It's official, Trump has been Acquitted

[chipbennett]

References I will never get tired of hearing:

"Want see me set off some explosives?"
"Whoa, look over there, that chick is a bombshell!"

Okay, we are heartily in agreement here.

 

[Ingomike]

References I will never get tired of hearing:

"Want see me set off some explosives?"
"Whoa, look over there, that chick is a bombshell!"

Love that kind of explosive or bombshell. Just a little wary of combining them especially with the color red, as in female redhead explosive bombshell...

 

[Ingomike]

We disagree here. It is related to the reason that I don't watch any news TV. They are all following a formula designed to keep everyone at a heightened sense of concern, anger, fear, etc. (I swear you could literally feel your blood pressure rise/fall based on how much of that crap you consume.) The whole "bombshell", "explosive", all-breaking-news-all-the-time is part and parcel. It becomes like a dopamine hit or something. Everything is over-sensationalized. Every matter is not discussed, but rather debated, with everyone interrupting and talking over each other.

(And political social media is just as bad, if not worse - albeit in different ways.)

While you have some good points, this is just way overthought, as CM like to say, follow the money, the enemy of news understanding is pay-per-click today. How about we require any content paid by click to have a give-them-back-the-money link the reader can select if they feel they have been duped. LOL

 

[KG1]

You should never get tired of hearing those words. You should only get tired about whatever they reference.

I get tired of the references when they are most likely meant to sensationalize things for a partisan purpose which are framed in such a way that often do not represent the whole story.

 

[KG1]

How come we never hear the words "bombshell" and "explosive" in reference to good economic numbers?

 

[Doug]

**Explosive Bombshell Report**

McConnell's inability to block witnesses in the Impeachment trial signals the complete collapse of the Republican party.

 

[Ingomike]

While you have some good points, this is just way overthought, as CM like to say, follow the money, the enemy of news understanding is pay-per-click today. How about we require any content paid by click to have a give-them-back-the-money link the reader can select if they feel they have been duped. LOL

I get tired of the references when they are most likely meant to sensationalize things for a partisan purpose which are framed in such a way that often do not represent the whole story.

This is the real answer.

Many of us pine for the days of Johnny Carson and his comedic fairness. He worked to find his audience from a huge portion of the people. Therefore he made fun of everyone a little and it was found funny by a lot. Today late night has decided they can make money easier making fun of half the country to the other half and that means never making fun of their supporters.

Same with news, they make more money exciting their customers than trying to be accurate, all fueled by the pay per click.

 

[KG1]

Micheal Jordan's adage when it comes to political partisan alienation - "Republicans buy Nike shoes too"

 

[Ingomike]

Micheal Jordan's adage when it comes to political partisan alienation - "Republicans buy Nike shoes too"

Maybe for MJ, but Nike does not care about that, ask Kaperdink...

 

[Murphy]

Read the constitution. Then think!

This seems like an impeachable crime to me:


https://www.businessinsider.com/bol...dered-continued-ukraine-aid-freeze-nyt-2020-1

Congress approved the military aid to the Ukraine, and the president froze it with the condition that it was announced the Biden's be investigated. Keep in mind it wasn't that the Bidens were investigated, but that it was announced that they were being investigated. The Ukraine could have just agreed to investigate the Bidens, and that should've been enough. The fact that it was required that it be announced indicates, at least to me, given that Biden is a potential presidential candidate, that the president was seeking a political benefit in said announcement. That, to me, is an abuse of power, and an impeachable event.

READ, READ, READ ! It’s called the Constitution, people! Our founders did some thinking to come up with it, the least we can do is use it!

 

[josh64]

Trump 2020!

And after that, Pence 2024! And 2028.

Then Don Jr in 2032.

Then two terms for Matt Geotz.

As to the stalinist show trial you guys are calling impeachment, everything the dems are accusing Trump of, they themselves are guilty of.
Here's an example of quid pro quo of an executive branch office holder demanding Ukraine fire the investigator who is investigating this officials son;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA0flDysUGM

This is sedition, insurrection, and treason more than it is an impeachment. And they're doing it right in your faces and in your name.

 

[Doug]

Trump 2020!

And after that, Pence 2024! And 2028.

Then Don Jr in 2032.

Then two terms for Matt Geotz.

As to the stalinist show trial you guys are calling impeachment, everything the dems are accusing Trump of, they themselves are guilty of.
Here's an example of quid pro quo of an executive branch office holder demanding Ukraine fire the investigator who is investigating this officials son;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA0flDysUGM

This is sedition, insurrection, and treason more than it is an impeachment. And they're doing it right in your faces and in your name.

Of course, they're Democrats. It's what they do.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

WH letter to Bolton warning him against publication of his book as it is right now

 

[HoughMade]

So the NYT published its interpretation of what it believes a passage in the book says with interesting timing knowing that the book would not be published anytime soon.

OK

 

[nonobaddog]

Since they can't publish it soon without getting in trouble - I would expect more "leaks" coming at opportune times.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Trump 2020!

And after that, Pence 2024! And 2028.

Then Don Jr in 2032.

Then two terms for Matt Geotz.

As to the stalinist show trial you guys are calling impeachment, everything the dems are accusing Trump of, they themselves are guilty of.
Here's an example of quid pro quo of an executive branch office holder demanding Ukraine fire the investigator who is investigating this officials son;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA0flDysUGM

This is sedition, insurrection, and treason more than it is an impeachment. And they're doing it right in your faces and in your name.

Well, you certainly are optimistic. The impeachment trial is neither seditious, insurrection, nor treasonous; though I'm sure you know that. Highly partisan, sure, that's fair.
Now in so far as the Biden and quid pro quo with the firing of the Ukrainian investigator, sure, I'll buy that. However, one would have to prove corrupt intent. There a number of different things at play here. First the firing of Victor Shokin was because "Officially" because he was pursuing corruption investigations of Ukrainian politicians. The International Monetary Fund, European Union, local Ukrainian organizations, the Obama Administration ALL pushed for the ouster. For me to believe there was corrupt intent, you're gonna have to explain why those other entities would employ pressure to oust Shokin to save Biden's son's company (because Hunter hasn't been accused of a crime).... or maybe Joe just got lucky. If anyone has an explanation as to why those other orgs also wanted Shokin out, besides actually wanting them wanting to root out corruption, I'd like to hear it.

 

[Ingomike]

So a very serious procedure that is overseen by the Chief Justice of SCOTS is greatly affected by reporting from an untrustworthy ideological media source. That reporting is based on an anonymous leak of an as of yet unpublished manuscript, that has neither been verified nor disclaimed by the party it is attributed to. The party that it is attributed to has a book coming out very soon, the book has been written and published with lightning speed compared to the normal process for publishing a book. It is certainly fascinating that the timing of the leak is just when it appeared witnesses were all but ruled out, the democrats were being criticized by even some in their own party.


The people promoting the book have a history of dramatic teases that turn out to be nothing when the book comes out. The person the manuscript is attributed to said he was unavailable to testify to the house, he was probably very busy writing this book in the haste needed to get it done on time. Now that the book is done he has indicated he could certainly testify to the Senate, conveniently right before the release of his book and during the pre-order period.

Due to the government positions held by the person the quotes are attributed to the manuscript had to be reviewed by the NSC to be certain nothing was being published that was classified etc. It is believed by some that the leak came from the NSC. While there is no evidence he was involved in approving the manuscript or involved in the leak of it to the NYT, it is incredibly coincidental that none other than Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman's identical twin brother is a senior ethics lawyer at the NSC in charge of book approvals, Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindmam. Lt. Col. Alexander Vindmam is widely suspected of being the source of the whistleblowers information to make the complaint.

Talk about deep state, out of the millions of government employees the idea that these twin brothers are in positions that have such an affect on an administration that testimony exists that they disagree with is unfathomable.

The plan to remove DJT from office is deep and wide, it is is coalition of forces that includes the opposing party, opposing political players of the Presidents party, the institutions of government, and the MSM media. If not for some alternative media and the Presidents direct communication via Twitter the information of other side would never get out...

So the NYT published its interpretation of what it believes a passage in the book says with interesting timing knowing that the book would not be published anytime soon.

OK

It's even more interesting than that...

 

[BugI02]

Well, you certainly are optimistic. The impeachment trial is neither seditious, insurrection, nor treasonous; though I'm sure you know that. Highly partisan, sure, that's fair.
Now in so far as the Biden and quid pro quo with the firing of the Ukrainian investigator, sure, I'll buy that. However, one would have to prove corrupt intent. There a number of different things at play here. First the firing of Victor Shokin was because "Officially" because he was pursuing corruption investigations of Ukrainian politicians. The International Monetary Fund, European Union, local Ukrainian organizations, the Obama Administration ALL pushed for the ouster. For me to believe there was corrupt intent, you're gonna have to explain why those other entities would employ pressure to oust Shokin to save Biden's son's company (because Hunter hasn't been accused of a crime).... or maybe Joe just got lucky. If anyone has an explanation as to why those other orgs also wanted Shokin out, besides actually wanting them wanting to root out corruption, I'd like to hear it.

Shokin was pursuing the wrong oligarchs, who then jerked the leash to rile up their paid pets at the IMF, EU and SFWH (scandal-free white house). Wasn't to protect Hunter so much as to keep the lid on the can of worms

 

[Ingomike]

So I heard a snipit of what I believe was part of the Presidents official case where the issue of the balance between for the good of the country vs the good of the Presidents campaign, was brought up. He talked about a hypothetical Senator weighing does he believe it was 48%-52% that it was for the good of the country or 48%-52% for the good of the campaign. That is not the question, the question is is it possible the President did it for the good of the country and if so it is neither illegal nor impeachable. To do otherwise is to impeach for thoughts...

 

[spencer rifle]

Well, he didn't "intend" to do anything illegal, so nothing illegal happened.
That's how it works.
Government people told me so.