Convinced yet?

[edwardmurphy]

If it's a sham then why do guys like Chris Wallace and Brett Baer think there's something to it? Surely they're not "leftists."

If it's a joke then why are Republican Congressmen and the right wing media trying so hard to convince their supporters and viewers not to watch it? Shouldn't those guys want as many Republicans as possible tuned in to see Jim Jordan totally own Shifty Schiff?

Yet for some reason they don't. The House GOP, Breitbart, Fox News, and all off the right wing pundits are saying the same thing: Don't watch! Don't listen! Steer clear! It's boring! What are they worried about?

Think, man.

Listen to what the right is saying and ask yourself if it makes any sense at all.

[Byblos]

If it's a sham then why do guys like Chris Wallace and Brett Baer think there's something to it? Surely they're not "leftists."

If it's a joke then why are Republican Congressmen and the right wing media trying so hard to convince their supporters and viewers not to watch it? Shouldn't those guys want as many Republicans as possible tuned in to see them make a mockery of Shifty Schiff and his laughable witch hunt?

Think, man.

Listen to what the right is saying and ask yourself if it makes any sense at all.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/rep-devin-nu ... 34159.html

Listen to Devin Nunes and tell me it's not a sham
Listen how Ukraine was involved in a smear campaign against Trump, paid by the DNC
Listen how the democrats almost over-night pivoted the narrative from Russia to Ukraine
Listen how witnesses have absolutely nothing but hearsay and personal opinions
Listen how the president and the president alone sets foreign policy
Listen how it is the president's absolute right not only to hire and fire ambassadors at will, particularly those who disagree with his policy
Listen how it is the president's absolute right to use whomever he wishes to further his foreign policy, including so-called irregular channels (not the first president to do so)
Listen how it would have been dereliction of duty for those channels (regular or otherwise) not to investigate corruption
Listen how what he did with Ukraine is very consistent with his general foreign policy elsewhere to stop or severely curtail spending
I'm not even asking you to think, just listen ...

You are so blinded by Trump hatred I wouldn't waste my time asking you to think.

[PaulSacramento]

You know you're in trouble when Obama says "he guys, let's not go to the extremes" ( paraphrasing).

[edwardmurphy]

You know you're in trouble when Obama says "he guys, let's not go to the extremes" ( paraphrasing).

The "extreme" they're talking about is Canadian style healthcare. Is that really all that crazy, Paul?

[PaulSacramento]

You know you're in trouble when Obama says "he guys, let's not go to the extremes" ( paraphrasing).

The "extreme" they're talking about is Canadian style healthcare. Is that really all that crazy, Paul?

Obama was talking about the Canadian health care system ?

[edwardmurphy]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/rep-devin-nu ... 34159.html

Listen to Devin Nunes and tell me it's not a sham

Ok, right off the bat:

Levin says:

"Two bureaucrats thought that Ukraine should get a ton of money, get it right away, and get it with no conditions."

Ummm... [nonsense]. The money was appropriated by Congress, and that's not the end of it. The DoD also had to sign off on the release of funds, which it did back in May. Whether or not to release the aid was never the Ambassador's decision. Nunes is trying to distract you by misrepresenting the facts.

Next:

"The President of the United States is concerned about corruption."

Ummm... [nonsense]. There is zero evidence that the President had any interest whatsoever in Ukrainian corruption unless it happened to involve the Biden-Burisma or CrowdStrike conspiracy theories. He didn't mention the endemic corruption and supposedly concerns him in either of his phone conversations with President Zelensky. In fact, Rudy Giuliani, Trump's secret point man in Ukraine, and his associates Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, are all under indictment for corruption. We now know that they bribed gave campaign contribution to Pete Sessions to work behind the scenes to sour Trump on Marie Yovanovich who was, by all accounts, an excellent and highly respected career diplomat and who actually was working against corruption. Turn on the TV right now and you can listen to sworn testimony to that effect.

And by the way, I think it's worth taking a moment to remember that all of these competent, highly respected career civil servants are offering testimony under oath. Devin Nunes isn't under oath. Neither is Donald Trump. Neither are any of the pundits that are smearing those civil servants for obeying the law and dong their jobs.

There's just no way to spin this as nothing more than a politically motivated witch hunt. Trump did what he's being accused of, and it was a violation of his sworn oath to put our nation ahead of himself.

Listen how Ukraine was involved in a smear campaign against Trump, paid by the DNC

I didn't hear him say that, but if it were true I'd expect to see it on the front page of the Wall Street Journal. That's the thing about these wildly inflammatory accusations - if they're true they get immediate, widespread traction.

Listen how the democrats almost over-night pivoted the narrative from Russia to Ukraine

The "Russia narrative" is ongoing. It's beginning to look like Trump lied in his written statements to Mueller. And the Mueller investigation determined that the Russians interfered in the election, which was the point, and that Trump obstructed justice continuously throughout the process.

Beyond that, the fact that Trump's behavior with regard to Ukraine is only related to Russia in that Trump's interference in the delivery of military aid was yet another instance of Trump doing things that directly benefit Russia and are detrimental to an American ally.

Listen how witnesses have absolutely nothing but hearsay and personal opinions

Some of them have second hand information. Others have direct knowledge. Nunes is misrepresenting the facts again. That's kind of his thing.

Listen how the president and the president alone sets foreign policy
Listen how it is the president's absolute right not only to hire and fire ambassadors at will, particularly those who disagree with his policy

We all know this and nobody has said otherwise. Nunes wants us to believe that impeachment is about Taylor and Yanukovich feeling sad. It's not.

Listen how it is the president's absolute right not only to hire and fire ambassadors at will, particularly those who disagree with his policy
Listen how it is the president's absolute right to use whomever he wishes to further his foreign policy, including so-called irregular channels (not the first president to do so)

Give me a break. There's just no way to spin Rudy Giuliani, Lev Parnas, and Igor Fruman sneaking around and undercutting American foreign policy as the President appropriately exercising his prerogative to further his foreign policy goals.

Listen how it would have been dereliction of duty for those channels (regular or otherwise) not to investigate corruption

Indeed it would. And there is no evidence that Trump actually made any effort to investigate corruption. He only cared about smearing Biden and pushing the CrowdStrike conspiracy theory. He talked to Zelensky twice and never mentioned corruption, despite the fact that it was literally on the agenda that was provided to him before the call. Trump didn't care about corruption. He just wanted to hurt Joe Biden's candidacy.

Listen how what he did with Ukraine is very consistent with his general foreign policy elsewhere to stop or severely curtail spending

There's another red herring, and I'm not even sure it's true. I'll look it up later, but at the moment I'm not inclined to take Devin Nunes' word on that or anything else.

I'm not even asking you to think, just listen ...

And that's the problem. If I listen without thinking, or fact checking, or paying attention to everything else that's happening then yeah, maybe I'd believe Devin Nunes. But I'm not inclined to turn off my brain, and that's what it would take for me to accept all of his bold faced lies and and slippery misdirections.

You are so blinded by Trump hatred I wouldn't waste my time asking you to think.

I'm guided by the evidence and by the sworn testimony of a half dozen career foreign service professionals, most of whom were appointed by either Trump himself or by people that Trump appointed.

[edwardmurphy]

Obama was talking about the Canadian health care system ?

Pretty much. The "extreme" plan he was talking about is Medicaid expansion.

[Stu]

So Nunes today said that the Democrats have denied several Republican witnesses the right to testify.

Doesn't that pretty well make this whole thing nothing but a circus and nothing more than a kangaroo court and show trial.

[abelcainsbrother]

They have moved away from "quid quo pro" because it was not resonnating enough to sound criminal to the word "bribery" now.

That's because "quid pro quo" (this for that) in and of itself is not a crime.

Quid pro quo becomes a crime (such as extortion or bribery) when it is used for the purpose of compelling someone to do something illegal. For example compelling a foreign entity to illegally interfere in a US election.

Really? Is this really the way you want things to be done in America? You are accused of extorting Ukraine in a phone call,which you prove is untrue by showing the phone transcript and yet the prosecutors change their accusation from extorting Ukraine in a phone call to witholding aid,and now you are guilty of that. You really desire these kinds of shenanigans in America? Where they constantly move the goal posts to prosecute you for something,despite the evidence?A banana republic is what you support.I guess its not a big deal until it happens to you.I guess you think Democrats would only do this to President Trump and not you an American citezen,so it is fair.They would'nt falsely accuse you of a crime come up empty handed, but keep on looking until they find something.Politics is nasty,eh? My conscience is clear.

[abelcainsbrother]

That's an easy choice for me, if Satan were running against Hillary.

Hillary retired 3 years ago. The "anyone but Hillary" thing is played out. You need a new excuse if you want to vote for a criminal again.

What's that old saying?

Better the devil you know, than the devil you don't.



Like I said before, every president has done illegal things. If given only two choices, I'd rather have the lawbreaker who does some good, than the lawbreaker who has policies that I disagree with.

They're all criminals. And pretending otherwise, is just naive.

Perhaps this is why you're not as strong as a Trump supporter as I am. It is because you just assume rght off the bat they they are all guilty of something and so Trump is too. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? I mean I know the Democrats and MSM have tried to turn Donald Trump into Bill Clinton but Donald Trump is not like Bill Clinton and has a totally different history than Bill Clinton does. Just because I defend Trump so much,does not mean he is perfect,as noone is. But there is absolutely no reason to believe the potrayal of Donald Trump by the left and MSM since he decided to run for President,at all. I guess if they repeat it enough over and over, though,it seems believable he is guilty of atleast some of it,despite his history that shows the opposite of their portrayal of him.I think some of it has rubbed off on you. I mean the most pro-life person we've ever known in politics but yet he is guilty of something. I mean,even I had to hope he would deliver when it comes to being pro-life because I knew he was pro-choice for years,but he even surprised me and is definately a man of his word,even if he is a baby Christian.

[abelcainsbrother]

If it's a sham then why do guys like Chris Wallace and Brett Baer think there's something to it? Surely they're not "leftists."

If it's a joke then why are Republican Congressmen and the right wing media trying so hard to convince their supporters and viewers not to watch it? Shouldn't those guys want as many Republicans as possible tuned in to see Jim Jordan totally own Shifty Schiff?

Yet for some reason they don't. The House GOP, Breitbart, Fox News, and all off the right wing pundits are saying the same thing: Don't watch! Don't listen! Steer clear! It's boring! What are they worried about?

Think, man.

Listen to what the right is saying and ask yourself if it makes any sense at all.

We don't get our news from fake news corps.There is nothing wrong at all with ignoring the MSM and allowing others to report what is really going on. One if these days you're going to learn to not trust and not watch fake news,where they constantly get it wrong,over an over. It is amazing how they have you're hopes up again,after I warned you about the MSM. You really think there is something to this impeachment but are just going to be let down again just like Russia collusion,the Mueller Report,Trump is going to be impeached when Mueller Report comes out,we have all of the evidence to impeach him when the Mueller report comes out,Trump obstructed justice and we are going to impeach him,Trump extorted Ukraine in a phone call and we are going to impeach him,Trump withheld foreign aid from Ukraine and we're going to impeach him. Don't you see a pattern here of being totally wrong? If not,you will,again. This is good for you in the long run. Because you yourself get to learn to not trust fake news.

[edwardmurphy]

So Nunes today said that the Democrats have denied several Republican witnesses the right to testify.

Nunes is a clown. He's crying because the Dems won't let him call the whistleblower, whose testimony is unnecessary, and Hunter Biden, who has nothing to do with what Trump is being accused of. It's another attempt to muddy the waters.

If the Administration had a witness who could cast doubt on anything that Trump is accused of we'd have heard from them. There are more than 50 Republican congresspeople on the committees that ran the closed doorhearings. One of them would have leaked the exonerating evidence and this whole thing would have been adjourned.

Instead the Administration has ordered their people not to testify, the State Department has withheld records that have been subpoenaed, and the President has tried to declare executive privilege on everything. Like a guy with nothing to hide, y'know?

If Trump is innocent then why can't he get anyone who was there to come out and say it? If he did nothing wrong then why are so many of his own appointees (or the appointees of his appointees) saying he did?

Think...

Doesn't that pretty well make this whole thing nothing but a circus and nothing more than a kangaroo court and show trial.

No.

It's not a circus, or a court, or a trial. It's an impeachment inquiry. If they don't call any more witnesses it will go to committee, where I imagine they'll write up articles of impeachment. If they do then it will go to the House for a formal vote, which I expect will pass. Then it will be on to the Senate for a trial, where Trump will be acquitted despite strong evidence that he's guilty.

[abelcainsbrother]

I think Ed is finally realizing what I told him months ago. The Senate was the key.Trump only campaigned for Senators and they won.This is why the Republicans have the majority in the Senate and it is a stronger majority in the Senate for Republicans than before the mid term elections too. As we got rid of RINO'S and replaced them with Trump supporters. It is part of Draining the swamp! I think only Mitt Romney is a potential problem for us where before we had more problems. I was right again. Senate was the key! Something Ed is overlooking is Republicans in both the House and Senate are united now.As this impeachment inquiry is purely partisan with only Democrats voting for it,with no Republicans and two Democrats.

[abelcainsbrother]

DB: And if it takes a loss of historic proportions in 2020 to get the Republicans to purge themselves of Trump's corruption, then it will be painful, but IMHO necessary for the future to clean up the Republican party.

ALL Republicans are not corrupt, and you know it!

Yes I do... but the number of Republicans who are willing to speak out publicly against Trump's corruption and criminal behavior is rapidly dwindling. Romney will speak up occasionally. I used to respect Lindsey Graham, but ever since McCain died it looks to me like Graham has gone into Trump sycophant mode.
When I see fewer Republican voices speaking out against crime and corruption in their own party, and more Republican voices tearing down law enforcement and the justice system, I wonder... what on earth happened to the party of Law and Order?

This is why I don't like to discuss politics on G&S - I get sucked into it.

Yeah... I often ask myself... should I even post in the politics threads?
But sometimes it actually helps for me to see how brothers and sisters in Christ deal with some of the issues that I struggle with... even if we disagree.

Lindsey Graham has been activated. If the Dems in the House vote to impeach Trump. Look for a trial in the Senate looking into the ties of the Bidens,Clinton's,Schiff,Pelosi,etc in Ukraine.What the Dems accuse Trump of when it comes to Russia is exactly what they are guilty of in Ukraine.Real crimes,not fake made up crimes based on hear-say.


But also the Senate is going to be looking into the DOJ and FBI's conduct during the Foriegn Intelligence Act (FISA) warrant process as it relates to the 2016 presidential election. Remember I spoke about Treason and Sedition and certian people dismissed it as just namecalling,conspiracy theory,accusing Dems of fake stuff,etc? Yes! Just wait until Ted Cruz realizes he was illegally spied on too,just in case he was the winner they would have something on him to control him,you talk about uniting Republicans. You're going to find out that it was not just the Trump campaign that was illegally spied on,but Ted Cruz,Supreme court judges,Congressmen,the American people. And it is going to totally blow a hole in their spying on Trump because of Russia collusion because we're going to find out the Obama admin spied on many for ways to blackmail,or find info to use against them to force them to go along with their agenda by illegally spying.It was not just the Trump campaign because of credible Russia collusion,etc like they claimed. People are going to learn many were illegally spied on and not just the Trump campaign.Year of the boomerang. The hunters become the hunted. And unlike with the Dems fake ways based on hear-say alone and no evidence,you're going to see evidence of real Federal Crimes just as I have said many times.
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/

[PaulSacramento]

Impeachment = All eggs in one basket.
*shakes head*