The Undisputed Demise Of The Democrat Party

[Irwin Corey]

The items in your OP are only "undisputed" in your mind. As we see in this thread, they are disputed, absolutes will let you down almost every time.

My comment on item 12 is Representative Schiff would LOVE to take the stand and testify under oath the he hasn't met the whistleblower. I doubt John Roberts will allow the whistleblower to be forced to testify, the whistleblower's anonymity is protected by law; which is why he didn't testify during the impeachment inquiry.

Before Republicans will be able to present evidence or call witness's they will have to show "relevance" to the Articles of Impeachment. Again Robert's (not the Republicans) will determine who is allowed to testify.

 

[Winston]

So you already undercut your own argument that you were trying to make with the OP

That statement IS disputed by some, ergo not undisputed.

I didn't say it was undisputed. Christ that's a thick post. I said you can dispute it, dispute all you want, but you won't be taken seriously. The problem with conversing with Trumpers on this topic is they are biased and will not accept any outcome that does not involve a complete exoneration. Even though the evidence says otherwise.

 

[Decypher]

You just can't make this stuff up

Any yet you did.

 

[Condor060]

Except you are missing the key point: These are his suppositions to prove, not ours! :doh

By using "undisputed", he is attempting to shift the burden of proof to us - rather than proving his own suppositions.

Are you really that scared to dispute anything I provided? What other excuse can we come up with?

 

[Condor060]

:lamo

I dispute the whole post. It's partisan garbage that ignores key facts unearthed by the Impeachment inquiry.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sure you do. Why don't you point to any claims and dispute them? We all know why you or other Democrats won't

 

[Condor060]

Trump tried to bribe Ukraine.

You can dispute it but, you won't be taken seriously.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Since every witness who testified stated they had no evidence of that other than what they might have heard, what evidence do you have that these witnesses don't.

 

[Winston]

Sure you do. Why don't you point to any claims and dispute them? We all know why you or other Democrats won't

Sondland testified that "everyone was in the loop" that there was a QPQ regarding meetings in exchange for an announcement of an investigation into the Bidens and Crowdstrike. That is corroborated by other accounts.

I am not going to sit here and split hairs and quibble with someone who's only exit is a total exoneration though. You don't take this seriously. You just want to continue supporting Trump and unburden your mind from his abuses of power.

 

[Condor060]

The items in your OP are only "undisputed" in your mind. As we see in this thread, they are disputed, absolutes will let you down almost every time.

My comment on item 12 is Representative Schiff would LOVE to take the stand and testify under oath the he hasn't met the whistleblower. I doubt John Roberts will allow the whistleblower to be forced to testify, the whistleblower's anonymity is protected by law; which is why he didn't testify during the impeachment inquiry.

Before Republicans will be able to present evidence or call witness's they will have to show "relevance" to the Articles of Impeachment. Again Robert's (not the Republicans) will determine who is allowed to testify.

Trump would be the defendant and not obligated to show any relevance for his defense. That obligation is for the plaintiff only which every witness they brought to the impeachment hearings will not qualify. All the have is hearsay.

Schiff will fight not to testify and the WB will be examined in close door session.

 

[Condor060]

Sondland testified that "everyone was in the loop" that there was a QPQ regarding meetings in exchange for an announcement of an investigation into the Bidens and Crowdstrike. That is corroborated by other accounts.

So you just forgot about how he testified after he made that statement? How convenient for you. Once he was questioned by Republicans we found out he has no evidence of ANYTHING and his claims were all just his presumptions, not fact. Nice try though.

I am not going to sit here and split hairs and quibble with someone who's only exit is a total exoneration though. You don't take this seriously. You just want to continue supporting Trump and unburden your mind from his abuses of power.

No, what I am saying is the Democrats have been outed and their Impeachment hearings were a farce. EVERY single witness that testified admitted under Republican questioning that they had no evidence of any impeachable crime by the president. Pretty lame

 

[Condor060]

Any yet you did.

Prove it

 

[Irwin Corey]

Trump would be the defendant and not obligated to show any relevance for his defense.

Absolutely untrue. Defense and prosecution have to bring relevant evidence and witness; they can't just run all over the map. IF, for example the Republicans want to have Hunter Biden testify they WILL have to show how his testimony addresses the Articles of impeachment. Robert's won't allow it; hide and watch.

 

[Deuce]

Are you really that scared to dispute anything I provided? What other excuse can we come up with?

I disputed everything you wrote. Whether you crawl out of your propaganda bubble is a different question, and one I am not remotely interested in.

 

[Chomsky]

So now its just fine, right?

No, it's not a good thing. I believe strongly in the rule of law, and would like these subpoenas to carry some weight behind them. But I can read the writing on the wall, and I suspect many of those the Senate subpoenas will follow Trump's lead. However, I do firmly believe the whistle-blower should not be forced to divulge his or her identity.

 

[KLATTU]

I I said you can dispute it, dispute all you want, but you won't be taken seriously. The problem with conversing with Trumpers on this topic is they are biased and will not accept any outcome that does not involve a complete exoneration. Even though the evidence says otherwise.

The problem with conversing with liberal DEmocrats is they are biased and will not accept any outcome that does not not involve a removal from office. Even though the evidence says otherwise.

See how that works?
Introspection - you should look into that .

 

[iguanaman]

Sure you do. Why don't you point to any claims and dispute them? We all know why you or other Democrats won't

Because they are all 100% BS. Every single witness that testified said they were told the aid was held up because of Trump's orders and that it was contingent on the investigations of Biden and the DNC server. Trump did not release the aid until he got caught in his scheme by the WB. That is why he is so mad at him/her. The WB messed up his scheme to get dirt on his political opponent.

 

[Condor060]

I disputed everything you wrote. Whether you crawl out of your propaganda bubble is a different question, and one I am not remotely interested in.

All you did was say you disputed my claims. If thats all you got then its all you got. But you couldn't dispute the actual claims with anything other than your presumptions. Kind of like every other witness that took the stand in the hearings.

 

[Deuce]

All you did was say you disputed my claims. If thats all you got then its all you got. But you couldn't dispute the actual claims with anything other than your presumptions. Kind of like every other witness that took the stand in the hearings.

If "disproven" was the standard you were looking for, perhaps that's the word you should have used.

So how does this relate to the "demise" of the Democratic Party? (you seem to not know how to spell it correctly, hope this helped)

 

[Condor060]

If "disproven" was the standard you were looking for, perhaps that's the word you should have used.

So how does this relate to the "demise" of the Democratic Party? (you seem to not know how to spell it correctly, hope this helped)

Lets take a look.

1. The DNC is broke and doesn't even have enough money for a convention
2. Their total candidates combined have only raise 1/3 of what Trump has raised by himself
3. They don't have a single candidate that can beat Trump
4. They have been caught twice now with fake impeachment scandals making unsupported claims and fake accusations
5. They have become so far left that even moderate Democrats won't support them
6. The FISA warrant scandal has now arrived with the first claim about an FBI official providing falsified documents to the court
7. Pelosi and Schiff have promised the world they would remove Trump
8. Trump has raised over 350 million with a year to go
9. The economy and stock markets are booming and unemployment numbers are all historical lows
10. Most people have tuned out the impeachment hearings and the debates

 

[Condor060]

Because they are all 100% BS. Every single witness that testified said they were told the aid was held up because of Trump's orders and that it was contingent on the investigations of Biden and the DNC server.

Yet every single witness testified that these were their presumptions and not directions given to any of them by Trump or any Trump aid. Not to mention that the Biden investigation was never started so theres that.

Trump did not release the aid until he got caught in his scheme by the WB. That is why he is so mad at him/her. The WB messed up his scheme to get dirt on his political opponent.

Nothing in the call script has ever provided any resemblance of a quid pro quo or bribery and nobody has testified that they have any evidence or knowledge of any impeachable crimes.

 

[Deuce]

Lets take a look.

1. The DNC is broke and doesn't even have enough money for a convention
2. Their total candidates combined have only raise 1/3 of what Trump has raised by himself

They don't have a candidate right now. Fundraising numbers in a primary are a lot lower than in the actual election, this is normal.

3. They don't have a single candidate that can beat Trump

Wishful thinking on your part, the polls show Trump and the GOP are in serious trouble. The elections we've seen over the last couple years further prove this.

4. They have been caught twice now with fake impeachment scandals making unsupported claims and fake accusations

All cultists believe this, I'm not interested in debating something you've been brainwashed on.

5. They have become so far left that even moderate Democrats won't support them

Moderate democrats don't vote.

6. The FISA warrant scandal has now arrived with the first claim about an FBI official providing falsified documents to the court

Just a claim. Prove it, or I don't care.

7. Pelosi and Schiff have promised the world they would remove Trump

Neither are running for president, don't care.

8. Trump has raised over 350 million with a year to go

See above. Apples to oranges.

9. The economy and stock markets are booming and unemployment numbers are all historical lows

The economy is good for rich people. The working class just aren't seeing the benefit.

10. Most people have tuned out the impeachment hearings and the debates

This applies equally to Republicans, not an indicator of Democrats having trouble.

You've got a lot of speculation, bad comparisons, wishful thinking, and half-relevant figures. I have the history of elections since 2016. The country has pretty severely rejected Trumpism once they found out what it really is. Districts Trump won by 20 points are being lost to Democrats.

I will bet you a hundred bucks in forum donations that Trump is not re-elected. How sure are you?

 

[Decypher]

Prove it

Well let’s take the first two of your “undisputed” claims and then see if it’s worth our time continuing.

1. It is undisputed that Democrats started their Impeachment quest the day Trump took office

2. It is undisputed that Democrats falsely accused Trump of being a planted Russian asset and took this country through hell for 2 1/2 years over fake claims.

1. Did the Democrats start impeachment talk on the very first day Trump was in office? You’re going to need to show your work here because it wasn’t until after the midterms that they were even in a position to do so. The Mueller investigation obviously predates that but the very first day? Citation needed I’m afraid. While I appreciate you might be using hyperbole to make your argument, you can’t then also claim your poetic license is an undisputed fact.

2. Two outlandish claims here, neither of which can be described as undisputed. Firstly the Mueller probe wasn’t necessarily investigating whether Trump is a Russian asset, more that he conspired with Russia to sway the election. The result was inconclusive. Secondly, your emotional claim that it put the country through “hell” is more of your favored hyperbole which needs evidence to support it.

Your thread claims that it lays out undisputed facts. Yet upon reading, it’s clear it’s full of unsupported assertions and emotional language. None of which is backed up with any evidence or citations. I only examined the first two here but unless you can provide a more coherent argument, I’m afraid your thread remains disputed.

 

[OscarLevant]

You are free to prove it. Bet you can't.

The onus of someone making a claim is to prove a claim is not for your opponent to prove a negative. If you don't understand that then you are clueless about how debates actually work

The only thing I will bet on is that you don't understand the above

If I told you I am the best guitar player in California it would not be for you to prove I'm not , it would be for me to prove that I am

Capiche?

 

[Condor060]

Well let’s take the first two of your “undisputed” claims and then see if it’s worth our time continuing.



1. Did the Democrats start impeachment talk on the very first day Trump was in office? You’re going to need to show your work here because it wasn’t until after the midterms that they were even in a position to do so. The Mueller investigation obviously predates that but the very first day? Citation needed I’m afraid. While I appreciate you might be using hyperbole to make your argument, you can’t then also claim your poetic license is an undisputed fact.

2. Two outlandish claims here, neither of which can be described as undisputed. Firstly the Mueller probe wasn’t necessarily investigating whether Trump is a Russian asset, more that he conspired with Russia to sway the election. The result was inconclusive. Secondly, your emotional claim that it put the country through “hell” is more of your favored hyperbole which needs evidence to support it.

Your thread claims that it lays out undisputed facts. Yet upon reading, it’s clear it’s full of unsupported assertions and emotional language. None of which is backed up with any evidence or citations. I only examined the first two here but unless you can provide a more coherent argument, I’m afraid your thread remains disputed.

Fair enough. I appreciate the tone in which you answered. Very respectful.

1. Trump Inauguration: Impeachment Campaign Launch | Time

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/01/20/the-campaign-to-impeach-president-trump-has-begun/

Pres. Trump: Impeachment Began 'The Day Of The Inauguration' - Sara A. Carter

Efforts to impeach Donald Trump - Wikipedia

This doesn't even include Maxine Waters screaming impeach 45 every day from the day Trump took office.

2. Adam Schiff took his turn of dozens of broadcast claiming he had the evidence of Trump being a Russian asset. This set off hundreds of repeated media resources making the very same claim. At the conclusion of Muellers investigation he had no evidence of Trump conspiring with Russians and no criminal recommendations to the DOJ.

This did nothing but pit the parties against each other as we have now seen we have the most divided nation in our history prior to the civil war.

My meaning of undisputed is I have watched every hearing, read through Muellers report, and tracked the donations of the DNC and RNC and there isn't a single fact available to anyone to dispute what I listed as an undisputed fact. Although I have invited everyone to try, none has taken the challenge. I am sure I know why.

 

[ElChupacabra]

His use of the word undisputed reminds me of Trump using crib notes during an exchange with a reporter this week to remember talking points "I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo."

Trump has Huge wants... and his notion of a quid pro quo (a.k.a 'this for that') usually involves a swindling of sorts. Condor060's #8 references $350Mil raised by the Trump Campaign. Going forward, I expect Trump to try some more bribery.

There was a part of me that kept wondering when he would screw that up and say something like "no squid go pro". I have my doubts on whether he knows the term; the concept yes, the latin phrase not so much.

 

[Condor060]

1. The DNC is broke and doesn't even have enough money for a convention
2. Their total candidates combined have only raise 1/3 of what Trump has raised by himself

They don't have a candidate right now. Fundraising numbers in a primary are a lot lower than in the actual election, this is normal.

If they can't raise but less than 1/3 of Trumps donations collectively while they have candidates who are drawing from 20 different sources, how in the hell do you think one single candidate will catch up to Trump. Which none of this has anything to do with the DNC being broke. They raise money for their single candidate and they can't even pay for a convention.

3. They don't have a single candidate that can beat Trump

Wishful thinking on your part, the polls show Trump and the GOP are in serious trouble. The elections we've seen over the last couple years further prove this.

We all saw how those polls worked in 2016. How did that work out for ya

4. They have been caught twice now with fake impeachment scandals making unsupported claims and fake accusations

All cultists believe this, I'm not interested in debating something you've been brainwashed on.

Then you shouldn't have any problem providing information where the DOJ or IG is supporting either one of the fake impeachment claims.

5. They have become so far left that even moderate Democrats won't support them

Moderate democrats don't vote.

Then you are really screwed

6. The FISA warrant scandal has now arrived with the first claim about an FBI official providing falsified documents to the court

Just a claim. Prove it, or I don't care.


You should turn on the news. Even the Liberal media is reporting on it.

7. Pelosi and Schiff have promised the world they would remove Trump

Neither are running for president, don't care.

Voters do and all they have been told is lies by Democrats and Schiff now for 3 years.

8. Trump has raised over 350 million with a year to go

See above. Apples to oranges.

Yeah, right. The highest presidential candidate fund raising in history more than double the second highest and it doesn't bother you. Suuuure.

9. The economy and stock markets are booming and unemployment numbers are all historical lows

The economy is good for rich people. The working class just aren't seeing the benefit.

Voters disagree

10. Most people have tuned out the impeachment hearings and the debates

This applies equally to Republicans, not an indicator of Democrats having trouble.

Its an indicator that there is nothing anyone believes.