impeachment stupidity

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
living sounds said:
I don't think the Nobel Foundation qualifies as a "King, Prince, or foreign State".
It also says unless approved by Congress. I think that congress’ inaction over a majority of his term has more or less de facto accepted or sanctioned his business arrangements with regard to the trust. Short of a direct line of corruption or violation of what’s been done to date, this is just noise.
 
Mulvaney:  "There was a quid pro quo."
Mulvaney later:  "Oops.  Can I take that back?"
 
there is nothing to be impeached... get over it...
i am not a Trump supporter, but i aint gonna vote  for Hillary, nor Obama....
they are the reason we have Trump...  so, get over it!



 
I'm not planning on voting for "Hillary nor Obama" either...    8)

BUT, Michelle Obama just crushed some NH poll declaring her the front runner.  :eek:

Hillary is hanging around side stage taking weird potshots at Demo candidates. She just called one a Russian asset. 

This would all be amusing if it wasn't also important. 

Only about a year to go... hang on, the ride will get more interesting from here.

JR
 
Tulsi Gabbard is the real deal.  Hillary I think has plans to jump back in like a savior or something.  IMHO. 

I’ve listened to Tulsi several times now .  I’ve liked her messages every time.  Naturally the dem party tries to then get rid of her.  The Parties are the problem.  There should be 4 parties.  Left, Dems,  Repubs,  And Right or something like that.   

Go Tulsi!
 
JohnRoberts said:
BUT, Michelle Obama just crushed some NH poll declaring her the front runner.  :eek:

My goodness, if Michelle ran we would have real race here...

But now AOC is on board with Bernie. Sounds like your dream team John ;D
 
bluebird said:
My goodness, if Michelle ran we would have real race here...

But now AOC is on board with Bernie. Sounds like your dream team John ;D
Sometimes I wonder if these people aren't trying to help President Trump get re-elected.  ::)

But that is illogical... I'm sure they are working in their own self interest.  ;D

JR

 
Don't really understand why she's not more popular.

Because she blew Harris out of the running in the debate.  She’s dangerous to the party bosses vision.  They’re  doing to Tulsi what they did to Bernie last time.  And then Hillary claiming Tulsi works for Putin!  She’s scared of her.  There’s a disturbance in the force. :eek:
 
She accused Clinton of having "blood on her hands" after the Iraq war she "championed."
"Their blood is on her hands. That's why she's smearing my character and trying to undermine my campaign," Gabbard said.
Gabbard received an outpouring of support from fellow 2020 Democratic candidates including Marianne Williamson, Andrew Yang and Beto O'Rourke.
Yang wrote in a tweet: "Tulsi Gabbard deserves much more respect and thanks than this. She literally just got back from serving our country abroad."
Williamson chimed in: "The Democratic establishment has got to stop smearing women it finds inconvenient!" Adding, "the character assassination of women who don't toe the party line will backfire."
"You deserve respect and you have mine," she told Gabbard.
 
JohnRoberts said:
Sometimes I wonder if these people aren't trying to help President Trump get re-elected.  ::)

That thought crossed my mind too. Nobody seems less popular than Hillary, atm...
 
In case this escaped the notice of the right wing press:
State Department probe of Clinton emails finds no deliberate mishandling of classified information

Not that that wasn't obvious when years (yes, years) of Republican-led congressional probes found absolutely nothing of substance.  It was all political theater (I know, shocking) and another example of wasteful spending by Republicans (yes, another shocker.)

Of course, they did get Trump elected, which has worked out great....for Putin. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
 
Ignorance is not a defense for the mishandling of of classified materials. Deliberate is a red herring.
 
dogears said:
Ignorance is not a defense for the mishandling of of classified materials. Deliberate is a red herring.
As with most things, it's best to go right to the primary source, since the original implication was that Clinton used the private email server to 'deliberately circumvent classification procedures'.

APD Uncovered No Persuasive Evidence of Systemic Misuse Relative to the Deliberate Introduction of Classified Information to Unclassified Systems

While there were some instances of classified information being inappropriately introduced into an unclassified system in furtherance of expedience, by and large, 'the individuals interviewed were aware of security policies and did their best to implement them in their operations.  Correspondence with the Secretary is inherently sensitive, and is therefore open for broad interpretation as to classification, particularly with respect to Foreign Government Information.  Instances of classified information being deliberately transmitted via unclassified email were the rare exception and resulted in adjudicated security violations. There was no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information.
So the report found there was 'no ignorance of security policies' as you just insinuated.
 
No, I didn’t insinuate that at all. What I mean was, you don’t have to deliberately mishandle classified information to be guilty of a felony. Ignorance or ineptitude aren’t excuses. It doesn’t matter if you know or not, or if you try your best or not. If you mishandle classified information you have broken the law.

I don’t care what they do about it from a political point of view. But there are plenty of people in jail or lost jobs or whatever who did similar things, but who don’t have elite immunity.
 
Back
Top