pro iran

[Barbecueboy]

Lurker

Was and has been my point from day one.......the dems and their followers talk democracy and what the framers intended.

Yet when it happens( like the 2016 elections )and it doesn't quite go their way they revert to their inner whiney beyotch mode and complain about how it's flawed and should be changed some way to fit their hand out needs better.

Maybe the dems need a union to represent them to get those things done?

[Barbecueboy]

One has to know when it feels like your spinning your wheels it's time to do something different.

Perhaps you could pass on this information to lord pelosi?

She has been axel deep for almost 3 years now.

[Barbecueboy]

You keep thinking I'm beholding the Democrtas but, I'm not that's why I don't care what they want. If they are asking for witnesses then they better offer up Hunter, Joe or anyone else the Trump team wants to testify.

So your saying when they don't and Won't you'll start whining about that too??

I'll hold my breath.

[kidrock]

So your saying when they don't and Won't you'll start whining about that too??

I'll hold my breath.

I said I don't care what they think. I never said what they would do.

[Barbecueboy]

Cleopatra......queen of denial...^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[kidrock]

Cleopatra......queen of denial...^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

So far you haven't come up with a sentence where I said me or I was in misery so, there's that.

[ZERO25]

So far you haven't come up with a sentence where I said me or I was in misery so, there's that.

Only those 12,458 posts minus the ones from Nov. 8, 2016!

[Barbecueboy]

So far you haven't come up with a sentence where I said me or I was in misery so, there's that.

So if you said , dam if BBQ would just get in line and follow along like all good dems he wouldn't make this place so miserable......that wouldn't mean that you are sharing the misery in here while I'm posting?

This ought to be good y'all.....

[Stefan2k4]

Let the people decide who is lying and who isn't.

That's called an "Election". We had one in 2016. We'll have another in Nov 2020. That's not what "impeachment" is. Impeachment is the antithesis of that. It's not about letting the people decide. It's about people like Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff deciding for them and undoing an election. If you're in favor of democracy and allowing the people to decide, you should be opposed to this whole sham of a process, because the whole basis for it is that the people decided wrong in 2016 and they need lord Nancy and lord schiff to set them straight.

The people who would really need to testify would be the 63 million voters who elected Donald Trump their president. They are the ones who gave him his power and who he will ultimately have to answer to. Therefore, who better to ask, if he abused his power by questioning Hunter Biden's boondoggle. I strongly suspect they would say no. The way to get their testimony is through the ballot box, not a senate trial. This whole process is an abuse of power by the democrats in congress.

[lurker]

That's called an "Election". We had one in 2016. We'll have another in Nov 2020. That's not what "impeachment" is. Impeachment is the antithesis of that. It's not about letting the people decide. It's about people like Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff deciding for them and undoing an election. If you're in favor of democracy and allowing the people to decide, you should be opposed to this whole sham of a process, because the whole basis for it is that the people decided wrong in 2016 and they need lord Nancy and lord schiff to set them straight.

Well stated. While others will chime in and boldly disagree --- what you stated is the crux of the impeachment deception.

Therefore, who better to ask, if he abused his power by questioning Hunter Biden's boondoggle. I strongly suspect they would say no.

Correct. And I have said to others, I think Trump was within his power to ask any and all inquisitive questions regarding Hunter Biden, within the given framework of corruption in Ukraine.

[lurker]

After re-reading -

That's good to hear your not afraid of witnesses. Having witnesses at the trial is something a lot of people are saying so, Pelosi wouldn't be alone if she did say it.

Just so I am super clear on this, as I want a FAIR impeachment process; I want the Republicans in the Senate to use the same rules mindset given that the Democrats used in the House. Fair is fair. All Democrats important points of order to be gaveled down or such and so on. Give the Democrats NOTHING they want, and ONLY Republican witnesses.

So bring on the whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, and Hunter Biden. Hopefully pulling off the veil of ALL Democrats, thus showing the American public what a sham and the original and only INTENT the impeachment process, really is/was. That being, get Trump out of office because they don’t like him and they didn’t like the outcome of the 2016 election, and disqualify Trump in 2020.

[kidrock]

Lurker

Just so I am super clear on this, as I want a FAIR impeachment process; I want the Republicans in the Senate to use the same rules mindset given that the Democrats used in the House. Fair is fair. All Democrats important points of order to be gaveled down or such and so on. Give the Democrats NOTHING they want, and ONLY Republican witnesses.

So bring on the whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, and Hunter Biden. Hopefully pulling off the veil of ALL Democrats, thus showing the American public what a sham and the original and only INTENT the impeachment process, really is/was. That being, get Trump out of office because they don’t like him and they didn’t like the outcome of the 2016 election, and disqualify Trump in 2020.

Sure that would be within their right to do so, and let the American people judge them on how they handled the trial. The ball is in their court and they can run the game how they want to run it. Republicans called the house hearings a sham and I guess the Dems will then be able to say what a sham the Senate trial was.

[kidrock]

That's called an "Election". We had one in 2016. We'll have another in Nov 2020. That's not what "impeachment" is. Impeachment is the antithesis of that. It's not about letting the people decide. It's about people like Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff deciding for them and undoing an election. If you're in favor of democracy and allowing the people to decide, you should be opposed to this whole sham of a process, because the whole basis for it is that the people decided wrong in 2016 and they need lord Nancy and lord schiff to set them straight.

The people who would really need to testify would be the 63 million voters who elected Donald Trump their president. They are the ones who gave him his power and who he will ultimately have to answer to. Therefore, who better to ask, if he abused his power by questioning Hunter Biden's boondoggle. I strongly suspect they would say no. The way to get their testimony is through the ballot box, not a senate trial. This whole process is an abuse of power by the democrats in congress.

That's where you and I differ because I don't as well as many others don't see it as a sham and you do.

I think we all know how this is going to turn out. There will be an acquittal for Trump. He has some good lawyers on his side and I'm sure they will make a good compelling argument and say it doesn't rise to the level of impeachment.

[ss12]

That's called an "Election". We had one in 2016. We'll have another in Nov 2020. That's not what "impeachment" is. Impeachment is the antithesis of that. It's not about letting the people decide. It's about people like Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff deciding for them and undoing an election. If you're in favor of democracy and allowing the people to decide, you should be opposed to this whole sham of a process, because the whole basis for it is that the people decided wrong in 2016 and they need lord Nancy and lord schiff to set them straight.

The people who would really need to testify would be the 63 million voters who elected Donald Trump their president. They are the ones who gave him his power and who he will ultimately have to answer to. Therefore, who better to ask, if he abused his power by questioning Hunter Biden's boondoggle. I strongly suspect they would say no. The way to get their testimony is through the ballot box, not a senate trial. This whole process is an abuse of power by the democrats in congress.

lets just go with your theory on democracy. In a democracy it the rule of the people were the majority rules. Trump received 63 millions vote and Clinton received 66 millions votes. So lets also let the 66 millions that voted for Clinton also testify. Who wins? I would say that the 66 millions win since its a democracy. This is why we have a constitutional republic.

[lurker]

Sure that would be within their right to do so, and let the American people judge them on how they handled the trial. The ball is in their court and they can run the game how they want to run it. Republicans called the house hearings a sham and I guess the Dems will then be able to say what a sham the Senate trial was.

Out of everyone I know, first or second hand, everyone see’s through the impeachment sham for what it is, with seeing all ulterior motives, agendas and intentions, as I’ve stated here - other than, one person I work with, and two posters here. It is my belief that the greater majority of the American voting masses see through the Democrats sham for removal of Trump.

Thus in my humblest of opinions, the odds are not in favor of any Democrats moving forward on most political topics of (Democrats importance) governmental agendas regarding items that really matter, to them. Democrats are going to get exactly what they are deserving, for many years to come. You can thank, Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler, a host of others, plus the 31 other Democrats, for the Party suffering to come.

How the 31 Democrats in Trump districts voted on impeachment - https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4...on-impeachment