 |
|

01-13-2020, 10:48 AM
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 17,807
|
|
Re: Impeachment Hearing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On
Just want to say that I made this observation and now Senate Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy made that claim on the news today. Heard someone else say last night that they will not allow Bernie to, like last time, win the nomination and this is the way they will fix it.
Very interesting. 
|
There won't be a Senate impeachment hearing. McConnell has the votes and plans on promptly voting to dismiss it whenever Pelosi finally figures out where the Senate chamber is and delivers the articles to the Senate. A Senate hearing would be disastrous for both parties so McConnell won't allow it.
|

11-16-2019, 12:55 PM
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,419
|
|
Re: Impeachment Hearing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On
Right, I am sure Esaias didn’t really need that explained to him.
|
Esaias wrote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias
How does the House impeach a President? I thouggt that was a Senate prerogative?
|
This needed correction.
|

11-17-2019, 11:18 AM
|
 |
Not riding the train
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 48,544
|
|
Re: Impeachment Hearing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Avery
Esaias wrote:
This needed correction.
|
My comment was in reference to Esaias’ apparent sarcasm. Hence, he didn’t need you to give him the tutorial.
__________________
|

11-17-2019, 10:54 PM
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,419
|
|
Re: Impeachment Hearing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On
My comment was in reference to Esaias’ apparent sarcasm. Hence, he didn’t need you to give him the tutorial.
|
The sarcasm "apparent" could easily be missed, and readers left with only confusion. In the real world, even today, there are millions who think impeachment means removal.
|

11-20-2019, 09:39 PM
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,419
|
|
Re: Impeachment Hearing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On
My comment was in reference to Esaias’ apparent sarcasm. Hence, he didn’t need you to give him the tutorial.
|
You are repeating yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias
I thought I had posted a response but it apparently suffered a Mandela Effect??? Anyways, thanksfor the clarification.
|
Most welcome
Last edited by Steven Avery; 11-20-2019 at 09:43 PM.
|

11-19-2019, 09:26 PM
|
 |
Unvaxxed Pureblood
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Zion aka TEXAS
Posts: 26,793
|
|
Re: Impeachment Hearing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Avery
Impeach is to bring charges against the President, that is done by the House. Then if 2/3 of the Senate agrees, he is removed.
Clinton was impeached, but not removed.
|
I thought I had posted a response but it apparently suffered a Mandela Effect???
Anyways, thanksfor the clarification.
|

11-20-2019, 03:36 PM
|
 |
Not riding the train
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 48,544
|
|
Re: Impeachment Hearing
Sondland testimony - Lesson - wait for the cross examination. 👍🏻
Good job Republicans sticking to the salient points. Dems, like Hollywood and the media are all about the feelings. Unfortunately, they know that resonates with the lower information voter. Sad for America.
__________________
|

11-20-2019, 03:50 PM
|
 |
Not riding the train
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 48,544
|
|
Re: Impeachment Hearing
I want to make a point from yesterday’s testimony by sanctimonious Lt. Col. Vindman. He talked about speaking to two people in the intelligence community, but wouldn’t identify one of them.
Guess who raised a point of order before Schiff jumped in to protect the whistle blower? Eric Swalwell (D-CA)!
I didn’t hear one single person in the media mention that fact. What does that mean? They are lying. Swalwell, Schiff and Vindman all know who the whistleblower is. I am sure most on the Democrat side do as well. They sure jumped on that exchange rather quickly.
__________________
|

11-20-2019, 09:41 PM
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,419
|
|
Re: Impeachment Hearing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On
I want to make a point from yesterday’s testimony by sanctimonious Lt. Col. Vindman. He talked about speaking to two people in the intelligence community, but wouldn’t identify one of them.
Guess who raised a point of order before Schiff jumped in to protect the whistle blower? Eric Swalwell (D-CA)!
I didn’t hear one single person in the media mention that fact. What does that mean? They are lying. Swalwell, Schiff and Vindman all know who the whistleblower is. I am sure most on the Democrat side do as well. They sure jumped on that exchange rather quickly.
|
This reminds me of the false theory that the Jews lost the knowledge of the Tetragram pronunciation, and then arranged vowels to deliberately mask the name they did not know.
Last edited by Steven Avery; 11-20-2019 at 09:58 PM.
|

11-15-2019, 02:11 PM
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 17,807
|
|
Re: Impeachment Hearing
Dems were all focused on her feelings ... how did Trump's recalling her post make her feel? How did she feel about the tweets and gossip made about her?
Meanwhile, GOP were asking why are you even here?
I agree with either Nunes or counsel, who said she shouldn't be at that hearing but rather appearing before some State Dept HR board.
Also, Jim Jordan: "...our indulgence wore out with you a long time ago, Mr. Chairman..."
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
| |
|