Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers



Politics and General Debates Thread

RedCowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
8,216
Points
113


Schiff looks psychotic and here he is trying to coach a witness mid testimony.
Democrats have the latitude to say anything, ask anything, present anything and call any witness but republicans are completely hamstrung in this total farce that has produced zero evidence of bribery.



There's been nothing to prove bribery what so ever, everyone had to answer that they knew of no bribery, no crime.

All anyone has presented is opinion, and opinions about opinions but absolutely no proof of bribery.

It's pathetic to see a sad desperate Trump hater clinging to the hope that the twist of a word might suggest something, anything that could validate their hate, hopelessly searching for some hint of anything to reverse the soul crushing loss of 2016, but there's no proof of bribery there at all.

 
Last edited:



paul1598419

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
16,233
Points
113
The only thing that is coming out about the 2016 election is Roger Stone has now been convicted on all charges of lying to Congress about what he knew and when he knew it. That makes six Trump campaign and/or officeholders who have been convicted. The main thing that Stone lied about was in the Mueller report. A coordination with Wikileaks during the campaign that they have all lied about. He was in contact with Julian Asange about when a dump of illegally hacked DNC emails, which Russia got for them, would come out and exactly when more would be released. THIS IS FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN OUR ELECTIONS!

I always get a kick out of your Fox News stories and the way they are edited to remove unsympathetic questions, words, phrases or anything that makes Trump look bad. I noticed they had several of the questions asked of Yovanovitch about what she knew about Trump's illegal acts, but conveniently left out the question of if she knew of anyone trying to bribe Trump. This is a stupid question as anyone who has paid any attention to this knows it was Trump soliciting to bribe Zelensky to open and announce an investigation into Joe Biden, his top contender at that time to run against him in 2020. And that is all OC was trying to say in that Fox News edited version that you submitted.

Gordon Sondland will be testifying again on Wednesday. He lied in his last testimony and went back to change it later admitting there was an obsession with Trump about Joe Biden, but now further evidence has come out from David Holmes that Trump cared more about an investigation of the Bidens than he did about Ukraine's security. Everyone should watch the full, unedited testimony he brings forward. I'm betting he might take the 5th. That would not be good for him. People are turning on Trump left and right because of his wanton abuse of power in office and because of his reliance on Russia to help him get elected in 2016. It is a great $hit show and well worth watching. If you can't get these live,. you can see them at night as many news organizations are rebroadcasting them.
 

RedCowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
8,216
Points
113
I have seen enough of it, I think most people are tired of this crap because we all know politicians bend and twist everything to their advantage and everyone can see how unfair/unjust/unbalanced this has all been, people around Trump have been persecuted while Hillary has been given every bit of leniency and then some.

Hillary Clinton did everything required for a felony violation of Section 793f Title 18 of the federal penal code.

Hillary had lawful access to highly classified information and she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it in violation of her trust but charges were not brought against Clinton because there was not absolute and undeniable PROOF of Hillarys intent.

There is no proof of Trump committing bribery, Zeinsky said he was not pressured, did not know assistance was delayed and the assistance was given to Ukraine.

Someones opinion is NOT absolute and undeniable proof of intent, it's not proof of a high crime or of any crime, it's just someones opinion and people don't like the idea that a secret accuser can make a charge and you then must prove your innocence, that's not justice and you know dam well this is the most unfair impeachment process in the history of the Untied States, downright disgraceful and there will be a price for it.


How dare Trump seek the truth when the Obama admin. is dirty, Trump did nothing wrong in the 1st place and it dam sure wasn't bribery, now Biden on the other hand.

 
Last edited:

paul1598419

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
16,233
Points
113
That's hilarious. I haven't heard anyone reference Hillary Clinton, except Trump in a long time. Trump''s own kids, who only got security clearances because Trump over ruled the security people who vet these people used servers that were not classified and did so from the white house. BTW, they are also in charge of Trump's holdings at the same time. No wonder he is fighting tooth and nail to keep his taxes out of the hands of other government officials who investigate these things. Having lost every court case up the final court of appeals, his tax service has said they will only keep these secret IF the SCOTUS will expedite a hearing on the matter. Don't expect him to win there either.

Yes, Joe Biden was the point man on Ukrainian corruption, but his getting Shokin fired was in the interest of the Ukrainian people. He was not investigating any of the higher ups who were responsible for the corruption in Ukraine and that includes Burisma. I think Hunter Biden sitting on the board of that company did give the impression of a possible conflict of interest, but he was an adult and in the end did nothing illegal. He was NEVER the target of any investigations in Ukraine. The whole Ukrainian 2016 election conspiracy theory was started by the Russian military as a way to offset the damning evidence in the Mueller report. BTW, that conspiracy theory was in the Mueller report.

And your talking points that there has been no evidence that Trump did this as a bribe to get Zelensky to announce an investigation into the Bidens doesn't stand up to scrutiny after all the people who have testified before the House. You cherry pick parts that show republicans trying to defend Trump, but it is falling flat against the overwhelming evidence that he did exactly that. There will be three people testifying in public who were on the call on July 25th. Their testimony before has been released as the House has gone through and redacted names of people and events that are classified.

I'm looking forward to Sondland's testimony as he was at the heart of this whole thing and he has already been proven to have lied about Trump's knowledge about these events. He has already amended his earlier testimony to include this. Now, we know he was on the phone with Trump on 7/26 with at least three witnesses who heard Trump ask about the Biden investigation. When asked, Sondland said, "Trump doesn't give a shit about Ukraine, he is only interested in the Bidens." There is no way to keep Trump's intent out of this as there were too many people who had first hand knowledge about it. Do watch his full testimony on Wednesday. It will be at the very least a fascinating event to see.
 

RedCowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
8,216
Points
113
There is no impeachable offence.
There is no proof of bribery.

 

paul1598419

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
16,233
Points
113
Yes, Mark Levin speaking on Fox News is the be all and end all to this whole affair of Trump's coercing Zelensky into announcing an investigation into the Bidens, a theory his staff had been telling him was nonsense and that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 election, despite all the evidence in the Mueller report.
Thanks for clearing that up. :ROFLMAO:
 

Hap

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 5, 2013
Messages
8,568
Points
113
One thing I've had in the back of my head is the following idea.

We as the people of the US, essentially have the power to elect a president. Why don't we also have the power to remove a president if there is enough dislike to warrant his removal. Whether it be Trump or Obama, I believe the threat of potential removal from the public may pressure them to focus more on the country.

Sorry to change topic :)

-Alex
 

RedCowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
8,216
Points
113
If Obama had been treated the way Trump has been treated during this whole ridiculous process by Adam Schiff and company you liberals would be screaming bloody murder and you know it.

@ Hap : It's called an election. :) Changing Presidents is no small deal, once every 4 years is how we work.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Hap

RedCowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
8,216
Points
113
Sorry. :)

-Alex
Don't be sorry Hap, you have every right to voice your views here like anyone else and I'm not being rude, just saying the election is how we do it and changing Presidents sooner than 4 years would pose problems.

But there is impeachment for extreme cases although no President have ever actually been removed that way and it's not meant for removing a President for personality reasons but High Crimes and there is a very high bar for the burden of proof, what Trump did in his phone call with recently elected Ukrainian President Zelensky is really just every day business in reality and others have said that, it's not fair to change rules and deny Trump equal protection like Bill Clinton had during his impeachment, we don't want to treat someone unfairly regardless of the reason because someone else later on may feel totally differently that you and you don't want a different President to be treated unfairly for what you may feel is the wrong reason, everyone is innocent until proven guilty and everyone has the same rights, we should all be VERY concerned about the way Adam Schiff is abusing Trumps basic right to equal protection.

Remember how OJ Simpson was found not guilty because of planted evidence ?
Schiff is attempting to plant evidence in the court of public opinion, they know the senate will throw out any impeachment handed down from the house based on this unscrupulous miscarriage of justice, but they hope to sully Trump in the court of public opinion, however the way Schiff has gone about it will not sit well with people and has done more damage than anything else.


 
Last edited:

paul1598419

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
16,233
Points
113
The bar for impeachment is bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors. There is actually enough evidence in the transcript of the phone call to get there, but because the public has such a large roll in this it becomes necessary to show overwhelming evidence. Every day that goes by there in brand new evidence of Trump's abuse of his office for personal gain and next week it will likely get much worse. In the end, the American people will have to decide if this kind of abuse is worth removing Trump from office or will it now be the new norm for our country? If it is to become the new norm, we will not be a democracy any longer. We will have an authoritarian government and any president can abuse his office for whatever reason he feels like doing. Those are the stakes.

And yes, there are Trump supporters who would never vote to remove him no matter what he does because he is their crook. Contrast that with 1974 when both republicans a democrats joined together to the point that Nixon stepped down from office rather than being forced from office by the large majority that favored it. It is the polarization we have now. It has been going this way for over twenty years. I hope that we can take a step back and recover from this before we tear the country apart.
 
Last edited:

Encap

Well-known member
Joined
May 14, 2011
Messages
5,289
Points
113
One thing I've had in the back of my head is the following idea.

We as the people of the US, essentially have the power to elect a president. Why don't we also have the power to remove a president if there is enough dislike to warrant his removal. Whether it be Trump or Obama, I believe the threat of potential removal from the public may pressure them to focus more on the country.

Sorry to change topic :)

-Alex
There is no provision in the US Constitution for a recall vote to remove a President of the USA once elected---same for Congressmen.
Voting for someone different next time is about it in USA.
Can you imagine the chaos that would ensue if there were dozens of recall elections and changing faces. opinions, views, and jobs to do--same elected position? Is bad enough now that they can't get hardly anything done.
Imagine how it would be if electing someone didn't have any time frame---what would get done if anything?

I think being happy that you don't personally get all the government you pay for is about as good as it gets. That you at least you have a chance at/possibility of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness as you define/see that, so choose for the most part, as long as your activities don't outright harm anybody else in general. No guarantees of course but a chance is better than no chance of running your own show however you want to.

"Several states proposed adopting a recall for US senators in the years immediately following the adoption of the Constitution. However, it did not pass.
Several State Constitutions do have recall election provisions --- In 2011, there were at least 150 recall elections in the United States. Of these, 75 officials were recalled, and nine officials resigned under threat of recall. Recalls were held in 17 states in 73 different jurisdictions."
See for more detailed lists and explanations : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recall_election
 
Last edited:

Encap

Well-known member
Joined
May 14, 2011
Messages
5,289
Points
113
Or you guys can do what we are doing in the UK, vote to leave something, mess it up and call for an early election. Just an idea. jk
Over here/in USA the elected officials/representatives typically mess everything up as best they can and the registered voters just wait for the next election to vote for whomever, whether more of same or someone different-- no early elections.

A good mess being a terrible thing to waste. lol
 
Last edited:

Encap

Well-known member
Joined
May 14, 2011
Messages
5,289
Points
113
Sometimes you just have to take a step back and see the funny side to life. lol
Exactly lol

Actually --"Did Not Vote" won by a landslide in the 2016 Presidential election not Trump or Clinton.
As a percentage of eligible voters, Clinton received 28.43% (65,845,063) of all votes compared to Trump’s 27.20% (62,980,160) and Did Not Vote’s 44.37% (102,731,399 . LOL

As it is---many people don't even bother to vote because to them it makes no difference at all who is elected or not -government is government--matters little if at all " who is in power" to them.
All of the US government are people who " We the people.." hire to do government functions work. Essentially hired hands on the ranch by, for, and belonging to the people of the USA. USA is still a People capital P with a government, small g, that is the principal strength of the USA.

Fortunately, for the USA, it Is not the other way around, the way the left wants it to become and hopefully never will be a Government , capital G, with a people, small p.
Government becoming the wealthy life and living overlords of all--the wealthy and all powerful parents most nobody ever had dictating what can be to an ever growing dependent, enfeebled, spiritless, created by government authority, feckless population unable to be responsible for or fend for/help themselves which is not what the USA was founded upon nor built by.
Foreign to USA is an all seeing, all knowing, all powerful government determining on what terms and conditions. everyone, the people/population in general will be allowed to live, think, and say. Is the opposite of what and why the USA was established to begin with--not part of USA blood, heritage, operational, nor organizational principals.

"In the 2016 election:
As a percentage of eligible voters, Clinton received 28.43% (65,845,063) of all votes compared to Trump’s 27.20% (62,980,160) and Did Not Vote’s 44.37% (102,731,399 .
Total voter turnout was estimated to be 55.3% of the voting age population and 59.0% of the voting eligible population .
Neither Candidate even won a majority of votes cast, Clinton got 48.0% vs Trump’s 45.9%
As a percentage of the entire US population (including those too young or other ineligible to vote) Clinton got votes from 20.30% of the population and Trump got votes from 19.41% of people "
From: https://brilliantmaps.com/did-not-vote/

"Tens of millions of registered voters did not cast a ballot in the 2016 presidential election, and the share who cited a “dislike of the candidates or campaign issues” as their main reason for not participating reached a new high of 25%, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of new Census Bureau data"
"While a dislike of the candidates or issues was the most frequently cited reason for not voting, other top reasons included a lack of interest or a feeling that their vote wouldn’t make a difference (15%), being too busy or having a conflicting schedule (14%), having an illness or disability (12%) and being out of town or away from home (8%). Another 11% gave other reasons. "
See: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/01/dislike-of-candidates-or-campaign-issues-was-most-common-reason-for-not-voting-in-2016/
 
Last edited:




Top