• 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!

Didn't Democrats in Congress just do EXACTLY what they claim Trump should be impeached for?

Didn't Democrats in Congress just do exactly what they claim Trump should be impeached for?


  • Total voters
    20
Trump has been viciously attacking, mostly unprovoked (not completely, just mostly) from before he started (birther nonsense anyone). It is obvious to anyone who isnt completely blinded by their partisan beliefs that Trump is the aggressor here and has been from the start. He's defensive because he's guilty of a lot of things and pretty incompetent as a President.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

Now we're going in circles. I won't change your mind and you won't change my mind. But that's how public discourse works these days. The only concession you'll get from me is that both sides are in the gutter. You claim Trump is the aggressor, I say he defends himself quite well. You want Trump to act "presidential"; when is the last time your side has shown a shred of respect for the office of President? Not since before day one is the answer. Biden has his shady dealings, the Clinton's have their shady dealings. Obama had his shady dealings. If you're looking for purity, you won't find it in this democracy.
 
Now we're going in circles. I won't change your mind and you won't change my mind. But that's how public discourse works these days. The only concession you'll get from me is that both sides are in the gutter. You claim Trump is the aggressor, I say he defends himself quite well. You want Trump to act "presidential"; when is the last time your side has shown a shred of respect for the office of President? Not since before day one is the answer. Biden has his shady dealings, the Clinton's have their shady dealings. Obama had his shady dealings. If you're looking for purity, you won't find it in this democracy.
Not purity, just some respect for the office amd our country from the President. Something besides favoritism and self serving corruption. That is what Trump has been doing the last 3 years. No Dems have matched Trump when it comes to lies or disrespect. Not even all those you mentioned put together match him.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
False equivalence. Congressional oversight is part of our system of checks and balances. The Ambassador works for the US government

Democrats are abusing their power and claiming it as oversight. Who stops the House from abusing their power? Who checks them? Apparently no one.
 
the dems are not trying to get dirt for an election ...they are getting information for the impeachment

LOL!! Seriously? The Dems are trying to remove a legitimately elected sitting president. That's far worse than asking a foreign government to investigate someone who isn't even the nominee of a party. And, an investigation could clear Biden and influence the election in Biden's favor. Trump never asked anyone to find dirt, only to investigate. Why do Democrats automatically believe that an investigation will find dirt?
 
He hid the recording of that call in a highly classified (above normal for this sort of call) vault. He hides behind legal manipulation all the time. He hides his tax returns with the treasury department. He hides behind the ignorance and/or gullibility of many of those who support him to try to get away with a lot of corrupt acts. Be also hides behind his name and money in business dealings.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

So, you're saying he is rich politician?
 
your boy facing a firing squad, all his own making. Enjoy, I know I will ! Keep talking Rump and Rudy, please dont stop !!

He's been facing a firing squad from Democrats before he was even sworn in.
 
Democrats in Congress has the Ukraine ambassador testify, hoping to get dirt on Trump - their opposition - to impeach him.

WAIT A MINUTE! Isn't that exactly what they claim is reason to remove an official - trying to get dirt on political opposition from a foreign government?

So, I must conclude either 1.) Most Democrats are exactly perfectly amoral lying hypocrites or 2.) on its face all this attack on Trump is crap.

Which one is it?


Only if you base you entire theme on a false premise.
 
His tactics are sleazy and corrupt. Most expect a President who will be above such things since such tactics that describe as admirable are not seen as desirable to a lot of people. Which may explain Trumps inability to climb any higher in approval ratings.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

Trump ran against the establishment of both parties so it's no surprise that the establishment of both sides don't like him.
 
Liberals count on their opposition to be "above such things". Then they can attack with lies and innuendo's without fear of retaliation. They throw bombs, Trump throws bombs back. They just ain't used to that. They can't adjust, so they double down. Then Trump doubles down. I love watching it. Liberals got so used to setting the rules; they get to attack while their opposition (like Trump) has to act all "presidential" and take it. Well, Homey don't play that game. He fires back. BTW; the polls said Trump didn't have a chance last time. Now we call him Mr. President.

They did the same thing to Kavanaugh. When Kavanaugh got right back in their face over unproven allegations, the left tried to claim that he didn't have the temperment to be on the Court.
 
LOL!! Seriously? The Dems are trying to remove a legitimately elected sitting president. That's far worse than asking a foreign government to investigate someone who isn't even the nominee of a party.
Following the Constitution to remove a politician from office is worse than abusing high office?
That's an odd take, imho.


And, an investigation could clear Biden and influence the election in Biden's favor.
Great. Let's get the USDOJ involved and have them start an investigation.

This whole affairs is years old.
Do you suppose that there could be a reason why Trump_DoJ has not taken the actions you would like them to take on this matter?
They have literally had years to look into this.
But they have not done what you wish they had done.
hmmm.

Do you suppose it's more likely that Trump's DoJ is too corrupt to take the actions you want?
Or is it likely that politicans are making up bull****?
OR what exactly?

Why do Democrats automatically believe that an investigation will find dirt?
There's no indication this is true.
No one gives a **** if the Bidens go down.
No one is worried about that.
That is a well beaten straw man.
I think you personally have been beating the poor strawman for weeks now.
Do you refill it with straw yourself? Or is there another team member who replenishes the straw after you beat the stuffing out of him?
 
Trump has been viciously attacking, mostly unprovoked (not completely, just mostly) from before he started (birther nonsense anyone). It is obvious to anyone who isnt completely blinded by their partisan beliefs that Trump is the aggressor here and has been from the start. He's defensive because he's guilty of a lot of things and pretty incompetent as a President.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

Where was he the aggressor?
 
it's a damn shame that posts like this have to be made.

What's a damn shame is that the House has "oversight" of the president so that he can't abuse his power and yet there is no one overseeing the House to make sure they don't abuse their oversight power.
 
Now we're going in circles. I won't change your mind and you won't change my mind. But that's how public discourse works these days. The only concession you'll get from me is that both sides are in the gutter. You claim Trump is the aggressor, I say he defends himself quite well. You want Trump to act "presidential"; when is the last time your side has shown a shred of respect for the office of President? Not since before day one is the answer. Biden has his shady dealings, the Clinton's have their shady dealings. Obama had his shady dealings. If you're looking for purity, you won't find it in this democracy.

Well said.
 
Not purity, just some respect for the office amd our country from the President. Something besides favoritism and self serving corruption. That is what Trump has been doing the last 3 years. No Dems have matched Trump when it comes to lies or disrespect. Not even all those you mentioned put together match him.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

Democrats have no respect for the office of president. How about showing the president some respect?
 
Democrats in Congress has the Ukraine ambassador testify, hoping to get dirt on Trump - their opposition - to impeach him.

WAIT A MINUTE! Isn't that exactly what they claim is reason to remove an official - trying to get dirt on political opposition from a foreign government?

So, I must conclude either 1.) Most Democrats are exactly perfectly amoral lying hypocrites or 2.) on its face all this attack on Trump is crap.

Which one is it?

The best part of this mental derangement by Democrats to impeach Trump is that they are also condemning Hillary's Steele dossier. If Trump is guilty of committing a crime for seeking information on his political opponent from a foreign source, then so is Hillary Clinton.

If the mentally unhinged Democrats bring up Articles of Impeachment in the House, then on the very same day the Department of Justices needs to indict Hillary Clinton on the very same charges Democrats are accusing Trump of committing. It will be the Democratic Party that puts Hillary in prison (since Trump won't).
 
Following the Constitution to remove a politician from office is worse than abusing high office?
That's an odd take, imho.



Great. Let's get the USDOJ involved and have them start an investigation.

This whole affairs is years old.
Do you suppose that there could be a reason why Trump_DoJ has not taken the actions you would like them to take on this matter?
They have literally had years to look into this.
But they have not done what you wish they had done.
hmmm.

Do you suppose it's more likely that Trump's DoJ is too corrupt to take the actions you want?
Or is it likely that politicans are making up bull****?
OR what exactly?


There's no indication this is true.
No one gives a **** if the Bidens go down.
No one is worried about that.
That is a well beaten straw man.
I think you personally have been beating the poor strawman for weeks now.
Do you refill it with straw yourself? Or is there another team member who replenishes the straw after you beat the stuffing out of him?

Staging a political coup taking down a legitimately elected sitting president is much more treasoness than asking a foreign country to investigate someone who isn't even the nominee of a party, an investigation that could very well benefit Biden more than Trump.
 
Staging a political coup taking down a legitimately elected sitting president is much more treasoness than asking a foreign country to investigate someone who isn't even the nominee of a party.

Do you know what the word "coup" actually means?
Can you define the word coup?
 
Democrats in Congress has the Ukraine ambassador testify, hoping to get dirt on Trump - their opposition - to impeach him.

WAIT A MINUTE! Isn't that exactly what they claim is reason to remove an official - trying to get dirt on political opposition from a foreign government?

So, I must conclude either 1.) Most Democrats are exactly perfectly amoral lying hypocrites or 2.) on its face all this attack on Trump is crap.

Which one is it?

3.) Area lunatic makes another false equivalence.
 
The President is head of the Executive Branch, he is not the branch. Congress is questioning a former State Department employee. No hypocrisy, you are misunderstanding what is happening.
You should read Article 2 of the constitution.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
Democrats in Congress has the Ukraine ambassador testify, hoping to get dirt on Trump - their opposition - to impeach him.

WAIT A MINUTE! Isn't that exactly what they claim is reason to remove an official - trying to get dirt on political opposition from a foreign government?

So, I must conclude either 1.) Most Democrats are exactly perfectly amoral lying hypocrites or 2.) on its face all this attack on Trump is crap.

Which one is it?

None of the above......
 
Trump ran against the establishment of both parties so it's no surprise that the establishment of both sides don't like him.

Exactly. This is something people either don't recognize or won't accept. Trump is anti-establishment. He is an old fashioned independent populist. THAT's why people voted for him. Because they have NO faith in either party. That's why Trump beat out those 15 other mainstream Republican candidates.

And crude and rude as Trump can be, mudslinging and has always been part and parcel of populist politics; it has to be, because populists get attacked from all sides, including the MSM.

I consider Trump our last best hope. Neither political party gives a rat's ass about the working man. They are content to let all the jobs go.
 
You know what I mean. Getting into the weeds is a deflection tactic by you.
Defining the terms you are using is deflecting?

It seems like a definition of terms is an essential part of the process.

Maybe you looked up the definition and found that it does not at all apply to what is going on.
Maybe that's why you seem reluctant to define your term.

Or, maybe you actually do think that defining ones terms in a debate is a distraction from the debate.

Or maybe some other option.

Can't really tell.

As a freebie I'll let you know that using Constitutional mechanisms to remove a politician from power is not a coup.
yw
 
Defining the terms you are using is deflecting?

It seems like a definition of terms is an essential part of the process.

Maybe you looked up the definition and found that it does not at all apply to what is going on.
Maybe that's why you seem reluctant to define your term.

Or, maybe you actually do think that defining ones terms in a debate is a distraction from the debate.

Or maybe some other option.

Can't really tell.

As a freebie I'll let you know that using Constitutional mechanisms to remove a politician from power is not a coup.
yw

You know darn well what my post meant. You just don't want to debate it.
 
Back
Top Bottom