The Impeachment Thread.

What's up today?

Moderators: plunderer, Bernie the union guy

User avatar
Libertas
Board Emeritus
Posts: 18913
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by Libertas »

It was clear last night at the rally rump is trying to get AOC murdered, soon he will just come out and say he wants his idiots to kill all who dont support him.
Excuse me while I use a BROAD BRUSH to say anyone who spends one minute defending anything rump is just as guilty as he is of all his crimes

bradman
Policy Wonk
Posts: 1796
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 6:01 pm
Location: Home of the DFL

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by bradman »

Give this lady a medal. The courage she showed just maybe the spark that will turn the tide. She gives me hope............

https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/s ... timony.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Thank you for the opportunity to start with this statement
today.
For the last 33 years, it has been my great honor to serve the
American people as a Foreign Service Officer, over six
Administrations—four Republican, and two Democratic. I have
served in seven different countries, five of them hardship posts,
and was appointed to serve as an ambassador three times—twice
by a Republican President,and once by a Democrat.Throughout
my career, I have stayed true to the oath that Foreign Service
Officers take and observe every day: “that I will support and
defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies,
foreign and domestic;” and “that I will bear true faith and
allegiance to the same.” Like all foreign service officers with
whom I have beenprivileged to serve,I have understood that oath
as a commitment to serve on a strictly nonpartisan basis, to
advance the foreign policy determined by the incumbent
President, and to work at all times to strengthen our national
security and promote our national interests.
My Background
I come by these beliefs honestly and through personal
experience. My parents fled Communist and Nazi regimes.
Having seen, first hand, the war, poverty and displacement
common to totalitarian regimes, they valued the freedom and
democracy the U.S. represents. And they raised me to cherish
these values as well.
Their sacrifices allowed me to attend
Princeton University, where I focused my studies on the Soviet
Union. Given my upbringing, it has been the honor of a lifetime
to help to foster those principles as a career Foreign Service
Officer.
From August 2016 until May 2019, I served as the U.S.
Ambassador to Ukraine. Our policy, fully embraced by
Democrats and Republicans alike, was to help Ukraine become a
stable and independent democratic state, with a market economy
integrated into Europe.



It brings a tear to my eye it does.
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat. - Will Rogers

User avatar
ProfessorX
Board Emeritus
Posts: 17627
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Location: Sunny South Florida

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by ProfessorX »

She was a very good and honorable distinguished career diplomat for the U.S. as ambassador to the Ukraine.

It's clear to me the reason the maladmin sacked Voyanovich is they realized she wouldn't play ball with their corrupt schemes, and threatened to blow the whistle on it. So they found a replacement who would.
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger

marindem01
Policy Wonk
Posts: 1589
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2019 11:34 am

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by marindem01 »

Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI 2) is facing a serious primary challenge from Hawaiian State Senator Kaiali’i Kahele.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/kai-kahe ... bf796ea5c8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Gabbard is a long shot in the Democratic Presidential Primary.

Senator Kahele raised $399,000.00 has as opposed to Gabbard's $83,000.00.

Gabbard's poll numbers are not very high and she has a history of refusing to debate her opponents. Gabbard has also complained about being allowed to part of the Democratic Debate.

Gabbard's poll numbers sank after she met with 45 in 2017 and she has opposed his impeachment.
"The Clouded Mind See's Nothing", The Shadow.

User avatar
carmenjonze
Board Emeritus
Posts: 24883
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by carmenjonze »

Bye, Tulsi.

Stop calling the cops on us.

User avatar
Libertas
Board Emeritus
Posts: 18913
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by Libertas »

Barr is nuts

AG Bill Barr: "This is not decay. This is organized destruction. Secularists and their allies have m
OK. which one of you is ORGANIZING THIS "organized destruction"?????????????




The Hill

@thehill
Attorney General Bill Barr: "This is not decay. This is organized destruction. Secularists and their allies have marshaled all the forces of mass communication, popular culture, the entertainment industry, and academia in an unremitting assault on religion & traditional values."

Embedded video
8,558
7:53 PM - Oct 11, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy
11.3K people are talking about this

?s=20

@thehill
Attorney General Bill Barr: "This is not decay. This is organized destruction. Secularists and their allies have marshaled all the forces of mass communication, popular culture, the entertainment industry, and academia in an unremitting assault on religion & traditional values."
Excuse me while I use a BROAD BRUSH to say anyone who spends one minute defending anything rump is just as guilty as he is of all his crimes

User avatar
carmenjonze
Board Emeritus
Posts: 24883
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by carmenjonze »

Libertas » Sat Oct 12, 2019 3:03 pm wrote: Attorney General Bill Barr: "This is not decay. This is organized destruction. Secularists and their allies have marshaled all the forces of mass communication, popular culture, the entertainment industry, and academia in an unremitting assault on religion & traditional values."
Well one can only hope.

Lol f' this dumb Iran-Contra pardons stupid little fascist.

Wonder what the Russian government has on his ridiculous sycophant butt.

Stop calling the cops on us.

User avatar
ProfessorX
Board Emeritus
Posts: 17627
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Location: Sunny South Florida

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by ProfessorX »

This probably should go in its own thread, but some have been calling to impeach Barr ... so maybe not. (I'm not positive IF the AG CAN be impeached in the Const but anyhoo.)

Yeah, that speech of his was quite whackadoo, now wasn't it. First off: secularism is not a "creed". Perhaps it is a social and political position, but secularism has nothing, per se, to do with religious belief. Secularism is the position that religious belief should remain a private matter, not something for the state to intrude upon, and not to be the basis of theocratic rule. Because many religious people recognize the danger of government politicizing and controlling their churches, sometimes religious people have been the strongest advocates for the wall of separation between church and state. Also, secularism prevents an oppressive religious majority from discriminating against various religious minorities (as well as atheists and nonbelievers.)

Blaming that litany of social ills he did on 'secularism' was nonsense. Aside from the fact that he was wrong about a key point. Violent crime has actually been decreasing in this country over the last 2 decades, all while it has become more secular. Of course, the naked hypocrisy for a man who has participated in such recent coverups and corruption talking about declining social morality ...

Is academia launching a war on religious belief? Well, I would say, my own academic education led me to question the empirical basis of a number of religious claims, and that was a good thing. Since the Enlightenment, it has no longer been the job of the university to be the handmaiden for theology. Does Barr not want the university to have the academic freedom to question those things? I do.
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger

User avatar
Sam Lefthand
Board Emeritus
Posts: 13822
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by Sam Lefthand »

ProfessorX » Sun Oct 13, 2019 8:49 am wrote:...snip...

First off: secularism is not a "creed". Perhaps it is a social and political position, but secularism has nothing, per se, to do with religious belief. Secularism is the position that religious belief should remain a private matter, not something for the state to intrude upon, and not to be the basis of theocratic rule. Because many religious people recognize the danger of government politicizing and controlling their churches, sometimes religious people have been the strongest advocates for the wall of separation between church and state. Also, secularism prevents an oppressive religious majority from discriminating against various religious minorities (as well as atheists and nonbelievers.)

...snip...
:lol:

I enjoyed that. First you said, "secularism is not a "creed"." Then you told us what the Secularist creed is.

A creed is formal statement regarding beliefs or aims to be used by adherents for guidance of their thoughts and deeds.

Our Democratic party plank is a creed.

I tend to ignore them, but some folks set quite a store over them.

User avatar
ProfessorX
Board Emeritus
Posts: 17627
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Location: Sunny South Florida

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by ProfessorX »

Sam Lefthand » Sun Oct 13, 2019 12:13 pm wrote: I enjoyed that. First you said, "secularism is not a "creed"." Then you told us what the Secularist creed is.
It depends on whether you are using definition 1 or 2 from Merriam-Webster.

1. a brief authoritative formula of religious belief
the Nicene Creed
2 : a set of fundamental beliefs
also : a guiding principle

Barr seemed to be arguing that secularism is a creed of type 1, we can debate whether it is creed of type 2.

The main point I was making is Barr seems to think secularism is some form of hostility to religious belief, that the creed of it is the rejection of all forms of religious belief, or some version of atheism or agnosticism. It isn't. Many secularists are religious believers.

I would argue that this sort of relates to whether there is a difference between holding good ideas and having dogmas. A la Chris Rock.

Secularism, I think, is a good idea, but not a dogma. I suppose every philosophical position could be considered a creed with a loose enough definition. Secularism, like rationalism, is to me, a good idea, not a dogma or a doctrine. It's a good idea to be rational. I don't view rationalism as a "creed". Also, I think it's a good idea to be secular. In the same way.

BTW; the Democratic party does indeed have a platform, I think because voters should know what a political party stands for, otherwise what else you are voting for? It's not like choosing Brand Coke vs. Brand Pepsi. I hope people support parties because of their positions, any other reason is silly.

It doesn't insist all people in the party have to adhere to it, which is why we have pro-life Democrats (for example); I'm OK with that, the U.S. system kind of forces parties to be big tents. That doesn't mean the party leader might not Whip you if you go against the platform on a critical vote. Whip it, whip it real good. :D
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger

User avatar
ZoWie
Board Emeritus
Posts: 20699
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Location: The blue parts of the map

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by ZoWie »

MoveOn called a pro-impeachment demonstration for the old traditional site at the Westwood Federal Building. This is at one of the world's busiest intersections and it's much more visible than Pershing Square downtown on a Sunday. There were quite a few people there. It doesn't take much to make these look huge, and it did.

Also some kind of pro-impeachment demo at the site across from the White House. Looked well attended and very loud.

Now that the president is officially a traitor, I expect more of these.

User avatar
carmenjonze
Board Emeritus
Posts: 24883
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by carmenjonze »

ProfessorX » Sun Oct 13, 2019 8:49 am wrote:This probably should go in its own thread, but some have been calling to impeach Barr ... so maybe not. (I'm not positive IF the AG CAN be impeached in the Const but anyhoo.)

Yeah, that speech of his was quite whackadoo, now wasn't it. First off: secularism is not a "creed". Perhaps it is a social and political position, but secularism has nothing, per se, to do with religious belief. Secularism is the position that religious belief should remain a private matter, not something for the state to intrude upon, and not to be the basis of theocratic rule. Because many religious people recognize the danger of government politicizing and controlling their churches, sometimes religious people have been the strongest advocates for the wall of separation between church and state. Also, secularism prevents an oppressive religious majority from discriminating against various religious minorities (as well as atheists and nonbelievers.)
Yes it's one of the reasons the white Evangelicals took so long in coalitioning with the whacked-out, rightwing pro-segregation, antiabortion, antigay Catholics, too. Then it occurred to both during the so-called forced busing and post-Roe era that they could form a voting bloc and influence the GOP/RNC. And bam: the Moral Majority, socially-conservative "jobs and the economy" Reagan-Democrats, and then the Christian Coalition.
Blaming that litany of social ills he did on 'secularism' was nonsense. Aside from the fact that he was wrong about a key point. Violent crime has actually been decreasing in this country over the last 2 decades, all while it has become more secular. Of course, the naked hypocrisy for a man who has participated in such recent coverups and corruption talking about declining social morality ...

Is academia launching a war on religious belief? Well, I would say, my own academic education led me to question the empirical basis of a number of religious claims, and that was a good thing. Since the Enlightenment, it has no longer been the job of the university to be the handmaiden for theology. Does Barr not want the university to have the academic freedom to question those things? I do.
I hope somebody challenges this dumb bigot on what he thinks "academia" is. My guess is he means what social conservatives always mean: the social sciences and humanities.

I do get that they're not so keen on science like climate change or evolution. But these same types rely on pseudoscientific talk to rationalize their social policies.
Last edited by carmenjonze on Sun Oct 13, 2019 8:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Stop calling the cops on us.

User avatar
ProfessorX
Board Emeritus
Posts: 17627
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Location: Sunny South Florida

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by ProfessorX »

carmenjonze » Sun Oct 13, 2019 7:42 pm wrote: I hope somebody challenges this dumb bigot on what he thinks "academia" is. My guess is he means what social conservatives always mean: the social sciences and humanities.

I do get that they're not so keen on science like climate change or evolution. But these same types rely on pseudoscientific talk to rationalize their socail policies.
Well, I'm sure that like most righties he hates that part of the academy most of all.

But, as far as undermining the certitudes of religion ... it was astronomy that showed the Earth is not the center of the universe, geology that it is not 6000 years old, biology that humans evolved from earlier primates, physics that most of the laws of nature are from a blind watchmaker ... I think the "hard sciences" have done more damage to fundamentalism than anything else.

Of course, it was the humanities that showed how the Bible was probably actually written.
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger

Ike Bana
Board Emeritus
Posts: 20776
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:01 pm

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by Ike Bana »

ProfessorX » Sun Oct 13, 2019 10:49 am wrote:This probably should go in its own thread, but some have been calling to impeach Barr ... so maybe not. (I'm not positive IF the AG CAN be impeached in the Const but anyhoo.)
What I'm gonna do here is paste the wiki section on the accusations directed at Reagan cabinet EPA secretary Anne Gorsuch (mother of SCOTUS associate justice Neil Gorsuch)
In 1982, Congress charged that the EPA had mishandled the $1.6 billion toxic waste Superfund and demanded records from Gorsuch. Gorsuch refused and became the first agency director in U.S. history to be cited for contempt of Congress.[8][9] The EPA turned the documents over to Congress several months later, after the White House abandoned its court claim that the documents could not be subpoenaed by Congress because they were covered by executive privilege. At that point, Gorsuch resigned her post, citing pressures caused by the media and the congressional investigation.
In 1982 the Democrats held a 101 seat majority over the Republicans. In the Senate Republicans held an 8 seat majority. The action against Gorsuch was centered in the US House and ended with her being found in contempt of Congress by the House. Pretty much the primer for claims of executive privilege protecting administration officials as we are seeing today.

So...anybody think House Democrats might actually find anybody from this administration in contempt of Congress? Who can say? Not that Barr is going to resign.

User avatar
RoyPDX
Policy Wonk
Posts: 3257
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:41 pm
Location: Oregon

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by RoyPDX »

Reminds me of George Carlin, when he once said about a definition: "IT'S THE SECOND DEFINITION BECAUSE IT'S NOT THE FIRST." Yeah, in all caps. :)
The forest was shrinking, but the trees kept voting for the axe. For the axe was clever and convinced the trees that because his handle was wood he was one of them. —West Asian Fable

User avatar
ProfessorX
Board Emeritus
Posts: 17627
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Location: Sunny South Florida

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by ProfessorX »

Such a lovely metaphor. :D

House Democrats tap impeachment gusher
https://www.axios.com/ukraine-investiga ... 3fab7.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The White House is tense — and some aides are frantic — as Democrats on Capitol Hill tap a gusher of revelations that paint an increasingly vivid portrait of President Trump's unrestrained conduct of foreign policy.

Why it matters: Democrats are moving fast. Letters to potential witnesses reveal the breadth and speed at which the inquiry is unfolding, a stark contrast to the Mueller report which stretched over nearly two years.

The probe now reaches into the Pentagon, with Democrats sending a letter demanding the appearance of Acting Assistant Defense Secretary for International Security Affairs Kathryn Wheelbarger.
Fiona Hill, Trump's former National Security Council senior director for Europe and Russia, testified yesterday that then-national security adviser John Bolton told her to notify the NSC's chief lawyer about a rogue effort by EU ambassador Gordon Sondland, Rudy Giuliani and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, the N.Y. Times reports.

"I am not part of whatever drug deal Sondland and Mulvaney are cooking up," Bolton instructed Hill to tell White House lawyers, according to the Times.
"Giuliani’s a hand grenade who’s going to blow everybody up," Hill, during 9+ hours behind closed doors at the House Intelligence Committee, quoted Bolton as saying.

Some White House officials are demoralized, amid unusual chaos and uncertainty, even for this West Wing, according to a former top Trump official.

[snip][end]

Hell hath no fury like a walrus mustache scorned, I suppose. :D

Image
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger

User avatar
Libertas
Board Emeritus
Posts: 18913
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by Libertas »

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump- ... t-n1066141" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


I was just gonna post this, prof.

Bolton is a vile racist pig fuck BUT like nixon and others who dont deserve capitalization of their names, has a line he wont cross.
Excuse me while I use a BROAD BRUSH to say anyone who spends one minute defending anything rump is just as guilty as he is of all his crimes

User avatar
ProfessorX
Board Emeritus
Posts: 17627
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Location: Sunny South Florida

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by ProfessorX »

I don't think Bolton is "a" whistleblower (any of the so-called official ones).

I also think he's partly motivated by revenge, and that he couldn't get the rest to go along with all of his neocon hawk douchebaggery.

Whatever. We got the Mob by getting people inside it to turn state's evidence. They usually weren't Saints. Sometimes that's how prosecutions go.

If his testimony will help take down Trumpco, I'll listen to it.
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger

User avatar
Libertas
Board Emeritus
Posts: 18913
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by Libertas »

ProfessorX » Tue Oct 15, 2019 9:23 am wrote:I don't think Bolton is "a" whistleblower (any of the so-called official ones).

I also think he's partly motivated by revenge, and that he couldn't get the rest to go along with all of his neocon hawk douchebaggery.

Whatever. We got the Mob by getting people inside it to turn state's evidence. They usually weren't Saints. Sometimes that's how prosecutions go.

If his testimony will help take down Trumpco, I'll listen to it.
Just read Pence says he will not obey the law, wont cooperate.

GOOD damn thing this isnt Obama's WH doing this, we would have 100,000 dead liberals in the streets by sunset. You know, GOP and righty would give us till then to comply...

This is why I say we are broken and I dont see how we can fix it.









BREAKING: Pete Sessions subpoena for a *Grand Jury* investigating Ghouliani and associates
Game on.

Former Rep. Pete Sessions subpoenaed by grand jury investigating Giuliani and associates

A federal grand jury in New York has issued a subpoena to former Texas congressman Pete Sessions seeking records and other information on his interactions with President Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, and two Giuliani associates charged last week with a scheme to funnel foreign money to U.S. politicians, according to two people familiar with the investigation.

The subpoena seeks records about Sessions’s dealings with Giuliani and two business associates, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, who had been helping Giuliani investigate Democratic presidential candidate and former vice president Joe Biden. Parnas and Fruman were charged this week with violating campaign finance law in an ongoing investigation that has ensnared the president’s personal lawyer because of his relationship with the two men.

A spokesman for Sessions (R-Tex.) said in a statement: “Mr. Sessions is cooperating with the US Attorney from the Southern District of New York and will be providing documents to their office related to this matter over the next couple of weeks as requested.” A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan declined to comment. Giuliani did not immediately return a message.

The subpoena was first reported by The Wall Street Journal, which added that Giuliani seemed to be the “primary focus” of the subpoena. In the indictment unsealed last week, prosecutors said Parnas and Fruman schemed to exceed campaign donation limits in giving money to an unnamed U.S. congressman, at the same time that they were asking the congressman to get the then-U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, removed from her job.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


And I read where Lara Rump said most people had to google Kurds to know who they were, meaning it is OK to kill them if we dont know them.
Excuse me while I use a BROAD BRUSH to say anyone who spends one minute defending anything rump is just as guilty as he is of all his crimes

bradman
Policy Wonk
Posts: 1796
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 6:01 pm
Location: Home of the DFL

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by bradman »

ProfessorX » Tue Oct 15, 2019 12:23 pm wrote: Whatever. We got the Mob by getting people inside it to turn state's evidence. They usually weren't Saints. Sometimes that's how prosecutions go.

If his testimony will help take down Trumpco, I'll listen to it.
Given how Rudy started his career, if they go down that way, i would call that irony.
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat. - Will Rogers

User avatar
Libertas
Board Emeritus
Posts: 18913
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by Libertas »

https://twitter.com/ScottMStedman/statu ... 0212586644" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"bombshell” in Congressional testimony today
Excuse me while I use a BROAD BRUSH to say anyone who spends one minute defending anything rump is just as guilty as he is of all his crimes

User avatar
Libertas
Board Emeritus
Posts: 18913
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by Libertas »

huge


Confirmation that this entire scheme is a Russian mob disinformation campaign

@VeraMBergen

NEW: In their effort to discredit Trump’s perceived enemies, the president's close allies received key documents and information from a Ukrainian oligarch wanted in the US on corruption charges, five people directly involved tell TIME https://time.com/5699201/exclusive-how- ... ack-biden/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; … via @shustry


Scott Stedman
@ScottMStedman
Confirmation that this entire scheme is a Russian mob disinformation campaign https://twitter.com/verambergen/status/ ... 5011356673" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Vera Bergengruen

@VeraMBergen
NEW: In their effort to discredit Trump’s perceived enemies, the president's close allies received key documents and information from a Ukrainian oligarch wanted in the US on corruption charges, five people directly involved tell TIME https://time.com/5699201/exclusive-how- ... ack-biden/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; … via @shustry

195
5:20 PM - Oct 15, 2019
Excuse me while I use a BROAD BRUSH to say anyone who spends one minute defending anything rump is just as guilty as he is of all his crimes

User avatar
ProfessorX
Board Emeritus
Posts: 17627
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Location: Sunny South Florida

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by ProfessorX »

So ... looks like both Sondland and Mulvaney pretty much admitted there was quid pro quo.

Except Sondland seems to have basically said he said otherwise originally because the POTUS thought so/told him to other than it being the actual reality. :roll:

Meanwhile, Mulvaney seems to have admitted it ... then gotten belligerent and said "this is the way we always do things". Or to put it more curtly: "Yeah so?"

Well, Mick ... it may be the way of the Trump corrupt and criminal maladmin, but no, "it is not the way ethical admins do things".
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger

User avatar
ZoWie
Board Emeritus
Posts: 20699
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Location: The blue parts of the map

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by ZoWie »

His response was to the general effect of, "This is how we do foreign policy, it's different now. Get over it."

This is how we impeach the president, it's the same as always now. Get a better mob-connected lawyer than psycho rudy.

marindem01
Policy Wonk
Posts: 1589
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2019 11:34 am

Re: The Impeachment Thread.

Post by marindem01 »

45's attorney (Jay Sekulow) has thrown Mulvaney under the bus.

https://www.politicususa.com/2019/10/17 ... o-quo.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
"The Clouded Mind See's Nothing", The Shadow.

Post Reply