well, I'm amazed
- earendel
- Posts: 13588
- Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:25 am
- Location: mired in the bureaucracy
well, I'm amazed
The whole day gone and no one has mentioned Speaker Pelosi's announcement that the House will begin a formal impeachment inquiry.
"Elen sila lumenn omentielvo...A star shines on the hour of our meeting."
- flockofseagulls104
- Posts: 7774
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
- Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: well, I'm amazed
So, what else is new?earendel wrote:The whole day gone and no one has mentioned Speaker Pelosi's announcement that the House will begin a formal impeachment inquiry.
Your friendly neighborhood racist. On the waiting list to be a nazi. Designated an honorary 'snowflake'. Trolled by the very best, as well as by BJ. Always typical, unlike others.., Fulminator, Hopelessly in the tank for trump... inappropriate... Flocking himself... Probably a tucking sexist, too... All thought comes from the right wing noise machine(TM)... A clear and present threat to The Future Of Our Democracy.. Doesn't understand anything... Made the trump apologist and enabler playoffs... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar.... don't know much about statistics and polling... Nothing at all about biology... Ignorant Bigot... Potential Future Pariah... Big Nerd... Spiraling, Anti-Trans Bigot.. A Lunatic AND a Bigot.. Very Ignorant of the World in General... Sounds deranged... Fake Christian... Weird... has the mind of a child... has paranoid delusions... Simpleton
- Beebs52
- Queen of Wack
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
- Location: Location.Location.Location
- earendel
- Posts: 13588
- Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:25 am
- Location: mired in the bureaucracy
Re: well, I'm amazed
Two things. First, it's new that Speaker Pelosi has decided to do this. She's been resisting calls from other Democrats to begin impeachment proceedings. Second, it's now a "formal" inquiry, meaning that it will lead to articles of impeachment. Heretofore there have been investigations, but now those investigations will result in official charges.flockofseagulls104 wrote:So, what else is new?earendel wrote:The whole day gone and no one has mentioned Speaker Pelosi's announcement that the House will begin a formal impeachment inquiry.
"Elen sila lumenn omentielvo...A star shines on the hour of our meeting."
- Beebs52
- Queen of Wack
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
- Location: Location.Location.Location
Re: well, I'm amazed
How do you know it will result in formal charges?earendel wrote:Two things. First, it's new that Speaker Pelosi has decided to do this. She's been resisting calls from other Democrats to begin impeachment proceedings. Second, it's now a "formal" inquiry, meaning that it will lead to articles of impeachment. Heretofore there have been investigations, but now those investigations will result in official charges.flockofseagulls104 wrote:So, what else is new?earendel wrote:The whole day gone and no one has mentioned Speaker Pelosi's announcement that the House will begin a formal impeachment inquiry.
Well, then
- earendel
- Posts: 13588
- Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:25 am
- Location: mired in the bureaucracy
Re: well, I'm amazed
I don't, really, but it hardly seems that she would have gone out on a limb and made this a "formal impeachment inquiry" otherwise. After all, the committees investigating the White House have been doing this all along. Now they will be under "that umbrella of impeachment inquiry" (her words). I can't imagine that there won't be charges.Beebs52 wrote:How do you know it will result in formal charges?earendel wrote:Two things. First, it's new that Speaker Pelosi has decided to do this. She's been resisting calls from other Democrats to begin impeachment proceedings. Second, it's now a "formal" inquiry, meaning that it will lead to articles of impeachment. Heretofore there have been investigations, but now those investigations will result in official charges.flockofseagulls104 wrote: So, what else is new?
Not that that will change anything in particular - no matter what the House does, the Senate isn't going to convict the president. It's political theater - both sides get what they want. The Democrats appease the left wing of the party, the Republicans can run their Congressional races claiming to "protect" the president, and the president himself gets to picture himself as a martyr, energizing his base even more than they already are.
"Elen sila lumenn omentielvo...A star shines on the hour of our meeting."
- Beebs52
- Queen of Wack
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
- Location: Location.Location.Location
Re: well, I'm amazed
She did it to appease aoc et alearendel wrote:I don't, really, but it hardly seems that she would have gone out on a limb and made this a "formal impeachment inquiry" otherwise. After all, the committees investigating the White House have been doing this all along. Now they will be under "that umbrella of impeachment inquiry" (her words). I can't imagine that there won't be charges.Beebs52 wrote:How do you know it will result in formal charges?earendel wrote: Two things. First, it's new that Speaker Pelosi has decided to do this. She's been resisting calls from other Democrats to begin impeachment proceedings. Second, it's now a "formal" inquiry, meaning that it will lead to articles of impeachment. Heretofore there have been investigations, but now those investigations will result in official charges.
Not that that will change anything in particular - no matter what the House does, the Senate isn't going to convict the president. It's political theater - both sides get what they want. The Democrats appease the left wing of the party, the Republicans can run their Congressional races claiming to "protect" the president, and the president himself gets to picture himself as a martyr, energizing his base even more than they already are.
Well, then
- Bob78164
- Bored Moderator
- Posts: 21644
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
- Location: By the phone
Re: well, I'm amazed
How about, she did it because what Donny is doing can't be allowed to stand.Beebs52 wrote:She did it to appease aoc et alearendel wrote:I don't, really, but it hardly seems that she would have gone out on a limb and made this a "formal impeachment inquiry" otherwise. After all, the committees investigating the White House have been doing this all along. Now they will be under "that umbrella of impeachment inquiry" (her words). I can't imagine that there won't be charges.Beebs52 wrote:
How do you know it will result in formal charges?
Not that that will change anything in particular - no matter what the House does, the Senate isn't going to convict the president. It's political theater - both sides get what they want. The Democrats appease the left wing of the party, the Republicans can run their Congressional races claiming to "protect" the president, and the president himself gets to picture himself as a martyr, energizing his base even more than they already are.
But if you're sufficiently okay with how Donny is governing to oppose his impeachment, remember that at some point in the future, there will be a Democrat in the White House. If you're okay with Donny's conduct now, then you don't get to complain about comparable conduct by a Democrat (should that ever happen). --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson
- Beebs52
- Queen of Wack
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
- Location: Location.Location.Location
Re: well, I'm amazed
Snicker snort. Oh wait. There has been or will be conduct that hasn't yet been proven yet but that you think will for a dem?Bob78164 wrote:How about, she did it because what Donny is doing can't be allowed to stand.Beebs52 wrote:She did it to appease aoc et alearendel wrote: I don't, really, but it hardly seems that she would have gone out on a limb and made this a "formal impeachment inquiry" otherwise. After all, the committees investigating the White House have been doing this all along. Now they will be under "that umbrella of impeachment inquiry" (her words). I can't imagine that there won't be charges.
Not that that will change anything in particular - no matter what the House does, the Senate isn't going to convict the president. It's political theater - both sides get what they want. The Democrats appease the left wing of the party, the Republicans can run their Congressional races claiming to "protect" the president, and the president himself gets to picture himself as a martyr, energizing his base even more than they already are.
But if you're sufficiently okay with how Donny is governing to oppose his impeachment, remember that at some point in the future, there will be a Democrat in the White House. If you're okay with Donny's conduct now, then you don't get to complain about comparable conduct by a Democrat (should that ever happen). --Bob
Well, then
- BackInTex
- Posts: 12808
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
- Location: In Texas of course!
Re: well, I'm amazed
Was Joe Biden in office when he pressured Ukraine to fire the prosecutor to protect his son? I’m unclear on the timeline.Beebs52 wrote:Snicker snort. Oh wait. There has been or will be conduct that hasn't yet been proven yet but that you think will for a dem?Bob78164 wrote:How about, she did it because what Donny is doing can't be allowed to stand.Beebs52 wrote:
She did it to appease aoc et al
But if you're sufficiently okay with how Donny is governing to oppose his impeachment, remember that at some point in the future, there will be a Democrat in the White House. If you're okay with Donny's conduct now, then you don't get to complain about comparable conduct by a Democrat (should that ever happen). --Bob
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson
War is where the government tells you who the bad guy is.
Revolution is when you decide that for yourself.
-- Benjamin Franklin (maybe)
~~ Thomas Jefferson
War is where the government tells you who the bad guy is.
Revolution is when you decide that for yourself.
-- Benjamin Franklin (maybe)
- Bob78164
- Bored Moderator
- Posts: 21644
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
- Location: By the phone
Re: well, I'm amazed
Obviously. The investigation had long since concluded before President Obama instructed Vice President Biden to ask for the corrupt prosecutor to be fired. And President Obama was joined by the rest of the West in wanting the guy gone.BackInTex wrote:Was Joe Biden in office when he pressured Ukraine to fire the prosecutor to protect his son? I’m unclear on the timeline.Beebs52 wrote:Snicker snort. Oh wait. There has been or will be conduct that hasn't yet been proven yet but that you think will for a dem?Bob78164 wrote:How about, she did it because what Donny is doing can't be allowed to stand.
But if you're sufficiently okay with how Donny is governing to oppose his impeachment, remember that at some point in the future, there will be a Democrat in the White House. If you're okay with Donny's conduct now, then you don't get to complain about comparable conduct by a Democrat (should that ever happen). --Bob
This has been looked at repeatedly. There is no "there" there. It's a smear. Completely false. And the message is getting out loud and clear. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson
- Beebs52
- Queen of Wack
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
- Location: Location.Location.Location
Re: well, I'm amazed
Of course.Bob78164 wrote:Obviously. The investigation had long since concluded before President Obama instructed Vice President Biden to ask for the corrupt prosecutor to be fired. And President Obama was joined by the rest of the West in wanting the guy gone.BackInTex wrote:Was Joe Biden in office when he pressured Ukraine to fire the prosecutor to protect his son? I’m unclear on the timeline.Beebs52 wrote:
Snicker snort. Oh wait. There has been or will be conduct that hasn't yet been proven yet but that you think will for a dem?
This has been looked at repeatedly. There is no "there" there. It's a smear. Completely false. And the message is getting out loud and clear. --Bob
Well, then
- tlynn78
- Posts: 8664
- Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
- Location: Montana
Re: well, I'm amazed
Lol! Tres amusant.Beebs52 wrote:Of course.Bob78164 wrote:Obviously. The investigation had long since concluded before President Obama instructed Vice President Biden to ask for the corrupt prosecutor to be fired. And President Obama was joined by the rest of the West in wanting the guy gone.BackInTex wrote:
Was Joe Biden in office when he pressured Ukraine to fire the prosecutor to protect his son? I’m unclear on the timeline.
This has been looked at repeatedly. There is no "there" there. It's a smear. Completely false. And the message is getting out loud and clear. --Bob
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -Thomas Paine
You can ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality. -Ayn Rand
Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire
You can ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality. -Ayn Rand
Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire