What do you think of how Nancy Pelosi has been handling herself?

And yet she keeps giving Trump’s administration more money. I think she’s even worse than Trump in some regards. Trump is the asshole you can see. Nancy and her ilk are the weasels that pretend to support the working class, but have secretly undermine and betrayed them on economic policy for decades, all while taking millions of dollars from corporate interests. Her net worth is over $120 million dollars.

I think she’s doing a wonderful job. I agree with the OP. She’s standing up to Trump in a dignified way, she doesn’t let him get under her skin and she’s handled the impeachment process judicially. I’m so impressed with her.

@janbb “She’s standing up to Trump in a dignified way”

So why the fuck did she just give him $738 billion dollar defense package? She stands up to him in words on camera, but when it comes to money (where the actual power is) she’s his best friend.

@gorillapaws I’m not going to argue with you. You are set in your opinions. There is something called negotiations and compromise and I certainly don’t know enough about setting a budget – nor do you – and keeping the government running to offer a cogent opinion. But black and white thinking got us into this mess and will keep us there unless Dems and the progressive left (of which I consider myself a member) unite.

About as well as anybody who just might lose the Speaker job in a year.

@janbb Politics has essentially become like pro wrestling. There’s a pretend fight, but the outcome is already determined. Pelosi and Trump both work for the same employers, they’re in different departments of the same company with the same mission. The “dignified resistance” that you see, is the theater. I’m just sad that so many people fall for the distraction.

At the end of the day, follow the money. Who is making it? who is spending it? and on what is it being spent on? The money never lies.

^Hard to follow the money when trump won’t release his taxes.

I have no opinion on that, but every time she shows up on my tellybox I hear the witch tune from Wizard of Oz!

She looks better on TV

That’s scary!

Very nicely. Most dignified.

I don’t like very much the image of Mrs. Pelosi handling herself.

You are welcome.

She also did a good job restraining the Democratic house members from celebrating after the impeachment vote.

@gorillapaws , I share your progressive views, but I was thinking about how Pelosi has acted politically, particularly regarding the issue of impeachment. She has acted out of concern for the threat that Trump poses to the Constitution, avoiding partisan showmanship while acting forcefully and effectively.

I can’t imagine why remarks on her looks are relevant to the discussion.

My original post had nothing to do with how the woman looks.
She just comes across as super creepy to me, ergo…a witch!

@janbb

You’re right of course.

I should have said “On a different note, and apropos of nothing, I have met the woman and she looks better on television”

Calling Pelosi an idiot is an insult to idiots. She’s been arguing for weeks (actually years) that the facts are clear and indisputable, only to turn around and say they need more facts. The Dems have been arguing that Trump is an immanent danger to the country but now wants to hold the articles indefinitely. How in hell does she think that will give her leverage over the Senate? The longer she holds them the more political she looks.

The economy is roaring and the country has never been stronger. Let Pelosi play her games, she’s not convincing anyone, and let’s move on. The IG report was devastating to the intelligence community and the Durham investigation will only make things worse for the Dems. The country is weary of these perpetual investigations. Hold the articles as long as you want and let’s move on.

I think she is losing it. Let’s look at what she just said about the impeachment. It’s a dire issue and that Trump presents a threat to national security unless he is dealt with. So her first action is to delay dealing with him? It tends to make her “sky-is-falling” claims look bogus…much like the rest of the impeachment garbage. Her claim is that she wants to ensure the Senate holds a fair trial. Here’s a clue…she isn’t in the Senate and has no say in how they do business! If she was worried about partisan actions, where was her concern when Schiff was blocking out Repubs right and left and turning the entire charade into nothing but a partisan hack job? Oh yeah…she was helping! Her hypocrisy is glaring for all to see. And she is hurting her own party and actually helping Trump. The polls show that Democrat voter support for impeachment is tanking and even the bogus CNN polls show this. Most Americans feel the Dems have done nothing for the country but have obsessed on Trump since Nov 4th 2016. And Nancy has been leading that charge.

If she delays more than 1 month i’m pretty sure the impeachment is canceled. Isn’t there a law about that? I don’t think she has the leverage here.

I’m impressed with her. @ihavereturned…better that than a scam trial where Trump can claim he was exonerated. If there’s no trial, he can’t ever rightfully claim that. He still will have been impeached, which will drive him over the edge. Besides, I haven’t heard of any monthly expiration date.

@Lonelyheart807 I’m not sure. I think if a month passes he will claim he was never even impeached and many will of his supporters will have this view. His supporters, and those in the center, will view it all as a waste of money or time.

While the subject of her lack of looks was briefly touched on, does that same double standard apply to the multiple insults thrown at Trump’s appearance on these pages?
I mean, fat, orange, ugly, repulsive to name but a few!!
Sit down & behave yourselves :D

@ihavereturned he already claims that. He can spew whatever lies he wants, but that won’t change the truth

@Lonelyheart807 I don’t think it’s a lie. Take a look at this:

”But an indefinite delay would pose a serious problem. Impeachment as contemplated by the Constitution does not consist merely of the vote by the House, but of the process of sending the articles to the Senate for trial. Both parts are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution: The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment. And the Senate must actually hold a trial.”(source)

@ihavereturned she’ll send them eventually, but the above has no time limit determined.

@Lonelyheart807 I think the Speedy Trial Clause of the constitution applies here. So there might be a time limit.

Pelosi has no evidence or case for a trial to present.

But if she doesn’t submit the articles, or appoint managers, McConnell can nullify it. To believe she has leverage, as Pelosi does, just shows how backward her thinking is.

The two articles submitted are not Consitutional and really don’t have any legal standing. Everything in the impeachment hearings was irregular and unprecedented. And trying to hold the Senate hostage is not a very good idea.

The Glory Days of the coup are past, and its time for Brannon or Comey (whose accounts conflict greatly) or both to face their own trials and sentences.

Pelosi Is the very model of dignity and decorum in contrast to the turd. She steadfastly refuses to call the fool out for the degenerate pile of shit he most certainly is. Her self control in this matter is beyond belief. She actually continues to treat the blathering dummy with the respect due his office, an honor he has long since abused beyond reason. The one thing I wish for the turd in whatever time he has left, is the arrival of an opponent willing to match his tactics. God knows, and any comic will tell you that no one could be more susceptible to justifiable derision and ridicule.

Pelosi’s doing just fine. You would know that to be the truth since she’s pissing off the very people who wouldn’t say a thing if McConnell is the one doing what she’s doing.

@mazingerz88 and that is where you are wrong. If I truly believed that crimes had been committed…believed strongly enough for an impeachment…and a Repub Speaker wanted to delay a trial, I would have the exact same things to say about him. If you have a case, if it is so dire to get the POTUS out of office that you can’t wait, send it for trial…don’t delay and play silly games.

Silly games is what McConnel is playing, with his intention to have a sham trial with no witnesses. He said he plans to coordinate with the President. What kind of juror coordinates with the accused? Pelosi believes that the public deserves a fair trial, with both sides bringing in witnesses. Why are the Republicans so reluctant to have witnesses? What are they so afraid of?

@LostInParadise isn’t that the same sort of thing the Dems just did with the Impeachment inquiry and investigation? They refused to let the Repubs call any witnesses, pre-screened questions they could ask and cut them off if they tried ad libbing any of the questions, brought in pretty much only witnesses that had no first hand knowledge of anything, ignored actual facts and testimony from people that did know (such as President Zelenskyy) and made gross jumps to get to anything that even approaches (but doesn’t quite reach) a crime. So if that was considered a “fair” inquiry, why would the Dems now balk if the same standards are applied to the trial? Is it that they only want one side heard and want the Dems in the Senate to try bogging things down? Why are the Dems afraid to actually have an opposing side heard?

The Republicans made no serious witness choices in the impeachment hearing. Calling Hunter Biden or the whistle blower to testify would have made a mockery of the process. On the other hand, John Bolton and Mick Mulvaney are people who may have valuable information.

@LostInParadise the whistleblower started this whole thing. Finding out what he heard, from whom, and what is motivations were for putting forth a second/third hand complaint were very pertinent aspects. If his motivations were just anti-Trump, the entire thing would fall apart. If he actually heard valuable stuff, he could tell from whom and they could be called as witnesses. The answer Schiff gave (and the timing of it) discredited the entire thing. Basically what he said was that the guy (or girl) that started the whole thing with entirely bogus claims had no useful information because the telephone transcript was released. But if the entire thing was bogus (which it was), why put it out in the first place? These are pertinent questions. And Schiff was wanting to call the whistleblower right up until it came out that the wb worked with his staff prior to writing the complaint. Suddenly he didn’t want him anywhere near the witness stand. Amazing, isn’t it? Now let me ask….isn’t that sort of thing exactly what the Dems are saying was a high crime or misdemeanor from Trump? Using their position to keep people from testifying? THAT is the real mockery that was made of the entire thing.
And all this merely points to the exact statement I had earlier…this bogus mockery is what the Dems considered “fair” when they were doing it. Why is it suddenly unfair when they think the Repubs might do it? Was it fair or not?

^^So the Reps should mock the process too since you believe the Dems mocked it? The Repubs have no choice but dump decency, conscience and common sense? You think this is still a fight. Really?

@mazingerz88 So far, all we have is the Dems accusations that the Repubs will corrupt the process. There isn’t anything else at this point. Pelosi is merely trying to avoid them acting like Dems. But here’s the turn around of your question…if you are so worried about the Repubs not being “fair” by acting like Dems in the process, why aren’t you screaming about how the Dems acted? After all, according to you they dumped decency, conscience and common sense. yet you are still defending them. Why?

”The Repubs have no choice but dump decency, conscience and common sense?”
Notice the question mark.
Not so much a statement as it is a (hypothetical?) question.

@rebbel but since the discussion was that the Dems corrupted the process and are afraid the Repubs will do the same, and since @mazingerz88 was trying to show me as a child for thinking it’s wrong for the Repubs to act the same if I felt the Dems were wrong, it really doesn’t matter if he made it a question or not. His point was taken and slapped back at him. But really, the whole thing with Pelosi shows she knows how corrupt the process was and IS trying to keep the Repubs from playing that same game. She wants the Dems to lie, cheat, and steal, but wants the Repubs to play fair. So to any rational, sane person, if you felt the Dems were being fair, then Pelosi has no worries since the Repubs couldn’t possibly get any worse. If, on the other hand, you feel the Dems were extremely partisan and unfair, then Pelosi has no grounds for trying to make the Repubs play fair. So pick your poison but you can’t have it both ways.

It would appear that Pelosi wants to make sure the Senate doesn’t do what the Democrats just did in the Congress.

Furthermore, she wants to guarantee that they can do the same in the Senate trial.

Pelosi knows she has no case if this were to actually GO to trial, so she wants to control the narrative again. By withholding what she is required to submit she believes she can hold this over the president and senate, but she will soon find the whole mess they created null and void, due to no legal or constitutional standing.

Which is also better for the Democrats, as a LOT would be exposed and wide open if a trial were to actually take place.

This is all very simple. The Dems have put on their case in the house. They claim the facts are clear and indisputable. If that is their argument the President has no obligation to present a defense. All that is left is closing arguments presented by the managers. Dems can scream and yell, squeal like a pig but they’ve already had their shot. Closing arguments and then a vote. That’s how it works.

As for Pelosi herself,

She has been attempting a coup by her own recent admission “for over 2–½ years.” She is raging with hate that is so intense that she cannot control her facial muscles. And her declaration of being a devout Catholic and that she “prays for the president’ is far from a class act. Is a mockery of people of faith, to be leading a coup and not focusing on the needs of the people of the U.S. especially those in her own district (San Francisco).

Granted this is a conspiracy theory but it’s the only thing I can think of to justify Pelosi holding back the Articles of Impeachment. What if Pelosi is trying to put together a case to impeach Pence? If she holds the articles for Trump until she can Get a vote on Pence, she can then send both to the Senate together. Then somehow get the Senate to convict both, Pelosi becomes President.

Granted this scenario is crazy But Pelosi is a little nuts and is the only possible justification for what she is doing. So is she crazy like a fox or just crazy like a crazy person.

History will see this as a coup.

The democrat party has devolved into something else that wants to overturn 2016 and railroad 2020 for their own ends. They cannot do it completely even with propaganda, so have been attempting a coup since the day he was elected, months before he took office.

Dems NEVER mocked this impeachment process from the beginning. Keep lying to yourselves. Happy New Year trumpee jellies. :)

Of course they never ‘mocked’ it. They can’t win any other way.

What you Trumpsters refuse to acknowledge is that you are stuck with a turd. Despite your obstinance and that of the Republican party, history will not see the press, intelligence services, and the Democratic House as corrupt. All of you are faced with the conundrum voiced in the blistering editorial from “Christianity Today”; the inevitable consequences of throwing your support behind an ethically bankrupt sociopath. What does it matter if Pelosi bides her time in laying the turd’s impeachment before the Senate? The turd being the turd, the delay will only see further evidence oozing up against him—depend on it. If the crowd of you had a nickel’s worth of sense you would be readying yourselves in anticipation of the NEXT impeachment from the grab bag of criminal escapades defining your turd’s scandalous tour of corruption. @Jaxk’s comment on Pence being flushed along with Stinky is prescient and EXACTLY why the GOP must battle to its own destruction in its futile struggle to defend the notion that the turd is not EXACTLY what it looks like. Good luck with that!

@stanleybmanly the future doesn’t look like the past. You are too focussed on aesthetics and the irony is that you are being closed minded here. Democrats have pushed me to the right and I am seeing it happen to many of my friends in the center too. If you guys keep being so out of touch with how the majority of Americans are actually seeing things, the democrats, as I suspect, will loose the 2020 election once again. Try and spend some time wearing the perspective that trump may not be stupid, or a sociopath, what would this imply? If you find such a thought repulsive then stop thinking about it for a while and try again. You must do this excercise if you want to come up with a greater insight than half of Americans are just dumb (incorrect).

@stanleybmanly Sometimes, I hear nine-year-olds talking like you when they gave someone cornered and bullied, and don’t realize an adult is around. Coming from an adult would appear to show mental instability. Normal adults don’t talk in turd talk and potty language, and I would appreciate it if you did not.

In any case, whatever your point is, is lost in the potty language and the reaction I have to someone who talks this way and whose brain is filled with such content.

I am by no means a Democrat, but any American ready to deny Stinky as ethically bankrupt and morally detestable is either beyond dumb or stridently dishonest. I will say again that the issue with Trump is NOT about liberal or conservative. It is about turpitude laced with mind boggling ineptitude. It is about an individual who exhibits every trait and characteristic you have been warned against since the day of your birth. That individual now sits at the head of my country and your party and the inevitable catastrophe to both plays out in front of us.

The country is doing just fine, very well, actually, in every measurable way— except for the hysteria raised by the coup efforts and their endless tirades and propaganda.

And you think yourself a man of God? Look at your own situation, and tell me how it is that you believe the country is doing fine.

Not really, why?

btw, as for what you said earlier, Christianity Today has lost about 80,000 subscribers per day for two consecutive days. By the time the editor is removed (for business reasons) a lot of staff will be unemployed.

Billy Graham and those of like mind were in Trump’s camp, and this editor will never even be heard from again.

Don’t bet on it. You can whistle past the truth if you choose. But there is no reconciling Stinky with ethical decency and YOU KNOW IT!

@mazingerz88 You say the Dems have not mocked the process, yet you told me they dumped decency, conscience, and common sense. Sounds like they mocked it to me.

Here’s another thought on how Pelosi has been handling the impeachment. She is withholding the articles of impeachment from the Senate ostensibly in an effort to force the Senate to give her concessions on how they run the trial. McConnell’s answer to this was pretty classic. He said that withholding something that he doesn’t want anyway isn’t much of a threat. Trump isn’t really impeached until she gives the articles to the Senate. She will either have to send them over or declare the entire thing a farce and tear them up. So she is just playing games at this point.

I would like to see a link to an article saying that Trump has not actually been impeached, other than from Breitbart.

Trump IS IMPEACHED whether he is ever tried or not. Pelosi may well be lingering in the decision on when to force a trial for several reasons. To begin with, she has achieved her primary goal. The turd IS impeached. But the process of garnering evidence on the 2 charges continues. Considering the turd’s history, you can bet there will be additional nails to hammer into stinky’s coffin when the Senate gets the package. But better than that, she can paint a list of Stinky’s remaining encyclopedia of crimes and misdemeanors on the side of a barn, don a blindfold and throw a dart and voila!!- the NEXT impeachment. Now you may believe impeachment fever merely cuts into voter tolerance of Democrats, but that is short term shallow thinking. These hearings give the Republicans the same problems their round the clock hammering of Hillary gave the, Democrats with one crucial difference. In 30 years of bad mouthing Clinton, NO ONE went to jail. This is decidedly not the case with Stinky who has a peculiar habit of criminally incriminating all he touches. The current 2 charges illustrate my point. Giuliani is going to die in prison. Nunez now finds his career circling the bowl—he’s a goner. Trump’s entire entourage listening in on that phone call (including Pence) is implicated in Stinky’s crime, which is why the Republicans must lie, cheat and steal to back up stinky. Pelosi has enough stink on Trump to investigate and impeach Stinky for whatever time he remains in office. The jackass (if he lasts) will be under impeachment on Election Day. Next November—depend on it! And every one of those investigations will almost without exception net more Republicans who tied their futures to an ill tempered big mouthed gangster simpleton.. Your fool is the key to the destruction of the Republican Party, and sadly for the gegenerate dummy, there is a smart dynamic woman wielding that key.

@LostInParadise Here is Noah Feldman…the Democrat’s OWN lawyer stating that Trump probably isn’t impeached.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/20/us/trump-feldman-impeach.html

@stanleybmanly Here’s the funniest part…the Articles of Impeachment don’t really have crimes listed. Yes, they called for Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress. Yet here’s the kicker…neither one is an actual crime. There is no crime called “Abuse of Power”. It is an opinion at best. Now…other actual crimes can be committed due to someone abusing their authority…we see that all the time. But “Abuse of Power” is not a crime. “Obstruction of Congress” is likewise not a crime. Obstruction of Justice is a crime, but that is not what was listed and to date, Trump has not committed obstruction of justice. “Obstruction of Congress” is a term that butt-hurt Dems created and tried passing off as a crime…obviously hoping no one would notice it has not actual legal status. Want proof of that? Okay…I give you Eric Holder and Lois Lerner. Both refused to cooperate with Congress and both were found to be in “contempt of Congress”. But what is the penalty for such a thing? Nothing. It isn’t a crime. That is why nothing happened to either one of these people due to that.
Let’s review. The Dems say Trump used the power of his office for personal gain. Did he gain anything? They say an investigation into Biden’s behavior in Ukraine is a personal gain due to it impacts a political opponent. Did the investigation happen? Nope. Did Trump try forcing it to happen? According to many Ukrainian officials including the new President the answer is no. So he gained nothing…no personal gain. So what you have is a lot of opinion that the Dems are trying to pass off as fact. Obstruction of Congress. That is such a hokey charge as I have already explained, but let’s look a little deeper. What the Dems are really saying is that if they (the Legislative Branch) say they want something the POTUS (the Executive Branch) is required to give it to them. So vetoes are forbidden, apparently. This entire thing is ridiculous to the nth degree. The branches are, by design, required to oppose each other in many, many ways. That is called checks and balances. The Dems are trying to do away with that.
Face it, most sane Americans recognized this entire affair as a sham, bordering on a coup attempt.

@seawulf575 , There seems to be a bit of opposition to the claim that Trump has not yet been impeached. Just about any newspaper, radio or television report takes the impeachment as a matter of fact.

You can call it a sham or coup. What you can’t call it is over! The “coup” is ongoing, intense, and unrelenting. Even Stinky will be overwhelmed by the extent of it.

In less than a year, the current House of Congress will be voted out. Several of those who started the Russia hoax, including Comey or Brennan or both, will be on trial or in prison.

Its getting hard to find anyone who isn’t sick of all of this—they were told in 2018 that Mueller had something really big on Trump and to vote Democrat, and that the new congress would work with the Republicans on infrastructure, prison reform, health care, the opioid crises, etc etc. All of these things Trump did, and the newly elected Democratic congress obstructed. Americans are too smart to be fooled again. The Democrats have done nothing but obstruct any progress in this country to get at the president. Why would anyone trust anything to change? As you said, their intentions are to be ongoing, intense, and unrelenting. So why would America support that?

America needs a government that will work for the state of the nation and the world, not obstruct it.

That is indeed what America needs and I defy you to demonstrate that the turd has anything remotely to do with the realization of the concept. And you should be tied to a stake and publicly whipped for the insinuation that it is the Republican Party which is free of obstructionism. And as for that new Congress you anticipate, 3 Senate seats and both chambers will be controlled by Democrats, and God help Stinky in the event. As it is, I sincerely doubt that the turd will still be in office come November. You and I may well be present for the systemic destruction of the Republican Party chained as it is to stinky as he circles the bowl. Enjoy the ride.

@stanleybmanly “The “coup” is ongoing, intense, and unrelenting. ” So you are okay with an opposition political party staging a coup with the assistance of our intelligence communities? Good to know. So you would then support it if Trump started spying on political opponents and the Repubs started creating accusations and charges against all the top Dems and all the Dem presidential candidates? good to know as well. Oh WAIT! I forgot….it’s only okay when the Dems do it. Laws don’t apply to them.

What you nut jobs call a coup is merely the prosecution of a megalomaniacal criminal thug. The idea that Trump is the victim of persecution at the hands of Democrats is fatuous, And the assertion that the nation’s intelligence services and the judicial branches conspire with the Democratic Party to topple the pig is laughably ridiculous and as stupid as the turd promulgating the lie. Those disappointingly dim witted enough to buy into such bullshit deserve the rewards due the delusional. And those rewards are forthcoming. Your pig is a criminal, plain and simple. He is a CAREER criminal. The Democrats, intelligence services and courts ALL concur on this, and the only question remaining is the extent and breadth of the turd’s criminality. The truth is that the intelligence services, courts and democrats combined could not come close to inventing so despicable a villain as YOUR certified blue ribbon turd, and the sooner the malignant horror is excised from our body politic, the quicker you and the rest of the boatload of conspiracy jackasses can move on to the next wing nut invented conspiracy.

@stanleybmanly I think you need to review the meaning of the word “coup”. Let’s review the facts a bit, shall we? Pretty much from the day he was elected, the Dems and the liberal media have been calling for his impeachment. For what? Winning the election? So they were calling for what amounts to an unconstitutional change of the government through political force. But let’s continue. Someone put for the idea that Trump colluded with Russia to win the election. Of course there was no real details…nothing that showed exactly how he managed to win with Russia’s help…but that didn’t matter. It was an excuse to dig. The FBI, with many members that were Hillary Clinton supporters and Donald Trump haters, used Hillary’s opposition research in the form of the Steele dossier to violate the constitutional rights of Trump’s campaign and its members. And remember, the Steele Dossier was compiled by a foreign agent at the behest of the Hillary and the DNC and relied heavily, supposedly, on Russian intelligence. But the Dems and the intelligence communities didn’t want to look at that…they just wanted to dig up, or more accurately, create dirt on Trump they could use to justify impeachment to undo the results of the election. They lied to the FISA courts to avoid due process to allow them to spy on them. So now we have political force and constitutional violations. But it gets better. After 2 years and tens of millions of dollars chasing after this farce, the results were clear…no Americans were involved with any Russian interference in the election. However, as part of this investigation as well as investigations in Ukraine, it came to light that the corrupt government of Ukraine had, indeed, assisted in interference with the election. Now remember, election interference was the key to the entire Russia Collusion scam. Trump interfered in the election with Russia’s help was what the claim was. So when Trump talks to the new Ukrainian president about the corruption and the potential interference by Ukrainians in our election, the left goes crazy and claims he is trying to just dig up dirt on his political opponent. So what we have is a change of story suddenly. Before, when Hillary and the Dems were working with foreign agents to dig up dirt, it was okay and Trump was bad. Now they claim Trump is working with foreign agents to dig up dirt and it is bad. It also changes the narrative that supposedly drove the entire Russia collusion hoax…Trump is trying to find out more about the interference in the 2016 election and suddenly that isn’t important…just that he would dare to talk to another country’s leader that is a crime.
To come up with articles of impeachment, the Dems had to run the most biased investigation in the history of our nation. They had to manufacture a “whistleblower” who made all sorts of wild claims that were instantly debunked. Yet they continued, ignoring the lies that they created to start the investigation and still calling them truths. But being very cautious to avoid letting the whistleblower’s identity be known and to purposely avoid having him brought up in front of congress to testify. Especially after it came to light that the WB had contacted Schiff’s staff prior to writing the complaint and after Schiff lied to the world about not knowing who the WB was. So we have political action, once again, built on lies, once again, in an effort to overthrow the duly elected POTUS. They claim actions by him that require them to ignore facts and testimony of first hand witnesses, relying instead on innuendo.
How you can call that anything other than a corrupt attempt at a coup is beyond me. You have to truly deceive yourself to get to that conclusion.

^^Blah Dems hated trump blah from the blah beginning blah blah blah…blah. Lol

As if hate for trump had anything to do with the fact that he is who he is. Get off licking the Putin sauce comrade! What you stupidly call “coup” is the US Constitution….comrade. Obviously something even Putin himself understands and banking on trump fans to undermine.

As I said before, you can call it a coup, a sham or a boiled ham for all I care. Call it Democratic treachery, swear the security services are corrupt, the courts impossibly biased—and the press hopelessly liberal. Everyone is crooked and dishonest EXCEPT the turd. I only know that it is your turd who is circling the bowl with virtually the entire panoply of his known associates either convicted or on their way to prison. If the turd is indeed being unjustly hounded, it is without question the best frame up in the history of the world. And frankly, it could not happen to a more deserving soul. You can cry foul and scream all you want, but Stinky is finished. The only questions remaining are about how many others go with him and whether he can hold out long enough to witness his humiliation on election day

And that charge that the Democrats are out to undo the election of 2016—it is meaningless when those Democrats can pin more crimes on stinky than a gator has teeth, it is THEIR JOB to undo the election. It wasn’t the Democrats who hooked the country to the turd.

If they can pin more crimes on Trump than a gator has teeth, why did they have to resort to non-crimes as their basis for impeachment? Seems contradictory. But then, you are pretty renowned for suspending reality to spew your hatred.

The courts are spewing Stinky with a little hatred regarding those “non crimes”. —particularly those little “non crime” ignoring of Congressional Subpoenas. And as for suspending reality, try selling the idea of your saintly turd being the victim of a bullying press, treacherous Democrats, or villainous intelligence agencies. You tell me which of us is it that has no grip on reality?

For the POTUS to ignore or disregard congressional subpoenas, unless ordered by the judicial branch, is the right of the executive branch, and always has been, and is the normal way the government operates.

The texts alone between extramarital-affair lovers Lisa Paige and Peter Strzok detail clearly what was being carried out, and correlates with the timeline of events. These events are currently under criminal investigation, and we can expect Brannan, Clapper, and Comey to get about 20 years.

There is nothing constitutional about using impeachment or the powerful tools of U.S. intelligence for political gain, or to undermine an election.

@stanleybmanly I have stated it before and will state it only this one last time since you seem too obsessed to actually catch it. Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress are not actual crimes. If you disagree, please show me what actual statute they are violating. Because I can’t find them and the Dems did not cite them in the impeachment articles. And if they aren’t actual crimes, they, by definition, cannot be considered high crimes or misdemeanors. And they certainly don’t qualify as one of the crimes that are as plentiful as a gator’s teeth. So I would suggest that until you can actually address this inconsistency, all you have is hatred and hot air and are coming off as obsessed.

And I tell you as sure as we argue here that the courts will render a decision on whether or not the turd is free from congressional oversight. Thus far, the courts are indisputably suspicious at the turd’s assertion that he or his staff is entitled to defy a Congressional
subpoena. The turd has thus far been unable to find a judge to agree with anything so ridiculous, as he appeals his way toward the Supreme Court. Face it, the dummy’s in the hot seat and faces ruin from every direction. The House rides him, the courts chide him and force his hand at every turn. He is being roasted to an orange turn in his own repugnant juices, and I envision nothing more satisfying than his upcoming annihilation.

So, you can’t actually point to a statute then? Didn’t think so. Thanks for playing.

@stanleybmanly It’s not even the supreme court, It is the judicial branch, that determines these things, and Trump was pushing for that. Congress does NOT have any power or authority over the President. If the president chooses to ignore or disregard a subpoena, its up to the judicial branch to determine if he is compelled to.

Endless, unsubstantiated political harassment, undoing an election, or running a coup are not valid reasons for investigations, looking for or manufacturing crimes, or one-party impeachments with no crimes in the articles.

^^Are you also doing Peter and Lisa’s sexual moans like trump? I pity your delusions.

I just go by the texts themselves.

Poor Lisa Paige considers herself a victim. All that humiliation made public. She doesn’t even seem to be concerned about the criminal probe. Just that she was humiliated for her sex talk, while plotting to overthrow a U.S. president.

^^Yeah. Maybe they should have moaned and moaned and moaned that they intend to overthrow trump and connive and text all about it and stage a coup and you know make sane people out of trump fanatics.

The texts are real, @mazingerz88

There is no need to make up anything about them, or attempt to discredit them.

They were very concerned that Trump not win the election. They plotted before the election, during the period between the election and the inauguration, and after Trump took office. Their hate was intense for Trump, their passion strong for Hillary, and their sex talk and love for each other over the top. The texts have been shown on the major Fox news programs dozens of times, have been in the two Inspector General reports, and are currently being used as a part of John Durham’s criminal probe into the origins of the Russia hoax.

^^The text are real. As in really it proves trump’s abuse of power and other criminal acts he did were caused by those agents? Really? Origin of the Russia hoax? There was a hoax? Really? Only in fantasy land. Snap out of it. Use. Brain. lol

You are not having a conversation on the same level.

The texts exist. They outline a lot of conspiring against the president, especially before and during the transition period. and their “insurance policy” just in case Trump wins the election.

If there was any criminal activity from the Trump campaign, there would be criminal probes into them, and Trump would likely be in prison.

@mazingerz88 How do you suspend reality to support your hatred of Trump? The Strzok/Page texts were real. They didn’t support any investigations into Trump and had to be ignored to try pushing the Russia narrative. The Russia Collusion investigation was a hoax. It was based largely on the basis of the Steele Dossier which was bought and paid for by Hillary and the Dems. It was not verified and was, indeed, known to be suspect…but was used anyway. And in the end, Mueller came to the conclusion that while Russia may have attempted to interfere in the 2016 election, no Americans were a part of their efforts. But you can somehow ignore ALL these facts to try pushing a debunked narrative even longer. You are right though…Putin is laughing at us. People like you are doing a great job for him. And given the liberal penchant for projectionism, I would suspect YOU might be Putin’s chef.

@seawulf575 “Pretty much from the day he was elected, the Dems and the liberal media have been calling for his impeachment. For what? Winning the election?”

Violating the emoluments clause…

Carter had to sell his peanut farm on the off chance that somehow he would benefit personally from the office. He should have sold his properties and divested all interest in them.

The emoluments clause does not apply at all.

No other presidents have had to abandon all their prior business dealings to become POTUS.

If you look at the recent democrats in power, most of them, in fact, have become very, very rich from their positions.

The emoluments clause has only been charged once, in the 1700s.

@gorillapaws when the impeachment cries started before he was even sworn into office, your claim is garbage. They wanted to impeach him because he won the election and Hillary lost. Until you can admit that, the conversation is moot. And you won’t ever admit that since that, then, opens the door to the idea that everything that the Dems have pushed since Nov 5th 2016 is nothing more than an attempt to undo the election and as such borders on being a coup d’etat.

@seawulf575 “your claim is garbage.”

You’re addressing the people making the claim, instead of the claim itself.

Your logical fallacy is: ad hominem

I’m sure you’re right that there are people who wanted to impeach Trump because they were mad that Hillary lost. That fact however is entirely irrelevant to whether or not Trump violated the emoluments clause the minute he started profiting from the office which is one of the very few things explicitly forbidden in the Constitution.

@yellowdog Source?

By the way, why doesn’t trump talk about the 21 women he has raped?

Has anyone noticed that there has been a weeklong suspension of outrageous and defamatory tweets?

Nope. He was tweeting about the whistle blower and naming him just in the past few days. Then it was deleted.

@gorillapaws believe it was an ad hominem if you like. I was pointing out the reason why your claim of the emoluments clause was garbage. He hadn’t violated the emoluments clause or anything else before the impeachment cries started. Impeachment wasn’t about any crime committed by Trump. It was about trying to undo an election. And if you believe he violated the emoluments clause, ask yourself this question: why wasn’t that listed as a crime in the articles of impeachment? After all, they listed exactly zero actual crimes and could have used something they could point to as a high crime or misdemeanor.

Seems to me that Pelosi is the only adult in the room. Unlike many of her colleagues, she resisted bringing up charges of impeachment until there was solid evidence. The impeachment trial by the House is like a grand jury investigation. All that needed to be done was to show that there is evidence suggesting a breach of the Constitution. There is no doubt that such evidence exists. The White House’s own summary of the infamous phone call shows that Trump requested an investigation of the Bidens months after Hunter Biden left the Ukraine. A fair trial by the Senate would be the next step, but McConnel refuses to have witnesses or investigation of legal documents.

@seawulf575 “if you believe he violated the emoluments clause, ask yourself this question: why wasn’t that listed as a crime in the articles of impeachment?”

This is an ad ignorantiam fallacy.

I have no idea what’s going on inside the minds of Pelosi and her ilk. It could be that they’re nervous about being called out for their own enrichment via insider trading. It could be political fuckery, gamesmanship, a desire not to muddy the waters with too many charges or other political maneuvering dreamed up by the political consultant world. The fact that he hasn’t been impeached for an emoluments breach is in no way an exoneration of his behavior or proof of innocence.

The fact remains: Trump used his office to enrich himself personally. That’s explicitly forbidden in the Constitution. You seem want to discuss everything except this fact, all of which is entirely irrelevant to the actual issue.

@gorillapaws your are grasping. Face it, the Dems didn’t actually list a real crime in the articles of impeachment. Showing he violated the emoluments clause would have at least been something. Face it…it isn’t the rock solid gotcha you believe it to be. Just as the Dems’ claims of bribery was nothing but smoke being used to try smearing him. The emoluments clause is used for the same purpose.
You just stated a “fact” at the end. What is your proof? He gave over the control of his business enterprises to his family members while he is in office. He gives his salary back to fund specific things in the government. He has suggested the use of his hotels around the world for a variety of functions, but in all those cases he has offered them free of charge so he isn’t making money off them. So I am now discussing your “fact”. Care to try defending it now? How about a nice liberal citation that is all supposition and innuendo? Those are always solid proof…at least to liberals.

Here’s a liberal supposition for you. What’s to prevent the House from picking any variety of “non crimes” on which to impeach the fool? Since he is accused of multiple violations, why shouldn’t the House commence investigations—toward the NEXT impeachment. How about investigating the money laundering aspects of the Turd’s tacky properties.

@stanleybmanly absolutely nothing. That is exactly what the Dems have done. What it DOES do is show how pitiful the Dems are, how they don’t want the public to choose the POTUS, that they will weaponize any tool they can find, regardless of its actual purpose. Impeachment is the tool for removing the president for High Crimes and Misdemeanors. If all you are going to do is throw out a lot of nonsense as reasons for impeachment (which the Dems have done), you can impeach on anything. And the Senate can ignore it or acquit all of the efforts. In other words, you waste time and money on foolishness. That sort of sums up the Dems since Trump was elected.

The Democrats are accusing Trump of two things, abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

Withholding public funds to force a personal favor by a foreign power qualifies as abuse of power, regardless of whether it specifically involves the emoluments clause. The White House summary of the phone call has Trump asking for investigation of the Bidens. Since Hunter Biden had left his job in the Ukraine, such an examination was of little benefit to the Ukraine, but the mere announcement of such an investigation would have been highly beneficial to Trump. This is an abuse of power, with or without a quid pro quo. With quid pro quo, it would be an extreme abuse of power, withholding military aid to an ally combating Russia.

Whether or not Trump can force people not to comply with congressional subpoenas is a matter that may have to be decided by the Supreme Court. A lower court ruled that Trump can’t do that, pointing out that a president is not a king.

@seawulf575 And that is exactly why your turd must be destroyed. Your narrative that blatant criminality should be passed off as “nonsense” must be opposed. At minimum Democrats achieve through parading the “nonsense” before the public through exposure of the extent and depth of the ineptitude and corruption defining a man without honor. The dems need only dominate the news cycle through focusing on the scum atop Trump’s lake sized cesspool of criminality and shady dealing. I am looking forward to it!

@LostInParadise Yes, they are charging him with Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress. Here’s the kicker: Neither one of those things is an actual crime. You cannot point to a legal statute or even an article of the Constitution and show me either of these “crimes”. That’s what is so sadly funny about this whole thing. Those on the left believe the Dems have done something. They have tried to weaponize innuendo and accusation…again.

@stanleybmanly You do realize what you are saying, right? That the Dems have nothing on Trump, are trying only a huge smear campaign, and will work with a supportive biased liberal media to make it work. Congratulations…you are finally actually seeing reality. Sadly, you believe this is acceptable behavior. So let me ask…the next time a Dem gets elected, is it going to be acceptable to you for the Repubs to push impeachment from the day of the election? Is it going to be okay for them to put on a sham investigation that excludes Dems entirely from any pertinent participation? Will it be okay when they impeach the fool on non-crime charges that amount to innuendo and accusation only? Charges that have zero solid evidence to back them up? Please…tell me you will be okay with that and I will keep your response to be used against you in the future. Of course if you tell me you will not be okay with that, then you are a hypocrite for believing it is okay now.

No no Once again—“nothing on Trump” is what YOU and other hypocrites are saying— not me. And any day now, Scotus is going to announce (just as all of the lower courts ALREADY have) that obstruction of Congress and abuse of power ARE indeed crimes! And believe me, I have no fears about any other President being buried in a sea of muck to the extent of your turd. This joke that “the dems, the press and the preponderance of the free world is “making it all up” is ludicrous pap served up to those as stupid as the turd himself. And bon apetit to you all!

The fact that you and the Democrats believe this and are attempting to carry it out are not working in your favor, @stanleybmanly

Yeah. I see your point, particularly since your boy is holding up so well under pressure, snd whining like the indubitable sissy/bully he is.

@seawulf575 The Senate trial is a political matter, not a criminal one. The CEO of a corporation can be removed for abuse of power without committing any crime. The same holds for the POTUS. Withholding military aid in order to get a personal favor is a transparent abuse of power, which easily falls under the category of misdemeanor and thus making it an impeachable offense.

What I’m saying is, you need more evidence than “he sounded like a mob boss” or “I was terrified when I heard what was said on the call” or “You have to read between the lines.”

Zelensky didn’t notice anything threatening, nor was any action withheld, nor was there any favor granted for aid. Obama withheld aid from the Ukraine and let Russia take Crimea as a favor to Russia, and there were no charges against him that I recall. Trump granted aid, yet you are somehow trying to shoehorn that he actually withheld it. Doesn’t make sense, and doesn’t even follow.

Trump was forced to grant aid to Ukraine when he was caught with his pants down holding the goods, and believe me, you hopeless conspiracy junkies will NEVER sell the idea that it’s Obama and not the turd sitting in Putin’s back pocket.

Except it never happened.

Might as well impeach him for assassinating Barack Housien Obama, who put his hands up and said, “Don’t Shoot!” in front of hundreds of anonymous witnesses on 5th avenue.

@stanleybmanly Let’s review the history. The Dems wrote articles of impeachment and aired them publicly for the world to see. Those articles are supposed to outline the high crimes and misdemeanors he committed. When you are hoping the courts will suddenly make the Dems’ statements into crimes, you are admitting that they have no actual legal statute or article of the Constitution that was violated. You are just hoping a court will create law….pretty much how liberals have worked for decades. Admit it…The Dems have NOT listed actual crimes in their articles of impeachment. And you might as well admit that Nancy Pelosi knows it. That is why she didn’t send them to the senate. She just wanted to play the smear game that you outlined earlier…not really impeach a POTUS to remove him from office. In other words, you have basically supported every single thing I have been saying about this sham. I’m just more honest about it.

@stanleybmanly Obama DID disarm the Ukraine and most of Europe for Vladmir Putin, Here he is telling outgoing Russian president Dmitry Medvedev:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNxEDomUlXw

Obama disarmed the Ukraine and stood by as Russia took Crimea. No military aid was given or missiles sold to the Ukraine, Biden brags about withholding aid. and even when the Ukraine does Biden’s bidding and fires the prosecutor investigating his son, Still, no aid is given until Trump is POTUS, Yet you somehow think the opposite happened.

@Yellowdog It’s called projectionism. Liberals are famous for it.