jimjam wrote:There are a few things going on here. Don The Con was holding court today entertaining the Boss of Turkey most likely discussing dead Kurds while Don The Con worked, i'm sure, on another Quid Pro Quo to see what he could get out of Turkey in return for his removing American troops from Syria but ……………………. maybe more important, I doubt many even noticed.
I'm sure his opponents for the presidency didn't notice. While they are screwing around, he's getting things done. The Democrats have been on vacation since Pelosi took power, getting absolutely nothing done other than renaming a few post offices after Democratic Party politicians. Trump even had another rally in Louisiana. Love him or hate him, the guy is a hell of a lot more productive by himself than the entire Democratic party.
jimjam wrote:BTW, who do you think is smarter: Donald or Nancy. I give the edge to Nancy ……. she is one smart tough bitch and it does look as if Don is afraid of her. And, of course, Nancy has the home court advantage. She's got the rules memorized while Don has difficulty even reading a paragraph.
Nancy is frankly passed her prime. She's good at retail politics, working a rope line, etc. Otherwise, she's not that gifted intellectually.
jimjam wrote:Yes, use the more accurate term "bribery" to make it clear to the public what Trump did to the Ukrainian president. Bribery is clearly an impeachable offense.
You don't have a quid pro quo, so there is neither bribery nor extortion. There isn't even a crime. Zelensky himself says so. It's kind of hard to convict someone when the supposed victim disagrees with the assertion.
jimjam wrote:But I am marveling at Nancy's timing, which is "everything," as she has moved this case against Trump along. She didn't pounce for impeachment immediately after the release of the damning Mueller Report. No, she waited until Trump crossed the line big time (as she predicted he would) and made his big mistake with his stupid Ukrainian bribery move.
Yeah. It's great jimjam, when the witnesses you've called haven't actually witnessed anything. Kent, Taylor and Yovanovitch weren't on the call, and have never met, spoken with, or communicated with Trump in any way, while the "whistleblower" is hiding away as his testimony is also 100% hearsay. The only one who was there, Vindman, can't name a crime committed. Nobody seems to be able to establish that.
jimjam wrote:And now it is a slow drip, drip, drip, as the investigation of Trump drags on day after day, spoiling Trump's control of the media and the message, and probably driving him nuts since he is so impatient and impulsive.
If you watched his speech in Louisiana last night, he thinks he's got this beat and the Democrats look foolish once again.
stormsmith wrote:A man named Mark Sandy (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Sandy) will be testifying that President
Trump told him to put a hold on the $400,000 to Ukraine for arms, which he did, then checked to see if it legal, and found out it wasnt.
Once again, can you name the crime here. What's illegal about not disbursing funds immediately? Congress imposed an obligation on the president to ensure funds aren't being wasted. He's obliged to review expenditures.
Rugoz wrote:Are there any decent quality "Republican newspapers" left? Regardless of where one stands politically, there can be no doubt that newspapers like the WP or NYT are of much higher quality than the above mentioned trash.
The Washington Times, particularly Byron York's work.
Beren wrote:Trump won't go to prison, he'll be pardoned by Pence like Nixon was by Ford, if necessary. I'm sure, however, that Pelosi's in cahoots with some Congressional Republicans to bring down Trump with this. Even Pence could be involved.
Politically, it would be the kiss of death. Trump draws larger crowds than any Democrat or Republican. Now that he has exposed the deep state, people love him even more.
Anyway, it's on to today's episode of lying-while-crying as they put Marie Yovanovitch on the witness stand after having witnessed nothing herself.