|
Replies: 18
| visibility 1
|
Legend [15748]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17370
Joined: 2/1/99
|
|
|
|
 |
Heisman Winner [111519]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73738
Joined: 9/10/03
|
I am going to wait and see what
May 20, 2019, 10:59 PM
|
|
Sarah Huckabee Sanders has to say before I draw any conclusions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93658]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95409
Joined: 12/25/09
|
She's all in with impeachment.***
May 20, 2019, 11:08 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Re: I am going to wait and see what
May 21, 2019, 6:52 AM
[ in reply to I am going to wait and see what ] |
|
Definitely. She doesn't lie. I will go with her word or with someone with strong convictions and a strong spine like Ted Cruz. I will follow that up with Hannity breaking it all down and then come to a consensus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17773]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16662
Joined: 9/1/12
|
Re: I am going to wait and see what
May 21, 2019, 6:15 PM
|
|
This gave me a good chuckle. Wish I could give more than one TU, but no scok.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42138]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38225
Joined: 11/30/98
|
You know what I bet she can't wait for?
May 21, 2019, 7:22 AM
[ in reply to I am going to wait and see what ] |
|
Going back to the private sector where she can continue living under the bridge and harassing the Billy Goats Gruff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15492]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18413
Joined: 12/10/14
|
Re: I am going to wait and see what
May 21, 2019, 1:41 PM
[ in reply to I am going to wait and see what ] |
|
Most of the time, facts aint all their cracked up to be.
Actually, when I hear some facts, I then tune into Hannity to find out what I'm supposed to think about 'em.
After that, if Laura confirms what Sean says, well hail, I put on my marchin boots an I head on up to Charlottesville!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93658]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95409
Joined: 12/25/09
|
CT88 Supports impeachment.
May 20, 2019, 11:05 PM
|
|
Actually, I believe Trump supports impeachment too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17773]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16662
Joined: 9/1/12
|
Amash Support’s impeachment? Yes. Yes he supports impeachment.***
May 21, 2019, 6:29 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Re: Amash Support’s impeachment?
May 21, 2019, 6:46 AM
|
|
He and the rest of the House will have to come to a conclusion on this. Perhaps they will have a vote, if enough of them feel a vote is warranted. That is their job in this situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
Not surprising
May 21, 2019, 12:01 PM
|
|
Unfortunately, this will bring him all the wrong kinds of respect from the media, who I don't think really care much about his reasoning. They would never cover a Democrat who "has strayed far outside his" partisan herd as positively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15492]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18413
Joined: 12/10/14
|
Re: Not surprising
May 21, 2019, 1:48 PM
|
|
Unfortunately, this will bring him all the wrong kinds of respect from the media, who I don't think really care much about his reasoning. They would never cover a Democrat who "has strayed far outside his" partisan herd as positively.
I agree with your reasoning Cam, and as an example of your point look at Tulsi Gabbard.
She threatens the Democratic machine worse than any candidate and they almost never cover her.
I dislike biased media on the left or right. I grew up with Chet Huntley and David Brinkley, Harry Reasoner and Walter Cronkite. The only time they offered 'opinion' there was a bar across the bottom that said "Editorial Opinion".
Now it's mostly all opinion. Just give us the facts ma'am, and we'll decide how to think about them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [60036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22497
Joined: 5/24/17
|
Re: Not surprising
May 21, 2019, 1:52 PM
|
|
I think Bret Baier is one of the best, if not the best today. He holds Trump to the fire and many other Republicans. Yeah, its on Fox and I am sure he is a Republican, but the show is actually great and they have a lot of respectful differing of opinion and not just a bunch of people yelling at each other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [60036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22497
Joined: 5/24/17
|
Re: Amash Support’s impeachment?
May 21, 2019, 1:50 PM
|
|
Political suicide.
In 10 years people are going to look back and realize how silly this all has become and how great the economy, unemployment and overall sense of consumer confidence is/was and realize that this all was a huge waste of time and money, which could have been used to fix infratructure, pay off debt and keep the economy chugging.
This is all so ridiculous. If you all are right, he is out of office in 18 months so why risk political suicide and why not just go after the middle of America and gain back control?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15492]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18413
Joined: 12/10/14
|
Re: Amash Support’s impeachment?
May 21, 2019, 2:47 PM
|
|
I agree that Brett Baer plays it, for the most part, pretty straight. However, as you said, it IS Fox News and he IS a Republican. I think he tries to be a straight journalist in a very tough environment much like Chris Wallace.
You say this has all become ridiculous, pointing out the economy and jobs. You are correct, the economy matters, but is it the only thing that matters? Bill Clinton, rightly so, was impeached for having an affair and lying about it. His character mattered. It was a horrible representation of what is expected of the President and it brought shame on the most hallowed office in American tradition.
So does Trump's character matter? Well, apparently not to most Trump supporters. This is the part that so infuriates those who, at least believe, his character matters just as much as any other President in history. Are there other Presidents who had character issues like Clinton? Absolutely, Eisenhower and JFK to name a couple. The difference is that no one knew about it in those days. The Press covered it up for them We were a completely male dominated culture back then and women were seen as 'less than' men. We are, for better or worse, a different culture now.
Given all of that, I would at least ask you to read Amash's tweets and see if his argument is reasonable. I think, personally, that many Trump supporters feel attacked when people attack Trump. I think that is fairly common in most societies.
Just read Amash's posts and see if he is way out in left field or is he making a rational argument. I also agree, that in this climate, he is likely committing political suicide.
At any rate, I'd like to know your thoughts.
First Post
Justin Amash
?
Verified account
Here are my principal conclusions:
1. Attorney General Barr has deliberately misrepresented Mueller’s report.
2. President Trump has engaged in impeachable conduct.
3. Partisanship has eroded our system of checks and balances.
4. Few members of Congress have read the report.
12:30 PM - 18 May 2019
@justinamash
May 18
More
I offer these conclusions only after having read Mueller’s redacted report carefully and completely, having read or watched pertinent statements and testimony, and having discussed this matter with my staff, who thoroughly reviewed materials and provided me with further analysis.
@justinamash
May 18
More
In comparing Barr’s principal conclusions, congressional testimony, and other statements to Mueller’s report, it is clear that Barr intended to mislead the public about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s analysis and findings.
@justinamash
May 18
More
Barr’s misrepresentations are significant but often subtle, frequently taking the form of sleight-of-hand qualifications or logical fallacies, which he hopes people will not notice.
@justinamash
May 18
More
Under our Constitution, the president “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” While “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is not defined, the context implies conduct that violates the public trust.
@justinamash
May 18
More
Contrary to Barr’s portrayal, Mueller’s report reveals that President Trump engaged in specific actions and a pattern of behavior that meet the threshold for impeachment.
@justinamash
May 18
More
In fact, Mueller’s report identifies multiple examples of conduct satisfying all the elements of obstruction of justice, and undoubtedly any person who is not the president of the United States would be indicted based on such evidence.
@justinamash
May 18
More
Impeachment, which is a special form of indictment, does not even require probable cause that a crime (e.g., obstruction of justice) has been committed; it simply requires a finding that an official has engaged in careless, abusive, corrupt, or otherwise dishonorable conduct.
@justinamash
May 18
More
While impeachment should be undertaken only in extraordinary circumstances, the risk we face in an environment of extreme partisanship is not that Congress will employ it as a remedy too often but rather that Congress will employ it so rarely that it cannot deter misconduct.
@justinamash
May 18
More
Our system of checks and balances relies on each branch’s jealously guarding its powers and upholding its duties under our Constitution. When loyalty to a political party or to an individual trumps loyalty to the Constitution, the Rule of Law—the foundation of liberty—crumbles.
@justinamash
May 18
More
We’ve witnessed members of Congress from both parties shift their views 180 degrees—on the importance of character, on the principles of obstruction of justice—depending on whether they’re discussing Bill Clinton or Donald Trump.
@justinamash
May 18
More
Few members of Congress even read Mueller’s report; their minds were made up based on partisan affiliation—and it showed, with representatives and senators from both parties issuing definitive statements on the 448-page report’s conclusions within just hours of its release.
@justinamash
May 18
More
America’s institutions depend on officials to uphold both the rules and spirit of our constitutional system even when to do so is personally inconvenient or yields a politically unfavorable outcome. Our Constitution is brilliant and awesome; it deserves a government to match it.
Second Post:
@justinamash
May 20
More
People who say there were no underlying crimes and therefore the president could not have intended to illegally obstruct the investigation—and therefore cannot be impeached—are resting their argument on several falsehoods:
@justinamash
May 20
More
1. They say there were no underlying crimes.
@justinamash
May 20
More
In fact, there were many crimes revealed by the investigation, some of which were charged, and some of which were not but are nonetheless described in Mueller’s report.
@justinamash
May 20
More
2. They say obstruction of justice requires an underlying crime.
@justinamash
May 20
More
In fact, obstruction of justice does not require the prosecution of an underlying crime, and there is a logical reason for that. Prosecutors might not charge a crime precisely *because* obstruction of justice denied them timely access to evidence that could lead to a prosecution.
@justinamash
May 20
More
If an underlying crime were required, then prosecutors could charge obstruction of justice only if it were unsuccessful in completely obstructing the investigation. This would make no sense.
@justinamash
May 20
More
3. They imply the president should be permitted to use any means to end what he claims to be a frivolous investigation, no matter how unreasonable his claim.
@justinamash
May 20
More
In fact, the president could not have known whether every single person Mueller investigated did or did not commit any crimes.
@justinamash
May 20
More
4. They imply “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” requires charges of a statutory crime or misdemeanor.
@justinamash
More
In fact, “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is not defined in the Constitution and does not require corresponding statutory charges. The context implies conduct that violates the public trust—and that view is echoed by the Framers of the Constitution and early American scholars.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6101]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 10117
Joined: 11/1/11
|
Allow me to stamp the end of your discussion
May 21, 2019, 5:00 PM
|
|
Amash is the co-owner of Dynamic Source International, a Chinese company that supplies Michigan Industrial Tools. If you look closely, his emotional tirade coincides nicely with Trumps imposition of a 25% tariff on $300 billski of Chinese imports. This Amush-for-brains is feeling some pain? Just another typical politician protecting his own self interests instead of working for the people who elected him. But don’t feel bad, you’re not the only liberal here who’s divorced from reality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15748]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17370
Joined: 2/1/99
|
LOL! What just happened!?! :-D***
May 21, 2019, 6:07 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15492]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18413
Joined: 12/10/14
|
Re: Allow me to stamp the end of your discussion
May 21, 2019, 11:50 PM
[ in reply to Allow me to stamp the end of your discussion ] |
|
Amash is the co-owner of Dynamic Source International, a Chinese company that supplies Michigan Industrial Tools. If you look closely, his emotional tirade coincides nicely with Trumps imposition of a 25% tariff on $300 billski of Chinese imports. This Amush-for-brains is feeling some pain? Just another typical politician protecting his own self interests instead of working for the people who elected him. But don’t feel bad, you’re not the only liberal here who’s divorced from reality.
Amash Imports was founded by his father in 1956. They import some items from China. Trump also imports from China as does his daughter Ivanka.
He is not a co-owner of a Chinese company, period. But again, you'll believe anything that's fed to you by Trump or Trump supporting right-wing websites.
You spread the same, tired, right wing disinformation that is specifically designed to cast doubt on someone's credibility. How do you fall for that so easily and so frequently?
You got it bad son, you are lost.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [50635]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43019
Joined: 12/3/98
|
what do the baptist think***
May 21, 2019, 5:25 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 18
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
