Politics Hillary Clinton says Tulsi Gabbard is a 'Russian asset' groomed to ensure Trump reelection

[riverman]

I think it's more likely that the two-party stuff gets stronger from this, not weaker. I think if anything the last half-decade or so has proven that there are enough people on the extremes, or close enough to those extremes that the parties can pander to those extremes and only really think about the middle or third parties for 6 months or so during the general election process.

The newest trend is to quit your party and then be insulted...join the other party and insult back...the wheels on the truck go round and round, round and round, round and round. The GOP is losing more party members to this trend than the dems are though...when you fire a hundred republican officials and cabinet members they're going to resurface with a vengeance..when you insult your national security agents and intelligence professionals you've made some really skilled enemies.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

The newest trend is to quit your party and then be insulted...join the other party and insult back...the wheels on the truck go round and round, round and round, round and round. The GOP is losing more party members to this trend than the dems are though...when you fire a hundred republican officials and cabinet members they're going to resurface with a vengeance

I don't know what to say here, I've heard every couple years for a decade, "the GOP's done", "the DNC is done", yet both keep chugging along... So you're guess is probably better than mine, but I have no idea.

 

[riverman]

I don't know what to say here, I've heard every couple years for a decade, "the GOP's done", "the DNC is done", yet both keep chugging along... So you're guess is probably better than mine, but I have no idea.

If Lebron and AD join the Lakers it's not because they're loyal ..it's because they want to be on the winning side...politics mirrors sports...including complaining about the rules or the refs....in my view every Senator that crashed that private interview behind closed doors is like the bench flooding onto a basketball court during play...they should all be fined and suspended without pay

 

[barfo]

I think it will be hard to prove one way or another that Trump had a quid pro quo with Ukraine

First, they don't need to prove it. Impeachment is akin to filing charges, not conviction.
Second, a quid pro quo is not necessary for impeachment. Any high crime or misdemeanor will do, and abuse of power is definitely impeachable.

barfo

 

[riverman]

When Trump first entered the arena it seemed he was hiding tax shelters, payola and witness tampering in active investigations concerning Mueller's process...that's clearly obstruction which is what I believe they already have evidence of and now even more dangerous to Trump is his pay for play tactic with the Ukraine and use of private citizens hired to protect his own interests representing govt financial aid to a country just invaded by Russia...the whole situation we have in DC is going to be an Oscar winning movie in a few years.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

First, they don't need to prove it. Impeachment is akin to filing charges, not conviction.
Second, a quid pro quo is not necessary for impeachment. Any high crime or misdemeanor will do, and abuse of power is definitely impeachable.

barfo

Yes, but you need to have some basis on those charges, the basis being evidence. Is just we found some people who said it happened evidence enough for an impeachment? I'm not really sure. This is why I think the chances are about 50/50 because I think that's about all the evidence they'll have from this is some people saying it happened, and some saying it didn't. This is also why I think it'll be very unlikely that he'll be removed from office, that and there is enough people in the GOP to stop it.

At the end of the day, Impeachment seems to not many thorns to it, unless he's removed from office.

 

[barfo]

Yes, but you need to have some basis on those charges, the basis being evidence. Is just we found some people who said it happened evidence enough for an impeachment?

Yes, when those people are credible, which they are. Also you have Trump's confession and Mulvaney's confession.

I'm not really sure. This is why I think the chances are about 50/50 because I think that's about all the evidence they'll have from this is some people saying it happened, and some saying it didn't.

Who is saying it didn't? The best defense witness so far (Sondland) says he 'doesn't recall'.

This is also why I think it'll be very unlikely that he'll be removed from office, that and there is enough people in the GOP to stop it.

That's a whole nother kettle of fish, and I agree with you - unless Republican senators suddenly develop a sense of right and wrong, he won't be removed.

barfo

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Yes, when those people are credible, which they are. Also you have Trump's confession and Mulvaney's confession.



Who is saying it didn't? The best defense witness so far (Sondland) says he 'doesn't recall'.



That's a whole nother kettle of fish, and I agree with you - unless Republican senators suddenly develop a sense of right and wrong, he won't be removed.

barfo

Whose credible or not is subjective to some extent. I bet there are people here who would discredit the people you are saying are credible and vice versa.
Also, how do you know who the best witnesses, either way, have been so far it's not public information at this point.

 

[barfo]

Whose credible or not is subjective to some extent. I bet there are people here who would discredit the people you are saying are credible and vice versa.

Sure, but do you think Democrats in congress care what Marzy and Maris think? It isn't S2 posters that decide whether to impeach, it's congresspeople.

Also, how do you know who the best witnesses, either way, have been so far it's not public information at this point.

If there was actually any exculpatory information in the testimony, it would have been leaked already. The fact that Republicans are attacking the process should tell you they don't have any facts on their side.

The opening statements that have been published have been pretty damning.

barfo

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Sure, but do you think Democrats in congress care what Marzy and Maris think? It isn't S2 posters that decide whether to impeach, it's congresspeople.



If there was actually any exculpatory information in the testimony, it would have been leaked already. The fact that Republicans are attacking the process should tell you they don't have any facts on their side.

The opening statements that have been published have been pretty damning.

barfo

No but I hope the democrats in congress arent only considering it “credible” testimony if its something they want to hear.

On the 2nd part not sure about the leaks, but if you say so.

I guess the crux to me is Im still not sure they’ll have enough to impeach him, and Im still very certain that if do it wont amount to much because the GOP unfortunately isnt going to let it.

 

[barfo]

No but I hope the democrats in congress arent only considering it “credible” testimony if its something they want to hear.

On the 2nd part not sure about the leaks, but if you say so.

I guess the crux to me is Im still not sure they’ll have enough to impeach him, and Im still very certain that if do it wont amount to much because the GOP unfortunately isnt going to let it.

Have you read Taylor's opening statement? If not you should. Let me know if you see a reason to call it non-credible.

barfo

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Have you read Taylor's opening statement? If not you should. Let me know if you see a reason to call it non-credible.

barfo

I have not, I will at some point this weekend. Though as you point out I'm not sure how important it is that you and I find it credible.

 

[MarAzul]

Have you read Taylor's opening statement? If not you should. Let me know if you see a reason to call it non-credible.

barfo

Do you have more than his opening statement?

 

[CupWizier]

Do you have more than his opening statement?

It's not a very hard puzzle to put together with the witnesses testimony that has been already revealed. I believe the box says easy to put together ages 5 and up.

 

[barfo]

Do you have more than his opening statement?

I do not. However, if the rest of his testimony contradicted the opening statement in a major way, I'm sure we would have heard about it by now. The republicans on the committee have every reason to leak that sort of data.

barfo

 

[barfo]

I have not, I will at some point this weekend. Though as you point out I'm not sure how important it is that you and I find it credible.

It's incredibly important that I convince you to raise your estimate of the likelihood of impeachment above 50%. I won't be able to eat or sleep until I achieve this goal.

barfo

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

It's incredibly important that I convince you to raise your estimate of the likelihood of impeachment above 50%. I won't be able to eat or sleep until I achieve this goal.

barfo

So I went and read it. I found it, interesting. I'm not sure it itself proved much, other than he had some logical reasons to be concerned. There were definitely some lines that seemed pretty "bad" for Trump and others that didn't. Whether it was truthful or not it appeared that Trump did not consider it to be a quid pro quo (though it probably was) and that he was just doing business, which when there are people's lives on the line is definitely wrong in my opinion. Unfortunately, it seemed almost all the information he was getting was second hand. I don't really have any reason to believe he is lying about it. For the record I don't doubt that there was an abuse of power or even a quid pro quo in play here, I just question how well it can be proven without a doubt that there was. I understand impeachment is not the act of proving it, but I do hope there is more evidence then one guy told another guy over a phone call, or a text message.

The only thing that sort of bothers me about this sort of statement and using it as "evidence" is multiple times he admits that it was his, "feelings", and even in his 1st paragraph he relays that this is his "view" on the what happened, which is all a testimony really is at the end of the day.

Definitely interesting and I'll give it more thought.

We'll go 51/49 impeached! ha.

Overall I'm glad they're doing the inquiry because if nothing else there definitely is grounds to look further into it.

edit:
I would like to say that he seemed to go into this situation with good reasons to be paranoid about this stuff in Ukraine, his wife didn't want him to go, and he seemed to admit that from the offset he was concerned. All reasonable, but confirmation bias tells us his "feelings" may have just been his brain communicating to him what he already thought was the case.

Just like me reading his testimony or you reading his testimony will probably tend to get out of it what we want.

Oh, and I hope Trump does get impeached and relieved of his duties...

 

[barfo]

We'll go 51/49 impeached! ha.

I've accomplished my life's goal, I am ready to meet my maker.

barfo

 

[Lanny]

It's clearly posted on the previous page.

See what? I don't even know who to search for.
It would help a lot if you would include the automatic quote that is included in your response of the person and his post that you are referring to.

 

[MarAzul]

leak that sort of data.

Ah!
Due process!

Impressive.

 

[MarAzul]

I will be very surprised, no not disappointed but surprised if the Dems every find the balls to impeach Trump.
They have been looking for a way so long now, they appear to be fools to all but the fools. It would be a disaster for them to do so with no chance what so ever to make it stick.

 

[yankeesince59]

I will be very surprised, no not disappointed but surprised if the Dems every find the balls to impeach Trump.
They have been looking for a way so long now, they appear to be fools to all but the fools. It would be a disaster for them to do so with no chance what so ever to make it stick.

They don't necessarily have to make it stick....but they can create enough doubt to make a difference in the next election which is probably even more important than removing Trump from office via impeachment.

You can deny it all you want, but the GOP as we've known it is dead.

 

[MarAzul]

but they can create enough doubt to make a difference in the next election which is probably even more important than removing Trump from office via impeachment.

Exactly what is going on.

Dems can't win elections, can't live with the Constitution.
If you want war, I hope you get it.

 

[yankeesince59]

Exactly what is going on.

Dems can't win elections, can't live with the Constitution.
If you want war, I hope you get it.

The GOP is no better/worse than the Dems.

And sorry, but yes, the Dems can indeed win elections...and the GOP are just as guilty of trying to change/circumvent The Constitution.


As far as the "If you want war, I hope you get it." comment, all I can say is "wow, just wow".

 

[Lanny]

The GOP is no better/worse than the Dems.

And sorry, but yes, the Dems can indeed win elections...and the GOP are just as guilty of trying to change/circumvent The Constitution.


As far as the "If you want war, I hope you get it." comment, all I can say is "wow, just wow".

I'm going to assume that you're conversing with Marzy, in which case I'm going to totally agree with you.

 

[yankeesince59]

I'm going to assume that you're conversing with Marzy, in which case I'm going to totally agree with you.

Yup, it was marzy...I assume you have him on "ignore"?

 

[jonnyboy]

Gabbard lovers will like this

Crazy Tulsi and her “transparency” lolz.

 

[Hoopguru]

They don't necessarily have to make it stick....but they can create enough doubt to make a difference in the next election which is probably even more important than removing Trump from office via impeachment.

You can deny it all you want, but the GOP as we've known it is dead.

I don’t know?
I’ve got friends and relatives in blue & red states, some libertarian, democrats & republicans and independents, there values and beliefs pretty much have stayed the same which is great. Why does a certain party have to be dead? I don’t see things other than more receptiveness to social issues.

 

[CupWizier]

Exactly what is going on.

Dems can't win elections, can't live with the Constitution.
If you want war, I hope you get it.

Can't win elections? Last time I looked they seemed to have done extremely well during the 2018 elections, you know, the blue wave and the one that seems to have problems with the constitution is your president.

 

[CupWizier]

Crazy Tulsi and her “transparency” lolz.

Crazy Tulsi needs to understand how the process works.

Federal judge ruled yesterday that the impeachment inquiry is perfectly
legal.