• Ever thought it'd be cool to have your art, writing, or challenge runs featured on PokéCommunity? Click here for info - we'd love to spotlight your work!
  • Our weekly protagonist poll is now up! Vote for your favorite Trading Card Game 2 protagonist in the poll by clicking here.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

News Democrats move forward towards impeaching Trump.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Clinton: No
Comey: Yes, I do believe he should have been prosecuted.
Click to expand...

Then, you admit that you were not okay with Trump committing the same abuses of power listed on Nixon's articles of impeachment? Why have you been silent about it?

I am fine with investigations, although I do agree the Benghazi investigation went far too long. "Lock her up" on the other hand has nothing to do with the current topic at hand. Nor do I believe anything is wrong with the chants just as I don't think there was anything wrong with the chants at current Democratic rallies of "Lock him up"
Click to expand...

Many would consider it rabble-rousing, along with inciting violence. It was certainly slander.

Biden and Obama are specifically telling their voters NOT to do it. Trump encourages it.

President Clinton was impeached for lying to a grand jury to get out of a rape investigation, the proof was far more substantial in regards to that as well, while with Trump it's mainly hearsay.
Click to expand...

But was Clinton threatening civilian lives by doing so? Lets be honest here, ALT, he was condemned by the public because he lied about sex, something I am almost certain most men have lied about at least once in their lives. Also, he was never charged with rape. One thing that annoys me most about Clinton's detractors is how they seem to believe ONE consensual extramarital affair makes him a sex fiend, rapist, and pedophile on the same scale as the Marquis de Sade.

Still waiting for you to answer this question: why do you even defend Trump?
 
Last edited:
Maedar said:
Then, you admit that you were not okay with Trump committing the same abuses of power listed on Nixon's articles of impeachment? Why have you been silent about it?
Click to expand...

I believe Comey should be prosecuted because he committed a crime by leaking sensitive FBI information to the press by using his friend as an intermediary, just because he was fired does not make him any less guilty.


Maedar said:
Many would consider it rabble-rousing, along with inciting violence. It was certainly slander.

Biden and Obama are specifically telling their voters NOT to do it. Trump encourages it.
Click to expand...

Would you say the same about the Lock Him Up chants now at the democratic rallies?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vo...trump-lock-him-up-chants-bernie-sanders-rally


Maedar said:
But was Clinton threatening lives by doing so? Lets be honest here, ALT, he lied about sex, something I am almost certain most men have lied about at least once in their lives. Also, he was never charged with rape. One thing that annoys me most about Clinton's detractors is how they seem to believe ONE consensual extramarital affair makes him a sex fiend and pedophile.

Still waiting for you to answer this question: why do you even defend Trump?
Click to expand...

Threatening lives is irrelevant, the question is if he lied to a grand jury during a sexual harassment lawsuit. Having an affair is irrelevant in this regard as his testimony should have been truthful when discussing a pattern of sexual harassment and rape in the past.

By the way I have already given you my answer as to the reason I support Trump, there are numerous policies I support, we have already been through this.
 
Last edited:
I believe Comey should be prosecuted because he committed a crime by leaking sensitive FBI information to the press by using his friend as an intermediary, just because he was fired does not make him any less guilty.
Click to expand...

You have proof of this, I assume?

Threatening lives is irrelevant,
Click to expand...

No it isn't. These are human lives he was putting at risk. IMOHO, that is simply inexcusable.

Having an affair is irrelevant in this regard as his testimony should have been truthful when discussing a pattern of sexual harassment and rape in the past.
Click to expand...

WHAT "pattern of sexual harassment and rape"? Where's the evidence of this?
 
Last edited:
First off, your link is an explanation from the IG about why he is not charging Comey.

Because Russia was going to invade Ukraine if they didn't get the money right away?
Click to expand...

They've been doing so since 2014.

Paula Jones? Juanita Broaddrick? Wanna go down the list?
Click to expand...

Skip to the one where actual charges were filed, okay? You keep claiming the Democrats are at fault and pulling a "hoax" because they don't have sufficient evidence to impeach Trump, but you cite cases where it was also determined there was not enough evidence to file charges. You can't have it both ways, ALT. If you claim there was legitimate reason to impeach Clinton, then you cannot deny there is no legitimate reason to impeach Trump.

AND, If you're just listing accusations, then why do you excuse the women who made similar accusations towards Trump?

And again, WHY do you condone putting lives a risk to defend Trump? Why do you defend a man whom, twice now, you admit is a criminal?

Here, read this:

https://www.needtoimpeach.com/impeachable-offenses/
 
Last edited:
please keep this relevant to impeachment instead of yas trump vs. no trump round #477957
 
Thank you, Maedar if you wish to continue the conversation about Comey or Clinton then let's please continue via PM or VM.

Maedar said:
And again, WHY do you condone putting lives a risk to defend Trump? Why do you defend a man whom, twice now, you admit is a criminal?

Here, read this:

https://www.needtoimpeach.com/impeachable-offenses/
Click to expand...

Okay first do you have any proof what so ever that the Ukrainian military was in such a pitiful state that with out these funds that people would die? If so I would please ask for said proof.

Next while I do think he has committed a crime, I am willing to let the voters decide next year if he should be removed from office for it or not.

Finally your link, not only seems like just standard Democratic talking points but some of them like the first two do not even reach the level of impeachment. Can you find a source a little less biased?
 
I can't really say what the state of the Ukrainian military is, but I'd imagine that they'd really want/need the aid of Russia's biggest not-friend. Russia has been occupying a significant portion of easternmost Ukraine for years now, and if I was Volodymr Zelensky, I'd take just about whatever help I could get in repelling what is likely still one of the stronger military forces in the world.

That's why the aid was withheld in the first place, it's easy to see that saying "no" is a hard thing for the Ukrainian government to do right now.
 
Okay first do you have any proof what so ever that the Ukrainian military was in such a pitiful state that with out these funds that people would die? If so I would please ask for said proof.
Click to expand...

Uh, you really think the Ukraine's military can stand up to Russia's?

Yeah. ALT, even someone with a basic grasp of logistics knows the Ukraine would be a sitting duck on its own. I'm just using common sense here.
 
Maedar said:
Uh, you really think the Ukraine's military can stand up to Russia's?

Yeah. ALT, even someone with a basic grasp of logistics knows the Ukraine would be a sitting duck on its own. I'm just using common sense here.
Click to expand...

I do not believe many militaries could stand up to Russia's right now, with or without our assistance, and that any major military action into Ukraine would be resolved by the UN, which is why I asked why it was so urgent? Is Russia making some kind of major push toward conquering Ukraine?

Nah said:
I can't really say what the state of the Ukrainian military is, but I'd imagine that they'd really want/need the aid of Russia's biggest not-friend. Russia has been occupying a significant portion of easternmost Ukraine for years now, and if I was Volodymr Zelensky, I'd take just about whatever help I could get in repelling what is likely still one of the stronger military forces in the world.

That's why the aid was withheld in the first place, it's easy to see that saying "no" is a hard thing for the Ukrainian government to do right now.
Click to expand...

I can understand that, but if things have been relatively stable these past few years, is a few weeks or months really going to make a difference? Personally I doubt if Ukraine were to not get the aid right away, that Russia would seize the opportunity and annex Ukraine when they have shown no military mobilization or action recently to do so.
 
I do not believe many militaries could stand up to Russia's right now, with or without our assistance, and that any major military action into Ukraine would be resolved by the UN, which is why I asked why it was so urgent? Is Russia making some kind of major push toward conquering Ukraine?
Click to expand...

One, Putin is known for being unpredictable. Didn't Trump himself stress the importance of the "element of surprise"?

Two, IMOHO, there is one important lesson in politics that Republicans continually fail to learn, and that is "ALWAYS prepare for the worst, but hope for the best." Republicans tend to prepare for the best, and are never prepared when things don't go as they planned.

Again, Trump is putting civilian lives at risk, and that is something neither I - nor the American people - will tolerate.
 
Last edited:
Maedar said:
One, Putin is known for being unpredictable. Didn't Trump himself stress the importance of the "element of surprise"?

Two, IMOHO, there is one important lesson in politics that Republicans continually fail to learn, and that is "ALWAYS prepare for the worst, but hope for the best." Republicans tend to prepare for the best, and are never prepared when things don't go as they planned.

Again, Trump is putting civilian lives at risk, and that is something neither I - nor the American people - will tolerate.
Click to expand...

Okay we're risking getting off on a Trump tangent with number "two" and since a mod already warned us let's stick with the topic at hand. Again you are welcome to PM or VM me.

You say it's putting lives at risk and Putin can act unpredictable, which is fine but is the aid really going to make that much of a difference if Putin decides to invade? Is a couple of million in military aid all that is stopping Putin from attacking? And even with unpredictability, we would know if Putin was amassing forced for an invasion, he cannot conjure up army units out of thin air.
 
Last edited:
Maedar said:
Ukrainian President Zelensky has finally issued a statement with his side of the story; the link below contains a link to the full interview.

https://www.aol.com/article/news/20...icials-for-spreading-misinformation/23872526/
Click to expand...

I don't know if this changes much, it is nice to have the Ukrainian President admit there was no Quid Pro Quo. However seeing how the removal from office is destined to fail, and the Ukrainian President is thinking of having to deal with Trump for another year if not for another five years, it makes sense he would deny it.

At best this just hurts the Democrats already flimsy amount of evidence for impeachment and may give some moderates cover to vote against it.
 
That's nor what he said, Alt. He said:

""If you're our strategic partner, then you can't go blocking anything for us. I think that's just about fairness. It's not about a quid pro quo."

That does not sound like a confirmation of Trump's defense to me.
 
Maedar said:
That's nor what he said, Alt. He said:

""If you're our strategic partner, then you can't go blocking anything for us. I think that's just about fairness. It's not about a quid pro quo."

That does not sound like a confirmation of Trump's defense to me.
Click to expand...

I know Huff Post/AOL did not include it, but doing some looking into the actual interviews he gave, he said this.

""Look, I never talked to the president from the position of a quid pro quo. That's not my thing," Zelensky said. "I don't want us to look like beggars."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...rump-corruption-criticism-ukraine/2586254001/
 
In other words, he REFUSED the offer of a quid-pro-quo, and he's making an open condemnation of Trump for even making the suggestion.

And Huff Post DID link to the full interview. Here is their link:

https://time.com/5742108/ukraine-zelensky-interview-trump-putin-europe/

If anything, this throws cold water on Trump's claim that it was a "perfect call".
 
Last edited:
Maedar said:
In other words, he REFUSED the offer of a quid-pro-quo, and he's making an open condemnation of Trump for even making the suggestion.

And Huff Post DID link to the full interview. Here is their link:

https://time.com/5742108/ukraine-zelensky-interview-trump-putin-europe/
Click to expand...

Except he has never mentioned that a Quid Pro Quo happened, has said previously he did not feel pressured, and is now saying that their discussion was not in a position of Quid Pro Quo.

Thank you though for linking it.

Maedar said:
If anything, this throws cold water on Trump's claim that it was a "perfect call".
Click to expand...

No call is perfect, no person is perfect, but Trump is a show man, and a politician, both require the person to never admit a mistake and always spin things in the best possible light.
 
Last edited:
Believe what you want. I do not see this interview as an attempt to confirm anything Trump said; it seems more like Zelensky is calling him out for promoting lack of trust. And he's certainly calling him out for promoting the conspiracy theories.
 
Two articles of impeachment dropped this morning, the first related to Ukraine, the second obstruction of justice.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/10/politics/impeachment-articles-announced/index.html

The second one seems like filler and uniquely stupid as the Democrats did not even attempt to go to the courts to settle the issue of executive privilege.

Meanwhile up to 10 Democrats are asking for a censure instead of impeachment, the number needs to get to 18 to start making Pelosi consider it as that is how many it would take to strike down impeachment.

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/10/democrats-censure-impeachment-080311

Meanwhile after everything impeachment polling is getting worse and worse with the public now against it at 51%.

https://www.courant.com/politics/ca...0191210-azjwntxpxjg2fil6zuqzqx72le-story.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top