• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Info PSA- Public impeachments start today- UPDATE 2/5/2020- Trump wins.

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
blackangst1 said:
I know exactly how it works. In Clintons case, there were 4 years of investigations. We're at the 3 year mark for Trump, and boy oh boy everyone is claiming there soooo much irrefutable evidence. How much more do they need?

Protip: none whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Nope, you are lying again. This particular impeachment inquiry is dealing with something that’s happened this year.

For someone doing a lot of posting in this thread you are really ignorant of the facts.
 
zzyzxroad said:
I get a pop-up that says

Thanks for reading The Times
Create a free account or log in for access to more of The Times.
Click to expand...

These dont include federal, state and local investigations:

Congressional Investigations


Congressional Investigations

In the months since Democrats took control of the House, several committees have opened inquiries that could turn up politically damaging or embarrassing material or lead to impeachment proceedings. Select an investigation to see more.
1.
Possible abuse of power by using
foreign policy for political ends
House Foreign Affairs, Intelligence and Oversight Committees
presidency
2.
Potential foreign influence over Trump
and possible attempts to obstruct justice
House Intelligence Committee
business
campaign
inauguration
presidency
3.
Possible role of Trump and others
in concealing hush money payments
House Oversight and Reform Committee
business
campaign
presidency
4.
Possible obstruction of justice and abuse
of power by Trump and his administration
House Judiciary Committee
business
campaign
inauguration
presidency
5.
Possible abuses of the White
House security clearance process
House Oversight and Reform Committee
presidency
6.
Whether Trump misrepresented his net worth
House Oversight and Reform Committee
business
7.
Alleged use of private messaging
by White House officials
House Oversight and Reform Committee
presidency
8.
Trump’s tax returns
House Ways and Means Committee
business
9.
Trump’s communications with Putin
House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight and Reform Committees
presidency
10.
Possible money laundering
House Intelligence and Financial Services Committees
business
11.
Russian interference in the 2016 election
Senate Intelligence Committee
campaign
12.
Proposed U.S. nuclear venture in Saudi Arabia
House Oversight and Reform Committee
presidency
Federal Criminal Investigations
 
blackangst1 said:
You cant possibly answer all those questions as to his involvement in either campaign. Its all speculation.
Click to expand...
I’m using the same bar for evidence that I do for either party.


These articles answer all of Nunes questions. If they don’t satisfy you. Maybe you need to ask yourself why your bar is very high for liberals while being very low for conservatives.
 
ivwshane said:
Nope, you are lying again. This particular impeachment inquiry is dealing with something that’s happened this year.

For someone doing a lot of posting in this thread you are really ignorant of the facts.
Click to expand...

So in your opinion, the only topic scheduled for discussion is the "whistleblower" testimony? Really?
 
Paratus said:
I’m using the same bar for evidence that I do for either party.


These articles answer all of Nunes questions. If they don’t satisfy you. Maybe you need to ask yourself why your bar is very high for liberals while being very low for conservatives.
Click to expand...

Ive never thought nor conveyed that. Stop making things up.
 
blackangst1 said:

Ive never thought nor conveyed that. Stop making things up.
Click to expand...

You most certainly did or did you forget about your comment on all the investigations by the democrats that are “embarrassing themselves”?

Go ahead and walk it back. Tell us how you meant something other than what you posted.
 
blackangst1 said:
Ive never thought nor conveyed that. Stop making things up.
Click to expand...

You’ve conveyed it with every post here tonight. Your posts insinuate that the Dems investigations over the last 10 months and calls impeachment over the last two years for are unfounded despite dozens of indictments and several convictions.

Without any introspection on your part you say Nunes questions on an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory are the most important ones of the day.

If you want to defend that position I’m all ears.
 
ivwshane said:
You most certainly did or did you forget about your comment on all the investigations by the democrats that are “embarrassing themselves”?

Go ahead and walk it back. Tell us how you meant something other than what you posted.
Click to expand...

Wha? I never thought the bar was higher. Maybe the Dems imposed that upon themselves. Theres no reason whatsoever they can hold a vote now on something other than nothingburger of Ukraine.
 
Paratus said:
You’ve conveyed it with every post here tonight. Your posts insinuate that the Dems investigations over the last 10 months and calls impeachment over the last two years for are unfounded despite dozens of indictments and several convictions.

Without any introspection on your part you say Nunes questions on an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory are the most important ones of the day.

If you want to defend that position I’m all ears.
Click to expand...

I never said they were unfounded. What I said they should have plenty of evidence to go to a vote. Why havent they?
 
blackangst1 said:
These dont include federal, state and local investigations:

Congressional Investigations


Congressional Investigations

In the months since Democrats took control of the House, several committees have opened inquiries that could turn up politically damaging or embarrassing material or lead to impeachment proceedings. Select an investigation to see more.
1.
Possible abuse of power by using
foreign policy for political ends
House Foreign Affairs, Intelligence and Oversight Committees
presidency
2.
Potential foreign influence over Trump
and possible attempts to obstruct justice
House Intelligence Committee
business
campaign
inauguration
presidency
3.
Possible role of Trump and others
in concealing hush money payments
House Oversight and Reform Committee
business
campaign
presidency
4.
Possible obstruction of justice and abuse
of power by Trump and his administration
House Judiciary Committee
business
campaign
inauguration
presidency
5.
Possible abuses of the White
House security clearance process
House Oversight and Reform Committee
presidency
6.
Whether Trump misrepresented his net worth
House Oversight and Reform Committee
business
7.
Alleged use of private messaging
by White House officials
House Oversight and Reform Committee
presidency
8.
Trump’s tax returns
House Ways and Means Committee
business
9.
Trump’s communications with Putin
House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight and Reform Committees
presidency
10.
Possible money laundering
House Intelligence and Financial Services Committees
business
11.
Russian interference in the 2016 election
Senate Intelligence Committee
campaign
12.
Proposed U.S. nuclear venture in Saudi Arabia
House Oversight and Reform Committee
presidency
Federal Criminal Investigations
Click to expand...


Thanks I will dig through these when I have time. From memory these are all legitimate.

Did you want to also address the why question for Hunter? It really seems like you have no actually reason for wanting him investigated. Make sure you read that whole routers article that was posted.
 
blackangst1 said:
I watched about 3 hours of testimony today, and all I could think about was the circus. What a shit show.

My favorite questioning was with Taylor:
“You weren’t on the call were you? You didn’t listen to President Trump’s call and President (Volodymyr) Zelenskiy’s call?” Jordan said.
“I did not,” Taylor replied.
“You’ve never talked with Chief of Staff Mulvaney?” Jordan asked.
“I never did,” Taylor said.
“You’ve never met the president?” Jordan asked.
“That’s correct,” Taylor said.

And then more testimony of 3rd or 4th hand comments from some whistleblower. Epic.

I think Nunes had the most important questions:

Nunes said no hearings should be held until three questions are answered - “what is the full extent of the Democrats’ prior coordination with the whistleblower; what is the full extent of Ukraine’s election meddling against the Trump campaign; and, third, why did Burisma hire Hunter Biden, what did he do for them, and did his work affect the Obama administration?”

And I still dont think this will ever to the floor for a vote.
Click to expand...

Holy shit if you actually think this.
 
blackangst1 said:
I dont know. I think an investigation is warranted though.
Click to expand...

an investigation into what?

A fake server that is already known to not ever have existed?

Do you think an 8th fake investigation into fake Hillary involvement in Bengazi is also warranted? It's the exact same legitimacy as what you think is warranted here, if you're keeping count.
 
blackangst1 said:
I never said they were unfounded. What I said they should have plenty of evidence to go to a vote. Why havent they?
Click to expand...

My opinion?
Politics and being backed into a corner. Impeachment is a political process after all but not without it’s dangers to the party.

I personally think they were going to not impeach him after the Mueller report failed to move the needle publicly despite the evidence of wrongdoing contained there in. They decided it was politically more feasible to just try and win the 2020 election than risk impeachment backlash.

It was only after the whistleblower report showing Trump was again trying to use foreign interference to win the next election and the DOJ obstruction of the whistleblower that they were forced to act. They couldn’t let him break the law to gain an advantage in the next election.

if you also remember over the next couple of weeks there were reports of him asking China for dirt, he tried to force the G7 to use his golf course, and then he turned on our Kurdish allies. After the impeachment process started that shit stopped.

Now the reason to take their time is while he’s tied up with the impeachment his behavior will be better since it’s a risk to alienate his allies. The other reason is dredge up so much dirt that it makes it politically difficult for GOP senators to vote against impeachment. That will take a lot of evidence to swing enough of the public to make a difference. As you know many of the Senators have said they will not vote for impeachment for any reason.

I give it a 90% chance the House Impeaches him. I give it a 90% chance the senate acquits him.
 
blackangst1 said:
I dont know. I think an investigation is warranted though.
Click to expand...
You understand that the very narrative that Biden needs to be investigated is what this impeachment is all about? You are effectively joining the #Obstruction crowd, sign in hand and everything?
You know who cooked the narrative that Biden is corrupt and needs investigating? Rudy went to Ukraine right? Got some papers. Its those papers you are parroting right now. Who cooked those papers? You should probably use duckduckgo cause google knows your heart and is prepared to feed you more fox breitbart and infowars. Duckduckgo, then check back with your learnings please. Lets talk.












....... found Viktor Shokin yet? What you think of him?
 
Last edited:
zzyzxroad said:
Thanks I will dig through these when I have time. From memory these are all legitimate.

Did you want to also address the why question for Hunter? It really seems like you have no actually reason for wanting him investigated. Make sure you read that whole routers article that was posted.
Click to expand...

haha, it's literally why America voted overwhelmingly Democrat in '18. The bamboozling of '16 was wearing off.

Look at that list, Democrats got to work. Republican controlled congress and POTUS managed to cluster fuck healthcare and pass a tax cut to people with literal piles of money.
 
ch33zw1z said:
haha, it's literally why America voted overwhelmingly Democrat in '18. The bamboozling of '16 was wearing off.

Look at that list, Democrats got to work. Republican controlled congress and POTUS managed to cluster fuck healthcare and pass a tax cut to people with literal piles of money.
Click to expand...

It was tragically comic to watch the hearings to see how incompetent and off the wall the Republicans were. This is an impeachment hearing on Trump for illegal use of his Office powers for which he provided his own damning evidence by naming Biden but I heard more about Obama not shipping weapons to Ukraine than the Republicans addressing the basis for impeachment. The Reps keep talking about "if this were a criminal trIal we'd have a different set of rules" and that's true. The unsaid part is that if this were a criminal trial then there would be no withholding evidence, and Trump along with others would be in prison.

The system we have is completely screwed and has been for more years than most care to admit.

Whether the Senate convicts or not we need to have a good hard look at the idiots behind the curtain.
 
blackangst1 said:
I watched about 3 hours of testimony today, and all I could think about was the circus. What a shit show.

My favorite questioning was with Taylor:
“You weren’t on the call were you? You didn’t listen to President Trump’s call and President (Volodymyr) Zelenskiy’s call?” Jordan said.
“I did not,” Taylor replied.
“You’ve never talked with Chief of Staff Mulvaney?” Jordan asked.
“I never did,” Taylor said.
“You’ve never met the president?” Jordan asked.
“That’s correct,” Taylor said.

And then more testimony of 3rd or 4th hand comments from some whistleblower. Epic.

I think Nunes had the most important questions:

Nunes said no hearings should be held until three questions are answered - “what is the full extent of the Democrats’ prior coordination with the whistleblower; what is the full extent of Ukraine’s election meddling against the Trump campaign; and, third, why did Burisma hire Hunter Biden, what did he do for them, and did his work affect the Obama administration?”

And I still dont think this will ever to the floor for a vote.
Click to expand...
The stupidity in this post has already been thoroughly covered by others. I just needed to quote it again for a good laugh. How do make it through life being this gullible? Why do you believe things that are outright lies?
 
So Blackangst complains about all the investigations of Trump by Dems and posts a long list of them in order to try and back up his argument. Only to accidentally support the Dems because Trump has already publicly admitted to the first three accusations.

I mean come on. If Trump had a valid accusation against him and investigations keep on turning up more and more inappropriate or just outright illegal actions then it makes complete sense to continue investigations on new allegations.

In fact has any serious accusation been shown as false yet? I genuinely can't think of a major allegation that hasn't been completely validated or, at the very least, if it hasn't been proven then it's been supported by additional evidence since.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top