Politics And Current Events
Posted: Thu Dec 05, 2019 9:17 am
"We have no choice but to act on what we said we were going to do since the day after the 2016 election."
A Pittsburgh Penguins Hockey Message Board
http://www.fifthavenueforum.com/forum/
http://www.fifthavenueforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=19
I'm curious as to your thoughts on this... it's been 3 years. Why now? According to you, they've been chompin at the bit to do this, and likely there have been incidents that rise to a similar level of this. Why wait 3 years to do it?"We have no choice but to act on what we said we were going to do since the day after the 2016 election."
Well, they only gained control of the house in 2019. So the Dems have only had the constitutional ability to bring Impeachment articles since January.I'm curious as to your thoughts on this... it's been 3 years. Why now? According to you, they've been chompin at the bit to do this, and likely there have been incidents that rise to a similar level of this. Why wait 3 years to do it?"We have no choice but to act on what we said we were going to do since the day after the 2016 election."
I'm curious as to your thoughts on this... it's been 3 years. Why now? According to you, they've been chompin at the bit to do this, and likely there have been incidents that rise to a similar level of this. Why wait 3 years to do it?"We have no choice but to act on what we said we were going to do since the day after the 2016 election."
Ah yes... that is true. Much better reasoning than NP's.Well, they only gained control of the house in 2019. So the Dems have only had the constitutional ability to bring Impeachment articles since January.I'm curious as to your thoughts on this... it's been 3 years. Why now? According to you, they've been chompin at the bit to do this, and likely there have been incidents that rise to a similar level of this. Why wait 3 years to do it?"We have no choice but to act on what we said we were going to do since the day after the 2016 election."
She was actually listening to the moderates in her party. Something that she was getting criticized for as "being political".https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pow ... peachment/
Allow me to two sides this.
At least the Dems picked something that happened when he was actually President. Pelosi drug her feet as long as possible when the rest of the party was screaming foul at what Trump had done and repeatedly said impeachment wouldn't be good for the country or her party.
It's almost like we're supposed to accept that Benghazi was conducted in good faith, as opposed to being an obvious pretext to investigate the administration to find something impeachable.I’m sure everyone here would have the same feeling in regards to impeachment if Hillary Clinton was president and did 1/4 of the things Trump has done.
Of course that was what Benghazi was about, and they did find the server that way.It's almost like we're supposed to accept that Benghazi was conducted in good faith, as opposed to being an obvious pretext to investigate the administration to find something impeachable,I’m sure everyone here would have the same feeling in regards to impeachment if Hillary Clinton was president and did 1/4 of the things Trump has done.
I’m sure everyone here would have the same feeling in regards to impeachment if Hillary Clinton was president and did 1/4 of the things Trump has done.
Journalism is just punditry anymore."journalism"
Yea. No one heard about Hillary’s emails. NOT ONE PERSONI’m sure everyone here would have the same feeling in regards to impeachment if Hillary Clinton was president and did 1/4 of the things Trump has done.
You're not deluded enough to even think for a second we'd hear about any of it. It'd all be reduced to "right wing talking points from Fawks nooze" as faftorial or whoever put it, and be dropped.
And I’m the deluded oneAnd to this day its seen as no big deal and sarcastically mocked as the reason squeaky clean Hillary was denied her rightful throne in the White House. It was a story for a few weeks and she had to face questions about those emails. Wow.
And I’m the deluded oneAnd to this day its seen as no big deal and sarcastically mocked as the reason squeaky clean Hillary was denied her rightful throne in the White House. It was a story for a few weeks and she had to face questions about those emails. Wow.
Benghazi was not about impeaching Obama, it was about kneecapping HRC.It's almost like we're supposed to accept that Benghazi was conducted in good faith, as opposed to being an obvious pretext to investigate the administration to find something impeachable.
That's a Perspective posted to the Style section."journalism"
Unsecure communicationsI wouldn't say the admin is more flagrant with potential security issues, but yes they've been found to be communicating on unsecure channels several times. Maybe if you add in the reported security clearance issues.