FOR THE FIRST TIME IN US HISTORY A SENATOR HAS VOTED TO CONVICT A PRESIDENT OF HIS OWN PARTY

  
By:  john-russell  •  2 weeks ago  •  258 comments

FOR THE FIRST TIME IN US HISTORY A SENATOR HAS VOTED TO CONVICT A PRESIDENT OF HIS OWN PARTY

With tears in his eyes, Mitt Romney announced moments ago that he will vote to convict President Trump of Abuse Of Power. 

It is the first time in history a senator has voted to convict an impeached president of his own party. 

In effect, Romney implied the evidence was overwhelming. 


Article is Locked

smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
JohnRussell
1  author  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago

History will be on Romney's side and against the side of the other Republican senators. 

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
1.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

Perhaps, there is actually ONE Republican, who puts COUNTRY ABOVE Party,

congratulations Mitt, for doing what EVERY SENTATOR should !

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
1.1.1  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  igknorantzrulz @1.1    2 weeks ago

He’s just a Lincoln project never trumper jackass wanting to give democrats a stupid talking point.  We disavow him as a Republican.  He’s lower than a RINO now and might as well become a democrat.  

 
 
 
evilgenius
1.1.2  evilgenius  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @1.1.1    2 weeks ago
We disavow him as a Republican.

How jackboot thuggish of you.

 
 
 
Cathar
1.1.3  Cathar  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @1.1.1    2 weeks ago

We disavow the current GOP as Jackboot dictator wannabees led by tRump who walks around like Mussolini and governs like the keystone Kops.

 
 
 
dennis smith
1.1.4  dennis smith  replied to  igknorantzrulz @1.1    2 weeks ago

One Repub did not vote along party line. How many Dems did that? Answer is ZERO

 
 
 
CB
1.1.5  CB   replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @1.1.1    2 weeks ago

Your insult is unbecoming. That's all. If Romney is a never Trumper he would have swept the charges against Trump - so despite your misguided anger: Romney is nothing less than a republican senator who still has a conscience and a real faith in his God.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.1.6  Freedom Warrior  replied to  CB @1.1.5    2 weeks ago

Faith in God my ass.  He's a freaking elitist Mormon.

But thanks for making my prediction come true.  Truly frickin laughable.  And I got a big head start on that one.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.7  Vic Eldred  replied to  CB @1.1.5    2 weeks ago
Romney is nothing less than a republican senator who still has a conscience and a real faith in his God.

Shall we erect the statue to him in San Francisco amid the human excrement? (A fitting location)

 
 
 
CB
1.1.8  CB   replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.1.6    2 weeks ago

Irrelevant. Laugh all you wish and do not get strangled on your spit. As for faith in God; what do you know about any of it, really?

 
 
 
CB
1.1.9  CB   replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.7    2 weeks ago

Vic, clearly you are angry. Please take a walk and come back 'refreshed.'

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
1.2  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

Not!  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.3  author  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

Chuck Schumer just now , on the Senate floor

"You can't be on the side of this president and be on the side of truth"

 
 
 
lady in black
1.3.1  lady in black  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3    2 weeks ago

He is correct!!!!

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.3.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3    2 weeks ago
You can't be on the side of this president and be on the side of truth

I hope the irony of the same Chuck Schumer who voted to  acquit Clinton saying this  isn't lost on you.  

 
 
 
dennis smith
1.3.3  dennis smith  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3    2 weeks ago

Ho Hum, just another lie from the mouth of Schumer.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.4  author  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

Mitch McConnell is speaking right now. Not a word about Trump is innocent , and showing an argument for that. 

Just whining about the Democrats. 

This short speech by McConnell serves as the final word by the Republican party on the impeachment.  Nothing but whining about the process.  They all know Trump is guilty. 

There it is. 

 
 
 
dennis smith
1.4.1  dennis smith  replied to  JohnRussell @1.4    2 weeks ago

They all know Trump is guilty. 

Did your crystal ball tell you that?

 
 
 
squiggy
1.5  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

83930919_2843346225725017_80953630605516

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago
History will be on Romney's side and against the side of the other Republican senators.

Wrong.

Historians will note that Romney campaigned on being more of a hawk on immigration that Donald Trump, yet has consistently voted against funding for the border wall. Historians will condemn progressives for a bogus impeachment and overwhelming hatred for half the country. Romney won't even make a footnote and it will be Utah voters who will ultimately deal with Romney when the time comes.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
1.6.1  r.t..b...  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.6    2 weeks ago
Historians will note that Romney

...was once the flag-bearer for his party as a Presidential candidate, had the courage to break with that party in voting his conscience, and suffered the wrath from that same party for doing so. Fickle, this party.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.6.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  r.t..b... @1.6.1    2 weeks ago

No fickle is your party. What about the "binders full of women" or the "dog on top of the car" or the "fat cat who cast off the 47%?"  All of a sudden he is a hero because he stood with a bunch of haters who wrote up two preposterous articles of impeachment! (And he did it by giving 3 different reporters "exclusive stories")

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.6.3  Sean Treacy  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.6.2    2 weeks ago

It's funny to see. Romney, Democrats dutifully denounced as racist, sexist and "not one of us" (textbook othering) is suddenly the exemplar of principle.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.6.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.6.3    2 weeks ago

And Romney was made for the part. Ask people what Romney stands for and watch what happens. I was once a volunteer for the Romney presidential campaign in 2012. I used to call people to ask them to vote for Romney. That is the question I was hit with all the time! It's the question the press currently never asks him. Instead they like to question him on all things Trump and he is all too willing to oblige.

 
 
 
Sparty On
1.6.5  Sparty On  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.6.3    2 weeks ago

Lol no doubt.  

The whole "enemy of my enemy" gambit rarely ends well for the people who choose to use it but hey, they can have Romney.   I for one was mildly surprised when Utah elected the carpetbagger their Senator but now perhaps he'll finally be honest with his constituency and switch to his true convictions.

Democrat.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.6.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sparty On @1.6.5    2 weeks ago

And the only problem he would have with that is that he looks so much like a Republican!

Otherwise they would have the man who shut down Catholic adoption in MA - before Obama did it and initiated a functioning health care system in MA - also before Obamacare and went after the Nuns in MA over abortion (again before Obama did it). Then he saw an opportunity in Utah when the renowned Orin Hatch finally retired. He ran for and won Hatch's Senate seat. His first order of business was to write an anti-Trump op-ed piece in the Washington Post.

Remember how he groveled for the Secretary of State job?  He didn't get it, did he?  Chalk another one up for Donald Trump!

 
 
 
Sparty On
1.6.7  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.6.6    2 weeks ago

Yep, i'm just sorry i voted for the guy in 2012.  

I was going to vote third party but after making that mistake with Perot in 92, i'll never do that again.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.6.8  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sparty On @1.6.7    2 weeks ago

Don't feel badly about it. You had no choice.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
1.6.9  r.t..b...  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.6.2    2 weeks ago
What about

The party fallback position. Few thoughts could be posited without that preface and the ensuing past tense argument. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
1.6.10  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.6.8    2 weeks ago

Lol, i felt about the same about it that i did when i voted in 2016.

Although in retrospect the 2016 turned out much better than the 2012 one probably would have had he won.

jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.6.11  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sparty On @1.6.10    2 weeks ago

That is true on so many levels. We had a revolution in the Republican Party. It is no longer the party of strict Conservatism. It is now a party of economic nationalism and one that no longer rejects big government, but instead harnesses it to further Republican policies. 2016 was a great turning point!

 
 
 
Ronin2
1.6.12  Ronin2  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.6.3    2 weeks ago

You forgot the aspersions they cast on his religion. Especially the underwear he wore. 

https://www.dictionary.com/e/slang/mormon-underwear/

mormon underwear

or magic underwear or Mormon undergarments   [mawr-m uh   n   uhn -der-wair]

WHERE DOES   MORMON UNDERWEAR   COME FROM?

Mormon underwear   refers to a conservative type of underwear, considered sacred, worn at all times by members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS), or the Mormon Church.

https://www.mrc.org/articles/hypocritical-nyt-columnist-tells-romney-stick-your-magic-underwear

New York Times columnist Charles Blow reacted angrily to comments by Mitt Romney during Wednesday night’s GOP debate on CNN, mocking Romney’s Mormon faith in a post on his Twitter account. Evidently reacting to Romney’s debate comments on the breakdown of minority families, Blow wrote: “ Let me just tell you this Mitt ‘Muddle Mouth’: I'm a single parent and my kids are *amazing*! Stick that in your magic underwear .”

Jim Geraghty at National Review, who first reported on the offensive tweet , pointed out the media double standard:

We just witnessed ESPN firing an employee for using the phrase “chink in the armor” in a headline about the New York Knicks’ Jeremy Lin. While no one could prove a desire to mock Lin’s ethnic heritage, and the employee expressed great regret for what he insisted was an unthinking lapse, it was deemed unacceptable even as an honest mistake. Regardless of what one thinks of ESPN’s reaction, one is left to marvel at the contrast before us. Would the New York Times find it acceptable if one of their columnists chose to mock Muslim religious practices? Jewish faith practices? But mocking some religions is okay? Doesn’t run afoul of any standards of the paper?

(A similar crack recently appeared in a guest post on the paper’s regular “Room for Debate” online feature.)

https://religiondispatches.org/bill-mahers-issues-with-mormon-underwear/

“Don’t get me started on Mitt Romney,” Maher sneered to Letterman. ”Because Mitt Romney will teach America what’s really in Mormonism.”

“Mitt likes to gloss over… ‘well, we’re just different types of Christians.’ No. No, I was raised Catholic,” Maher leaned in and raised an eyebrow, setting up for his big punchline: ”And there was no magic underwear.”

Big laughs from the crowd at CBS studios. Right on cue.

Magic underwear ?

It’s no secret that highly observant LDS people wear sacred undergarments as an expression of religious commitment.

But magic underwear ? Please.

Ah yes, good times, good times.

 
 
 
katrix
1.6.13  katrix  replied to  Ronin2 @1.6.12    2 weeks ago

Many Christians are very open about how they don't consider Mormons to be a Christian sect, as your example shows. 

I'm not a fan of how the Mormon religion treats women - and I consider it close to abuse how they force their teenage boys to go door to door, trying to sell their religion and having to ask if they can help with yardwork. These two earnest Mormon teenagers showed up at my house last year in suits and ties. Once I said I wasn't interested in talking about religion, they asked if I needed any yardwork done. Can you imagine making someone in a suit and tie use my chainsaw to cut down trees, or to dig a hole, or whatever? Not only dangerous, but at the least would ruin their clothes. We just chatted about the area where I live instead.

Still, not my business as long as a person agrees to put the Constitution over their religion. If they can't do that, I won't vote for them.

 
 
 
CB
1.6.15  CB   replied to  Vic Eldred @1.6    2 weeks ago

Can you say: "Romney loves his God?" Go on, try it.

 
 
 
CB
1.6.16  CB   replied to  Vic Eldred @1.6.2    2 weeks ago

Wow! Look at you throwing a fellow Trump republican under the tires of your car! You will regret this attack upon the man,  the next time Romney votes to let Trump have his way with the 'American' people! Try to be a little less predictable!

 
 
 
CB
1.6.17  CB   replied to  katrix @1.6.13    2 weeks ago

Some republicans are finding it challenging that a fellow republican and conservative has more integrity and grit than some others among them.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.7  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

Hardly!  He's a disgrace now.  We're kicking out of the club and literally chasing him out of town. ( He's selling his La Jolla residence) 

He's mostly persona non grata and fully marginalized as a legislator.  He'll complete his embarrassing fall from grace soon.

 
 
 
katrix
1.7.1  katrix  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.7    2 weeks ago
Hardly!  He's a disgrace now

Party over country, and Trump over party.

Disgusting and unpatriotic.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.7.2  Freedom Warrior  replied to  katrix @1.7.1    2 weeks ago

Democrat Party over country is your deal not mine.

As if Pierre Delecto is actually considered genuine.  

Trashing the Constitution may be considered highly respectable by the Dems but for those of us who know better it's equivalent to treason.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.7.3  Texan1211  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.7.2    2 weeks ago

Gee, don't you remember all those Democrats crying "party over country" when they each and every single one of them voted to acquit Clinton?

Oh, wait, sorry, that HAD to be different, because, well, DEMOCRATS.

 
 
 
Sparty On
1.7.4  Sparty On  replied to  Texan1211 @1.7.3    2 weeks ago

This is just getting good.   The TDS is accelerating at an exponential rate ..... no apogee in sight .....

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.7.5  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.7    2 weeks ago
He's a disgrace now.  We're kicking out of the club and literally chasing him out of town.

romney has been formally uninvited from attending cpac

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/31/romney-cpac-impeachment-110143

his career as a "conservative is over...

at this point, he might as well  join the lunatic left

 
 
 
CB
1.7.6  CB   replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.7.2    2 weeks ago

Oh wow. And, then THAT was written in all seriousness.

 
 
 
squiggy
1.8  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

84307663_2849121538480819_32568489959049

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.9  author  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

I've seen enough garbage from Trumpsters on this seed.

Locked. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
2  Ronin2    2 weeks ago

The reason Romney is crying is that he just kissed his political career goodbye. 

As for the rest of the BS.

It is the first time in history a senator has voted to convict an impeached president of his own party. 

Maybe the left should reread that statement a few million times until it sinks in! Then take a long hard look at Schumer and those Democrats still around in Congress from the Bill Clinton impeachment days. The hypocrisy might sink in sooner or later.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Ronin2 @2    2 weeks ago
The reason Romney is crying is that he just kissed his political career goodbye. 

I've heard that power brokers in Utah are already calling for his recall.  That would be a fitting culmination to his pathetic career as a politician.

 
 
 
katrix
2.1.1  katrix  replied to  XDm9mm @2.1    2 weeks ago
I've heard that power brokers in Utah are already calling for his recall.

Of course, since he put his country over his party. Unlike the other cowards. Look at the ones claiming "oh, Trump learned his lesson, I'm sure" while Trump is still screeching that he did nothing wrong in the least.

It's just astonishing that McConnell and team worked with Trump on this. In what trial does the jury work directly with the defendant? Only a rigged one.

 
 
 
evilgenius
2.1.2  evilgenius  replied to  XDm9mm @2.1    2 weeks ago
I've heard that power brokers in Utah are already calling for his recall. 

A bill was introduced in the state house allowing voters to recall Senators. It's certainly a swipe at Romney but isn't anything more than symbolical. I think there is also a recall petition that means as much as any petition which is slightly above toilet paper. He'll might have a tough time getting reelected though since Moscow Mitch is freezing him out on fundraising.

 
 
 
CB
2.1.3  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @2.1    2 weeks ago

Mitt Romney has a life (in God, faith, and country); he does not need to be recorded in history as 'paling' around with abusers of constitutional powers. Moreover, if he did not speak up now, he would not be properly able to when Trump commits his next impeachable offense. Which one can presume is in the works already if experience is any consideration.

I like that Mitt Romney let us all in on how much he has been beset by republicans and conservatives to twist him into a man he wouldn't recognize. I really appreciate that bit of sharing and maybe I will call his office and share this sentiment. After all, this is a grave moment in history and a serious decision and he weathered it! He says he will allow truth to win out!

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
2.1.4  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  katrix @2.1.1    2 weeks ago

The turtle  and his ilk are little more than ass kissing Trumpbots who only want to stay on the boss's good side.

 
 
 
Sparty On
2.1.5  Sparty On  replied to  CB @2.1.3    2 weeks ago

Yup and not that long ago he used to be an evil corporate raider according to most of you on the left.

Guess he's okay now eh?

 
 
 
CB
2.1.6  CB   replied to  Sparty On @2.1.5    2 weeks ago

Romney is still all that he was before. That has not changed. And I won't be thanking him for his life's work!  How come you didn't understand that without me writing it out?

However, today, Romney listens to his OATHS. What part of those oaths don't you get? Go read the oaths, Sparty On.

It takes heart to sat and listen to Trump's State of the Union last night and get up and vote against him the very next day; especially, knowing that it will put you on the outs with your fellows whom you love and maybe even adore.

Has it crossed your mind, that maybe just maybe republicans and conservatives should not politically kill off friendships over a deliberate abuser of power?! Donald Trump cares no more for McConnell than he does for Romney but for the power McConnell wields in the senate.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
2.1.7  Jasper2529  replied to  Sparty On @2.1.5    2 weeks ago
Yup and not that long ago he used to be an evil corporate raider according to most of you on the left.

He was also a misogynist and dog abuser. Oh, and don't forget how they mocked his religion and "magic underwear". 

Guess he's okay now eh?

Of course. Hypocrites.

 
 
 
evilgenius
2.1.8  evilgenius  replied to  Sparty On @2.1.5    2 weeks ago
Guess he's okay now eh?

No, he will forever be Mittens the Flip-Flopping RINO.

 
 
 
Tacos!
2.1.9  Tacos!  replied to  Jasper2529 @2.1.7    2 weeks ago
He was also a misogynist

To me, that was the most amazing hit job. Somehow making an effort to hire women for his cabinet was turned into misogyny.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
2.1.10  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  katrix @2.1.1    2 weeks ago

He put himself and Lincoln project scum and human debris over both country and party

 
 
 
KDMichigan
2.1.11  KDMichigan  replied to  CB @2.1.6    2 weeks ago

Oh please, a 5 year old could see thru the lefts new love affair for Mitt, He has been crying about president Trump since the day he announced his candidacy for President. Ever since Trump accomplished what he failed to do he has developed a severe case of TDS like a majority of the left. No one is surprised at his vote.

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.12  MUVA  replied to  KDMichigan @2.1.11    2 weeks ago

Mitt the Twit I can’t believe I voted for him. 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.1.13  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Jasper2529 @2.1.7    2 weeks ago

Romney is a opportunist doing nothing more than trying to pad his own ticket for the next election as he sees it, making him even more of a hypocrite. 

 
 
 
dennis smith
2.1.14  dennis smith  replied to  katrix @2.1.1    2 weeks ago
Of course, since he put his country over his party. 
How many Dems did that? = ZERO

 
 
 
CB
2.1.15  CB   replied to  Jasper2529 @2.1.7    2 weeks ago

He still is all of whatever he was before. I see the man when he is right and likewise I see him when he is wrong. I'm good like that! (Smile.)

FYI, the 80 percent of the time Mitt says he votes with Trump - 79.99 percent of the time Mitt is wrong, in my opinion!

 
 
 
Sparty On
2.1.16  Sparty On  replied to  CB @2.1.6    2 weeks ago

As a person who has taken an oath or two very seriously in my time, our understanding of "Oath" is clearly very different.

This isn't hard at all and speaks only to Romneys hatred for Trump.     Trying to drape the cloak of their oath around his actions is one of the most ridiculous comments i have ever heard here.   Romney actions are attributable to TDS only.   Nothing more and nothing less.  

That said, a Senators oath?   What a joke.   Most of them are too busy with their own agendas, partisanship and money grubbing to be bothered with truly following an oath to the people they are supposed to be representing.

 
 
 
CB
2.1.17  CB   replied to  KDMichigan @2.1.11    2 weeks ago

We don't love Romney as the next time he supports a stupid Trump lie or policy, you will get to see.

However, Trump tried to come between Romney's principles, convictions, faith, and belief in God. I can't prove it, but you might can bet Romney got spiritual advise from his advisor(s) on where he should be on this one. Trump brought this out of the man. Trump's epic fail. So let Trump pound sand.

Here is the question: If Trump does this crime again or some other crime for which he is charged, will he force another or a group of republicans to have to stand up again him? Or, will they take another OATH TO GOD AND COUNTRY and do obeisance to a failed man without a conscience.

Incidentally: ("So help me God. . . .")

Mormon - 1.

Right-wing Evangelicals - 0.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.1.18  Freedom Warrior  replied to  CB @2.1.6    2 weeks ago

That’s an incredible amount of BS particularly when you consider his vote was out of personal animus for the prez not out of conscience.  Where in hell do  people get this idea that Pierre Delecto stomping around in his sour grapes suddenly has a conscience when they have no use for it as president and plenty of nasty things to say about that conscience all the while knowing that the charges against the president were incredibly bogus to begin with. Of course we had to go through the charade just to prove it but Christ sake people need to give up on that bullshit already. 

 
 
 
lib50
2.1.19  lib50  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2.1.18    2 weeks ago

I'm not surprised Trump supporters don't understand conscience and deep spiritual values.  Romney will go down in history for his courage in the face of the Trump bullshit and payback machine.  Republican whining about 'his motives'  doesn't even make sense.  FFS, have some standards and expect to adhere to them if you expect it from everybody else.  Trump will always be impeached, gop will go down in history as complicit in his words and actions forever.  The senate coverup did not exonerate Trump in the least, many many republicans said he did it (Trump himself told us what he did).  Shame conservatives can't really opine about anything anybody else does wrong until they deal with Putin's puppet.

 
 
 
Sparty On
2.1.20  Sparty On  replied to  lib50 @2.1.19    2 weeks ago
conscience and deep spiritual values

Lol ..... words used by the left to describe Romney in the 2012 election.   Liar, deceitful, greedy, bullshitter, corrupt, unpatriotic and heartless corporate raider.

So now he has a conscience and a deep spiritual conviction eh?   The is one helluva epiphany by Romney that's for sure.

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.1.21  Tessylo  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.9    2 weeks ago

A binder full of women.  .   .   

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.1.22  Freedom Warrior  replied to  lib50 @2.1.19    2 weeks ago

Well you said nothing there of course that hasn’t been refuted 1 million times over with obvious exculpatory evidence. TDS doesn’t seem to be curable.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
2.1.23  Jasper2529  replied to  lib50 @2.1.19    2 weeks ago
I'm not surprised Trump supporters don't understand conscience and deep spiritual values.  Romney will go down in history for his courage

It was around 10 years ago that many on the left including left wing media called Romney's religion (Mormonism) a  "polygamist cult" and insisted that he wore "magic underwear". They also accused him of being a misogynist and elitist. But in Feb 2020 he is suddenly revered as having "deep spiritual values" and "courage".  jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif  

 
 
 
charger 383
2.1.24  charger 383  replied to  MUVA @2.1.12    2 weeks ago

I voted for Virgil Goode. who was on ballet in Virginia.  I didn't like Romney then and like him less now

 
 
 
CB
2.1.25  CB   replied to  CB @2.1.3    2 weeks ago

UPDATE: Called Senator Romney's office and thanked him for standing up for truth, faith, constitution, manhood, and God. We all need to support a "do-gooder" in their time of need. Oh, and I left on the tape that I am a democrat; expecting nothing more than he has already given in this one-off.

Senator Mitt Romney: 202-224-5251 (There was room for a message!)

 
 
 
CB
2.1.26  CB   replied to  Sparty On @2.1.16    2 weeks ago

 Your comment is meaningless to me.

 
 
 
CB
2.1.27  CB   replied to  Freedom Warrior @2.1.18    2 weeks ago

I'm done. Moving off this train of thought now. No more digression for me.

One last thing. Read @21.1.15. (Smile.)

 
 
 
CB
2.1.28  CB   replied to  Sparty On @2.1.20    2 weeks ago

And other Trump conservatives can have both too!

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
2.1.29  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.1.13    2 weeks ago

Oh yeah, like Trump isn't.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.1.30  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @2.1.29    2 weeks ago

Never said he was not, but this article is about Romney not Trump.

 
 
 
Sparty On
2.1.31  Sparty On  replied to  CB @2.1.26    2 weeks ago
Your comment is meaningless to me.

That means i'm on the right track.  

And save your uninformed and thinly veiled insults for someone who cares what you think.  

I don't

 
 
 
CB
2.1.32  CB   replied to  Sparty On @2.1.31    2 weeks ago

Okay, so now what?

 
 
 
Sparty On
2.1.33  Sparty On  replied to  CB @2.1.32    2 weeks ago

Go home hug your loved ones, have a cold one and chill out

 
 
 
Ender
2.2  Ender  replied to  Ronin2 @2    2 weeks ago

There is hypocrisy on both sides. Look at the parallels. Both parties just switched sides of the fence.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.2.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Ender @2.2    2 weeks ago

On that I agree 100%.

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.2.2  Ronin2  replied to  Ender @2.2    2 weeks ago
There is hypocrisy on both sides.

I can agree with you on that part.

The rest, not so much.

1) If the House Democrats had any morals or ethics they would have done their damn job and used the courts to compel testimony from witnesses. It is their job to vet witnesses and gather information for charges.  By not wanting to go the correct route they violated their oaths of office.

2) House Democrats held closed door testimony and only leaked the parts that they thought would damage Trump. With no light of day to testimony, and restricting Republican access to ask witnesses questions- and not allowing Republican witnesses; their articles of impeachment were shot full of holes as defense council showed the full testimony tapes.

3) Trying desperately to change the rules of the Senate to allow not just witnesses; but new witnesses broke the precedent set by the Clinton impeachment. Where the Democrats fought tooth and nail for no witnesses. The agreement reached was no new witnesses, and no live witness testimony. All they did was play the House interview tapes of three witnesses in the Senate. Same thing that the Trump defense team did.

If I were a Republican I would have shot down their articles as well. I can't stand Trump; but right now he is the lesser of two evils. Usurping a duly elected president is unforgivable. It will be a very long time, if ever, I will be able to vote for another Democrat.

 
 
 
Ender
2.2.3  Ender  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2.2    2 weeks ago

From what I have read the republicans were never restricted from the proceedings or asking questions. They asked many.

I don't care how many people wanted to hear from the Bidens, it in no way had anything to do with what donald was doing. That was only distraction and misdirection.

I agree that they should have taken it to the courts.

A vote for a republican is a vote for trump as it is his party now.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
2.2.4  Jasper2529  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2.2    2 weeks ago
House Democrats held closed door testimony and only leaked the parts that they thought would damage Trump.

They also repeatedly said that there were 17 witnesses when there are 18. Schiff still hasn't released the basement testimony of his 18th witness, Michael Atkinson.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jan/23/michael-atkinson-testimony-concealed-adam-schiff/

 
 
 
CB
2.3  CB   replied to  Ronin2 @2    2 weeks ago

You call small things. I am old enough to have voted for Bill Clinton and to have voted against Al Gore because of Bill Clinton. I am old enough to have seen Donald Trump do what he is charged with doing. And, Donald J. Trump is NO Bill Clinton!

So you can rest BS in a deep hole. Romney is shredding tears because he knows that keep his life-long-established oath to God requires he break with fellow republicans and conservatives who call him continuously asking him to treat this ". . . so help me God. . . " as less than its meaning to the man.

And if there is hypocrisy, it hails from those so-called "so help me God" senators who hang tough together with a for-real menace to society!

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.3.1  Split Personality  replied to  CB @2.3    2 weeks ago
512
 
 
 
Ronin2
2.3.2  Ronin2  replied to  CB @2.3    2 weeks ago
And, Donald J. Trump is NO Bill Clinton!

Yes, Clinton was proven guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt; and Democrats still chose party over country. 

With Trump all they had was second and third hand information, hatred, and TDDDS. Sorry that is not enough to impeach. Next time they need to do their damn jobs and go through the courts to compel witness testimony in the House.

The Clintons are every bit as scummy as the Trumps. But I will admit Bill Clinton is very likable. He is still a sleazy, slimy, sexual predator, who will do anything to get ahead. 

As for Romney- TDDDDS is not just a disease on the left.

Romney has not hidden his absolute hatred of Trump for accomplishing something he couldn't- winning the White House. Romney's judgement on anything concerning Trump needs to be questioned.

 
 
 
CB
2.3.3  CB   replied to  Split Personality @2.3.1    2 weeks ago

We have a 'clutch' of cluckers in here too! HA!

 
 
 
CB
2.3.4  CB   replied to  Ronin2 @2.3.2    2 weeks ago

Well, we're done *yawn*  going on and on about this *stretching*. Wake me when something new comes up or just lock me in for safe-keeping and shut the door on your way out!

 
 
 
lady in black
3  lady in black    2 weeks ago

Good for him.  Sad that other republicans tow the bullshit crooked/lying donnie spews forth

 
 
 
Ender
3.1  Ender  replied to  lady in black @3    2 weeks ago

Never liked him but I will give him credit for not following party line.

 
 
 
dennis smith
3.1.1  dennis smith  replied to  Ender @3.1    2 weeks ago
Unfortunately can't say the same for any of the Dems

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  lady in black @3    2 weeks ago

The reason the right wingers and Trumpsters are all livid is because they understand that this means the evidence against Trump was overwhelming.  If it wasnt , Romney never would have voted to convict. 

This blows their argument that Schiff had some sort of unsupportable vendetta against trump out of the water. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3.2.1  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @3.2    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
CB
3.2.2  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @3.2.1    2 weeks ago

This looks to me like something from a 'very stable genius.'

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
3.2.3  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  XDm9mm @3.2.1    2 weeks ago

exaxtly!  👍👏🇺🇸🗽

 
 
 
MUVA
3.2.4  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @3.2    2 weeks ago

No

 
 
 
dennis smith
3.2.5  dennis smith  replied to  JohnRussell @3.2    2 weeks ago

One Rep Senator voting to not acquit doesn't mean the evidence was overwhelming, just that he die not follow his party line.

Something the Dems CANNOT say about ANY of their Senators. 

 
 
 
CB
3.2.6  CB   replied to  dennis smith @3.2.5    2 weeks ago

Spin, Dennis. Spin.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4  XDm9mm    2 weeks ago

Hey JR, maybe, just maybe, you should go back and revise the lie you're perpetrating.

There has been no vote yet.   Let me say that one more time so it is understood by the "author".  There has been no vote yet, so this:

FOR THE FIRST TIME IN US HISTORY A SENATOR HAS VOTED TO CONVICT A PRESIDENT OF HIS OWN PARTY

is in fact a lie.

Romney has INDICATED how he will vote when the votes are taken but to this point in time NO ONE has voted.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @4    2 weeks ago
Romney has INDICATED how he will vote when the votes are taken but to this point in time NO ONE has voted.

Are you hoping he passes away before he gets to vote in a couple hours? 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.1.1  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1    2 weeks ago
Are you hoping he passes away before he gets to vote in a couple hours? 

Hell no.  I don't even hope that for you.   

I simply indicated the LIE you personally told.  Period. End of story.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @4.1.1    2 weeks ago

Did you expect me to seed two articles about it?

lol

when you dont have the facts on your side you nitpick trivialities

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.1.3  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.2    2 weeks ago
when you dont have the facts on your side you nitpick trivialities

What trivialities?  When YOU originally posted this piece, NO ONE HAD YET VOTED.   Ergo, YOU told a lie.  Period.  End of story.  You can't change what you did simply by ignoring the truth of the fact.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
4.1.4  1stwarrior  replied to  XDm9mm @4.1.3    2 weeks ago

Expect more to come.

 
 
 
CB
4.1.5  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @4.1.3    2 weeks ago

Well, you can just say that today, John was a prophet. And move on to make what's left of your 'case.'

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5  author  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago

Lookie at this asshole

----------------------------------------------------

Donald Trump Jr.
@DonaldJTrumpJr
Mitt Romney is forever bitter that he will never be POTUS. He was too weak to beat the Democrats then so he’s joining them now. He’s now officially a member of the resistance & should be expelled from the
1:32 PM · Feb 5, 2020
 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
5.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  JohnRussell @5    2 weeks ago

what took so long...?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  igknorantzrulz @5.1    2 weeks ago

Congress should put Don Jr's criminal activities under the microscope next. 

 
 
 
evilgenius
5.1.2  evilgenius  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.1    2 weeks ago
Congress should put Don Jr's criminal activities under the microscope next. 

That's not their job, John.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
5.1.3  Jasper2529  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.1    2 weeks ago
Congress should put Don Jr's criminal activities under the microscope next. 

Why? Is he running for an elected office? Or, better yet, does he hold an elected or appointed office?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.4  author  JohnRussell  replied to  evilgenius @5.1.2    2 weeks ago
That's not their job, John.

Depends on what the crime is. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.5  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Jasper2529 @5.1.3    2 weeks ago

You dont have to be in elected office to get investigated by Congress. 

 
 
 
evilgenius
5.1.6  evilgenius  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.5    2 weeks ago
You dont have to be in elected office to get investigated by Congress. 

They would have to do some heavy mental gymnastics to make it even remotely plausible. "Witch Hunt" would start to sound much more plausible to non-partisans. 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
5.1.7  Jasper2529  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.5    2 weeks ago
You dont have to be in elected office to get investigated by Congress. 

I deliberately gave you another option in comment 5.1.3   but you ignored it. Oh, well!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.8  author  JohnRussell  replied to  evilgenius @5.1.6    2 weeks ago

Well, I was being a little bit sarcastic originally, but it would not be beyond belief for Trump Jr to end up investigated.  The Congress investigates wrongdoing that comes under their jurisdiction.  Illegal activities by the Trump family would come under their jurisdiction. 

 
 
 
katrix
5.1.9  katrix  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.8    2 weeks ago

Well, if Hunter Biden is investigated, I certainly hope Don Jr and Ivanka are as well. They've clearly used their father's position for financial gain.

 
 
 
evilgenius
5.1.10  evilgenius  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.8    2 weeks ago
Illegal activities by the Trump family would come under their jurisdiction. 

It would be better suited somewhere like the Southern District of NY where the Trump Foundation was investigated.

 
 
 
evilgenius
5.1.11  evilgenius  replied to  katrix @5.1.9    2 weeks ago
Well, if Hunter Biden is investigated, I certainly hope Don Jr and Ivanka are as well. They've clearly used their father's position for financial gain.

Trumps flaunting of the Emoluments Clause IS being investigated. 

 
 
 
MUVA
5.1.12  MUVA  replied to  evilgenius @5.1.11    2 weeks ago

No

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
5.2  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  JohnRussell @5    2 weeks ago

Right on Mr. President.  He’s a democrat now

 
 
 
Cathar
5.3  Cathar  replied to  JohnRussell @5    2 weeks ago

 Jr was not talented enough to sell his own books he had to have offers buy them in bulk. From a guy who can not be involved in charities because he violated the rules.

 
 
 
CB
5.4  CB   replied to  JohnRussell @5    2 weeks ago

The apple does not fall far from the tree. . . .

 
 
 
Sparty On
6  Sparty On    2 weeks ago

Yawn .....

A never Trumper votes against Trump.   A guy who the left hated when he ran against Obama.   Bonne chance Mittster, they love you now ....

News at eleven if you can stay awake .....

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @6    2 weeks ago

If Romneny was voting in some sort of automatic fashion he would have been behind this a long time ago. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.1.1  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1    2 weeks ago

Nah, that he waited so long to announce what he was always going to do speaks to his lack of character.

He is a weak, angry little man  

Just like a lot of Dems these days.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
6.1.2  XDm9mm  replied to  Sparty On @6.1.1    2 weeks ago
Nah, that he waited so long to announce what he was always going to do speaks to his lack of character.

He is a weak, angry little man  

Just like a lot of Dems these days.

Character and Romney do not belong in the same sentence together.

I will submit that he is a bitter little man who like the vast majority of Democrats simply can't comprehend nor accept the fact that Donald Trump not only beat them, but continues to do so.

I'll further submit that Romney will likely make a mad dash to the Democrats in a pathetic attempt at salvaging what's left of his political career.  Who knows, maybe he's thinking that kissing their collective asses early enough might be a way to get into the Democrat fold through a brokered convention.

 
 
 
CB
6.1.3  CB   replied to  Sparty On @6.1.1    2 weeks ago

Another "very stable genius" has spoken, no doubt!

 
 
 
katrix
6.1.4  katrix  replied to  XDm9mm @6.1.2    2 weeks ago
I'll further submit that Romney will likely make a mad dash to the Democrats in a pathetic attempt at salvaging what's left of his political career

Maybe - after all, Trump made a mad dash for the Republicans because he knew he didn't stand a chance as a Democrat. Not that he has any more loyalty to the GOP than he did to the Dems.

 
 
 
Ender
6.1.5  Ender  replied to  katrix @6.1.4    2 weeks ago

That is what gets me most of all and a lot of people do not see. donald only has loyalty to himself.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
6.1.6  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  Sparty On @6.1.1    2 weeks ago

he just wanted to try to divert momentum from Trumps awesome SOTU address.  

 
 
 
CB
6.1.7  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @6.1.2    2 weeks ago

You apparently are feeling bitter. Why so angry? Donald Trump did cheat before and tried to cheat again. Pattern-forming states he will try even harder now to cheat yet once more-even with all eyes watching him. Surely, you have heard the one about, "The definition of insanity. . . ."?

Romney is a man of conviction. Those stupid foolish senators put their hands on a Bible they SAY they confess and swore to God whom they SAY they serve! Now tell me how is God supposed to feel about them acquitting a guilty man named Donald Trump to set about doing more of the same? If God is real, then it is clear God saw this deliberate affront to God's name!

Your anger is misplaced.

 
 
 
CB
6.1.8  CB   replied to  Ender @6.1.5    2 weeks ago

Oh they see it alright. Donald Trump makes sure his party members know that he is 'the boss.'  His retribution is swift, via social media. Twitter was not designed for this crap, but I can only wonder how this company feels taking profits for being home to a louse who ruins lives and careers everyday on their 'vehicle.'

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.1.9  Sparty On  replied to  CB @6.1.7    2 weeks ago
Your anger is misplaced.

Sorry but many on the left have had the market cornered on "angry" for the last three plus years.

Anyone who can't see that might be cornering the market in "denial" as well.

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.10  Tessylo  replied to  Sparty On @6.1.9    2 weeks ago

The only TDS I'm aware is of the tRump supporters Denial Syndrome.

There is nothing he can say or do, no matter how  vile, that won't be supported by his supporters.  

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.1.11  Sparty On  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.10    2 weeks ago
The only TDS I'm aware is of the tRump supporters Denial Syndrome.

No surprise there.

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.12  Tessylo  replied to  Ender @6.1.5    2 weeks ago
'That is what gets me most of all and a lot of people do not see. donald only has loyalty to himself.'

Yet he demands undying loyalty form everyone else.  

 
 
 
CB
6.1.13  CB   replied to  Sparty On @6.1.9    2 weeks ago

Yeah, that is all you got from @6.1.7.  Go figure.

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.1.14  Sparty On  replied to  CB @6.1.13    2 weeks ago

I understand.   The truth does hurt and you are clearly in a lot of pain.

 
 
 
CB
6.1.15  CB   replied to  Sparty On @6.1.14    2 weeks ago

Projection is irrelevant. If I had any pain that you could do anything about—I wouldn't hold out hope you would do something about it.

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.1.16  Sparty On  replied to  CB @6.1.15    2 weeks ago

Wrong again there buddy but i see you really do need to heed the advice of my last post or you can keep hating your way around this thread.   Your choice but regardless, i am done with this futile discussion and here's to  a great weekend or not.   No matter to me ..... it's beer thirty and i gone ....

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.2  Tacos!  replied to  Sparty On @6    2 weeks ago
A guy who the left hated when he ran against Obama.

No kidding. The way they assassinated this guy's character when he ran would have been epic and memorable if not for the way they have gone after Trump. Granted, I think Trump is more deserving of the abuse. It's just so much more extreme, we forget how they beat up on a basically decent person.

Now they want to act like they respect him. Please!

 
 
 
katrix
6.2.1  katrix  replied to  Tacos! @6.2    2 weeks ago
Now they want to act like they respect him. Please!

It's perfectly possible to respect an action from a person but not approve of him overall.

 
 
 
Cathar
6.2.2  Cathar  replied to  Tacos! @6.2    2 weeks ago

No one respects tRump they tolerate him. They finally got an empty suit to sign their legislation ballooning our deficit. The PArty of fiscal discipline lacks all of it.

 
 
 
dennis smith
6.2.3  dennis smith  replied to  Cathar @6.2.2    2 weeks ago

The voters respected him enough in 2016 to elect him. Those who backed the loser are nothing more than bitter to this day. That is their choice and they have to live with the bitterness. 

 
 
 
CB
6.2.4  CB   replied to  katrix @6.2.1    2 weeks ago

Tacos! knows this, or else s/he would not be so out of shape with Romney who was "just fine" on Monday and by the way, "just fine" on the obstruction charge with republicans and conservatives.

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.2.5  Tacos!  replied to  CB @6.2.4    2 weeks ago
or else s/he would not be so out of shape with Romney

I'm not out of shape over Romney. I don't agree with him on everything and that's not new, nor is it unique to Romney. My comments are not about him, though. They are about the extreme fawning over him that I see today from the same people who characterized him as the devil himself for things like making a lot of money (legally), trying to employ women, or the way he transported a dog once.

The point being that the assessment of the man is not based on what he's actually doing or saying but on what is politically expedient in the moment. Democrats love Romney today because he's anti-Trump. Nothing more. They don't admire his integrity, his faith, or anything like that. 

On the other hand, I have always found him to be a decent man and continue to think so today - even though I disagree with him on this particular issue.

 
 
 
CB
6.2.6  CB   replied to  dennis smith @6.2.3    2 weeks ago

We don't support a liar, cheater, and big-mouth abuser of the office of the president. Trump is changing y'all. Unless (clutches the pearls) some of y'all are just like him!

 
 
 
CB
6.2.7  CB   replied to  Tacos! @6.2.5    2 weeks ago
Democrats love Romney today because he's anti-Trump. Nothing more. They don't admire his integrity, his faith, or anything like that. 

I'm a democrat and I don't want you to confuse anything I have written here yesterday or today for "love" of Romney. However, I can respect you or anybody else who can tell the truth from error. You can't guilt-trip me, nevertheless. I am better than that.

I know the deal. Romney is a better Mormon because he stands up for his religion. I am not a Mormon and I don't pretend to be one today or tomorrow. When people use the name of God, when people take an oath to God, then whatever God s/he believes in is invoked. And, it's a meaningful and defining moment for said person.

 
 
 
katrix
7  katrix    2 weeks ago

Good old Trump supporters. They eat their own whenever their own admit that Trump did anything wrong. If you're not a total sycophant, they destroy you.

 
 
 
MUVA
7.1  MUVA  replied to  katrix @7    2 weeks ago

No

 
 
 
Ronin2
7.2  Ronin2  replied to  katrix @7    2 weeks ago

Wow, the exact same thing can be said about the Democrats.

Seems short term memory loss has set in on how Democrats treated Tulsi Gabbard for voting present on impeachment? She was correct, the Democrats hadn't followed proper procedure and their articles of impeachment were flimsy. 

Of course Hillary already called her a Russian asset; so piling on was easy.

Isn't politics fun?

 
 
 
Tacos!
8  Tacos!    2 weeks ago

At the very beginning of his remarks he said,

"I hope we respect each other's good faith."

Dude.

Other than in a small handful of moderate senators, if you think you see "good faith" in any part of this process, you are a bigger imbecile than I ever imagined.

Beyond that, I respectfully disagree with his conclusion that the president needs to be removed based on Article I. I think reasonable people can disagree on that count. Romney made the argument that the Bidens' behavior, while unsavory, was not a crime and therefore should not be a concern to the president. I think the same might be said of Trump's behavior. I think much has been made of little. I also think assumptions have been made that are not warranted. Both are typical for the opponents of this president.

He didn't address Article II. I will be interested to see how he votes on that one.

 
 
 
katrix
8.1  katrix  replied to  Tacos! @8    2 weeks ago
He didn't address Article II. I will be interested to see how he votes on that one.

What I read said that he would vote to acquit on Article II, convict on Article I.

 
 
 
CB
8.1.1  CB   replied to  katrix @8.1    2 weeks ago

Which speaks to the depth of Romney's faith and convictions. He stands for something—ultimately. Had it been possible for Romney to live with himself after going along with his party's bandwagon - from his sharing speech today he would have done just that gotten up on the wagon. He could not however for he strongly believed Trump abuse/s the power of his office. But, he allowed himself to accept political plausible deniability from Trump lawyers, Mitch McConnell, and all those he mentioned who came in waves to try to persuade him to take it (the political cover, that is).

 
 
 
CB
8.2  CB   replied to  Tacos! @8    2 weeks ago

Biden nor his son committed any offense, constitutional or otherwise. Donald Trump conspired to take advantage of this novice and new Ukrainian President to get him to out and out LIE about an investigation which ingloriously did not even need occurring. Trump wanted a 'talking point' in the bag in case the time would arrive he could use it to slay his lead political foe. Besides that, campaign finance law forbids a sitting president from using and acquiring international "oppo" research on his or her opponent.

You can close your eyes a thousand times and when you open them again the facts of the matter will still be unblinkingly staring back at you!

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.1  Tacos!  replied to  CB @8.2    2 weeks ago
Biden nor his son committed any offense, constitutional or otherwise.

Maybe. Maybe not. That's why you ask someone to look into it. The energy with which people insist - without such an inquiry - that Biden did nothing wrong, just makes it look like they're afraid he actually did do something wrong.

to get him to out and out LIE

I have not seen evidence supporting that he wanted President Z to lie. That's one of those unwarranted assumptions I mentioned.

Trump wanted a 'talking point' to slay his political foe with.

Everybody in politics wants that. If you want to start acting like there's something wrong with that, fine, but you need to be criticizing a lot more people than just Trump.

 
 
 
CB
8.2.2  CB   replied to  Tacos! @8.2.1    2 weeks ago
The energy with which people insist - without such an inquiry - that Biden did nothing wrong, just makes it look like they're afraid he actually did do something wrong.

Checking on one's political opponent is against our Campaign Finance Law:

(b) Contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value , or expressly or impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with any Federal, State, or local election. SOURCE : https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20

What we insist on is that Trump supporters should understand that a sitting president, imbued with a supported teams of staff did not know about campaign finance law, and/or, continued to persist in violation of the same. Furthermore, to this very day, said sitting president does not repent or admit of an error in sending teams (scores) of people over to a foreign country in a shadow operation to get a novice new president of Ukraine to go to the nearest microphone  and media outlet and state, whether real or fiction, that he had issued an order for the investigation of Joe Biden, a Trump opponent in the 2020 election campaign.

 
 
 
CB
8.2.3  CB   replied to  Tacos! @8.2.1    2 weeks ago
I have not seen evidence supporting that he wanted President Z to lie. That's one of those unwarranted assumptions I mentioned.

How was President Zelinsky going to investigate something known to everybody except conspiracy theorists and Russia as not happening? Trump had been told repeatedly that Russia interfered in our 2016 election. But as yo certainly know Trump was not satisfied with our intelligence—trusting what Russ a said about Ukraine (whom Russia is in a heated war with) more. Of course, Burisma (code for Bidens) was thrown in for personal benefit of Trump being able to denounce a political rival in the 2020 election cycle we are in now.

Tacos! It is plain for people with life time experiences to see, this was a conspiracy to advance a lie or set of lies to further Trump's political fortune and to destroy his leading opponent at the time. Trump wanted President Z to investigate what he in his high office should have known to be an out of proportion lie. Furthermore, Trump avoided all the legitimate means and tools of government to execute this properly with the help of the FBI and DOJ officials (besides AG Barr).

 
 
 
CB
8.2.4  CB   replied to  Tacos! @8.2.1    2 weeks ago
Trump wanted a 'talking point' to slay his political foe with.
Everybody in politics wants that. If you want to start acting like there's something wrong with that, fine, but you need to be criticizing a lot more people than just Trump.

Everybody in politics (except Trump ) apparently understands what a campaign finance law violation is and chooses not to clandestinely do an elaborate end-run around the Rule of Law. Trump listened to "his people" and got himself in this deep, deep, mess or maybe just  maybe Trump took his own counsel and did this to himself!

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.5  Tacos!  replied to  CB @8.2.2    2 weeks ago
Checking on one's political opponent is against our Campaign Finance Law:

That. Is. Absurd. Every single person running for any office is checking on their opponent. Or at least they are if they care about winning.

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.6  Tacos!  replied to  CB @8.2.3    2 weeks ago
How was President Zelinsky going to investigate something known to everybody except conspiracy theorists and Russia as not happening?

Easy. He investigates it using resources he trusts until he is satisfied with the result. Trump has never been the guy who just takes "everybody's" word for it. That's his prerogative. That's why that stuff with Obama's birth certificate went on forever. Just because you, or Biden, or MSNBC or whomever you feel asking says there's nothing there, that doesn't mean he's obligated to accept that.

this was a conspiracy to advance a lie or set of lies

There is zero evidence of a conspiracy involving the Ukrainian president to advance a lie or set of lies. There is nothing in the transcript of their phone call to indicate that Trump was anything other than sincere in his comments about Biden. You might think he's insane or delusional - and he might very well be - but there is nothing there to indicate that he is lying or that he wants Zelenskyy to lie. There is also nothing to indicate that Zelenskyy has any intention of advancing a lie. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.7  Tacos!  replied to  CB @8.2.4    2 weeks ago
Everybody in politics (except Trump ) apparently understands what a campaign finance law violation is and chooses not to clandestinely do an elaborate end-run around the Rule of Law.

Then why hasn't this Ukraine business led to legal action based on campaign finance law? Why wasn't he impeached for violating it? With all the criticism that Democrats weren't impeaching him for breaking a specific law, why wouldn't the Democrats impeach him for that if "everybody in politics" understands it?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.2.8  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @8.2.6    2 weeks ago
Trump has never been the guy who just takes "everybody's" word for it. That's his prerogative. That's why that stuff with Obama's birth certificate went on forever. Just because you, or Biden, or MSNBC or whomever you feel asking says there's nothing there, that doesn't mean he's obligated to accept that.

You do know, don't you , that Trump was totally disgraced by his involvement with the birther conspiracy theories? 

You seem to be saying that Trump is not "obligated" to accept reality. He is the president of the United States . We need him to accept reality, and not send "detectives' into Ukraine the way he sent "detectives" to Hawaii on a wild goose chase after Obama's birth certificate. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.2.9  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @8.2.8    2 weeks ago
You do know, don't you , that Trump was totally disgraced by his involvement with the birther conspiracy theories?

I guess that depends on what you mean by "disgraced." He managed to get himself elected President of the United States of America, so it can't be going that badly for him.

You seem to be saying that Trump is not "obligated" to accept reality.

Is anybody? I notice Democrats didn't do a very good of "accepting reality" after November of 2016, so I think there's plenty to go around of the problem you're concerned with.

 
 
 
CB
8.2.10  CB   replied to  Tacos! @8.2.5    2 weeks ago

Did you miss the theme that has been going on for a 'thousand years' now? Foreign involvement in our presidential elections is against the constitution and written law. Emphatically.

 
 
 
CB
8.2.11  CB   replied to  Tacos! @8.2.6    2 weeks ago

I don't bother trying to get into the tight spaces in Donald Trump's bloviated head.  Now as for you: believe what you want. You can do better than Donald Trump; but I leave it up to you. 'Date,' and stay in a relationship with whom you wish.

 
 
 
CB
8.2.12  CB   replied to  Tacos! @8.2.7    2 weeks ago

You and your cadre (4) are not keeping up. Trump was impeaced on "All the above." AKA: Abuse of Power.

You really need to get some authentic news in your life!

 
 
 
CB
8.2.13  CB   replied to  JohnRussell @8.2.8    2 weeks ago

Yeah, that whole exchange above was "heady" for me.

 
 
 
CB
8.2.14  CB   replied to  Tacos! @8.2.9    2 weeks ago

Please don't try to 'back-board" democrats in your jump-shot. Donald Trump is a dangerous 'leader' and a stupid offensive man. He really has no business in politics - because it is clear to anyone who has eyes that his perspective is republicans and conservatives are not his "betters," "equals," or constituents, you all are "The  Enthralled!"

When any one in the Trump organizations comes to his or her proper senses and speak out immediately the Trump siege mentality is triggered: Trump, his boys, and "the Enthralled" curse and spit on that one.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.3  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @8    2 weeks ago

Your relentless idea that it is just fine for a president to ask a foreign government to investigate his US election rival is simply strange.  I can understand why people would argue he didnt do it, because they want to pretend. 

Saying he did it but he was justified is another kettle of fish.  Disturbing. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.3.1  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3    2 weeks ago
Your relentless idea that it is just fine for a president to ask a foreign government to investigate his US election rival is simply strange.

That is an incomplete representation of what happened. He asked that president to investigate a former Vice President of this country for actions he took as Vice President while in that country and related to events and people in that country. It would actually be weird if the president of that country was not consulted and I find it reasonable for the current president to take the lead on consulting him.

Oh, and that former VP happens to be an election rival. That doesn't excuse him from being investigated.

Saying he did it but he was justified is another kettle of fish.

I don't think I have made a declaration about how justified Trump's interest is. I think Trump is probably reaching because - like many politicians - he is prone to conspiracy theories and eager to assassinate the character of his opponents. That is hardly unique to Trump. On the other hand, I do not fear the investigation he says he wants and I acknowledge that it is at least worth a look. "Investigate away!" I say. 

The current popular insistence from the Left that there is zero grounds for investigating the Bidens is disingenuous at best.

 
 
 
katrix
8.3.2  katrix  replied to  Tacos! @8.3.1    2 weeks ago
Oh, and that former VP happens to be an election rival. That doesn't excuse him from being investigated.

IF that were true, he would have gone to the DOJ, not a foreign country. Biden's actions were part of official U.S. policy, not a rogue operation for personal gain as Trump's were.

 
 
 
MUVA
8.3.3  MUVA  replied to  katrix @8.3.2    2 weeks ago

Trump asked for cooperation with the AG I would read the transcript it makes it clear.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
8.3.4  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  MUVA @8.3.3    2 weeks ago
Trump asked for cooperation with the AG I would read the transcript it makes it clear

Unbelievable isn't it?....................Rhetorical.

jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.3.5  Tacos!  replied to  katrix @8.3.2    2 weeks ago
IF that were true, he would have gone to the DOJ, not a foreign country.

No, I think the way to go would be to do both. He said he was going to have the AG call President Z and I think he should have. I also think it was appropriate to talk him directly about it to begin with. I think it would be obnoxious to have our DOJ investigating goings-on in Ukraine without consulting the new president.

 
 
 
dennis smith
8.3.6  dennis smith  replied to  MUVA @8.3.3    2 weeks ago

Comments without basis is becoming quite common for some with TDS

 
 
 
CB
8.3.7  CB   replied to  Tacos! @8.3.1    2 weeks ago
The current popular insistence from the Left that there is zero grounds for investigating the Bidens is disingenuous at best

Your disagreement is with the U.S. Constitution and campaign finance law - not us. President Trump, even some republican and conservative senators positively admit, committed the illegal act of attempting to get international countries to interfere in U.S. elections, even though he applied so much pressure to those republicans and conservatives that it divided many of them from God ("So help me God." they said). However, they did not rely on God or faith, but Trump instead.

 
 
 
Tacos!
8.3.8  Tacos!  replied to  CB @8.3.7    2 weeks ago
President Trump, even some republican and conservative senators positively admit, committed the illegal act of attempting to get international countries to interfere in U.S. elections

I have a hard time seeing how uncovering true information - without violating anyone's rights as Nixon did - constitutes interfering with an election. That sounds to me like something that happens in any election. Nobody had a problem with Trump or his campaign people being investigated by the government or whoever Hillary Clinton was soliciting for information.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
8.3.9  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3    2 weeks ago

First of all Burisma isn’t a rival and it’s quite a stretch to consider Biden as one either. The veep is a freakin 3 time loser many times over and naturally he can’t even get the douche bag obummer to support the asshole. Then from there not investigating corruption no matter where it is just because you’re some political figure means you’re exempt? What kind of fucking nonsense is that.

 
 
 
CB
8.3.10  CB   replied to  Tacos! @8.3.8    2 weeks ago

Trump is president. That's all. He is supposed to be a model of good, purity, the "American Way," and specifically Rule of Law. He is not suppose to be the epitome of some thug looking for a street fight to sink in his teeth. But, I digress. Trump is impeached —he got that legally.

 
 
 
CB
8.3.11  CB   replied to  Freedom Warrior @8.3.9    2 weeks ago

Why don't you get with the constitution and the founders? We do not allow foreign influence in our elections! And, we have campaign finance law (2002) which disallows a president abusing his or her power to ask foreign nationals to interfere in our elections, especially for remuneration or allocation of pre/authorized funds, resources, or materials.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
9  r.t..b...    2 weeks ago

It is still a fait accompli, but no one will be ever be able to say it was along strictly partisan lines. Thanks, Mitt, for voting your conscience. 

 
 
 
Colour Me Free
9.1  Colour Me Free  replied to  r.t..b... @9    2 weeks ago
but no one will be ever be able to say it was along strictly partisan lines.

Haha..

I am always late to the 'party' Razing .. but that cracks me up.  I have heard this 'argument' repeated several times, as if it means something .. the whole impeachment process has been nothing but partisan .. a lone republican breaks ranks and now it can be said that the impeachment of Donald J Trump was not strictly along party lines?  Technically it is true .. yet it is still laughable!

: )

Peace

 
 
 
r.t..b...
9.1.1  r.t..b...  replied to  Colour Me Free @9.1    2 weeks ago
Technically it is true

...and one less bullet to put in his chamber. Partisan? Of course. Meaningful? I think so, if for no other reason than to quell one small part of the already divisive dialogue. But I could be wrong...  : )

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
10  Sean Treacy    2 weeks ago

For the first time in history, the impeachment managers  fail to secure even half the votes in favor of removal.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
10.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @10    2 weeks ago

Yes Trump has the clampdown on the Republican Party.  I think they ask his permission to go to the bathroom now. 

 
 
 
CB
10.1.1  CB   replied to  JohnRussell @10.1    2 weeks ago

The party spies know everything there is to know about Trump republicans. Good, bad, and ugly. Oh yes, you better believe Trump has spies out and about looking over his 'kingdom.'

 
 
 
Texan1211
10.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @10.1    2 weeks ago
Yes Trump has the clampdown on the Republican Party. 

Yes, a political party always supports its own President.

Always.

Why would you expect anything different now?

I think they ask his permission to go to the bathroom now. 

Did you think the same of Democrats when Clinton was impeached?

 
 
 
dennis smith
10.1.3  dennis smith  replied to  JohnRussell @10.1    2 weeks ago

"I think they ask his permission to go to the bathroom now."

"I think"  fits the Dem talking points of maybe, assume, probably, perhaps etc.

 
 
 
CB
10.2  CB   replied to  Sean Treacy @10    2 weeks ago

Spin room, finally got up and fully occupied? Good Sean! Get to work!

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
11  Dean Moriarty    2 weeks ago

What do you expect from a guy that makes his dog ride the roof of the car. jrSmiley_7_smiley_image.png

512

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
11.1  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  Dean Moriarty @11    2 weeks ago

The dogs 🐕 are upset that he became one of them.  

 
 
 
Cathar
11.1.1  Cathar  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @11.1    2 weeks ago

You do know tRump hates dogs.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
12  XDm9mm    2 weeks ago

TRUMP IS OFFICIALLY ACQUITTED!!!!

TRUMP 2020

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
12.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  XDm9mm @12    2 weeks ago

256

384

 
 
 
Cathar
12.1.1  Cathar  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @12.1    2 weeks ago

Bolton will speak and his condemnation of tRump will speak volumes. tRump is a washed-up TV reality star who barely commands the English language.

 
 
 
bugsy
12.1.2  bugsy  replied to  Cathar @12.1.1    2 weeks ago
tRump is a washed-up TV reality star who barely commands the English language.

Maybe...but he's still your President.

 
 
 
MUVA
12.1.3  MUVA  replied to  bugsy @12.1.2    2 weeks ago

You beat me to it what he said.jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
dennis smith
12.1.4  dennis smith  replied to  Cathar @12.1.1    2 weeks ago

Only if you believe Bolton.

Trump (spelled correctly) is POTUS until Nov and most likely until Nov 2024.

 
 
 
Cathar
13  Cathar    2 weeks ago

..but not EXONERATED. No witnesses, no documents mean no trial.

 
 
 
dennis smith
13.1  dennis smith  replied to  Cathar @13    2 weeks ago

House dems should have done their job instead of demanding the Senate do it for them.

 
 
 
Texan1211
13.2  Texan1211  replied to  Cathar @13    2 weeks ago
but not EXONERATED. No witnesses, no documents mean no trial.

Impeachments aren't meant to exonerate. The choice is to convict or not. That is all it is designed to do. And under Senate rules, it was a trial.

Those are the facts, and that will be what history records.

 
 
 
Old Hermit
13.2.1  Old Hermit  replied to  Texan1211 @13.2    2 weeks ago
Those are the facts, and that will be what history records.

The Facts history will record will include how the Trump impeachment trial (Ie; the Republican whitewash/cover up), was the FIRST & ONLY impeachment trial in our Nations history to not allow witness or evidence to be introduced.

Witnesses have been part of "every other impeachment trial the Senate has ever had."

Tammy Baldwin
stated on January 19, 2020 in a TV appearance: 

meter-true.jpg

Yes, every past impeachment trial included witnesses.

Let’s break out the history books.
Senate has held 15 impeachment trials

The Senate has held just two prior impeachment trials against presidents — Bill Clinton in 1999 and Andrew Johnson in 1868. Both included witnesses.

The Senate heard testimony from 41 witnesses in the Johnson proceeding, and three for Clinton, including Monica Lewinsky. In the Clinton case, House managers obtained depositions from the witnesses and excerpts of that testimony were shown to the Senate, the Washington Post reported.

But those aren’t the only impeachments the Senate has heard. The U.S. Senate website lists 19 people prior to Trump who were impeached by the House, including 14 judges, a senator, a Supreme Court justice and the secretary of war.

Cases against three of the judges were halted before a trial when the judges resigned, and the case against Sen. William Blount in 1799 — the first impeachment in U.S. history — stopped before trial when the Senate determined it didn’t have such jurisdiction over one of its own.

.

The historical facts will also record that the vote to impeach and remove a sitting President for the crimes he was proven guilty of was BIPARTISAN!

The vote to impeach and remove Trump included all of the Democrats, all of the Independents and, (for the first time in our Nations history), a member of the Presidents own party, the last honorable Republican Senator still in office.

Mitt Romney just did something that literally no senator has ever done before

original

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
13.2.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  Old Hermit @13.2.1    2 weeks ago

The witness testimony from the House was entered into evidence. Politifact  is, unsurprisingly, wrong.  There testimony is just as valid as the three witnesses deposed in the Clinton impeachment, who also didn't testify before the Senate.

 
 
 
Texan1211
13.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  Old Hermit @13.2.1    2 weeks ago

My statement stands as written.

I know how much stock Dems are putting into the whole impeachment thingy, but really, when you think of Clinton, do you automatically think impeachment?

Democrats are acting like this is the worst thing possible to happen. It isn't. It just isn't.

 
 
 
CB
13.2.4  CB   replied to  Old Hermit @13.2.1    2 weeks ago

Big 'toothy' smile!

 
 
 
CB
13.2.5  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @13.2.3    2 weeks ago

You are acting like its the worse thing that can possibly happen. We think Donald Trump trying to corrupt Ukrainian politics and the Ukrainian people - who have been through hell with Russia and national corruption- are pretty bad. We think delusional and enabling republican senators are pretty bad too!

 
 
 
Cathar
14  Cathar    2 weeks ago

..but not EXONERATED. No witnesses, no documents mean no trial.

 
 
 
bugsy
14.1  bugsy  replied to  Cathar @14    2 weeks ago

 So those 17people that sat before the House and the several more that were in Schiff's secret hideout were not witnesses?

What the hell was the House doing all that time?

 
 
 
MrFrost
14.1.1  MrFrost  replied to  bugsy @14.1    2 weeks ago
 So those 17people that sat before the House and the several more that were in Schiff's secret hideout were not witnesses?

That wasn't a trial. That was an investigation. 

 
 
 
dennis smith
14.1.2  dennis smith  replied to  MrFrost @14.1.1    2 weeks ago

Obviously they did not investigate thoroughly

 
 
 
bugsy
14.1.3  bugsy  replied to  MrFrost @14.1.1    2 weeks ago
That was an investigation.

Seems to most Americans, that :investigation" was a sucky one.

 
 
 
It Is ME
14.1.4  It Is ME  replied to  MrFrost @14.1.1    2 weeks ago
That wasn't a trial. That was an investigation. 

Apparently....the "Investigation" fell SHORT ! jrSmiley_87_smiley_image.gif

FACT in point: The House wanted the Senate to finish their failed "JOB" !

 
 
 
MrFrost
14.1.5  MrFrost  replied to  bugsy @14.1.3    2 weeks ago

Seems to most Americans, that :investigation" was a sucky one.

Over 80% of American's wanted witnesses and documents in the senate trial. So after screaming about, "let the voters decide", they said, "fuck the voters, no witnesses, no documents". 

How do you think that's going to play out come November? I am betting it be like an anchor around the GOP's neck. 

 
 
 
MUVA
14.1.6  MUVA  replied to  MrFrost @14.1.5    2 weeks ago

I don't believe that stat for a second along with 95 % of the people. 

 
 
 
WallyW
14.1.7  WallyW  replied to  MrFrost @14.1.5    2 weeks ago

The voters still get to decide if they want to reelect a proven winner.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
14.2  XDm9mm  replied to  Cathar @14    2 weeks ago
.but not EXONERATED. No witnesses, no documents mean no trial

Acquitted synonyms;

Please note the FOURTH ONE DOWN.....  EXONERATE.

So, you were saying?

 
 
 
Cathar
15  Cathar    2 weeks ago

tRump hates "Government" schools. This stems from the fact he would have failed in attending them.

 
 
 
dennis smith
15.1  dennis smith  replied to  Cathar @15    2 weeks ago

Proof please

 
 
 
CB
16  CB     2 weeks ago

Isaiah:

20 Woe to those who call evil good
    and good evil,
who put darkness for light
    and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet
    and sweet for bitter.

 
 
 
Ronin2
16.1  Ronin2  replied to  CB @16    2 weeks ago

You can't be serious. Politicians will flop to whatever is most expedient for them regardless of party. Party before god, country, and everything else- unless they are expecting to jump ship to the other side.

So now Romney is good? Seems the left has jumped ship. You need to go back and look at the way Romney was demonized by the left when he was the Republican candidate for president.

The left can have Romney- of course he better be watching his back for the knife they will put in it once they are done with him. He will last no longer on their side than Trump is in office. Maybe less time if he can't get reelected.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
17  Jeremy Retired in NC    2 weeks ago

How did that vote work out for you?  Trump is STILL your President and Romney is on his way out.

 
 
 
MrFrost
18  MrFrost    2 weeks ago

Weird... I thought the last spine in the GOP died with McCain. Nice to know that there is at least one. 

 
 
 
dennis smith
18.1  dennis smith  replied to  MrFrost @18    2 weeks ago

There aren't any on the Dem party as they all toed their party line.

 
 
 
dennis smith
18.2  dennis smith  replied to  MrFrost @18    2 weeks ago

There aren't any on the Dem party as they all toed their party line.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
19  The Magic Eight Ball    2 weeks ago

romney  is a member of the globalist swamp and now suddenly people are surprised by his votes?  

y'all crack me up :)

 
 
 
dennis smith
19.1  dennis smith  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @19    2 weeks ago
To "The Magic Eight Ball", there are some Dem posters who use possibly, maybe, perhaps etc. Can you allow them to use your name as well in their comments as it fits their narrative?
 
 
 
Sean Treacy
20  Sean Treacy    2 weeks ago

The premise of the article is entirely false. Dozens of senators have voted to  impeach a president of their own party.  Look no further than the first.

 
 
 
PJ
21  PJ    2 weeks ago

It is refreshing to see that there is still one republican who can put his principals before party.  To see someone of faith actually following the teachings of his faith.  There is still one republican on capital hill who understood what it meant to take an oath to uphold the Constitution.

Republican leaders will be upset primarily because he is an example of what they are not, honorable.  He has made them look partisan and self serving.

He may lose his seat when he goes up for re-election but his principals will remain intact and he can look himself in the mirror.

 
 
 
Texan1211
21.1  Texan1211  replied to  PJ @21    2 weeks ago
It is refreshing to see that there is still one republican who can put his principals before party.  To see someone of faith actually following the teachings of his faith.  There is still one republican on capital hill who understood what it meant to take an oath to uphold the Constitution.
Republican leaders will be upset primarily because he is an example of what they are not, honorable.  He has made them look partisan and self serving.
He may lose his seat when he goes up for re-election but his principals will remain intact and he can look himself in the mirror.

I wonder how many progressives, liberals, and Democrats have gotten over the fact that not even one Democrat could bring themselves to vote to remove Clinton.

And I'll bet that nary a one of them complaining today ever uttered one damn word against Democrats who voted ENTIRELY in lockstep.

Bunch of freaking HYPOCRITES.

 
 
 
PJ
21.1.1  PJ  replied to  Texan1211 @21.1    2 weeks ago

Jesus Christ [deleted] I'm putting you on ignore.  [deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
21.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  PJ @21.1.1    2 weeks ago

Normally intelligent people understand exactly what I write.

Is there anything I can do to help you with that?

 
 
 
PJ
21.1.3  PJ  replied to  Texan1211 @21.1.2    2 weeks ago

Well since I'm intelligent you're correct, I understand exactly what you post and it's not "in my opinion".  [deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
21.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  PJ @21.1.3    2 weeks ago

I am usually willing to help the less fortunate.

What exactly do you need?

 
 
 
PJ
21.1.5  PJ  replied to  Texan1211 @21.1.4    2 weeks ago

I need you to help your fellow trumpies in finding the truth again.  jrSmiley_68_smiley_image.png

Enough is enough - I've given you enough attention today.  Run along and find someone else to pester.

 
 
 
Texan1211
21.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  PJ @21.1.5    2 weeks ago
I need you to help your fellow trumpies in finding the truth again.  

Here is a few truths they already know:

Democrats worked on impeachment (according to the Speaker) for over 2 years, but could only find something to impeach Trump for in the last 6 months of the year past.

Democrats refused to let the courts decide on executive privilege.

Democrats put on a crappy case.

With the exception of Romney, the votes were along strict party lines---just like the last impeachment.

And last, and most importantly, Trump is STILL your President.

Wanna help me convince progressive liberals about these truths?

 
 
 
PJ
21.1.7  PJ  replied to  Texan1211 @21.1.6    2 weeks ago

I'm being muzzled so I'm outta here.  Enjoy your safe space.  Cheers!

 
 
 
Sparty On
21.1.8  Sparty On  replied to  PJ @21.1.7    2 weeks ago

Lol .... is that what NT is?

Damn i gotta talk to someone about that last vacation i got then .......

 
 
 
r.t..b...
21.1.9  r.t..b...  replied to  Texan1211 @21.1.6    2 weeks ago
Here is a few truths

Here are just two more..one, he has been impeached and two, he had a member of his own party vote for his removal from office. Historical in any context, hysterical in every deflection. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
21.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  r.t..b... @21.1.9    2 weeks ago
Here are just two more..one, he has been impeached and two, he had a member of his own party vote for his removal from office. Historical in any context, hysterical in every deflection. 

And? Others have been impeached. Whoop-di-do. Democrats want to act as if impeachment is the end of the world for Trump. It won't affect him in any way that I can tell.

Mark my words--impeaching Trump will cost Dems more than it costs Trump.

 
 
 
Texan1211
21.1.11  Texan1211  replied to  PJ @21.1.7    2 weeks ago

No one is muzzling you. Can you not express yourself without violating site rules?

 
 
 
r.t..b...
21.1.12  r.t..b...  replied to  Texan1211 @21.1.10    2 weeks ago
And? Others have been impeached.

Three in our entire history, plus one who saw the handwriting on the wall, none of whom went on to further their political careers as an elected official. Should trump buck the trend, it will say much more about us as an electorate ("Whoop-di-do") than him...his die is already cast.

 
 
 
Texan1211
21.1.13  Texan1211  replied to  r.t..b... @21.1.12    2 weeks ago

LOL. Some always think we are in dire straits whenever a Republican wins.

Facts tell us those folks are wrong.

 
 
 
CB
21.1.14  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @21.1    2 weeks ago

Texan and the whataboutisms in life. Go figure. Next, you will be trying to persuade anybody who will 'listen' that a sex escapade is unconstitutional. Clinton was impeached: Perjury and Obstruction. Trump was impeached: Abuse of Power and Obstruction. Do a side by side comparison and get back to us.

 
 
 
CB
21.1.15  CB   replied to  r.t..b... @21.1.9    2 weeks ago

Romney's vote is going to cause future political scientists and presidential historians to focus laser like on and deep-dive the Trump impeachment and its deficiencies!

R.T.B, you better believe that Romney will be closely scrutinized in history for this solitary vote. Alas, I can hear the conspiracy theorists already gnashing: "Romney voted Aye - just so he could be famous in time!"

Romney's vote is going to cause historians to focus in on and deep-dive the Trump impeachment and its deficiencies! Any other president would wilther under the scrutiny set to come Trump's way in history!

 
 
 
Texan1211
21.1.16  Texan1211  replied to  CB @21.1.14    2 weeks ago

Well, to hear al the yahoos out on it, one would tend to believe that impeachment is the very worst thing that can happen.

I'm telling you that isn't so.

Impeachment without conviction and removal means just about nothing.

Just a political act.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
21.1.17  XDm9mm  replied to  Texan1211 @21.1.16    2 weeks ago
Impeachment without conviction and removal means just about nothing.

"Just about"?  That's generous.

It's entirely meaningless.

 
 
 
Ronin2
21.1.18  Ronin2  replied to  CB @21.1.15    2 weeks ago

Is Clinton withering under the scrutiny of his impeachment? He is still giving $500,000 plus shot speeches to those that wish to try to gain influence? Of course that influence is greatly diminished since Hillary lost; and so are his speaking engagements.

You don't think that Romney won't be subjected to the same treatment for his vote in history? His decision will be analyzed thoroughly; and he doesn't even have the party for cover.

 
 
 
Sparty On
22  Sparty On    2 weeks ago

Mitts father George, our former Governor here in Michigan and a good one to boot, is rolling around in his grave at his sons actions.

Hopefully Utah wises up and amends their constitution/code to allow for a recall vote.

 
 
 
It Is ME
23  It Is ME    2 weeks ago

"FOR THE FIRST TIME IN US HISTORY A SENATOR HAS VOTED TO CONVICT A PRESIDENT OF HIS OWN PARTY"

Just another one of those Liberal Media Hypes "FOR" someone "Liberals" used to Hate !

" We hated him ........ Now, we don't" ! jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

Sounds very Bolton-ish…..doesn't it ? jrSmiley_89_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
bugsy
23.1  bugsy  replied to  It Is ME @23    2 weeks ago
Sounds very Bolton-ish…..doesn't it ?

And Comey-ish

 
 
 
It Is ME
23.1.1  It Is ME  replied to  bugsy @23.1    2 weeks ago
And Comey-ish

So True. 

The Dems "Hated" him too, until they didn't !

 
 
 
Tessylo
24  Tessylo    2 weeks ago

84167940_3035900326429042_50297277223566

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
25  Dean Moriarty    2 weeks ago

Good news Americans support the acquittal. From Reuters.

Poll: 43 percent of Americans back Trump acquittal, 41 percent opposed

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2020/02/06/poll-43-percent-of-americans-back-trump-acquittal-41-percent-opposed/23920402/

 
 
 
WallyW
26  WallyW    2 weeks ago

It's a snowy and cold Friday morning here in the Rocky Mountains. A  few things have become obvious.....

1. Trump is still president, with all the perks and powers that go with that office.

2.  Trump's approval ratings are at an all time high, which pretty much insures his reelection.

3.  The Democrats have lost their way and fallen into total disarray. Their chance of retaining the House is slim  to none.

 
 
 
Ronin2
26.1  Ronin2  replied to  WallyW @26    2 weeks ago

I wish I could believe that last one; but with the leftist coasts locked strongly in Democratic control; it will only a take a few close wins in the heartland to keep them in power in the House.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Dean Moriarty


35 visitors