US President Donald J. Trump Impeachment Megathread - Democrats commit mass political suicide

On September 24th, 2019, Nanci Pelosi did what everyone expected was some exceptional political posturing -- initiating a formal impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.

The initial "charge," such as it was, was "betraying his oath of office and the nation's security by seeking to enlist a foreign power to tarnish a rival for his own political gain." This, amusingly, was after it was discovered and widely reported on that the DNC had contacted the very same foreign power to attempt to tarnish Trump.

Specifically, this was all based on a rumor that Trump had asked the Ukraine to investigate how a prosecutor investigating Joe Biden's son for corruption had gotten fired, and withheld foreign aid until they had agreed. (He did ask the leader of the Ukraine to investigate what happened with the prosecutor, but did not hold up any foreign aid nor threaten anything of the like.)

Around this time, Trump did something they could not, and still cannot, understand: He publicly turned over all the documents. The transcript of the phone call they claimed showed him committing the crime of blackmailing the Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden for him was released, showing that Trump did nothing wrong. The only reaction the radical left had was arguing over the definition of "transcript" and spouting off a conspiracy theory about official state documents being edited.

At the same time, old video evidence of Joe Biden publicly bragging about blackmailing the Ukraine into NOT investigating his son came to light. Yes, this is exactly what they're accusing Trump of doing. The left is nothing if not subtle. Right after this, evidence came to light that Pelosi, Kerry, and Romney's kids had similar fake jobs in the Ukraine, getting paid ungodly amounts of money and embezzling US foreign aid to the Ukraine -- all things that Trump's Attorney General has openly discussed investigating.

By releasing the transcripts, the DNC was tripped up. Instead of being able to leak information from their secret investigation until November 2020, they were forced to play their hand publicly.

And they had no hand to play. The impeachment accusations came from second and third hand sources -- watercooler talk from Unelected Deep State Analysts with Trump Derangement Syndrome, outraged that President Trump refused to obey them when they felt they had a better idea as to how to run Foreign Affairs. Other allegations included that supposedly, the telepathic DNC members working in the state department knew what Trump was thinking (despite him literally saying the exact opposite) or could tell that Trump would do something even worse -- maybe something actually illegal -- in the future, and boy howdy, the imaginary Trump in their minds was a right bastard.

(As an aside, the name of the whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, has been censored across pretty much all social media, a test run of whatever censorship they're going to enact in the next few months to try and swing the election.)

At the same time, the DNC performed significant amounts of partisan political fuckery to do this all publicly, but unofficially -- preventing the GOP from bringing forth witnesses or questioning the DNC's witnesses, or even reading the double plus secret evidence the DNC supposedly had. Those GOP that did get access to the evidence have confirmed it's a 3 pound 5 ounce nothingburger.

The charges have since mutated, with them initially being changed to "bribery" -- as "bribery" focus groups easier and is easier to spew out on Twitter.

On December 18th, 2019, along party lines and with bipartisan opposition, they finally drafted their articles of impeachment -- first for "Abuse of Power" and second for "Obstruction of Congress." Neither are actually crimes nor are they impeachable offenses, even if they were true -- which the DNC has provided no evidence of, explaining that it's the Senate's job to investigate and find the evidence.

Narrator: It is not the Senate's job to investigate and find the evidence.

The "Obstruction of Congress" charge is particularly egregious, as they are claiming that Trump, by reaching out to the courts to act as mediators in his dispute over the rules with Pelosi, was obstructing her. In other words, Pelosi's stance is that the President must obey her, even if she's being a batshit insane drunk. Many legal scholars, including Alan Dershowitz, have pointed out that this is absolute bullshit.

The latest development as of this writing on December 21th, 2019, is that Pelosi is demanding that the GOP recuse itself, allowing the DNC to reshape the Senate in order to make the process "fair" -- by creating a Kangaroo court. The GOP is refusing outright, as the Senate's role during this is very specifically to take the charges and all the evidence gathered from the house -- which is none -- and vote yes or no on impeachment. They need 2/3rd majority to vote yes, and the DNC does not have the votes.

Pelosi is refusing to send over the articles of impeachment until the GOP allows her to stack the Senate against Trump, an act that Dershowitz as well as Noah Feldman, the DNC's own star legal expert witness, has said is unconstitutional and "a problem," as Trump isn't impeached until the articles have been filed. Meanwhile, the DNC has put the House on vacation until the new year, while the Senate is exploring options including forcing the articles over without Pelosi's ok. Trump and the Senate have both went to the SCOTUS to ask them if any of this is constitutional.

tl;dr: Trump may have found where the Swamp was embezzling US Foreign Aid. Many politician's children working fake jobs for huge amounts of money in the Ukraine, blatantly selling influence. This caused the DNC to freak out and try and headshot Trump. They missed. The Democrats appear to have committed political suicide, making Trump a Martyr and only realizing in the aftermath that they didn't actually get rid of him or even weaken him in any way. They also appear to realize they fucked up and are trying to slow walk it back, keeping the "he's impeached!" victory while not actually having to let anyone read the evidence or have a trial on it.


@Yotsubaaa did a great writeup here with links to various winner posts: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/nancy...kraine-phone-call.61583/page-135#post-5606264

And @Yotsubaaa did a new version very late on the 21st of December: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/presi...chment-megathread.61583/page-260#post-5754920

Which are too big to quote here.



https://archive.fo/oVGIv

WASHINGTON — Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced on Tuesday that the House would initiate a formal impeachment inquiry against President Trump, charging him with betraying his oath of office and the nation’s security by seeking to enlist a foreign power to tarnish a rival for his own political gain.

Ms. Pelosi’s declaration, after months of reticence by Democrats who had feared the political consequences of impeaching a president many of them long ago concluded was unfit for office, was a stunning turn that set the stage for a history-making and exceedingly bitter confrontation between the Democrat-led House and a defiant president who has thumbed his nose at institutional norms.

“The actions taken to date by the president have seriously violated the Constitution,” Ms. Pelosi said in a brief speech invoking the nation’s founding principles. Mr. Trump, she added, “must be held accountable — no one is above the law.”

She said the president’s conduct revealed his “betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security and betrayal of the integrity of our elections.”

Ms. Pelosi’s decision to push forward with the most severe action that Congress can take against a sitting president could usher in a remarkable new chapter in American life, touching off a constitutional and political showdown with the potential to cleave an already divided nation, reshape Mr. Trump’s presidency and the country’s politics, and carry heavy risks both for him and for the Democrats who have decided to weigh his removal.

Though the outcome is uncertain, it also raised the possibility that Mr. Trump could become only the fourth president in American history to face impeachment. Presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were both impeached but later acquitted by the Senate. President Richard M. Nixon resigned in the face of a looming House impeachment vote.

It was the first salvo in an escalating, high-stakes standoff between Ms. Pelosi, now fully engaged in an effort to build the most damning possible case against the president, and Mr. Trump, who angrily denounced Democrats’ impeachment inquiry even as he worked feverishly in private to head off the risk to his presidency.

Mr. Trump, who for months has dared Democrats to impeach him, issued a defiant response on Twitter while in New York for several days of international diplomacy at the United Nations, with a series of fuming posts that culminated with a simple phrase: “PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT!” Meanwhile, his re-election campaign and House Republican leaders launched a vociferous defense, accusing Democrats of a partisan rush to judgment.

“Such an important day at the United Nations, so much work and so much success, and the Democrats purposely had to ruin and demean it with more breaking news Witch Hunt garbage,” Mr. Trump wrote. “So bad for our Country! For the past two years, talk of impeachment had centered around the findings of the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, who investigated Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections and Mr. Trump’s attempts to derail that inquiry. On Tuesday, Ms. Pelosi, Democrat of California, told her caucus and then the country that new revelations about Mr. Trump’s dealings with Ukraine, and his administration’s stonewalling of Congress about them, had finally left the House no choice but to proceed toward a rarely used remedy.

“Right now, we have to strike while the iron is hot,” she told House Democrats in a closed-door meeting in the basement of the Capitol. Emerging moments later to address a phalanx of news cameras, Ms. Pelosi, speaking sometimes haltingly as she delivered a speech from a teleprompter, invoked the Constitution and the nation’s founders as she declared, “The times have found us” and outlined a new stage of investigating Mr. Trump.

At issue are allegations that Mr. Trump pressured the president of Ukraine to open a corruption investigation of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., a leading contender for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, and his son. The conversation is said to be part of a whistle-blower complaint that the Trump administration has withheld from Congress. And it occurred just a few days after Mr. Trump had ordered his staff to freeze more than $391 million in aid to Ukraine.

Mr. Trump has confirmed aspects of his conversation with the Ukrainian leader in recent days, but he continues to insist he acted appropriately.

The president said on Tuesday that he would authorize the release of a transcript of the conversation, part of an effort to pre-empt Democrats’ impeachment push. But Democrats, after months of holding back, were unbowed, demanding the full whistle-blower complaint and other documentation about White House dealings with Ukraine, even as they pushed toward an expansive impeachment inquiry that could encompass unrelated charges.

President Trump’s personal lawyer. The prosecutor general of Ukraine. Joe Biden’s son. These are just some of the names mentioned in the whistle-blower’s complaint. What were their roles? We break it down.

Ms. Pelosi told fellow Democrats that Mr. Trump told her in a private call on Tuesday morning that he was not responsible for withholding the whistle-blower complaint from Congress. But late Tuesday, the White House and intelligence officials were working on a deal to allow the whistle-blower to speak to Congress and potentially even share a redacted version of the complaint in the coming days, after the whistle-blower expressed interest in talking to lawmakers.

Although Ms. Pelosi’s announcement was a crucial turning point, it left many unanswered questions about exactly when and how Democrats planned to push forward on impeachment.
 
Last edited:
The rage begins...
Screenshot_20200121-132841.jpg
 
This whole thing is so muddled by nonsense, I thought I'd do a timeline on a bunch of this stuff. Not sure when Congress first approved 2019 aid, the date the spooks cleared Ukraine, or the date of the whistleblower rules changing. Anyone else want to fill out/correct anything else relevant in this timeline?

Ok.

Bruisma is under investigation as of 2012.

Hunter Biden joins Burisma inApril, 2014.

Biden travels to Ukraine three days later.

Shokin appointed to investigate Burisma in 2015.

In December 2015, Biden claims he has never spoken to his son about Burisma, but during a trip to Kiev demands Shokin be fired from investigation in the same month.

March 2016, Shokin is fired.

In June 2016, aid is provided.

Biden admits in a January 2018 speech, to demanding the prosecutor investigating Burisma be fired in exchange for $1 billion from the USA.

Trump temporarily withholds aid in years 2017 and 2018 to Ukraine. He has temporarily withheld aid to several countries, as have several previous Presidents, but released aid in legally mandated time frame.

April 2019 Ukraine forms anti-corruption court.

In April 2019, Biden announces Presidential run, after Trump had already stalled the transfer of aid (?).

In May 2019 Ukraine government announces Hunter Biden cleared of wrong-doing.

Zelensky becomes Ukrainian leader in May 2019.

Ukrainian prosecutor promises to release details of Hunter Biden’s payments to Bill Barr.

June/July 2019 (?), spook agencies clear Ukraine as being free of corruption allowing aid to be released. Despite this, Trump continues to withhold aid, first wishing to speak to new President of Ukraine. By law, he is not allowed to release aid without feeling existence of anti-corruption efforts by Ukraine.

July 2019, Trump calls Zelensky, who felt no pressure, to investigate Bidens and was unaware of aid being withheld. No mention was made of bribery, quid pro quo’s or the aid being withheld on conditions of Zelensky acting against Biden corruption suspicions.

July/August 2019 (?), whistleblower rules changed to allow second hand knowledge.

August 2019, whistleblower files report, two weeks after Trump/Zelensky call, despite having no personal knowledge of call.

September 5, 2019, Ukraine Anti-corruption court begins operating.

September 2019, aid is released, many weeks before mandated deadline, all without Ukrainian government doing anything Trump had asked, days after Ukrainian court begins operating.

September 2019, House Democrats begin pursuing impeachment.

September 2019, Trump releases transcript of call. Zelensky as well as other Ukrainian officials assert there was no pressure, nor did they act to investigate Hunter Biden.

September 2019, Mark Waid claims to have a second whistleblower.

September/October/November 2019, House Intelligence holds secret hearings where President is not allowed defence or questioning rights, Democrat members controlling all witnesses, as well as Republican members being stifled and censured. This is followed by limited public hearings, and then House Judiciary hearings. No witnesses can affirm knowledge of quid pro quo, nor have direct knowledge of Trump’s reasons. Sondland, the only one with direct conversation with Trump regarding Ukraine, says Trump told him he wants nothing from Ukraine, and his interpretation was only guessing. During process, since White House could not adequately question witnesses, Trump asserts Executive Privilege over staffers testifying, and House Democrats assert issue is too urgent to petition third branch, the Judiciary, to decide on privilege.

December 2019, Democratic member admits they must impeach Trump or he may be re-elected.

December 2019, House votes on articles of impeachment.

January 2020, several Democrats admit theywill continue with impeachment efforts via other charges.

January 2020, having waited a month, House finally forwards articles to Senate (indicating their failure to subpoena was not due to urgency), and calls Senate rules unfair since indications are made that it was the duty of House to subpoena relevant witnesses themselves, rather than having the Senate do it for them.
 
Last edited:
So, in the opening statement of Adam Schiff so far:

He has lied before the senate.

Stated that congress has more power than the executive.

Quoted someone by affecting a bad accent.

Claimed there was a crime but can't name it.

Stated they were depriving Trump of due process because they just don't have the time.

Demanded fairness where he himself deprived others of fairness.

---

This guy needs to be removed from government.
 
So, in the opening statement of Adam Schiff so far:

He has lied before the senate.

Stated that congress has more power than the executive.

Quoted someone by affecting a bad accent.

Claimed there was a crime but can't name it.

Stated they were depriving Trump of due process because they just don't have the time.

Demanded fairness where he himself deprived others of fairness.

---

This guy needs to be removed from government.

"C'mon guys please just let me have this this one time"
 
So, in the opening statement of Adam Schiff so far:

He has lied before the senate.

Stated that congress has more power than the executive.

Quoted someone by affecting a bad accent.

Claimed there was a crime but can't name it.

Stated they were depriving Trump of due process because they just don't have the time.

Demanded fairness where he himself deprived others of fairness.

---

This guy needs to be removed from government.

I was going to say, it sounded like Adam Schiff was being a salty bitch about quite a bit.
 
The rage begins...
View attachment 1108408

Typical Lefty, spent 30minutes typing out a War and Peace diatribe, instead could've just said "Hoes Mad!" and be done with it.
 
Speaking of utterly fucked-up organizations, Victor Davis Hanson gives CNN the whacking it deserves. Fuck CNN, actually they've fucked themselves. NFG here.

As a side note, get a poetry feed every morning.

Today's feed was a poem about the "impeachment", written by some old hippie. Went to his web site, assured him he had nothing to worry about, since I was sure the "trial" would be conducted in the same impartial and non-partisan manner the "hearings" were. Fuck that asshole, and fuck Schiff, Pelosi, and all the Dems. And all three holes for Tulsi, heh, heh.

VDH lays it on them..

https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/19/progressive-petards/


Progressive Petards
When the Left has to live according to its own rules, it will rue the loss of the civilization it destroyed.

Victor Davis Hanson - January 19, 2020


Since at least 2016, CNN has mostly ceased being a news agency, but that hasn’t stopped it from being an active participant in #TheResistance. The network is so caught up in the fervor of this movement that many of its guests and regular hosts have been fired, reprimanded, or apologized for threats to the president or general obscene references (e.g., Reza Aslan, the late Anthony Bourdain, Kathy Griffin).

Many of its marquee reporters have resigned, were fired, or reassigned for fake-news bias (e.g., Thomas Frank, Eric Lichtblau, and Lex Haris), or came under fire for false reporting (Jim Sciutto, Marshall Cohen, and Carl Bernstein) or have had to offer retractions and/or apologies (Gloria Borger, Eric Lichtblau, Jake Tapper, and Brian Rokus.)

Its anchors have apologized for obscenity (Anderson Cooper) or simply making up false statements (Chris Cuomo), while analysts have been caught in a number of contradictions about their own role in on-going scandals (James Clapper).

The common denominator has been the new journalistic ethos that aborting the Trump presidency justifies any means necessary to achieve such noble ends. Throughout CNN’s descent into parody, progressives still smiled at the usefulness of CNN for the larger project of delegitimizing the Trump presidency. Few understood the Thucydidean concept that once nihilists destroy norms and protocols of ethical behavior for perceived short-term advantage, they usually rue the loss when they themselves become victims of their own biased zealotry and are in dire need of the civilizational help they recently ruined.

So it was last week, when CNN moderator Abby Phillip warped the recent Democratic presidential primary debate by not asking, so much as accusing, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) about a claim that he said a woman such as Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) could not be elected president—in the fashion of a “When did you stop beating your wife?” question: “Senator Sanders, CNN reported yesterday, and Senator Warren confirmed in a statement, that in 2018 you told her that you did not believe that a woman could win the election. Why did you say that?”

Leftists were outraged at the CNN host’s flagrant bias—as if there was gambling really going on in Casablanca, as if CNN’s own Candy Crowley had not attempted to hijack the second 2012 presidential debate to aid favorite Barack Obama, or as if CNN’s Donna Brazile had not leaked a debate question to aid Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Diversity Drama
The same irony is on display with the Democratic presidential field. One strange theme has been dominant since the primary debates began: the more the white frontrunners pontificated on “diversity” and deplored “white privilege,” the whiter the Democratic field seemed to grow—until there were no nonwhite candidates left.

Those who followed the Democratic field were vexed, given that for three decades the Left has canonized its two fundamental identity politics principles of “proportional representation” and “disproportional impact.” These are the rather strange ideas that racial, ethnic, and gender groups must be represented in coveted jobs and billets according to their percentages in the general population—and its addendum that if there was not proper proportional representation, then no evidence of bias or discrimination was needed to take reparatory action to ensure that race governed hiring and admissions.

Thus, according to progressive doctrine, the white liberals and democratic socialists on the Democratic debate platform, not Democratic voters, pollsters, and donors themselves, are in a way culpable for the absence of candidates of color, whether or not a Biden, Buttigieg, Sanders, or Warren was guided by prejudicial behavior in beating a Booker, Castro, Harris, Patrick, or Yang.

Perhaps if the Democratic candidates lived by the rules they had enforced on universities or other public agencies, then an underrepresented Cory Booker or Julian Castro would have been by fiat reinstated on the debate stage and an “overrepresented” Bernie Sanders or Pete Buttigieg, the beneficiaries of centuries of “white privilege,” would be passed over from the opportunity—for the greater societal good of diversity.

The idea that a Biden or Warren “earned” their stronger polling or greater fundraising, based on any meritocratic notion of out-debating, out-hustling, out-campaigning, or out-politicking a Harris, Castro, or Booker would be considered not just absurd, but proof of the bias of any who embraced such a structurally racist position.

Absurd? Perhaps, but for the rest of the country that has been lectured unceasingly by progressive elite scolds, it was pure schadenfreude.

Impeachment Indiscretion
Democrats may also be hoisted by their own petard in the ongoing impeachment psychodrama. They more or less rigged the House impeachment proceeding, by using their majority to depart from past practice. They monopolized the witness lists, selectively leaked, and rushed to indict Trump on the theory that every day the president was not impeached was another day the country was endangered.

Then when bipartisan support never appeared, when there was no special counsel’s damning report, when there was no public majority support, and when there was not the appearance of constitutional indictments for treason, bribery, and specific high crimes and misdemeanors, the impeachment writs simply sat, ossifying as if the House prosecutors suddenly wished to be sober, judicious, and reflective, when in truth they were finagling ways to fortify their anemic writs before what they feared would be a disastrous and embarrassing Senate acquittal.

Democrats insisted that the Senate trial have witnesses and that Republican senators conduct the proceeding in a nonpartisan fashion antithetical to the partisan manner in which they had rammed through impeachment in the House. In other words, Democrats demanded that Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) not replay the roles of Reps. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).

Yet the obvious expectation in such a free-for-all impeachment and trial circus was always that Hunter Biden and Joe Biden would be the most preeminent witnesses called, given Trump’s logical defense that the younger Biden was utterly corrupt, was known to be corrupt but found useful by Ukrainians, and thus naturally such a high-profile case justified presidential suspicions of Ukrainian requests for aid—with the corollary that the elder Biden, the font for Hunter’s ability to leverage money for access, would not be able to testify honestly about the degree to which he knew of his son’s skullduggery.

Joe Biden, despite his senior moments and his lifelong reckless speech, may be for now the Democrats only hope to carry the Midwest swing states that sent Donald Trump to the White House. Thus, the Democrats in the very fashion they have conducted themselves throughout this impeachment farce, may be insidiously destroying the candidate with the best chance of regaining the White House—even while likely enhancing Donald Trump’s polls.

That the Democrats realized such risks and ignored them, either suggests the Left wants to finish off the Biden candidacy, or their obsessions with destroying Trump outweighs any practical considerations of replacing the president with one of their own.

Blinding Rage
These are strange times, in which progressives grow near quiet when courageous Iranians hit the streets to protest a murderous government, but express remorse over the killing of one of the most murderous of all Iranian autocrats.

For years, leftists have decried the bipartisan kid-gloves treatment of China, as its mercantilism systematically hollowed out the old Democratic blue-collar base in the Midwest—only to blast the first president who agreed that China had to be confronted before it eroded what was left of the American industrial heartland.

And we were always warned to fear the government overreach of the intelligence agencies, even as ex-high officials go on liberal networks, warping their use of their security clearances, to contextualize their own previous unethical behavior.

Of all the strange symptoms of Trump Derangement Syndrome, progressive self-immolation is the strangest.

He just condemned everything he did in Congress. I am also offended by the fact that Schiff is pretending they aren't going to just do this again and again and again until Trump is out of office in 2024.

No sweat. All future Presidents will either be impeached or a serious effort made to impeach them. Doesn't matter if that President walks on water. Just another way for the losing party to salve their butthurt.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No sweat. All future Presidents will either be impeached or a serious effort made to impeach them. Doesn't matter if that President walks on water. Just another way for the losing party to salve their butthurt.

The DNC has tried, at least thumbing it in, to impeach every Republican President for the past few decades. It's just that Trump, having stood up to the Bureaucracy and Swamp and won, has scared them completely fucking shitless and it's not just the fringe doing it.

Or, the fringe has taken over and we're all fucked.
 
Or, the fringe has taken over and we're all fucked.
This.

I love how people liked to say earlier in this thread that Nancy Pelosi was trying to reign all the tards in when Nancy has ALWAYS been on the fringe as much as any of them. You can't tell me by looking at her face that is the sign of a sane woman.
 
No sweat. All future Presidents will either be impeached or a serious effort made to impeach them. Doesn't matter if that President walks on water. Just another way for the losing party to salve their butthurt.

Are you retarded? You keep saying this despite me already showing that it is completely fake news because of demographic replacement. Coloreds don't vote Republican, and they will be the majority within 10 years. A Democrat President isn't going to be impeached by a Democrat House. Get it? Take your head out of the sand and realize that the US is about to become a single party state.
 
I was listening to that sleepy-eunuch read this shit and I suddenly remembered: They still haven't presented an actual crime.

They are still trying to litigate Trump's policy decisions and grasping at whatever straws they can find.

They keep talking about evidence and an overwhelming case but there's no crime. Not one person stated there was a crime. They said they thought it was bad or wrong but never said it was a crime. Not one of them under direct questioning said there was a crime.

There was no abuse of power. They can claim it all they want but there was none. The impoundment act wasn't violated no matter who says it was because the funding didn't expire--it was paid out.

There was no obstruction of Congress. There was a legal use of privilege to protect the system of checks and balances(the destruction of which presents dangers these fucks cannot accept because they believe they will always be in power even as they lose it). Coup actors simply wouldn't wait to be beaten in court as they have in the past(Sekulow referenced the case) so they claimed Trump was acting outrageously and obstructing! They sure like to claim anyone not doing their b

The only misconduct we've seen is on the part of Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler, and countless others. That's being revealed and will continue to be revealed.

I am really unsure what their plan is here but I know the result is failure.
 
I shouldn't be surprised that the MSM is gaslighting this hearing to be illegitimate and theirs to be TRUE AND HONEST. I really want this to blow back in everyones faces. I can't wait for all of this to blow over and for Schiff to be hung out to dry. Really want to see every joker nuked in glorious fashion.
 
Did trumps paedo buddy lawyer speak?
I'm watching the PBS Youtube stream. Still Shithead Schiff.
Edit - Every livestream chat is disabled on every stream I find.
Edit#2 - He's been talking for how long now and is sending people to sleep. "Hey guys, when people say we were not allowing the president or his lawyer into our hearings, that's just plain wrong. Don't ask me how or why, it's just wrong."
Edit#3 - He's finally off the mic.
 
Last edited:
The fact that their entire "Whistleblower" testimony is nothing but second-hand information should've shot this down before it ever got to this point.

But beyond that...yeah, they haven't shown ANY crime. It's just a bunch of "OBVIOUSLY NO ONE LIKES THIS PRESIDENT, SO IMPEACH HIM" crap with zero real accusations or evidence to back them up.

If anything, this just shines more of a spotlight on the Bidens shady as fuck actions, as this entire thing seems to be caused by them.
 
So the side that conducted their meetings in secret basements to the point a bunch of repubs charged in to see what the president was even being accused of is trying to make a public trial out to be illegitimate. How fucking close are things going to have to become to that Eric Andre meme?

BLAM! Why did the Republicans make this such a circus?
 
The fact that their entire "Whistleblower" testimony is nothing but second-hand information should've shot this down before it ever got to this point.

But beyond that...yeah, they haven't shown ANY crime. It's just a bunch of "OBVIOUSLY NO ONE LIKES THIS PRESIDENT, SO IMPEACH HIM" crap with zero real accusations or evidence to back them up.

If anything, this just shines more of a spotlight on the Bidens shady as fuck actions, as this entire thing seems to be caused by them.
It should have. Coincidentally, Shithead changed those rules right before this came around. What a fucking (((coincidence))).
So the side that conducted their meetings in secret basements to the point a bunch of repubs charged in to see what the president was even being accused of is trying to make a public trial out to be illegitimate. How fucking close are things going to have to become to that Eric Andre meme?

BLAM! Why did the Republicans make this such a circus?
They gaslight everything now and people believe it. That's the saddest bit. Tells you more about the human condition than anything.
 
Back