Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,632 posts, read 12,553,459 times
Reputation: 10486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1
How long have the republicans controlled the senate?
They didn't mention or investigate Hunter Biden in 2014. Not in 2015. 2016. 2017. 2018.
Trump became interested ONLY when Biden began running against him.
Duh.
Trump had probably put it on the back burner , due to running the country and dealing with the constant obstructions from the Dems, and, on top of that there was the faux Russia, Russia, Russia matter.
More than likely Biden knew that once the Russia b.s. was over that Trump would start looking at him, which is why he, at his elderly age and declining mental facilities, had decided to run, to protect himself.
No doubt that Hillary will do the same. If she hears Trump may be looking her way then she'll probably jump into the race, to protect herself. Amazing that people who have done, or may have done, corrupt things cannot be [rightfully] investigated if they jump into a presidential/political race.
I knew John Bolton, personally. Two things about what he might say: (1) his contribution might come across as abrasive, rude, condescending, and undiplomatic; (2) nevertheless, he will tell the truth -- you can count on it -- irrespective of the consequences. He's just wired that way, and always has been. He will tell the truth.
The outcome of this one is already in the bag...Isn't it about time we correct an obvious injustice? Talk about "abuse of power"--that's exactly what the Dems in The House have done. They knew all along that he wouldn't be convicted, but went ahead anyway just to influence the next election by innuendo.
It's time we amend The Constitution to require a 2/3 majority of votes in the House to impeach the President, in order to avoid this sort of petty politicking. That's why 2/3rds is required for conviction in the Senate.
- Which is their right as it is a political process.
- Not what the founders wanted. They fully expected the Senate to conduct a real trial and actually get to the truth. Not happening here.
Sway me from what ? Voting GOP ? Nope. Not until the Democrats stop attacking the 2A, go hard on illegal immigration, and generally move more towards the center. I don't like either party moving to extremes but I'll stick with the GOP since it sides with my ideology better.
That's right. Hunter Biden has been investigated like 5 times already. Kind of like Clinton and that idiotic Uranium One conspiracy.
Now it's time to investigate Jr., Ivanka, Jared, Eric and Melania to see how they profited off of the presidency and Trump's name. The princess and Kushner made $80 million working at the WH. Let's see how much foreign money they've sucked in. The fact that this moronic head of a family, built on nepotism, chooses this to pretend to be principled about it is hilarious.
Trump did it. He is guilty. It has been proven. And the GOP thinks it is A-ok. So we should all start contacting foreign sources to see what dirt can be dug up on Trump. Lindsey and Mitch are fine with it.
Alan Dershowitz made some statements that are in today's New York Times 1/28/2020.
And I quote from today's Times: "As evening set in, Mr. Dershowitz made the legal team’s only reference to Mr. Bolton, telling senators that the description of Mr. Trump’s actions in his manuscript “would not constitute an impeachable offense.” He added, “Let me repeat: Nothing in the Bolton revelations, even if true, would rise to the level of an abuse of power, or an impeachable offense.”"
Dershowitz went on to say that the founding fathers would never have found what Trump did an impeachable offense.
Well, here is a quote from Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Paper #65: A well-constituted court for the trial of impeachments is an object not more to be desired than difficult to be obtained in a government wholly elective. The subjects of its jurisdiction are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.
If you can get past the eighteenth century English, it should be obvious at this point that Dershowitz has neglected to consider Federalist #65 in his speech.
Yes. Like making a sham of our election. If you don't think that's what is happening here and is what is at stake here you're sadly mistaken.
I knew John Bolton, personally. Two things about what he might say: (1) his contribution might come across as abrasive, rude, condescending, and undiplomatic; (2) nevertheless, he will tell the truth -- you can count on it -- irrespective of the consequences. He's just wired that way, and always has been. He will tell the truth.
I do not agree with John Bolton on policy but, I have always trusted him to be truthful even if abrasive about it. Apparently, General Kelly believe the same, as today he has made a statement to that effect. I hope he does testify and we hear from Mulvanny as well.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
