• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jonathan Turley 'inundated with threatening messages' after testimony opposing Trump impeachment

Literally not one person here can say what the threats were, how many there were and who made them.

Not. One.

This is how right wing conspiracy theories are born.
 
ludin said:
Yes leftist have been in a coma for 3 years.
They do not under stand things like.

No there was no linkage on any call I had.

The president told me he did 't want anything.
I don't have evidence I just assumed.

Yes I was on the phone call no there was no quid pro quo.

I guess leftist were in a coma when all of that was testified to.
Click to expand...

Knock it off buddy. There you go with your lies again. Just like the fake claim of yours that Trump no longer has an interest in his companies. Just stop lying.

The call transcript is direct evidence of a request for a quid pro quo, a request for an investigation of the Bidens in exchange for more javelin missile sales.

Sondland testified Trump ordered him to follow Rudy's orders. Sondland testified that Rudy told him to condition a White House meeting/call on an investigation of the Bidens.

These two requests are well established.

The thing that is not well established is Trump's desire to request a quid pro quo for an investigation into the Bidens in exchange for $400 some odd million dollars in MILITARY AID. This will not be established until people like Rudy, Pompeo, Bolton, and Mulvaney testify, but the WH is not allowing it to happen.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
This is a lie.
Click to expand...

I posted you where they said it so you are saying 16 people perjured themselves?

Leftist denial fallacies are no longer valid.
So since you cannot accept fact we will assume you simply was not paying attention to their testimony even though I have time after time posted it for people like you.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
Knock it off buddy. There you go with your lies again. Just like the fake claim of yours that Trump no longer has an interest in his companies. Just stop lying.

The call transcript is direct evidence of a request for a quid pro quo, a request for an investigation of the Bidens in exchange for more javelin missile sales.

Sondland testified Trump ordered him to follow Rudy's orders. Sondland testified that Rudy told him to condition a White House meeting/call on an investigation of the Bidens.

These two requests are well established.

The thing that is not well established is Trump's desire to request a quid pro quo for an investigation into the Bidens in exchange for $400 some odd million dollars in MILITARY AID. This will not be established until people like Rudy, Pompeo, Bolton, and Mulvaney testify, but the WH is not allowing it to happen.
Click to expand...

So you are saying the people that testified are lying because those are their words not mine?

What evidence do you have that they are lying?
 
The AntiDonald said:
But it's OK for Trump himself to threaten/intimidate witnesses. You people are shameful.

Turley was most likely secretly paid to spew off his garbage. If the RNC buys thousands of copies of Don Jr. books just to boost him to the best sellers list, they are capable of anything.

And Baron was not insulted by any stretch of the imagination. His name was used as a sarcastic example of what a president can't do. No apology necessary, but she still gave one. That's decency, the opposite of Trumps fans.
Click to expand...

You wouldn't recognize decency if it slapped you on side the head.

No apology necessary from her.................:lamo
 
Conservative said:
you are right, this thread is about Turley so let's focus on Turley, a Constitutional Scholar with an impeccable reputation who was not a Trump supporter nor did he vote for Trump telling the American people that this impeachment process is purely political and there is no credible evidence supporting the charges. What this shows is how radical the left is and yet we have people here supporting that radical ideology. You want to discuss Turley, do so, Perceived threats? You don't believe the radical left is capable of making threats? what rock do you live under?
Click to expand...

I'm sure he's very nice man...but he's also a flip flopper and seems to have double standards on impeachment which makes his testimony largely irrelevant.


For Clinton's impeachment he said this..."While there's a high bar for what constitutes grounds for impeachment, an offense does not have to be indictable. Serious misconduct or a violation of public trust is enough."

But for Trump's impeachment he said this..."I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards ... This impeachment would stand out among modern impeachments as the shortest proceeding, with the thinnest evidentiary record and the narrowest grounds ever used to impeach a president."


Of course, he didn't need any evidence to push for Clinton's impeachment...but now he does for Trump....even though there is lot more evidence against Trump than there was against Clinton...or Nixon for that matter.
 
Last edited:
Moot said:
I'm sure he's very nice man...but he's also a flip flopper and seems to have double standards on impeachment which makes his testimony largely irrelevant.


For Clinton's impeachment he said this..."While there's a high bar for what constitutes grounds for impeachment, an offense does not have to be indictable. Serious misconduct or a violation of public trust is enough."

But for Trump's impeachment he said this..."I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards ... This impeachment would stand out among modern impeachments as the shortest proceeding, with the thinnest evidentiary record and the narrowest grounds ever used to impeach a president."


Of course, he didn't need any evidence to push for Clinton's impeachment...but now he does for Trump....even though there is lot more evidence against Trump than there was against Clinton...or Nixon for that matter.
Click to expand...

He was right in both cases. That, obviously means your statement is wrong. Mystery solved.
 
Anthony60 said:
He was right in both cases. That, obviously means your statement is wrong. Mystery solved.
Click to expand...

In your own alternate universe, perhaps. :roll:
 
Moot said:
I'm sure he's very nice man...but he's also a flip flopper and seems to have double standards on impeachment which makes his testimony largely irrelevant.


For Clinton's impeachment he said this..."While there's a high bar for what constitutes grounds for impeachment, an offense does not have to be indictable. Serious misconduct or a violation of public trust is enough."

But for Trump's impeachment he said this..."I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards ... This impeachment would stand out among modern impeachments as the shortest proceeding, with the thinnest evidentiary record and the narrowest grounds ever used to impeach a president."


Of course, he didn't need any evidence to push for Clinton's impeachment...but now he does for Trump....even though there is lot more evidence against Trump than there was against Clinton...or Nixon for that matter.
Click to expand...

Do you understand what perjury is? That is a crime and that is undeniable. That is the evidence against Clinton, provide the same for Trump?
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Yeah, they sure as **** don't want a comparison of the death toll of white nationalists in this country compared to the far left.
Click to expand...

Little "whataboutism" to justify the behavior of intolerant LIBERALS?
 
Moon said:
Oh, so you were only a little bit completely wrong. You’re welcome.
Click to expand...

So you believe that people like me are calling and threatening Turley because we disagree with him?

I may be welcome, but you're absolutely wrong.
 
Conservative said:
Do you understand what perjury is? That is a crime and that is undeniable. That is the evidence against Clinton, provide the same for Trump?
Click to expand...

The only reason trump hasn't committed perjury is that he refuses to testify under oath. If he obeys a subpoena, he certainly would be.
 
Last edited:
Roadvirus said:
Annnnnnnnd more "whataboutism"!
Click to expand...

No, it's called the right are hypocrites. Its okay as long as its Trump an Co doing it. It's not so ok when its supposedly happening to Republicans. I'm not justifying the threats, many of you justified Trump calling Nazis good people
 
W_Heisenberg said:
I agree with Turley. We need to interview more witnesses...people like Bolton, Mulvaney, Rudy, and Pompeo.

Don't you agree?
Click to expand...

Schiff and every member of his staff, the whistleblower, Joe and Hunter Biden, Brennen, Pelosi, Nadler, …..

So yes, force all of them to testify.
 
roughdraft274 said:
It wasn't the democrats who booted out the few democrats that were against impeachment. You're thinking of republicans. So basically your entire statement makes as much sense as a screen door on a submarine.
Click to expand...

Sometimes a poster who is desperate, posts some of the most absurd and poorly thought out things, just because they feel a need to say something, I guess.

You provided another example of that phenomena.
 
Conservative said:
Do you understand what perjury is? That is a crime and that is undeniable. That is the evidence against Clinton, provide the same for Trump?
Click to expand...

Comparing Clinton's impeachment to Trump's is a false equivalence. 'Clinton didn’t use the power of the presidency to try to extract valuable help for his re-election campaign from a foreign leader & endangering our national security to do so.'
 
ocean515 said:
Sometimes a poster who is desperate, posts some of the most absurd and poorly thought out things, just because they feel a need to say something, I guess.

You provided another example of that phenomena.
Click to expand...
Did you forget that Justin amash was booted from the Republican party dared to break ranks?

My point was valid. It just went over your head apparently.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom