Trump Impeachment Inquiry

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Should President Trump Be Impeached?

  • Yes

    Votes: 60 59.4%
  • No

    Votes: 18 17.8%
  • Undecided and awaiting evidence before making a decision

    Votes: 5 5.0%
  • Hillary Did it

    Votes: 9 8.9%
  • It Should be Left to the Election

    Votes: 6 5.9%
  • Get over it!

    Votes: 2 2.0%
  • Rudy Giuliani Did it

    Votes: 1 1.0%

  • Total voters
    101

FiveThous

His name was Sashi Brown
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
6,806
Reaction score
4,532
Points
113
Come on Civil War 2.
The US need doesn't realized it yet, but they need the DNC to screw over Bernie AGAIN. This would be the best hope for smaller parties and get rid of the antiquated two party system by fracturing the Obama Republicans and the far left progressives.
 

Out of the Rafters at the Q

Out of the Rafters
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
5,855
Reaction score
8,118
Points
113
The US need doesn't realized it yet, but they need the DNC to screw over Bernie AGAIN. This would be the best hope for smaller parties and get rid of the antiquated two party system by fracturing the Obama Republicans and the far left progressives.
We won't get rid of the two party system until we overhaul our elections.

 

-Akronite-

All-Star
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
8,282
Reaction score
7,188
Points
113
The US need doesn't realized it yet, but they need the DNC to screw over Bernie AGAIN. This would be the best hope for smaller parties and get rid of the antiquated two party system by fracturing the Obama Republicans and the far left progressives.
That seems dangerous, given who's in office. Can we break the two-party system with a fractured Republican Party first? :chuckle:

In all seriousness, in a hypothetical where Bernie leads on the first ballot and the super delegates give the nom to someone else (especially Bloomberg), the Democratic Party will absolutely be torn to shreds before losing the election.
 

Blink

Rookie
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
74
Reaction score
85
Points
18
That seems dangerous, given who's in office. Can we break the two-party system with a fractured Republican Party first? :chuckle:

In all seriousness, in a hypothetical where Bernie leads on the first ballot and the super delegates give the nom to someone else (especially Bloomberg), the Democratic Party will absolutely be torn to shreds before losing the election.
I don't think it matters too much which party fractures first. There is a struggle in both parties between the center and left/right. The only thing that keeps it together is the knowledge that breaking up would hand the election to the opposition.

I think the breakup of either party would end up with the center of both parties coalescing. Maybe not immediately, but within a few election cycles. The "winning" party would head toward their extreme, and alienate their center in the process.
 

JDailey23

Sixth Man
Joined
Feb 21, 2008
Messages
2,512
Reaction score
1,628
Points
113
Imagine that. The stuff Trump denied was actually true. Except now, he has no repercussions.

Look, another misleading headline. He sent his personal lawyer to Ukraine with no specific directive. He went to look into corruption, so happened to find it in Biden.
The headline makes it seems like he sent him specifically to investigate the Biden’s, which trump still denies.

Asked in November if he directed Giuliani to "do anything" in Ukraine, Trump said, "No, I didn't direct him," but went on to call Giuliani a "great corruption fighter." Giuliani says he's exposing legitimate corruption in Ukraine, even though his claims about former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden have been widely debunked. If it’s not true, then why is it a big deal?
 

-Akronite-

All-Star
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
8,282
Reaction score
7,188
Points
113
Look, another misleading headline. He sent his personal lawyer to Ukraine with no specific directive. He went to look into corruption, so happened to find it in Biden.
The headline makes it seems like he sent him specifically to investigate the Biden’s, which trump still denies.
Um, but we know explicitly why Rudy was going to Ukraine, he yelled about it on TV before and after he did it. It was to go after Biden stuff because it would benefit his client, the president. So I see your argument about the headline being misleading, but if we're being honest we already know that Trump worked with Rudy and explicitly asked others in our government and foreign governments to work with Rudy on Burisma/Crowdstrike.

Asked in November if he directed Giuliani to "do anything" in Ukraine, Trump said, "No, I didn't direct him," but went on to call Giuliani a "great corruption fighter." Giuliani says he's exposing legitimate corruption in Ukraine, even though his claims about former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden have been widely debunked. If it’s not true, then why is it a big deal?
Because Trump was extorting a foreign government, abusing his office, in order to get announcements for investigations. This was so that there would be something publicly damaging to Biden and, based on evidence from impeachment, not about actually doing the investigations, let alone caring about corruption in general.
 

Obscured By Clouds

Milk, milk, lemonaide.........
Joined
Nov 15, 2019
Messages
201
Reaction score
234
Points
43
Look, another misleading headline. He sent his personal lawyer to Ukraine with no specific directive. He went to look into corruption, so happened to find it in Biden.
The headline makes it seems like he sent him specifically to investigate the Biden’s, which trump still denies.

Asked in November if he directed Giuliani to "do anything" in Ukraine, Trump said, "No, I didn't direct him," but went on to call Giuliani a "great corruption fighter." Giuliani says he's exposing legitimate corruption in Ukraine, even though his claims about former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden have been widely debunked. If it’s not true, then why is it a big deal?
How does it not being true somehow make it ok?
 

Radio

Top