Trump's Russian Collusion

[youthathletics]

the fact that the President asked a foreign leader for dirt while holding up $391,000,000 in aid. They just don't care. If it upsets "Libs," good. If "Libs" want it, bad. No need for facts or discernment.

If it is so cut and dry in your eyes, then what is the problem with the left that they do not see it so clearly as you do?

Interesting how your comments so overly simplify it all and yet the the left does not even get it. You sound like you are in the republicans corner on this (its a sham) and in the same breath you are standing alongside the left being complicit in a sham.

I gotta tell you: your post makes no sense to me at all. I think it is easy; it is plainly wrong; it is of an “impeachable” character and kind. I genuinely don’t understand how anyone doesn’t think the same. “It’s” not a sham; it’s a gross misuse of public authority and trust.

I'll try again....
The entire point of my post is why are the democrats having such a hard time with this? You see and articulate it clear as day....who don't they? In your eyes its a slam dunk.....why is it so hard for the House to see it the same why you do?

[a fan]

You see and articulate it clear as day....who don't they? In your eyes its a slam dunk.....why is it so hard for the House to see it the same why you do?

Are you remotely serious about this?

Dude. There were Republican who voted no on Richard Nixon's impeachment in the House Judiciary Committee.

This has NOTHING to do with reality, truth, or anything but politics.

And the nanosecond McConnell decides Trump is a liability rather than an asset? The votes will flip. Until then, you'll see this nonsense continue.

[youthathletics]

You see and articulate it clear as day....who don't they? In your eyes its a slam dunk.....why is it so hard for the House to see it the same why you do?

Are you remotely serious about this?

This has NOTHING to do with reality, truth, or anything but politics.

And the nanosecond McConnell decides Trump is a liability rather than an asset? The votes will flip. Until then, you'll see this nonsense continue.

Exactly my point.....It's all politics.

Too many people are trying to use logic, common sense, and chosen profession experience...none of that applies with politicians.

[ggait]

On reflection, it seems like Morrison was basically boxed in today.

If he didn't confirm the QPQ, he commits obvious perjury based on the known testimony of Taylor, Hill, Vindman, etc. And also based on the notes and documents that Morrison knows exist, but which have so far been suppressed by the WH.

But he also has to maintain (with seemingly no basis) that the QPQ was legal. Because if he doesn't say that, then he's confessing to being involved in a cover up and a conspiracy. Since he admits to getting involved with the editing of the call transcript and also the efforts to keep it from leaking.

So his position that it didn't seem illegal is needed to negate his personal criminal intent.

[MDlaxfan76]

Is it fair to say that the same people saying how dare anyone question Vindman's patriotism are the same ones saying Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian agent?

Why is it fair to malign one, but not the other ?

You can just as easily level the accusation (or insinuate the smear) that Vindman is a Ukrainian agent.

Both are unfounded insults to serving Army officers.

The 'just as easy' is an exaggeration.
Tulsi's issue is that quite a lot of her views, like many of yours Salty, line up with views propounded by Russia, Vlad.
An actual adversary of the USA.

You and Tulsi and others with such views may well be full-on patriots for the USA with those views, but it's indeed at least problematic.

Vindman quite the opposite.
Anti-Russia hawk, Ukraine is an ally not adversary.
And that's the super obvious difference.

Even more complicating for Tulsi would be if Russia was actually engaged in a social media campaign on behalf of Tulsi. There does appear to be something strange about how some of the hard right support Tulsi, so it's not entirely implausible.

But I quite agree that it's super inappropriate to make any such characterization unless there's hard evidence of that sort of activity by the Russians. And "agent" definitely shouldn't be the term unless folks truly believe she's actually in cahoots with Vlad, which stretches way beyond my imagination as plausible.

I don't have that skepticism about Trump as I believe he can be easily bought or leveraged, doesn't actually have a patriotic or self-sacrificing bone in his body. I just don't see that in Tulsi...hope I'm right!

[Trinity]

“The conduct of Trump's White House lawyers is a disgrace to the profession. Post says John Eisenberg's response to learning of Trump's misdeed was to move the record of it to a super secret system. Imagine putting "experienced in cover-ups" on your resume.”
Walter Schaub. Former WH ethics chief

[Peter Brown]

Is it fair to say that the same people saying how dare anyone question Vindman's patriotism are the same ones saying Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian agent?

Why is it fair to malign one, but not the other ?

You can just as easily level the accusation (or insinuate the smear) that Vindman is a Ukrainian agent.

Both are unfounded insults to serving Army officers.

Indeed. I am heartened to see some board posters who lean Democratic express dismay with HRC's comments...good for them. Her comments were despicable; she maintains an angry edge about losing (to be expected) but blames people rather than herself (not cool). Tulsi rejects HRC's brand of war-friendly Democratic policies; and she endorsed Bernie. So she says reprehensible things in very sly underhanded ways about people she dislikes (Tulsi), and some in the Party applaud her, which is really shameful. She should 'houdini' herself, I agree.

I will probably write more about consistency than anything else and hopefully I am not too inconsistent myself. That was the point of my post. As you probably know.

[Peter Brown]

Tulsi's issue is that quite a lot of her views, like many of yours Salty, line up with views propounded by Russia, Vlad.
An actual adversary of the USA.

What would those be?

[MDlaxfan76]

You see and articulate it clear as day....who don't they? In your eyes its a slam dunk.....why is it so hard for the House to see it the same why you do?

Are you remotely serious about this?

This has NOTHING to do with reality, truth, or anything but politics.

And the nanosecond McConnell decides Trump is a liability rather than an asset? The votes will flip. Until then, you'll see this nonsense continue.

Exactly my point.....It's all politics.

Too many people are trying to use logic, common sense, and chosen profession experience...none of that applies with politicians.

Let's separate how we the people can and should consider these matters, and how politicians reflect that in their actions.

You and I and everyone on here, our friends, family, colleagues, neighbors...WE... should definitely "use logic, common sense, and chosen profession(al) experience" ...and the facts and evidence.

We the people should do this, not simply go 'shirts and skins'.

And if we do so, the politicians will ultimately respond to their constituents.

[a fan]

I will probably write more about consistency than anything else and hopefully I am not too inconsistent myself. That was the point of my post. As you probably know.

Great to hear. You can start by heading over to the Socialism thread, and admit that yep, you like socialism just fine, and that hitting Warren for socialism was the the pot calling the kettle black.

[a fan]

Exactly my point.....It's all politics.

Too many people are trying to use logic, common sense, and chosen profession experience...none of that applies with politicians.

Just because the vote itself is political, doesn't mean what Trump did is ok.

[MDlaxfan76]

Tulsi's issue is that quite a lot of her views, like many of yours Salty, line up with views propounded by Russia, Vlad.
An actual adversary of the USA.

What would those be?

US withdrawal from ME, soft on Ukraine response, don't want tension with Russia, for starters.

Like I said, I think one can be a US patriot with those views, but they nevertheless line up with what Vlad wants.

[Peter Brown]

I will probably write more about consistency than anything else and hopefully I am not too inconsistent myself. That was the point of my post. As you probably know.

Great to hear. You can start by heading over to the Socialism thread, and admit that yep, you like socialism just fine, and that hitting Warren for socialism was the the pot calling the kettle black.

Yes, I am an incredible socialist! I believe that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. You have got me pegged to a tee! (also you don't read posts well as you are sampling your hooch apparently all day long which sometimes I would like to do but am forbidden by company policy let alone general societal norms; I thought (I did, but who's counting) I explained rather meticulously that the government gets far more from aviation than any one player gets out of government...and that airfields and airspace operate almost completely without any need of regulation...but who cares you are stuck in cuckoo land)

[Peter Brown]

Tulsi's issue is that quite a lot of her views, like many of yours Salty, line up with views propounded by Russia, Vlad.
An actual adversary of the USA.

What would those be?

US withdrawal from ME, soft on Ukraine response, don't want tension with Russia, for starters.

Like I said, I think one can be a US patriot with those views, but they nevertheless line up with what Vlad wants.

Don't we all want less tension with Russia? What am I missing in that?

Also, here is a great report of her issues, almost none of which 'line up with what Vlad wants':

https://www.tulsi2020.com/record

[MDlaxfan76]

I will probably write more about consistency than anything else and hopefully I am not too inconsistent myself. That was the point of my post. As you probably know.

Great to hear. You can start by heading over to the Socialism thread, and admit that yep, you like socialism just fine, and that hitting Warren for socialism was the the pot calling the kettle black.

Yes, I am an incredible socialist! I believe that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. You have got me pegged to a tee! (also you don't read posts well as you are sampling your hooch apparently all day long which sometimes I would like to do but am forbidden by company policy let alone general societal norms; I thought (I did, but who's counting) I explained rather meticulously that the government gets far more from aviation than any one player gets out of government...and that airfields and airspace operate almost completely without any need of regulation...but who cares you are stuck in cuckoo land)

Take it to that thread; seems to me that it's been well covered there. Difference of view on facts.

[MDlaxfan76]

Tulsi's issue is that quite a lot of her views, like many of yours Salty, line up with views propounded by Russia, Vlad.
An actual adversary of the USA.

What would those be?

US withdrawal from ME, soft on Ukraine response, don't want tension with Russia, for starters.

Like I said, I think one can be a US patriot with those views, but they nevertheless line up with what Vlad wants.

Don't we all want less tension with Russia? What am I missing in that?

Also, here is a great report of her issues, almost none of which 'line up with what Vlad wants':

https://www.tulsi2020.com/record

"want less tension" sure, as long as Russia doesn't meddle in the democratic elections around the world on behalf of extremist candidates and sow division in their populaces, undermine confidence in democratic processes and institutions, invade their neighbors, attack other countries' ships, imprison their seamen, etc.

But wanting to lift sanctions in the face of those actions?
because we 'want less tension'...???

[RedFromMI]

Tulsi's issue is that quite a lot of her views, like many of yours Salty, line up with views propounded by Russia, Vlad.
An actual adversary of the USA.

What would those be?

US withdrawal from ME, soft on Ukraine response, don't want tension with Russia, for starters.

Like I said, I think one can be a US patriot with those views, but they nevertheless line up with what Vlad wants.

Don't we all want less tension with Russia? What am I missing in that?

Also, here is a great report of her issues, almost none of which 'line up with what Vlad wants':

https://www.tulsi2020.com/record

Of course that is the set of things _she_ wants you to think are her issues.

But her negatives are huge: meeting with Assad after he was declared a war criminal, supporting a violent Hindu nationalist group (targeting Muslims), general affinity (like Trump) for authoritarian regimes. That is why (along with her past anti-LBGTQ stances that were religiously based) she is such a long shot for the D nomination (no chance unless everyone else falters).

She does tend to attract Rs who hate Ds, as someone on my Twitter feed noted...

[ggait]

Could you guys talk about Tulsi on another thread?

Has zero to do with impeachment.

She's at 3% in the Dem primary polls. Which means 98.5% of the country doesn't know or care who she is.

[wahoomurf]

The C.Q. (Chazerai Quotient) that has reached new levels with ALL the participants is going to get worse.

Gonna be fun!

[ggait]

In the Kupperman hearing today, Judge Leon sets argument for early December and hopes to rule by year end. Tea leaves indicating that Bolton (once subpoenaed) will join Kupperman's case.

That will definitely slow the Dems roll. Although maybe that sets the stage for a star turn from "Drug Deal" Bolton in the Senate trial.