• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

...impeach the fool...

zengriz said:
...ya think...

... :shock: ...

You rarely communicate anything of substance with your ridiculous three line posts, ellipses, and emojis. "Zen," my ass [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
End stage butt hurt is the fate of Trump supporters at this stage of his misbegotten ascendance to the porcelain throne. We must be patient with them while they wrestle with their folly.
 
CFallsGriz said:
zengriz said:
...ya think...

... :shock: ...

You rarely communicate anything of substance with your ridiculous three line posts, ellipses, and emojis. "Zen," my ass [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

...ok dipsiht..so you are a trumpeteer guy...
...the only thing that exceeds your ignorance...
...your lack or communicating any substance...
...tell us all about your guy or :stfu:.. :punch:...

... :cool: ...
 
Oh my, what fun this thread has become. So, Trump colluded with the Russians to leak Hillary's emails. There is no denying that they are hers and they show her meddling with the DNC to keep Bernie from having a fair shot, not to mention the collusion of the press with the DNC to stop Bernie. But Russians released them and we know it because . . . well, we really don't know if it was the Russians. All we do know is that Hillary wrote the ones that we are discussing and the 30k plus that she deleted in spite of being under court order to preserve them. (Hint - that's against the law).
Is there any evidence that the Russians tried to influence the election? Sure, just like we try to influence elections in other countries, including Russia. Did the Russians influence the election? Well, only in showing what Hillary and the Democrats think of us. If you wanted to keep the truth about what she thinks of us secret, then yes, I guess they did influence the election. But transparency is not a bad thing, or has it become so?
But what about the 17 intel agencies that say Russia meddled. Sorry, not true. Check Snopes if you want, but it was only the political appointees of agencies that said that, and there were only four of them. But the narrative is more important than the truth.
What about collusion? If there was just a smidgen of evidence, that would be helpful. But all we have is some incidental non reported meetings. Just like most of Washington does. Is that evidence of collusion? Not really, more likely just evidence of desperation by the accusers. And the worst of it is all the Democrats who are on the Intel committees who know it never happened but keep it alive just to paralyze the government that the people elected.
Obstructing justice? How can you obstruct justice if there isn't a crime? Firing Comey should have been done on November 10th of last year or as soon as possible thereafter. Comey leaking his memos to an outside source instead of the AG or even his IG is proof that he was trying hard to game the system. If you want another J Edgar Hoover, that was your chance. On the other hand, if you wanted a principled and dedicated public servant, it sure wasn't Comey.
You need to separate Trump the man, who is impetuous, rude, crude and without grace and class and Trump the Administration, which has already had a dramatic effect on illegal immigration, and reduced over 800 regulations that stifle business. Results matter more than personality. But I do have to admit, I enjoy the way Trump trolls the media and Democrats. It's like they're in a contest to show how stupid they are.
 
fencer24 said:
Oh my, what fun this thread has become. So, Trump colluded with the Russians to leak Hillary's emails. There is no denying that they are hers and they show her meddling with the DNC to keep Bernie from having a fair shot, not to mention the collusion of the press with the DNC to stop Bernie. But Russians released them and we know it because . . . well, we really don't know if it was the Russians. All we do know is that Hillary wrote the ones that we are discussing and the 30k plus that she deleted in spite of being under court order to preserve them. (Hint - that's against the law).
Is there any evidence that the Russians tried to influence the election? Sure, just like we try to influence elections in other countries, including Russia. Did the Russians influence the election? Well, only in showing what Hillary and the Democrats think of us. If you wanted to keep the truth about what she thinks of us secret, then yes, I guess they did influence the election. But transparency is not a bad thing, or has it become so?
But what about the 17 intel agencies that say Russia meddled. Sorry, not true. Check Snopes if you want, but it was only the political appointees of agencies that said that, and there were only four of them. But the narrative is more important than the truth.
What about collusion? If there was just a smidgen of evidence, that would be helpful. But all we have is some incidental non reported meetings. Just like most of Washington does. Is that evidence of collusion? Not really, more likely just evidence of desperation by the accusers. And the worst of it is all the Democrats who are on the Intel committees who know it never happened but keep it alive just to paralyze the government that the people elected.
Obstructing justice? How can you obstruct justice if there isn't a crime? Firing Comey should have been done on November 10th of last year or as soon as possible thereafter. Comey leaking his memos to an outside source instead of the AG or even his IG is proof that he was trying hard to game the system. If you want another J Edgar Hoover, that was your chance. On the other hand, if you wanted a principled and dedicated public servant, it sure wasn't Comey.
You need to separate Trump the man, who is impetuous, rude, crude and without grace and class and Trump the Administration, which has already had a dramatic effect on illegal immigration, and reduced over 800 regulations that stifle business. Results matter more than personality. But I do have to admit, I enjoy the way Trump trolls the media and Democrats. It's like they're in a contest to show how stupid they are.

The question is, did you collude with Citay on this post? Because,like his recent post, yours is pretty funny.....
 
Paytonlives said:
A very simple question: On what legal basis could impeachment proceed?

.... I don't see any.

Impeachment is not a legal proceeding it's political. With Republicans at the helm, probably not gonna happen....
 
Certainly Trump is just trolling and toying with his opponents ... that's why he appears so successful and why the entire world is laughing with him, not at him. As that wild eyed commie, Krauthammer says, "It's collusion dummy," along with a large and daily growing collection of Republicans. I guess The Rump has been trolling those bastards, too. To fail to see collusion at this point is tantamount to saying, "I'm just a mindless, partisan hack with zero integrity and I don't be needing or heeding no damn facts." But, forget Russia ... there's gross, almost unimaginable incompetence and carelessness, money laundering, emoluments, lying, lying, lying, fraudulent universities, treason and appalling clownishness of a particularly psychotic nature ... and those are his good points.
 
Please do tell, what is the evidence of collusion. And don't use the old "others say."

Don't use the Intel Community being unanimous about a hacking that they never had access to the server to determine who did it.
As far as the rest goes in your list, I agree that Hillary and Obama were doing all those things, but what is their relevance here?
 
fencer24 said:
Please do tell, what is the evidence of collusion. And don't use the old "others say."

Don't use the Intel Community being unanimous about a hacking that they never had access to the server to determine who did it.
As far as the rest goes in your list, I agree that Hillary and Obama were doing all those things, but what is their relevance here?

Fencer:
Good point. But it's never good when the national percentage that wants you impeached 42% is higher than your job approval rating 36%. Just sayin'....
 
So, you think Don Jr's meeting to gather dirt on Hillary is not proof ... see, the way it works, Trumperhhoid, is that an investigation ENDS with the hard proof. It begins with strong indications of a crime and then proceeds onward from there. Often, long before that time, there is enough evidence to convince anyone with common sense of guilt in the matter. That is why all those very numerous "others," including many Republican pundits believe there was collusion. When you have and endless array of meetings in which, every time, the Trump parties lied about it, then lied again about a second meeting, it may not be enough for a sold out apologist like you, but it is enough for anyone honest. And, of course, there are many connections going back years which indicate corruption in addition to treason. But, as I said earlier, we have a dozen other issues to nail to the pig's ass.
 
Oh, and btw, I hadn't heard Hillary and Barrack were running a scam university to steal money from young kids trying to make something of themselves. It's good to know that since I never voted for either of them. That crime alone would make anyone decent refrain from supporting such a vile piece of garbage and give even the most dim witted fool knowledge of what kind of scumbag he was supporting ... know anyone that vile?
 
Oh, Fat Bruno - What fun you are. You have succumbed to your hatred, and the first loss in hatred is logic. So I guess, I will have to forgive you for your lack of coherent thought.
Trump jr. meeting yielded nothing, but you claim his willingness to meet with someone who had dirt on a potential President should never have happened. Why?
If Hillary was vulnerable to the Russians, (even more than has already been proven) wouldn't it have been important to know what they had? And what is the crime to meet with a Russian lawyer? I can't find it in any of the US codes. Is it a violation of a Fat Bruno rule? Do you even have jurisdiction to prosecute?
Your argument that everyone else believes that there is collusion, so therefore there is collusion is a fine example of a logical fallacy. It's called arguing from popular opinion. Opinion can be shaped, as shown by your arguments, and it can be shaped by emotion more easily than facts. Again, I offer you as proof of the assertion.
I am not here to defend Trump. But I am here to defend reason logic and the truth. So far, you have only demonstrated anger and invective mixed in with logical fallacies. You have no proof that any vote was changed. In fact, the only proof you have is that Hillary wrote emails detailing how she, the DNC and the media conspired to deprive Americans of their choice (Bernie).
Shame on you for supporting someone who would steal an election.
As to the University thing, so what. Do you want to include Bill Clinton's stint on a for profit university that paid him millions of dollars a year and was a total scam? And what does that actually have to do with anything except as an ad hominem attack, another logical fallacy?
Boy, Fat Bruno, you are good at these logical fallacies. I could see why you are a Democrat.
 
fencer24 said:
Please do tell, what is the evidence of collusion. And don't use the old "others say."

Don't use the Intel Community being unanimous about a hacking that they never had access to the server to determine who did it.
As far as the rest goes in your list, I agree that Hillary and Obama were doing all those things, but what is their relevance here?

Here is the publicly available evidence suggesting collusion between Trump camp and Russia.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TrumpInvestigation/wiki/doc

Of course, this is publicly available information. We will ahve to wait and see what happens with the special counsel and the IC investigations.
 
Paytonlives said:
A very simple question: On what legal basis could impeachment proceed?

.... I don't see any.

I'm not a lawyer. But, here is a list of publicly available sources that suggest Trump/Trump associates may have colluded with Russia.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TrumpInvestigation/wiki/doc
 
Gee, Fencer, where would one even start with your looney melange of twisted charges? and omissions ... oh, I know ... one wouldn't bother. Try arguing, just once in your chronically dishonest life, with the actual arguments that are being made. Then, we've got all your long discredited list of charges against the Clintons which defy all the rules of logic you claim to uphold. You're a pathetic example of a kool ade drinking fraud. Btw, I didn't support Hillary and certainly did not like her treatment of Bernie. However, one must not be so stupid as to correlate this kind of thing with colluding with a foreign enemy to corrupt the democratic process. Are you that stupid? Of course, you are. And, puhlease, spare me the sanctimonious hater whine ... your whole agenda is hate. My disgust and repulsion is specifically reserved for corrupt, self aggrandizing, treasonous scum like Trump ... an aversion of which I am really very proud.
 
Back
Top