LEGION Posted December 4, 2019 Report Share Posted December 4, 2019 World leaders caught talking shit about Trump. Let me put on my surprised face. #LaughingStock oBamA mAdE tHE Us a lAUgHinG sToCk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M3J Posted December 4, 2019 Report Share Posted December 4, 2019 Was that in relation to the NATO summit? Yessir, I think. You know Trump supporters will deny him being a joke to everyone else, and they'll probably bring up Israel and Koreas as proof that Trumpet is taken seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEGION Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 Is American Politics nothing but whataboutism? Jesus, these hearings are annoying, yet necessary, to listen to absolutely chaotic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M3J Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 It is, especially from the right, and about unrelated situations at that. Figured that was common throughout the western world though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEGION Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 It's not. Which is why it always makes the headlines if it does indeed happen Not having a 2-party system helps. And in Germany not having a single party being able to gain the majority of the votes does too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generations Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 Every time I've watched a hearing about anything (the Mueller stuff, these impeachment hearings...whatever)...republicans always try to run off with an entirely different narrative, and it's the most abhorrent shit to listen to. I don't really know why they're even allowed to do it. The focus of the trial is one very specific thing. I get that you have this yarn you want to spin...but you can't just start talking about some Biden narrative and make the whole hearing about that. It's one thing if there are details in that story that can help you discredit wrong-doing by the president...but their never is. It's always a straight shift of the narrative to an unrelated direction. People should be cut off when they start doing that shit, because it's irrelevant to what the trial is actually about. If you want to defend the president, then do that. Attacking someone else is a different narrative. That is what you call wasting everyone's *censored*ing time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEGION Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 Yeah. "The Democrats" could literally be eating children live on television right now, it would have zero relevancy when it comes to the impeachment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AONO. Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 The main tactic of the GOP was to either spin it as being about something else (Bidens and the DNC server conspiracy), and to push the narrative of that there is nothing there and everybody is wasting time. That's literally all. There were no arguments or any kind of substantial questioning during the whole proceeding. The thing is, they needed to do that so they can keep their base calm so to speak. Their base are the ones that had to be made to believe that there is nothing there, and people who support Trump of course, not solely Republican supporters. Even though at this point it's basically coming as the same thing. While Trumps task was to stonewall the inquiry, obstruct the investigation as much as possible (him ordering people not to testify) so the whole process last as long as possible, to tire out the public and also make sure that his base is at bay... If Trump does't get removed, they made the race harder for him in 2020. Despite what his supporters believe. Yeah. "The Democrats" could literally be eating children live on television right now, it would have zero relevancy when it comes to the impeachment. I don't get what you are trying to say here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEGION Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 That "Whataboutism" is bullshit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generations Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 That eating babies comment was ridiculous, and I agree...it made no sense whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M3J Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 Makes me wonder if they're actually trying to rile up their voter base to be violent towards Democrats and anyone left of center. Would be on par. And it looks like the right don't understand how "whataboutism" works, as many of them defending Trump's sexual assault acted as if millennials who were underage at the time were okay with or voted for Bill Clinton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nWo_Kevin Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 If Trump does't get removed, they made the race harder for him in 2020. Despite what his supporters believe. While I disagree with this statement (I must be a supporter now), I do believe that's what this impeachment is all about. And if people are honest with themselves they'll know that too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AONO. Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 If Trump does't get removed, they made the race harder for him in 2020. Despite what his supporters believe. While I disagree with this statement (I must be a supporter now), I do believe that's what this impeachment is all about. And if people are honest with themselves they'll know that too. Don't try and make it look like that's what I've said. But ok... If I remember correctly you said you voted for a third party candidate and would vote for him depending on who is he running against, like Sanders or Warren. But would also have no problem with another 4 years of Trump. But also don't think he is that bad and support policies of his administration. But, no, I would not categorize you as a stereotypical "Trump supporter", and I don't even use that term in the context you are interpreting it. So don't spin it. You made that "bolded" conclusion... that if you think that you are automatically a "Trump supporter". So again, stop with your bs snarky attitude. Of course it's about both of those things, to either remove him, or weaken him. You think that people are so blinded by this rage against Trump that they can't see how most Democrats suck too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nWo_Kevin Posted December 10, 2019 Report Share Posted December 10, 2019 So again, stop with your bs snarky attitude. Of course it's about both of those things, to either remove him, or weaken him. You think that people are so blinded by this rage against Trump that they can't see how most Democrats suck too. Whoa, you took that way too seriously. You weren't even talking to me originally. So I didn't take offense to anything you said and I don't know why you took offense to what I said. But I'll apologize for my comment. Anyway, I believe the Democrats think they need to remove Trump prior to the election because they arn't confident they can beat him next year. A Harvard-Harrison Poll just came out today saying that if Hillary Clinton decided to join the race she'd automatically become the top candidate. Which just shows how bad the current candidates are. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/dec/9/hillary-clinton-emerges-top-choice-democratic-vote/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AONO. Posted December 10, 2019 Report Share Posted December 10, 2019 So again, stop with your bs snarky attitude. Of course it's about both of those things, to either remove him, or weaken him. You think that people are so blinded by this rage against Trump that they can't see how most Democrats suck too. Whoa, you took that way too seriously. You weren't even talking to me originally. So I didn't take offense to anything you said and I don't know why you took offense to what I said. But I'll apologize for my comment. Anyway, I believe the Democrats think they need to remove Trump prior to the election because they arn't confident they can beat him next year. A Harvard-Harrison Poll just came out today saying that if Hillary Clinton decided to join the race she'd automatically become the top candidate. Which just shows how bad the current candidates are. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/dec/9/hillary-clinton-emerges-top-choice-democratic-vote/ I didn't take offense, nor did I take it "way too seriously", but you responded to my post and made it seem like I've said that. However, apology accepted. It's cool. I think everybody knows how bad the current candidates are. Out of all the candidates in the last... maybe even 15 years, Obama was the only one that you could say, "ok yeah he'll be the president. sure it looks kinda obvious but he seems decent." The thing is, you could also say the same for the GOP, they went into that deal because they had nobody to run against Hillary. And in comes Trump with his team, and there you go. That's why the whole two party system in general is shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M3J Posted December 10, 2019 Report Share Posted December 10, 2019 Methinks Hillary's chances of winning is at its highest solely because she lost, and that made people who were on the fence or think badly about her actually like her or see her as a hero. Plus, Trump's shit term also helped her popularity as someone who could have beaten him, and someone who won the popular vote by 3 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AONO. Posted December 10, 2019 Report Share Posted December 10, 2019 Methinks Hillary's chances of winning is at its highest solely because she lost, and that made people who were on the fence or think badly about her actually like her or see her as a hero. Plus, Trump's shit term also helped her popularity as someone who could have beaten him, and someone who won the popular vote by 3 million. Doubt it, and I'd say the opposite. Btw that 21% is not a big number anyway. and Biden has 20%. And it tackled only democratic voters. Hillary certainly did not come out of that election as a hero of anything. That survey doesn't say much anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M3J Posted December 10, 2019 Report Share Posted December 10, 2019 You must not have social media or follow centers and left of center, because I've seen so many go from being dubious to supporting her and saying good things about her after she lost. she definitely came out as a feminist hero even though she lost because she *censored*ed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AONO. Posted December 10, 2019 Report Share Posted December 10, 2019 You must not have social media or follow centers and left of center, because I've seen so many go from being dubious to supporting her and saying good things about her after she lost. she definitely came out as a feminist hero even though she lost because she *censored*ed up. it's the effect of having Trump as president and realazing what has happened. Doesn't necessarily mean they suddenly support her personally. The "left" mostly didn't even vote for Hillary, nor would they if it again comes to that. Yet it won't. And I'm definitely not seeing how she came out as a "feminist hero". Whatever that means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M3J Posted December 10, 2019 Report Share Posted December 10, 2019 Yes, but it's also her losing despite being qualified, which many women relate to, as well as talking about and tweeting stuff that's anti-Trump and looks feminist. It does mean they support her when they praise her and all that shit.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Saint Posted December 10, 2019 Report Share Posted December 10, 2019 As someone who's was Republican (now independent), I think this impeachment will make things even more interesting leading to the election. The majority of the people I know hate Trump (even going as far as too flip off Trump Towers), and U.S. Veterans I talked too can't stand him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generations Posted December 10, 2019 Report Share Posted December 10, 2019 If Trump was ever going to win re-election, then he'll win anyway. Because, the true "deep-state" is a foreign one, and Trump has dodged his share of point-blank shots already. It's always been about accusing others of doing the exact thing that he's doing and walking Scot-free. And again...that's why this trial isn't even about impeaching Trump, necessarily...it's about trying to convince the public that they're supporting a guy who cares more about foreign and private interests than those of our own nation. Period. And unfortunately, the "right" is so far corrupted and perverted, that they will squint their eyes shut and bury their heads in the sand while giving the man carte-blanch to get away with it all. Hell...it's easy enough to see in the way they handle debate on the floor. They're more content to attack the actual process of impeachment than they are to attempt to prove Trump innocent. I can't tell you how many times I've heard rhetoric about it being "unjust to impeach a president who was voted into office by the people" (which he wasn't anyway...he *censored*ing lost). But...that's what impeachment is for. We've used it before. I'm not sure why they're acting like it's a bad or wrong thing to impeach a president (any president, presumably). That's part of our democratic process. So...to coin one of their own favorite phrases...if they don't like it, maybe they should leave it. As for the Bidens...if there was any wrong-doing...then, by all means, let's get to the bottom of it. But, that is not what this trial is about. Two wrongs don't make a right. Trump doesn't get out of his own wrong-doings for trying to sniff out the wrong-doings of other people. You don't get to ask foreign governments for political dirt on an opponent, withhold support for said nations, (extort them)...etc. So, yeah...find the truth on Biden. I certainly don't care. Find the truth on all of the corrupt politicians. That's great. It doesn't stop Trump from being the single most corrupt president that this nation has ever seen. His impeachable offense is seeking a favor from a foreign government in exchange for aid that they were already slated to receive. There's no amount of back-pedaling that can change that scenario...because that's how facts work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nWo_Kevin Posted December 11, 2019 Report Share Posted December 11, 2019 Since we all love facts so much. I'll just leave this here... https://time.com/5746417/ukraine-andriy-yermak-impeachment-interview/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generations Posted December 11, 2019 Report Share Posted December 11, 2019 ^ That says nothing to me. It sounds like an aid to the Ukrainian president is trying to paint a picture where the Ukrainian president was holding his ground on an anti-corruption stance (and hence not being taken advantage of). Because, you know...of course it looks bad for your president to be powerless against a corrupt foreign entity such as Trump. Not exactly something you want to admit to when you are running a platform that is specifically against corruption. Saying that Trump had the Ukrainian president by the balls isn't exactly something you want to admit when you are an aid to said Ukrainian president. Yeah...that's all I'm reading there. But, you do you... Once again, republicans would rather take the word of a foreign official over their own intelligence agencies, I suppose... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AONO. Posted December 11, 2019 Report Share Posted December 11, 2019 From that article, what Yermak said does not fully negate what Sondland said. Yermak sad they were never alone one on one, but Sondland didn't say they were. The only debatable thing here is that Yermak said: "The new interview with Yermak is likely to revive that debate. When TIME asked him whether he had ever felt there was a connection between the U.S. military aid and the requests for investigations, Yermak was adamant: “We never had that feeling,” he says." I also agree with this: "President Trump and his allies seized on those remarks as evidence of his innocence. “The Ukrainian president came out and said very strongly that President Trump did absolutely nothing wrong. That should be case over,“ Trump told reporters on the day TIME published that interview.Independent fact-checkers found these remarks misleading, and noted that President Zelensky also voiced criticism of the Trump Administration during the interview. In particular, Zelensky questioned the fairness of the decision to block U.S. military aid to Ukraine, suggesting that this was not the way strategic allies should behave toward each other.Many observers criticized Trump for cherry-picking parts of the Zelensky interview last week, and pointed out that Ukraine is still deeply dependent on the U.S. for financial and political support, making it difficult for Zelensky and his aides to contradict Trump’s arguments against the impeachment inquiry." Besides, Sondlands testimony is just a piece of the whole puzzle. Pompeo, Bolton and of course Rudy Giulliani were are called to testify and I'm sure they could clarify a lot of things. There is nothing "factual" here in that article, so don't present it as such. It's not like Zelensky or Yermak will just flat out say, "oh yeah, Tump and his people were duches, impeach him lol" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.