Trump disparages Pelosi at their first meeting since impeachment inquiry began, Democrats say

[Nalu]

First you said it was a promise. Now you say it's an indication.

Make up your mind.

In any case, the way I see it is he will never release the transcripts. He will do as he has done...release the cherry-picked snippets that benefit his narrative.

I don't care what you call it. You would know I already told you that if you weren't wasting your time snipping my posts for middle school dramatic effect.

Also as I said, suit yourself. We reasonable people have already written off partisans who prejudge everything related to Master Trump.

You're a pleasant poster. Nice to meet you.

 

[marke]

There are no "seditious traitors" (maybe the people in the White House, but I wouldn't go that far). You speak nonsense here. Perhaps take a sedative. Regroup and try again.

The scenario was hypothetical, designed to highlight a point you obviously did not get.

The impeachment clause exists in the Constitution for a very specific reason. If you don't think we have crossed into that reason, well that is an argument, but its pretty irrational to not think we are not at least close to that line. I, and 52% of Americans think we have already crossed the line. The Constitution, in its brilliance, provides for the removal of a President (and other officials) that are deemed unfit to serve. The determination of their fitness to serve has a process, that includes a trial.

I am not opposed to legitimate impeachment proceedings. I am opposed to weird twisting or dismissal of traditional rules governing how impeachment proceeding are to be conducted. Democrats in the full House did not vote for impeachment proceedings to begin, yet Schitff began them on his own in secret while banning the rule of law, due process, and republican involvement. How democrats manage to think that is just, fair, legal, honest, open or moral is beyond me.

 

[marke]

The House committee hearings were perfunctory when Clinton was impeached. There was not much, if any, proceedings of the committee.

Today's committee hearings have numerous witnesses, and they are closed-door to prevent future witnesses from knowing what the testimony had been. This is a common convention in courts.

Are the proceedings honest and open? Were the proceedings against Clinton honest and open? Did the full House vote to approve before proceeding with an impeachment hearings in the House? Yes, in the Clinton case. No, in Trump's case. Were witnesses questioned in the House openly by members form both parties? Yes, in the Clinton case. No, in Trump's case. Were the charges clearly outlined, identified and reasonably shown to be undoubtedly violations of US law? Yes, in Clinton's case. No, in Trump's case.

 

[Minty_fresh]

I thought he was toast after the Mueller investigation?

Not me. I figured he could weather that storm. Like Billy boy a d white water. Minus Linda Tripp of course....lol
But this is not survivable. Nancy is gonna cut him down. She's been chillin and waiting for the right opportunity. Then she takes the shot, like any good hunter....he's toast.

 

[Mach]

Clinton was not impeached by a secret group of republicans behind closed doors while banning democrat participation. The democrats do things differently, likely because they have no interest is being honest and open and fair to both republicans and democrats as well as to the American people.

First, the rules for special counsel under Clinton, expired and were replaced by DOJ specific rules for special counsel, you should know this if you are going to act like you care.
Kenn Starr was allowed to do it mostly any way he wanted with the old rules. Mueller had to follow DOJ policy.

As to Trump's impeachment investigation, they had no other option, because Barr/DOJ chose at least 3 time, not to investigate this.
As a direct result of that, the House has to do its own investigation. Investigations like this, are done mostly in private to protect the investigation. What do investigators often say during ongoing investigations marke? "We don't comment on ongoing investigations".
But here you are, crying that they aren't commenting about ongoing investigations as much as you'd like, whey they both shouldn't, and It was Barr who chose not to investigate it.

 

[Mycroft]

We reasonable people have already written off partisans who prejudge everything related to Master Trump.

Have you written yourself off?

It will be in public. Schiff already promised that. The reason it's not in public right now is because Trump and his army of demons will use the ongoing testimony to make up lies for the rest of it. All of this is public knowledge already by the way.

 

[SLC]

First you said it was a promise. Now you say it's an indication.

Make up your mind.

In any case, the way I see it is he will never release the transcripts. He will do as he has done...release the cherry-picked snippets that benefit his narrative.

Yep Schiff isn't interested in transparency.

 

[Trump]

They have scammed you with that too. The matter was heavily investigated and to dream that Bill Barr flying around the world trying to reverse the overwhelming conclusion by the FBI, CIA, and others, that Russia was behind the election interference is left for the weak-minded.

I bet you fell for Trump saying that he sent investigators to Hawaii and "you wouldn't believe what they found."

I'm willing to say if Durham finds no wrong doing in his investigation....I can live with that...can you say the same if Durham finds wrong doing in his report?

in case you missed my question the first time.

 

[SLC]

I don't care what you call it. You would know I already told you that if you weren't wasting your time snipping my posts for middle school dramatic effect.

Also as I said, suit yourself. We reasonable people have already written off partisans who prejudge everything related to Master Trump.

You're a pleasant poster. Nice to meet you.

Sort of like what Schiff does. Cherry picks snippets of testimony to release.

 

[Nalu]

Have you written yourself off?

Are rhetorical questions your thing?

 

[Media_Truth]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...a7baa6-ef9f-11e9-b648-76bcf86eb67e_story.html

"At their first meeting since the impeachment inquiry began, President Trump disparaged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), prompting Pelosi and other Democratic leaders to leave the meeting after what she described as the president’s ‘meltdown.’"

"Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), meanwhile, told Republican senators that the Senate will probably meet six days a week during the impeachment trial, which he expects to begin around Thanksgiving."

================

The President responds to Pelosi like a two year old. Meanwhile, McConnell gets ready for Trump’s trial during Thanksgiving. I think the Turkey needs a pardon.

Gee - another day, another Trump meltdown. :boom

 

[Nalu]

Sort of like what Schiff does. Cherry picks snippets of testimony to release.

Um, ok. Not the same thing though. I get that you're trying to make a cheeky point, but the other poster didn't just release incomplete portions of my transcript. He deleted what I wrote and then took the time to replace it with "~snipped because I'm not interested in the way you see it~". Doesn't that strike you as gratuitously bitchy? I met the guy a couple hours ago and exchanged fewer than 10 messages with him. I'm not quite sure why there's an air of "let me be the biggest asshole I can be to a complete stranger, anonymously" hanging over some exchanges, both online and in real life. Isn't there anyone left who wants our discourse to improve?

 

[MauiMan]

More like treating her like she's treated him. Look at her public statements for the last few weeks. She got what she asked for.

She’s been factual while Trump distorts, lies, and obstructs.

 

[MauiMan]

I guess you are shocked that anyone would speak so disrespectfully of a politician who was elected by 200,000 American voters?

She won with 78.1% of the vote in her district. The Republican got 7.6%. That’s better than Trump by a wide margin. In fact, Trump lost the popular vote.

Trump will be impeached. President Pence will lose to Elizabeth Warren in 2020.

 

[rocket88]

Keep dreaming. Pelosi doesn't even have the guts to vote on the inquiry. There's no way they'll vote to forward the articles to the Senate...lol

Of course not. The point is that during the election they can talk about Trump being under a cloud of possible imoeachment. Similarly, Trump doesn't actually exlect the Ukrainians to come up with something, he just wants to say Biden is being investigated.

 

[Mycroft]

Are rhetorical questions your thing?

It's not a rhetorical question. I quoted you prejudging Trump.

 

[rocket88]

Treason? Who is trying to overthrow whom? Is Trump trying to overthrow Pelosi or is Nancy trying to overthrow Trump?

Trump is not geing overthrown. If he is removed from office via impeachment, that's a Constitutional process. You don't just get to change the meaning of words.

 

[MauiMan]

I wish the updates didn't roll in reverse chronological order, but that's not your fault.

I just read the version appearing around 2:00 A.M. ET. It's fascinating. The Republicans are misrepresenting the ongoing hearing process. Trump has been losing his **** almost hourly. And Syria isn't even mentioned except to say that the Democrats walked out of a meeting about it. Hot mess express.

That is a fact. Trump is losing his mind. He should be removed immediately before he launches nuclear weapons on someone. He’s actually a sociopath. The fact that he caused the deaths of our friends—the Kurds—means absolutely nothing to him. Seriously—he does not have the ability to empathize with other people.

 

[Nalu]

It's not a rhetorical question. I quoted you prejudging Trump.

This is what you quoted:

We reasonable people have already written off partisans who prejudge everything related to Master Trump.

Which part was the prejudgy part?

 

[MauiMan]

Gee - another day, another Trump meltdown. :boom

Another day in The Nut House.

 

[Mycroft]

This is what you quoted:

We reasonable people have already written off partisans who prejudge everything related to Master Trump.

Which part was the prejudgy part?

Jesus!! Can't you read?

This is what I quoted:

"It will be in public. Schiff already promised that. The reason it's not in public right now is because Trump and his army of demons will use the ongoing testimony to make up lies for the rest of it. All of this is public knowledge already by the way."

You are dismissed. (see my sig)

 

[Nalu]

That is a fact. Trump is losing his mind. He should be removed immediately before he launches nuclear weapons on someone. He’s actually a sociopath. The fact that he caused the deaths of our friends—the Kurds—means absolutely nothing to him. Seriously—he does not have the ability to empathize with other people.

This administration, this media, and this political environment make me feel like an unwilling crash test dummy. We're actually adapting to and adopting the psychosis of the environment, which is terrifying for the future.

 

[Nalu]

Jesus!! Can't you read?

This is what I quoted:

"It will be in public. Schiff already promised that. The reason it's not in public right now is because Trump and his army of demons will use the ongoing testimony to make up lies for the rest of it. All of this is public knowledge already by the way."

You are dismissed. (see my sig)

Just a suggestion, but try to calm yourself.

I see what you mean. You didn't specify what I said that led you to your current breakdown. Rest assured it wasn't intentional. As you can see, I didn't prejudge the outcome of the impeachment. I've met a few posters like you so far. Your missives are so replete with emotion and irrationality, for no good reason that I can discern, that I have concern that a format like this isn't good for you. I mean, why voluntarily engage with a stranger you'll never meet just to ramble aimlessly for a short time before imploding into an angry puddle?

Amyway, "dismissal" is a continuation of the school grade feedback I'm receiving, so I'll go ahead and dismiss it too.

 

[j brown's body]

As she said...with you, all roads lead to Putin. Owned.

View attachment 67266395

The look on the military brass in this photo says it all. Total dejection and defeat. Sad.

 

[Bullseye]

She’s been factual while Trump distorts, lies, and obstructs.

If you define "factual" as babbling all the left wing nonsense, you may be correct. "Factual"? NFW.