Impeachment

For starters Hillary has yet to win a primary without cheating. In 2008 when states were moving their primaries to earlier dates they stripped some states of their delegates and all candidates agreed not to campaign there as they all agreed ahead of time it wasnt going to count. Hillary goes campaign there, wins, then the DNC does a 180 and says it counts.



For 2016 she offered Tim Kaine the Vice President position solely so he would step down and she could get her campaign manager installed as head of the DNC who did everything possible to rig the primaries in her favor. She was clearly less popular than Bernie. She lost to him in Michigan I think it was with a 20 point lead in the polls.



Beyond that she would have won if she took a strong stance on marijuana legalization. Would have netted her 7-15 million more votes in my opinion.




There's also the matter of her taking high paying speaking gigs up until the day she announced for President. Those speech payments are illegal once she decides to run for President. She decided to run long before she announced. Arguably you could say as early as when Tim Kaine resigned as head of the DNC. Her speech tour might as well been a bribery tour.



Let's not forget about the Clinton Foundation. Why did it shut down after she lost. Because she no longer had the potential to pay back those donations in favors.



If I remember correctly she has historically high unfavorable ratings for a Presedential candidate going in. Republicans have been campaigning against her for 20 years knowing she was eventually going to run.



She also had the baggage of her championing the 94 crime bill which hurt her a lot imo.




She was not liberal enough for the Democratic base and perception on the right was that she was/is Stalin in a dress. You just dont run such a divisive candidate as her and expect to win.
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
[tw]1181594277643800583[/tw]

From the WSJ article:

Mr. Sondland has come under fresh scrutiny in recent days after Sen. Ron Johnson (R., Wis.) told The Wall Street Journal on Friday that Mr. Sondland had told him in August that the decision to hold up nearly $400 million aid to Ukraine was contingent on an investigation desired by Mr. Trump and his allies.
Click to expand...



Ron Johnson is also one of the Republicans who sent a letter to "the" Ukraine requesting the prosecutor be fired that Biden has bragged about getting fired.



https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...oed-biden-on-ukraine-reforms-kfile/index.html
 
RJ was on Meet the Press Sunday and it was pretty entertaining.

Started regurgitating fake news deep state witch hunt conspiracy theories.
 
To be perfectly clear, HRC was not my candidate of choice. And the 2016 general was the first and only time I voted for her in 3 opportunities. 2008/2016 (D) primary and 2016 general
The Iraq War was the disqualifyer for me.
But to hand the economy to a man that bankrupted a business whose operation is called "house money" and his treatment of the Telemundo reporter for 2 examples

Having said that ... why was she such a "terrible candidate" ? During the run up to November 2016 there was no talk of Pa,Wisc,Mich or Fla. Only afterwards.
As in, AA should have gotten someone better than Shane GReene and had another option than Julio yesterday
Please check the states / counties the Trump org. targeted.

The Clinton Foundation is operating today.
It was her opponents that was shut down after the election

and this :

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Report_Volume2.pdf



II. (U) FINDINGS 1. (U), The Committee found, that the IRA sought to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election by harming Hillary Clinton's chances of success and supporting Donald Trump at the direction of the Kremlin. (U) The Committee found that the IRA' s :lnformation warfare campaign was broad in scope and entailed objectives beyond the result of the 2016 presidential election. Further, the Committee's analysis of the IRA's activities on social media supports the key judgments of the January 6, 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, "Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections," that "Russia's, goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton,· and harm her electability and potential presidency."5 However, where the Intelligence Community assessed that the Russian government "aspired to help President-elect Trump's election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him," the Committee found that IRA social media activity was overtly and almost invariably supportive of then-candidate Trump, and to the detriment .of Secretary Clinton's campaign.

.............

As one poster eloquently put it
"What propaganda?"
 
Last edited:
Does today's White House declaration mean I dont have to pay that traffic ticket or even show up when subpoenaed ?
asking for a friend

Are subpoenas now not worth the paper they are printed on ?
........

And should Trump stall until the election & should he lose, is not verifying anti-Trump votes a real possibility?
ala 99% Sadaam Hussein
 
Last edited:
I posted a whole bunch of reasons. The only one you addressed was the one that I couldn't have known before the election anyways. 3 years later and being anti-marijuana is almost a disqualifier for even running.



Bernie was a far better candidate and more popular. Hillary represented the status quo in a time of growing anti-establishment sentiment. Just look at the support Ron Paul got in 2012 and Bernie in 2016. Its the same sentiment that helped get Obama elected. People wanted something different and he atleast looked different.
 
and I offered one.
Never the less, HRC as a terrible candidate won the 2nd highest vote total in history
Love her or hate her for whatever reason, it is
Monday morning Quarterbacking. And really not up to Stephen A Smith level

My point is, She and her campaign are not the reason Trump is POTUS
66 beats 63 no matter what or where you are
Trump won because foreign entities targeted 5 counties that swung the electoral college
 
Last edited:
I'm just glad someone in our political system is finally ready to openly confront the 50-year legacy of evil left behind by Mr. Greenjeans.
 
The man is lawless at his core. Can he really just ignore governmental process?

This could, and should, ramp up public opinion for impeachment. The choice is now impeachment or tyranny. If he can do this, he really can do anything he wants.
 
Last edited:
Pretty bold legal philosophy: can’t be indicted, can’t be impeached, can’t be investigated.
 
I don't see how he lasts to the end of the month. He's forcing a true constitutional crisis.

What a narcissistic a-hole. "It's ALL me or I'll bring the whole government down!"

It's almost as if he sees the writing on the wall and is ramping up public opinion for impeachment to give himself an excuse to resign, just before the economic recession and his tariff chickens come home to roost. He absolutely would think this way.
 
Last edited:
New Poll Shows 20-Point Increase in Support for Impeachment Inquiry—Among Republicans

A new poll out Tuesday from the Washington Post and the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University shows dramatic shifts in support of the impeachment process, with 58 percent of the country now saying they support the impeachment inquiry and nearly half—49 percent—saying they support removing Trump from office.

The level of support for the impeachment process predictably differs along party lines, but none of the recent indicators are good for the president. “Since a July poll by The Post and ABC, there has been movement toward an impeachment inquiry among all three groups, with support for the inquiry rising by 25 points among Democrats, 21 points among Republicans and 20 points among independents,” the Post notes.

tenor.gif
 
Julio3000 said:
Pretty bold legal philosophy: can’t be indicted, can’t be impeached, can’t be investigated.
Click to expand...

This is one of those old things from the Mueller investigation most people ignored or downplayed come back around. I forget now if it was on Twitter or on camera, but he made a comment about it being a crime to even investigate him, and everyone was "oh, he didn't mean that. He just misspoke." Well, no, he didn't. He absolutely meant it.
 
Runnin said:
I don't see how he lasts to the end of the month. He's forcing a true constitutional crisis.

What a narcissistic a-hole. "It's ALL me or I'll bring the whole government down!"

It's almost as if he sees the writing on the wall and is ramping up public opinion for impeachment to give himself an excuse to resign, just before the economic recession and his tariff chickens come home to roost. He absolutely would think this way.
Click to expand...

The Chosen One is who he is. The sad thing about the last few years has been the behavior of the many enablers around him and others who have adopted a hear no evil see no evil attitude. And that includes the nothing burger chorus around here.
 
Last edited:
Julio3000 said:
Pretty bold legal philosophy: can’t be indicted, can’t be impeached, can’t be investigated.
Click to expand...

It's important how this is framed. One side wants to frame it as a political war to overturn an election. That narrative can't be allowed to win out. What we have is a legally predicated inquiry in which the House is discharging one of its most important constitutional responsibilities. Not as sexy as war. But the Dems would be smart to frame it that way. Avoid overheated rhetoric and work as hard as they can to get the facts out.
 
So far, nothing that has come out about the Ukraine call has really screamed impeachment offense to me. Wrong? Sure, but it's generally on the level of what I expect from politicians.

What is an impeachment offense to me is defying a Congressional impeachment investigation. Impeachment is one of the few real checks on a President's power. Refusing to comply with an impeachment investigation is not only potentially criminal, it undermines the balance of power established in the Constitution. If I was one of the Dem leaders planning articles of impeachment, that's my basis.
 
striker42 said:
So far, nothing that has come out about the Ukraine call has really screamed impeachment offense to me. Wrong? Sure, but it's generally on the level of what I expect from politicians.

What is an impeachment offense to me is defying a Congressional impeachment investigation. Impeachment is one of the few real checks on a President's power. Refusing to comply with an impeachment investigation is not only potentially criminal, it undermines the balance of power established in the Constitution. If I was one of the Dem leaders planning articles of impeachment, that's my basis.
Click to expand...


It seems to me there's enough evidence to establish quid pro quo. But what's more damning is the obstruction that is clearly being displayed. They aren't even trying to hide it at this point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top