages abdicating their life's training and work to take up arms against the country and Constitution is hallucinatory--not to mention deeply insulting--at best.

[Orbitus]

Yes, people in the military generally support Republicans, great essay he shared. Beyond that, his personal leap from their political support to speculating wildly that it necessarily presages abdicating their life's training and work to take up arms against the country and Constitution is hallucinatory--not to mention deeply insulting--at best.

He thinks because some no name morons that have been advocating for civil war for the better part of a decade, if not longer, are in the right, simply because he is tired of progress. He wants the US to basically be the 50s again, but not the 1950s, more like the 1650s.

[Klok]

thedailybeast

Source: opinion piece from some fucking glorified bloggers.

Epic.

[Skroe]

Yeah, I don't understand how the military would willingly side with someone that just stabbed our allies in the back that they have fought alongside for the last few years since ISIS formed. Just so Trump could keep his tower in Istanbul, and send them to help the murderous pieces of shit that probably bombed themselves in Saudi Arabia. Where Trump also gets a ton of money from.

I mean it's even more fundamental than the facts of Trump's wrongdoing. It has to do with the foundational principles of the US Armed Forces, which are to defend the country as a whole and the constitution. It's throughougly indoctrinated within the entire organization and has for many decades.

We take this for granted now, but it's a remarkable thing that, generally speaking, America created. Throughout the 19th century the US Army and Navy were apolitical, non-ideological forces in a world overrun by them. Napoleon's Army? Ideological and political. It was his. The British Imperial-era army? Until the beginning of the democratic era in the UK whch was a process that did not culminate until 1918, the military was under the de facto control of the aristocracy that had voting rights. It wasn't until after World War II that political armed forces were generally extinguished in the West (Spain under Franco being a notable exception). But the Armed Forces of the USSR is perhaps the grandest political military force the world had yet seen up to that point. Still, the US spent the post-World War II era exporting this model as it rebuilt the world. And it continued in the post-Cold War era. Consider Iraq. Even in that misadventure, one of the things the US did was try and replace the Saddam-era Baathist dominated Republican Guard with a legitimate National Iraqi Army that was loyal to the country, and not a leader.

The institution and the people who make it up, who are so tradition bound, will not destroy that unique legacy to the world - that true gift that makes liberal democracy possible in its most fundamental form - by throwing in with Trump. Or anybody else.

The Military stands for the Constitution. And all of America. And for democracy. But not for liberals, conservatives, Democrats or Republicans. That is a blessing, and the highest of praise we can offer, because most armed forces in history have been anything but that, and it's brought the world millennia of devastation.

[Orbitus]

And if a tiny number in the military even tries that insanity, they will be arrested by their peers and superiors before we even find out about it.

And a courtmarshalling would happen, for treason, and we don't take that shit lightly.

[zenkai]

Republican lawmaker 'destroyed' latest impeachment inquiry witness argument: McCarthy

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said a fellow Republican lawmaker deconstructed a key part of the latest Trump impeachment inquiry witness testimony in Tuesday's closed-door session.

"In 90 seconds, we had John Ratcliffe destroy [acting U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill] Taylor's whole argument," McCarthy said.

The questioning by Ratcliffe, a Texas Republican and member of both the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, was an important moment in the hearing, McCarthy claimed.

"We can't really talk about it," he said.

Ratcliffe appeared on Fox News after the testimony and said there were new details brought to light, but said nothing "worthy of impeachment."

McCarthy added House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., is not allowing lawmakers to speak too specifically about the proceedings, in an interview Tuesday on "The Ingraham Angle."

"Adam Schiff won't let us talk about what happened," he said regarding U.S. diplomat to Ukraine Bill Taylor's closed-door hearing on Capitol Hill. "There is no quid pro quo."


The California lawmaker also claimed the impeachment inquiry process continues to be based largely on testimony from those without first-hand knowledge of the Trump-Ukraine situation.


"The one thing that you find out in this process is all this information is just like that whistleblower... everything is second-, third-, and fourth-hand information," he said.

He criticized Schiff for how he is conducting the proceedings, claiming the relevant Republican lawmakers are unable to view information from the hearings unless they are accompanied by the chairman's staff members.

"What they are doing [is] they are changing every rule we ever had," he said.



Ruh Roh, sounds like they won't have enough evidence to move further for a vote at this rate

[Dhrizzle]

He thinks because some no name morons that have been advocating for civil war for the better part of a decade, if not longer, are in the right, simply because he is tired of progress. He wants the US to basically be the 50s again, but not the 1950s, more like the 1650s.

Hmmm, as the UK has spent the past couple of years shooting ourselves in the feet while debating whether to do the hands or go straight for the head next, it would actually be really handy if the US became a subservient part of our Empire again.

[Skroe]

If I were Mike Pence, I'd start picking out Oval office curtains.

[kaelleria]

Republican lawmaker 'destroyed' latest impeachment inquiry witness argument: McCarthy

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said a fellow Republican lawmaker deconstructed a key part of the latest Trump impeachment inquiry witness testimony in Tuesday's closed-door session.

"In 90 seconds, we had John Ratcliffe destroy [acting U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill] Taylor's whole argument," McCarthy said.

The questioning by Ratcliffe, a Texas Republican and member of both the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, was an important moment in the hearing, McCarthy claimed.

"We can't really talk about it," he said.

Ratcliffe appeared on Fox News after the testimony and said there were new details brought to light, but said nothing "worthy of impeachment."

McCarthy added House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., is not allowing lawmakers to speak too specifically about the proceedings, in an interview Tuesday on "The Ingraham Angle."

"Adam Schiff won't let us talk about what happened," he said regarding U.S. diplomat to Ukraine Bill Taylor's closed-door hearing on Capitol Hill. "There is no quid pro quo."


The California lawmaker also claimed the impeachment inquiry process continues to be based largely on testimony from those without first-hand knowledge of the Trump-Ukraine situation.


"The one thing that you find out in this process is all this information is just like that whistleblower... everything is second-, third-, and fourth-hand information," he said.

He criticized Schiff for how he is conducting the proceedings, claiming the relevant Republican lawmakers are unable to view information from the hearings unless they are accompanied by the chairman's staff members.

"What they are doing [is] they are changing every rule we ever had," he said.



Ruh Roh, sounds like they won't have enough evidence to move further for a vote at this rate

Except we have the opening statement, Mulvaney stating there was a quid pro quo, Trump's own words in the transcript, and Trump's own words on the WH lawn.

And text messages. And like 9 witnesses that have already corroborated everything.

Just wait for the open hearings.

[Skroe]

And a courtmarshalling would happen, for treason, and we don't take that shit lightly.

Not for treason. For violating DoD regulations and the Hatch Act. Also for mutiny.

[dubious_doomhammer]

[I]Republican

Ruh Roh, sounds like they won't have enough evidence to move further for a vote at this rate

So far, only right wing (with mixed factual reporting) news sources have "reported" on this.

Following links don't mention John Ratcliffe at all and paint a different story.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1X10BC

https://apnews.com/4f32a3adcf2943bd901cf37446260c9d

It's pretty clear that republicans are going to do whatever they can to change public opinion, even if they have to lie about it - the fox news article even says "We can't really talk about it". Are we supposed to go on hearsay and call it fact? /facepalm emjoji, wru