snowlover91
Member
Wonder if this will turn out like the Ebola or SARS stuff where for a few weeks the media is in a frenzy over it and then all of a sudden it just dies off?
-
Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!
Political Thread
- Thread starter Bama Ravens
- Start date
- Status
Wonder if this will turn out like the Ebola or SARS stuff where for a few weeks the media is in a frenzy over it and then all of a sudden it just dies off?
Rosie
Member
Tennessee also.
It was said to me and they were 100% spot on correct
It's funny to me that a group of people are upset over a phone call to the Ukraine Pres and the withholding of future funding for a short period of time while corruption was looked into and that this trumped up anger is based off of us turning our backs on an ally. An ally that needed those funds to be able to fight Russia and prevent another invasion.
Same group: Upset with America and it's leaders for going to war with Iraq after Iraq invaded Kuwait, to help protect our allies in the Mideast and stabilize the region, protecting it from a ruthless dictator.
?
Same group: Upset with America and it's leaders for going to war with Iraq after Iraq invaded Kuwait, to help protect our allies in the Mideast and stabilize the region, protecting it from a ruthless dictator.
?
Spot on!!It's funny to me that a group of people are upset over a phone call to the Ukraine Pres and the withholding of future funding for a short period of time while corruption was looked into and that this trumped up anger is based off of us turning our backs on an ally. An ally that needed those funds to be able to fight Russia and prevent another invasion.
Same group: Upset with America and it's leaders for going to war with Iraq after Iraq invaded Kuwait, to help protect our allies in the Mideast and stabilize the region, protecting it from a ruthless dictator.
?
Downeastnc
Member
It's funny to me that a group of people are upset over a phone call to the Ukraine Pres and the withholding of future funding for a short period of time while corruption was looked into and that this trumped up anger is based off of us turning our backs on an ally. An ally that needed those funds to be able to fight Russia and prevent another invasion.
Same group: Upset with America and it's leaders for going to war with Iraq after Iraq invaded Kuwait, to help protect our allies in the Mideast and stabilize the region, protecting it from a ruthless dictator.
?
This just simply is not what happened.....
This is what happened.....the president through Rudy and Parnas among others got the Amb ran out of the Ukraine then told the Ukrainians they had to promise to go after Biden who by all accounts has not done anything in order to give the president political leverage in the US presidential election, if they did not then no aid.....the Ukrainians where going to do it but that president lost ( ironically that president was extremely corrupt ) the new president who ran and won on a anti corruption platform was then leaned on to go after the Bidens. The president literally put the funds on hold 90 minutes AFTER the July phone call....90 mins. See Shaggy's post above, the US under Trump has given billions to hundreds of countries with way more corruption than the Ukraine....heck the US had given the Ukraine aid 50 times during Trumps presidency and only this last time did Trump order it held. The actual act of holding that aid was ILLEGAL, it broke the law...Trump's aids pleaded with him to release it and to not keep in on hold yet Trump did not listen...ONLY when the story broke about the WB complaint did Trump ok the release of the aid because HE HAD TOO because he got caught.
Its a complete white wash to frame it as a investigation into corruption and that it was only for a short time etc.....its was illegal to do it in the first place, Trump did it anyways to try to extort a foreign government into going after his political rival and meddle in the US presidential election, and the ONLY reason Trump released the aid is because he got caught. That is what really happened.
Downeastnc
Member
Parnas and Fruman got the goods on Donald...….is anyone else worried that it is this easy to secretly tape the president of the USA at a private dinner....
Sandbar
Member
Regardless of anybody's "opinion" of what happened, the President will walk away from this intact and right back into the white house in November in a slaughter. Why? Because he has done a dynamite job, the sham Democrat party cant even offer a candidate worthy of dog catcher and most importantly, because most people don't give a damn about a phone call involving Ukraine and the corrupt Biden family. Thats called reality
Philstorm91
Member
I mean tbh, I was just 9 back when that happened. I actually did want revenge on the attacks. But I had thought Saudi Arabia would make more sense. At least since I knew that most of the hijackers had originated from that country. Alliances and oil and all that were lost on my simplistic mind.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
The bolded is your opinion, not necessarily reality.
Sandbar
Member
Actually I feel very confident in my statement
Rosie
Member
Oh joy, an emperor in the making.
Shaggy
Member
Polling says differently its damn near 50/50 on removal. Its overwhelming that the people you say don't care want more witnesses.
Sandbar
Member
Polling! LOLOLOL. So let me rephrase my original statement. The majority of people, who have more important things in life to be concerned about than a phone call to Ukraine, don't really care about that phone call to Ukraine......
Shaggy
Member
Then you're living in a bubble.
Sandbar
Member
Perhaps but I feel very good about the bubble I am living in.
Downeastnc
Member
Yeah I mean who cares if Trump craps all over the Constitution or breaks law's as long as our 401k is doing good right.....
Sandbar
Member
So long as you arent in charge of interpreting the constitution then yeah, Im gonna focus on my future. I feel pretty confident the guy in charge of hearing this trial knows a thing or two about the law of the land
pcbjr
Member
This is no editorial comment on Trump, nor is it intended to express any opinion on whether he is good bad or somewhere in between, or whether he is fit for office. It is a comment on process.
To put in to everyday terms, the Constitution makes the House the State Attorney. The House interviews and culls the witnesses. It then decides whether to "indict" based on what the witnesses say and show. If the House elects to "indict" based on the evidence it has adduced, the matter is referred to the "jury" (the Senate) along with the House's witnesses and documentation in support of the "indictment"; the House puts on the case, the Senate questions the witnesses and/or their testimony brought forward by the House, weighs the House's evidence, and comes to a decision. The Senate is not the prosecutor and has no obligation to call witnesses that the "prosecutor" did not bring forward. If the prosecutor feels that witnesses have been hidden during its investigation, in this case it (the House) goes to the 3rd branch of the government (the Judiciary) in an effort to compel those witnesses to testify during the investigative stage (the Judiciary then, in that event, determines if there is a legal right for the House to have particular witnesses testify during the investigative stage). If the "prosecutor" (the House) elects not to seek judicial intervention, it cannot then later compel the "jury" to do so once the "trial" has started. Of course, if the "jury" wants to hear additional evidence (not provided by the "prosecutor") in this instance it has the right to do so, if, in its sole (political) discretion, it wants to. That's just the way the process was written and how it is supposed to work.
Process cannot be "invented" on the fly to suit anyone's wants or needs (either side's); process (due process) is the foundation of our liberty.
To put in to everyday terms, the Constitution makes the House the State Attorney. The House interviews and culls the witnesses. It then decides whether to "indict" based on what the witnesses say and show. If the House elects to "indict" based on the evidence it has adduced, the matter is referred to the "jury" (the Senate) along with the House's witnesses and documentation in support of the "indictment"; the House puts on the case, the Senate questions the witnesses and/or their testimony brought forward by the House, weighs the House's evidence, and comes to a decision. The Senate is not the prosecutor and has no obligation to call witnesses that the "prosecutor" did not bring forward. If the prosecutor feels that witnesses have been hidden during its investigation, in this case it (the House) goes to the 3rd branch of the government (the Judiciary) in an effort to compel those witnesses to testify during the investigative stage (the Judiciary then, in that event, determines if there is a legal right for the House to have particular witnesses testify during the investigative stage). If the "prosecutor" (the House) elects not to seek judicial intervention, it cannot then later compel the "jury" to do so once the "trial" has started. Of course, if the "jury" wants to hear additional evidence (not provided by the "prosecutor") in this instance it has the right to do so, if, in its sole (political) discretion, it wants to. That's just the way the process was written and how it is supposed to work.
Process cannot be "invented" on the fly to suit anyone's wants or needs (either side's); process (due process) is the foundation of our liberty.
Last edited:
Flurry
Member
Wow...I guess ABC doesn't want some of their viewers hearing some of Jay Sekulow's commentary....They will let you hear only what they want you to hear....SAD
www.foxnews.com
ABC News' George Stephanopoulos cuts short Trump lawyer Q&A with throat-slash gesture
ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos was cut on camera making a throat-slash gesture as the Disney-owned network cut away from President Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow taking questions from the press on Thursday during coverage of the Senate impeachment trial .
www.foxnews.com
- Status