December 19, 2019
Level of Impeachment?
Timothy Birdnow
In a Facebook argument about impeachment one commenter asked:
In a Facebook argument about impeachment one commenter asked:
- Just out of curiosity, do you feel that the actions Trump is accused of do not reach the level of impeachable or do you feel that insufficient evidence has been presented to show that he did what he’s been accused of?
No. Read the transcripts; Mr. Trump asked that Ukraine do US a favr, not
himself personally. Trump wanted Biden investigated, that is true, but
Biden is on tape speaking to the Council on Foreign Relations bragging
about getting the prosecutor who was investigating his son fired by
threatening to withhold aid. It was Joe Biden who did what they are
accusing Trump of doing. Trump did NOT withhold aid and there was no
investigation opened. The Ukrainian President has stated publicly and
repeatedly that there was no pressure put on him. This is just a temper
tantrum by the Democrats and the Media because Trump won the election
and wouldn't go away. As far back as 2017 there were articles of
impeachment filed against Trump (by Al Green, for one). It is clear
they simply wanted to impeach the man. Perhaps you remember they were
doxxing Electors prior to the Electoral College vote to force some of
them to flip to Hillary Clinton. This has been about a refusal to
accept the will of the People all along.
Oh, and the evidence has been quite insufficient, consisting of heresay evidence and out of context excerpts. We had that ridiculous claim that Trump was overheard on the other line on the phone, for instance; Andrew Cuomo tried to repeat THAT experiment on live television and was humiliated when nobody could hear anything. You had a bunch of "well, I assumed" and other would have could have should have comments. You had a lot of people who were involved with the CIA, which is where this thing originated (Samantha Powers warned Trump "not a good idea to piss off John Brennan" and of course Trump fired Brennan. and tried to revoke his security clearance.) And of course James Comey was at the epicenter of the Hillary Clinton paid Steele Dossier,, which was a false document intended to destroy Donald Trump and used to justify the FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. So the CIA and FBI both had a hand in what is happening to Trump, and a lot of the witnesses had close ties to both. No, the impeachment evidence is not credible in the least
Oh, and the evidence has been quite insufficient, consisting of heresay evidence and out of context excerpts. We had that ridiculous claim that Trump was overheard on the other line on the phone, for instance; Andrew Cuomo tried to repeat THAT experiment on live television and was humiliated when nobody could hear anything. You had a bunch of "well, I assumed" and other would have could have should have comments. You had a lot of people who were involved with the CIA, which is where this thing originated (Samantha Powers warned Trump "not a good idea to piss off John Brennan" and of course Trump fired Brennan. and tried to revoke his security clearance.) And of course James Comey was at the epicenter of the Hillary Clinton paid Steele Dossier,, which was a false document intended to destroy Donald Trump and used to justify the FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. So the CIA and FBI both had a hand in what is happening to Trump, and a lot of the witnesses had close ties to both. No, the impeachment evidence is not credible in the least
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:52 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 424 words, total size 3 kb.
1
News media repeatedly state that Ukraine is "at war with Russia" as if it were a fact equivalent to "the sun rises in the east." It is actually utter nonsense. I recall one media nuthead talking to a Russian official who said, "Look, if we had invaded Ukriane you would not have to be asking if we did it." Did anyone have to ask if we invaded Iraq? If Ukraine was at war with Russia it would lose that war in about two days.
Likewise, they keep stating that he "asked Ukraine to investigate a political rival." Also nonsense. Double nonsense in fact. Biden is not a political rival, and will not become one unless he wins the Democratic nomination. In any case, he asked Ukriane to investigate the 2016 US election, and to investigate its own internal corruption. He did not ask Ukraine to investigate Biden.
Likewise, they keep stating that he "asked Ukraine to investigate a political rival." Also nonsense. Double nonsense in fact. Biden is not a political rival, and will not become one unless he wins the Democratic nomination. In any case, he asked Ukriane to investigate the 2016 US election, and to investigate its own internal corruption. He did not ask Ukraine to investigate Biden.
Posted by: Bill H at December 19, 2019 09:33 AM (vMiSr)
2
Right on all points, Bill! Ukraine and Russia are not at war. We have a mutual defense pact with Ukraine, but it is not activated. And Obama never activated it when the Russians seized the Crimean, so what does it matter if the two sides ARE at war?
And you are absolutely correct; Biden is not a political opponent until he wins the nomination. Trump was asking for a corruption investigation, nothing more.
And you are absolutely correct; Biden is not a political opponent until he wins the nomination. Trump was asking for a corruption investigation, nothing more.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at December 19, 2019 11:08 AM (BMegR)
3
It is rather very good, nevertheless glance at the data with this handle. Pest Control Oviedo
Posted by: Jackie Warren at May 30, 2023 09:38 AM (paDk9)
22kb generated in CPU 0.0462, elapsed 0.9562 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.9492 seconds, 162 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
37 queries taking 0.9492 seconds, 162 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
