- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: USSA Pelosi: It's 'dangerous position' to take a 'let the election decide'
Posted on 11/19/19 at 1:57 pm to FredBear
Posted on 11/19/19 at 1:57 pm to FredBear
I disagree with your false equivalency, but I’m glad you agree that public office and public funds shouldn’t be used for personal or political gain.
I suggest you write your Rep & Senators in support of impeachment.
I suggest you write your Rep & Senators in support of impeachment.
2
Posted on 11/19/19 at 1:58 pm to Jjdoc
This is why they hate the 2nd amendment.
Posted on 11/19/19 at 1:59 pm to victoire sécurisé
quote:
“The President shouldn’t be using federal money to bargain for political favors that will help him win the election.”
This never happened.
Your analogy is a non-starter.
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:02 pm to Centinel
I kind of agree with her general sentiment (completely disregarding the current impeachment proceedings).
If you as a voter think a hypothetical president committed an impeachable offense, and they decide to "let the election decide" - you as a voter may be stuck choosing between this hypothetical president who committed this impeachable offense and some socialist shill or other radical candidate you completely disagree with.
If you as a voter think a hypothetical president committed an impeachable offense, and they decide to "let the election decide" - you as a voter may be stuck choosing between this hypothetical president who committed this impeachable offense and some socialist shill or other radical candidate you completely disagree with.
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:03 pm to victoire sécurisé
quote:
Dems: “The President shouldn’t be using federal money to bargain for political favors that will help him win the election.”
Also Dems: Investigating Trump based on false rumors that will help us win the election is totally cool.
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:06 pm to Jjdoc
All the prog shite stains use the same words.
Today it’s “dangerous.
Today it’s “dangerous.
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:07 pm to victoire sécurisé
quote:
public funds shouldn’t be used for personal or political gain.
yeah. No democrat ever used public funds for political gain. *cough*great society*cough*obamacare*cough* Hell you got Andrew Yang flashing $100 bills to buy votes.
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:08 pm to victoire sécurisé
quote:
I suggest you write your Rep & Senators in support of impeachment.
List those you think want your suggestions.
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:11 pm to victoire sécurisé
quote:
Dems: “The President shouldn’t be using federal money to bargain for political favors that will help him win the election.”
Repubs: “Since there's no evidence that Trump did it for political/personal gain, let’s just let the election speak for itself.”
FIFY
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:12 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Investigating Trump based on false rumors
Trump openly admitted to doing what he is accused of doing. You can argue that it’s perfectly fine. I would disagree, but at least that’s a defensible position.
To say that he didn’t use his office and congressionally appropriated money as a bargaining chip for a Biden investigation goes against all available testimony and evidence.
Trump said there’s nothing wrong with it.
Sondland, Vindeman, Taylor all testified that it happened. Mulvaney defended it.
It happened.
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:13 pm to victoire sécurisé
Lol he specifically admitted to doing it for political gain?
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:13 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
“The weak response to these hearings has been, ‘Let the election decide,’” she said Monday. “That dangerous position only adds to the urgency of our action
This is coming from the woman that is on record re: Obamacare: "We have to pass it, to see what's inside."
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:13 pm to victoire sécurisé
It's your lie, tell it like you want
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:18 pm to Taxing Authority
False analogy. Legally appropriated funds are used for political gain all the time. Both sides do it. Remember W’s stimulus checks?
It’s ethically wrong. But is it illegal? Nope.
Is signing off on defense funds without mentioning strings attached and then attaching strings (that will help slam a political opponent) illegal? I’d say yes.
I think most people who see the situation objectively would agree.
It’s ethically wrong. But is it illegal? Nope.
Is signing off on defense funds without mentioning strings attached and then attaching strings (that will help slam a political opponent) illegal? I’d say yes.
I think most people who see the situation objectively would agree.
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:19 pm to victoire sécurisé
quote:
To say that he didn’t use his office and congressionally appropriated money as a bargaining chip for a Biden investigation goes against all available testimony and evidence.
There is no evidence.
I don't give two shits about second and third hand hearsay. I expect factual evidence, of which there has been precisely none. The only factual evidence presented in this impeachment has had zero, I repeat zero, evidence of any of what you and the democrats are accusing.
This post was edited on 11/19/19 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:23 pm to Centinel
quote:
I expect factual evidence, of which there has been precisely none.
So by this logic, you would never accept that a crime took place unless there is video or written evidence? Keep that in mind. If it is produced, would you change your mind?
Is there any other evidence that would convince you that Trump is committing an impeachable offense?
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:25 pm to victoire sécurisé
quote:
If it is produced, would you change your mind?
Of course. The minute hard evidence comes out that Trump specifically stated to Zelensky that he won't get funding unless he does what Trump wants, then I'll be open to go forward with Impeachment.
quote:
Is there any other evidence that would convince you that Trump is committing an impeachable offense?
No. You don't impeach the sitting POTUS over hearsay, especially hearsay from obviously biased individuals.
Would you accept being tried for a serious crime over what someone overheard that someone overheard you did?
This post was edited on 11/19/19 at 2:26 pm
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:26 pm to victoire sécurisé
quote:
Trump said there’s nothing wrong with it.
Sondland, Vindeman, Taylor all testified that it happened. Mulvaney defended it.
Every witness has been asked DIRECTLY if a crime had been committed.
Each and every one stated no.
END of it.
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:29 pm to Jjdoc
She is like a capitalist who likes capitalism until she actually has to practice it
Posted on 11/19/19 at 2:32 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
END of it
If the constitution clearly said that a president cannot be impeached unless a criminal act has been committed, you’re correct. END of it. But...
quote:
See Harvard Law Review "The majority view is that a president can legally be impeached for 'intentional, evil deeds' that 'drastically subvert the Constitution and involve an unforgivable abuse of the presidency' — even if those deeds didn’t violate any criminal laws."
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News