• 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!

Abuse of power, obstruction of congress

trouble13 said:
I love that you guys are still invested in telling people that. The problem with saying that is people are gonna want to know what evidence you have to support that accusation.
Click to expand...

Winning blue since early 2017 on is evidence enough.
 
trouble13 said:
No, it will be judge by the senate and the 10s of millions watching it.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

i doubt that the evidence will sway many cultists.
 
Helix said:
i doubt that the evidence will sway many cultists.
Click to expand...
Evidence? You claimed he confessed. Theres not much roim for ambiguity with that claim.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
swing_voter said:
There is no crime.

It's a circus. The senate will cast their vote, Trump will be found innocent, and that will be it. The impeachment is a huge waste of time and taxpayer dollars.
Click to expand...

Literally no one in the history of the US has ever been found 'innocent'.

Odd that you would state that.
 
trouble13 said:
He could do that but i would not rule out letting the defense rest without offering any rebuttal if the democrats dont produce a sufficient case.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Not sure how it's gonna go. But if they want witnesses let them have them. But...........even the Senate can't force Trump to make cabinet members appear unless the Supreme Court rules that he has to. So, who else they gonna call? Zelinsky?
 
AGENT J said:
BOOM!!!!! and the dodge train takes off!!!! The ownage of your failed posts and lies begins!!!
LMAO I knew this would be fun!!

To further my entertainment and to destroy your lies so more ill ask you AGAIN

Please simply back up your statement with one fact that proves it true . . . . one . . thanks!







who wants to bet my question is dodged and run from again?
Click to expand...

It's up to you to show posts you've made to show your "vast knowledge". Then we can talk.
 
Paradoxical said:
It's up to you to show posts you've made to show your "vast knowledge". Then we can talk.
Click to expand...

and the dodge train continues!!!! LMAO I love it once again the lies in your posts get totally owned, theres egg all over them and YOUR claims cant be backed up with any facts. I love it!!!

Here we are in the same spot, please simply back up your statement with one fact that proves it true . . . . one . . thanks!
 
trouble13 said:
He could do that but i would not rule out letting the defense rest without offering any rebuttal if the democrats dont produce a sufficient case.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I would agree. What I know the dems want to do is drag this out for maximum damage. Even without witnesses, they will parade their charges as if they amount to mass murder for the gullible democrat lemmings to get a good show. Th, we'll see some of the posters exclaim, like a thousand times before, "Trump is guilty. He is a liar. He obstructed." All the usual nonsense they parrot from MSNBS
 
Paradoxical said:
Not sure how it's gonna go. But if they want witnesses let them have them. But...........even the Senate can't force Trump to make cabinet members appear unless the Supreme Court rules that he has to. So, who else they gonna call? Zelinsky?
Click to expand...
My position is that Trump should be given the courtesy to call anyone he wants as part of his defense. Democrats should not be granted the ability to call any new witnesses except ones that are called to offer direct rebuttal to Trumps defense.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
AGENT J said:
and the dodge train continues!!!! LMAO I love it once again the lies in your posts get totally owned, theres egg all over them and YOUR claims cant be backed up with any facts. I love it!!!

Here we are in the same spot, please simply back up your statement with one fact that proves it true . . . . one . . thanks!
Click to expand...

I am seeing that you're the type that proclaims victory when you lost. It's like a guy that is all bloodied and bruised and claiming he won when the other guy is without a scratch. I get your MO now. Mildly amusing.
 
Paradoxical said:
I am seeing that you're the type that proclaims victory when you lost. It's like a guy that is all bloodied and bruised and claiming he won when the other guy is without a scratch. I get your MO now. Mildly amusing.
Click to expand...

Another failed dodge and deflection continue my entertainment!SO delicious!

Here we are in the same spot, please simply back up your statement with one fact that proves it true . . . . one . . thanks!

:popcorn2:




who bets my request is dodged and run from AGAIN?
 
trouble13 said:
My position is that Trump should be given the courtesy to call anyone he wants as part of his defense. Democrats should not be granted the ability to call any new witnesses except ones that are called to offer direct rebuttal to Trumps defense.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I agree. Let's see how it plays out. They presented their case and didn't allow the Republicans the witnesses they wanted, so I agree that as a defense, Trump can call everyone I mentioned plus the Biden crime family as well as Chalupa.
 
OpportunityCost said:
With impeachment, it is supposed to mirror some of the elements of our judicial system and as far as that goes, he is innocent until impeachment is both carried out and judged guilty. All of this assumption of guilt is just smear tactics to sway polling and the Senators that are going to be voting soon.
Click to expand...

As the Democrats have proved with this process, there is no requirement for anything other than a party majority in the House and a super-majority in the Senate. They have showed that as long as they have the votes in both houses then they get to write the rules as they see fit.
 
Jay59 said:
Agent J doesn't have knowledge, just deflections. I don't think anyone has ever dodged one of his posts, but he always claims they do.

Simple pleasures.


So, you have nothing. Again.
Click to expand...

I'm new hear. Learning. I can see that this is his specialty. Never really answer a post. Just finger point and accuse others of what they are guilty of. In this manner, they get the other person to run around in circles and when he does get the appropriate posts, it's never enough. <sigh>
 
Paradoxical said:
Lemme see here how this works. Run for president and be immune from criminal investigations?
Click to expand...

who argued that besides the impeached imbecile?
 
Helix said:
who argued that besides the impeached imbecile?
Click to expand...

Why is it an issue with the left? The president is duly bound to root out crime bosses. Even those running for president.
 
Paradoxical said:
Why is it an issue with the left? The president is duly bound to root out crime bosses. Even those running for president.
Click to expand...

He behaves like a crime boss.
 
Moot said:
Trump himself connected the July 25th phone call on Biden to Ukraine's funding...

"... After days of insisting there was nothing inappropriate about his telephone call with Zelensky, President Trump, in two sets of remarks to reporters asking about his July 25 phone call with Zelensky, appears to confirm a connection between U.S. financial assistance for Ukraine and his pressure for the country's leaders to pursue the investigation he wants.

On Sept. 22, Trump acknowledges discussing Joe Biden with the Ukraine leader during their July 25 phone call. "The conversation I had was largely congratulatory, with largely corruption, all of the corruption taking place and largely the fact that we don't want our people like Vice President Biden and his son creating to the corruption already in Ukraine," Mr. Trump told reporters. Trump says, "Certainly I'd have every right to raise Biden with Ukraine President if there's corruption and we are paying lots of money to a country."

Trump has repeatedly referred to what he falsely claims the Bidens to have done as "corruption." "It's very important to talk about corruption," Trump tells reporters on Sept. 23. "If you don't talk about corruption, why would you give money to a country that you think is corrupt? It's very important that on occasion you speak to somebody about corruption."..."​

The very next day on September 24, Pelosi announced an impeachment inquiry into Trump's quid pro quo with Ukraine...and three House committees opened investigations.

All the testimony that you call opinions are consistent with Trump's own statements.
Click to expand...

Lordy. Looking at things that occurred while Biden's son was a VP at a company pulling down a salary he wasn't qualified while we are making decisions for their Justice department deserves a look, no matter how connected to the Democratic party they are.

There was no discussion where the aid money was compromised by an investigation or lack of it.

You have to connect the dots, not just accusations because they are there.
 
Jay59 said:
Agent J doesn't have knowledge, just deflections. I don't think anyone has ever dodged one of his posts, but he always claims they do.

Simple pleasures.
Click to expand...

LMAO another post full of butthurt! Awesome i love it! This will be fun too.
by all means then feel free to answer my question and or who show where it was factually answered. If you cant it was factually dodged.

:popcorn2:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom