It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL and UNJUST

Race is still important and this will become abundantly clear as more white people begin to notice there’s a whole lot less of us out there in existence becoming the new population minority. Marxism didn’t have any influence on national socialism or fascism from what I can see.

you do not understand what the master of cynical negation si telling you.
I can…;cause I’m brilliant. He taught me to declare what I want others to believe of me.
Well, him and this entire forum of geniuses.

He’s telling you it was determined that black be blacks and whites be white…and you cannot blame them for what the universe - a.k.a. god - made them to be.
Might s well hate a mosquito for annoying you at night.

It’s all determined and we are manifestations of what has been determined and will forever live the exact lives it has been determined that we live.

So, except for the fucking police and those damn judges, we cannot blame anyone. All are innocent victims of circumstances.
I exposed my cock, yesterday, to an old lady…as it was determined that I do…and she did not call the police but called me over. It’s fate.
I had no part in any of it…even as she pleasured me to a happy ending, in the backroom of a bookstore.
I thank the absolute universe for that gift.

  1. We don’t have a transcript, because the White House refuses to provide a transcript that they insist contains nothing worth hiding.
  2. This happened over months. Military aid was withheld at least as early as July 3.

I find the people saying this also put a lot of weight on the notion that “the people” elected Trump. It’s true that the system elected Trump, but most people who voted voted for someone else.

Pretty weak arguments…

The Senate comes next, I look forward to this “whistleblower” being exposed and Biden’s investigated.

How did that get into your bubble of belief?

And there is a damn good reason for that to be the law.

Not as weak as the rebuttal :wink:

  • Irregularities in the released transcript, together with testimony of others on the call, show that we don’t have an actual transcript.
  • Mulvaney said they have tapes from which the transcript was produced.

Whether or not it’s a good policy, its pedantically the case that winning the Electoral College and winning the popular vote are different things, and if you appeal to the will of the people, you expose yourself to pedants like me pointing out that, wellactually, the people mostly preferred someone else.

The Electoral Collage is the Will of the People. Popular vote would appeal to California-Los Angeles-San Francisco-New York only; because those are the concentrations of population. This is common-sense; even elementary school children can understand this. President Trump was duly elected, with overwhelming majority. Now the UNCONSTITUTIONAL and UNJUST matter is Abuse of Power of the House Majority DNC, trying to impeach a duly-elected President without cause and committed no crime. No bribery. No “Quid Pro Quo”. And trying to investigate Trump for a crime that DNC, Joe Biden did in Ukraine, Ukraine and US CORRUPTION, gifting his son a No-Show job worth millions, with an admitted Quid Pro Quo on video.

Trump is being punished, for DNC and Biden corruption. At least, come the Senate, this FAKE-whistleblower will be exposed. The accusations dissolved. The smear campaign halted. NO crime committed. NO reason for impeachment.

Abuse of Power by DNC and House Majority. Corruption within the Democrat Party. Corruption by Adam Schiff and Nadler.

The whole “basis” of this impeachment is an Anonymous Witness, and if the American people want to know, we are SILENCED and our First Amendment is violated. This is a violation of Free Speech.

It wasn’t proposed as a literal transcript but rather a “memorandum of conversation” or “memcon” because the staffers translating from foreign languages must write out the substantive intent of each sentence in order to avoid misrepresentation from word-by-word translations. Even when they are writing out the English, in English, they still, using the same thinking - write out the substantive intent without worrying about precise wording, perhaps even improve the wording. That practice, used throughout the West among heads of state and international corporations, has been testified to by professionals and not contested.

Biased interpretation of the results of such a wide spread and historical practice allows for suspicion to signal maleficence when there is none. The only words anyone testified to being left out had no effect on the substantive content and no one proclaimed contrary. People with prejudice were just alarmed because they had assumed a literal word for word transcript when such isn’t the practice with any foreign language memorandum of conversation.

Equally people with prejudice sounded alarm over the length of the conversation record before considering the fact that every sentence was being spoken twice, once in each language.

Presumption and suspicion used to promote false narratives. Not the first. Not the last.

Not actually. What he said was, "Let me ask you this: If we wanted to cover this up, would we have called the Department of Justice almost immediately and have them look at the transcript of the tape?”

Again with prejudice, it is easy to take his word “tape” to mean a literal taping. People got in the habit of using the word “tape” when referring to any record of conversation. It is my understanding that electronic recording is used for sake of the translators but immediately overwritten after the memcon is checked. The memoranda are then locked away.

Also prejudice led the the suspicion that Mr. Trump’s directive to secure the memcons was nefarious. In fact such higher level securing had become his practice immediately after discovering prior leaked conversations with Mexico and Australia (no doubt from Vindman and the like).

Again, presumption and suspicion used to promote false narratives. Not the first. Not the last.

Encouraging disrespect for Mr. Trump from his own subordinates has been an ongoing endeavor from the CIA and deep state’s resistance from 2016. From such spawned disrespect, leaking of damaging inferences, suspicions, betrayals, and even leaking classified information is inspired and acquired by undercover operatives and – observers.

Okay but if you want to be a pedant, then you must consider exactly who “the people” really are. Your presumptive conclusion will be different.

Given a race variation of 50 whites and 10 blacks, who are “the people”? The majority?

The US is outstanding in many ways. One of them is that their constitution protects minorities of quite a variety. One of the intentionally overlooked minorities in the nation are the rural, non-urbanites versus the densely populated urbanites.

The US has States that are largely farmers and other states that are largely urbanite socialists. Farmers require representation in government as much as, if not more than, urbanites. They have very different needs. Socialist cities (Los Angles, New York,…) depend upon high population density because they thrive off the contention between other people - money and lawyers. The highest population will always be in the larger urban cities.

But does that mean that the socialist urbanites should totally rule over the farmers? Making them slaves to the socialists? No more so than those 50 whites should totally dominate those 10 blacks.

The US electoral college is what prevents such default slavery and protects a number of non-racial minorities from power mad users (Socialists urbanites). The founders had already calculated that issue.

obsrvr…

You know what else is a false narrative? That there are more urbanites than rural people. Direct democracy actually gives the rurals MORE power, it’s just that people don’t fucking vote…

This is a really long discussion if you get into me about this… I’m just noting YOUR false narrative!

I don’t think this is so, though this is related to the point you make throughout your post about biased interpretations. The Democrats didn’t need the removed language to believe what they believe, because they see the rest as sufficient. The Republicans see references to Biden and Burisma as legitimate in the context of routing out international corruption. But in Bayesian terms, more discussion of Biden/Burisma (and the decision to remove those references over the protest of some people on the call) should cause us to update our priors about the President’s motives on the call.

This is at odds with the Administration’s own explanation of how it ended up in a secure server, which claimed that it was put there by mistake, i.e. it did not belong there. It could not have been both normal practice and a mistake.

Your defense of the Electoral College is interesting, but I won’t engage with it here. My only point with respect to the vote is that “most people who voted voted for someone else”.

We finally have the Articles of Impeachment. These match my expectation: they’re short and easy for the average voter to understand, they don’t touch actual policy decisions, and the accused conduct is problematic enough that they justify removing a President. They’ll go to Senate, Trump will be acquitted, and the Democrats will turn them into slogans that they will hammer in every forum, every debate, every ad, every opportunity they have to paint Republicans as corrupt, self-interested, anti-American, etc.

I think it’s a good play, though they elide Trump’s worst sins.

“Corrupt” is attempting to impeach, for no reason, a duly-elected President. Not only duly-elected, but arguably the best president in 50 years, or more. “Corrupt” is abuse of power, of Congress. “Corrupt” is the “Democratic” party attempting to overturn, overthrow, and pervert Democracy.

How is this a “Democracy” when the “Democrats” won’t let us vote for who we want?

Filth, drain the swamp. Democrats comprise most of this swamp.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISOxe-egB64[/youtube]

Urwrong, for all your allegations of corrupt partisanship, from your participation in this thread I can’t see anything more than partisanship motivating your beliefs. You don’t engage with anything that contradicts your claims, and you don’t offer any evidence or argument in support. You just repeat boring rhetoric like “duly-elected” – what does that phrase even mean to you? How is it different from just “elected”? Are only unelected Presidents subject to impeachment?

Obsrvr makes the better case.

Obsvr doesn’t really make a case. I would like him to; but he hasn’t really made one.

My “bi-partisanship” is based on the Constitution and the nature of this “impeachment”. This impeachment is a clear abuse-of-power by Congress and the Democrats. I only wish I had more experience and knowledge of past impeachments, including Clinton’s impeachment. I believe that this impeachment is the most corrupt and unjust in US history. It is also a direct-attack against the US Constitution and our US public. It is an attempt to invalidate, and smear, the Majority vote, that won Trump’s election. It’s contradiction of “Democracy”. How can you be a “Democrat” if you refuse, reject, and attempt to overturn, illegally, the votes of the majority of America?!?

Without extensive Constitutional Law knowledge, I’m guessing that you can’t impeach the President for “anything you want”. You need to file a charge. And it ought to be criminal. And it ought to be a High Crime, meaning, explicitly illegal. I don’t necessarily agree with Clinton’s impeachment insofar as I don’t really care, personally, that he got a blowjob from his secretary. He bold-face lied to the US public, which is wrong, but I doubt its legitimacy for impeachment. At the very least, Clinton was caught in a lie.

In this “impeachment”, which is actually a Coup attempt, and treason by DNC and Liberal-Left, there is no charge! There is no crime! There is certainly no High Crime! In fact, DNC has been wasting millions and millions of taxpayer dollars for years now, attempting to find a crime, any crime! And the only reason this went forward, was because they had a gold-mine in this “whistleblower” (Traitorous Spy), which turned out to be nothing. Trump released his call, and it was legit. Trump has Right, and he is Justified, to seek Corruption in Ukraine, whether that includes Biden and his son’s no-show job, or not. Trump has every Right to investigate DNC corruption and treason, which this turns out to be. The reason for the backlash, is because this “impeachment” is actually going to expose Biden, his son’s No-show Ukraine job worth millions, and Biden’s Quid Pro Quo Joe caught on tape. Trump is more than justified in investigating Biden.

Furthermore, this “anonymous” source, being used as the center of the impeachment, and “protecting” his identity, which is a violation of the First Amendment of US public, that “we cannot say the name” or be banned from public venues or forums, is illegal. You cannot attempt to impeach a President, under an anonymous source! Are you fucking insane?!?!? This is absolutely unjust and treasonous!!!

In what Court of Law can accusations be made anonymously, you cannot confront your accuser, and you have no recourse to defend yourself?!?

The fact that you and others, Liberal-Left think this is valid or reasonable in ANY FORM and in ANY LENGTH, is just unbearable. This is a direct attack against our US Constitution, the US Public, our voting-rights, it is Anti-Democracy. Furthermore it is traitorous and treasonous.

I hope that Trump and Republicans use the full weight of their power to destroy the DNC for this.

Any Democratic Congressman who votes for this sham, is treasonous against the US Constitution and US public.

I would fully respect and support any Democratic Congressman who votes against this unjust impeachment.

If DNC and the liberal-left have any moral legitimacy, any moral quality, then they would strike this down and revoke it immediately.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Outhk9KSnUo[/youtube]

I’m Bi-Partisan when it comes to impeachment because I disagree with the nature of Clinton’s impeachment. I don’t think getting a BJ from an intern, is impeachable. There is a case against Perjury, which Clinton committed, but in the case of covering up a BJ, I don’t really think that’s a strong enough case.

This case against Trump, however, is no case at all, which is about as corrupt as you can possibly be.

For there to be a Legitimate impeachment, there must be a High Crime of seriously and severe political and domestic implications. The vote must be Bi-partisan, not “only one party”, and must follow due process of Law. There should be formal charges of a crime, with jurisprudence and overseen by the Law and Supreme Court if necessary.

I believe the US should be amended so that 2/3 of the House of Congress must vote to impeach, not 51%. That is outdated, and it clearly shows.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tjCJ6vYBZk[/youtube]

Here’s some Righteous Fury and Justice… hopefully just the beginning.

I will take that to be as close to a concession as ever to be expected on this discussion board.

As to the rest:

I can see that there is an ocean of difference between your bubble of belief and mine and that you will struggle mightily to prevent yours from floating up into the light of day. I wouldn’t want to be responsible for the consequences.

That is a confession to wanting to “divide the country” by once again refusing the results of a judicial system and demanding retribution and corrosive, country defeating internal resistance. Obviously you do not believe in courts but rather in media instigated public hate a d divisiveness in order to take your country from the hands of democracy into the hands of elitist socialist oligarchs (the only other option to accepting court rule and yet mentioning baysianism).

You are being a part of why your country isn’t doing even better than it is already. You should hope that you never succeed.

The articles of impeachment are

1) abuse of power - obvious hypocrisy from the Left and entirely political, easily tossed out of a real court.
2) obstruction of congress - not even a real thing but easily resolved in a real court which the Left refused merely because of political agenda timing.

The fact is that the global socialists have no scruples, morals, or ethics when is comes to gaining power over the world and yet they continue to eternally shout, “TRUST US!!”.

The socialist Left in the US have openly proven that they will do anything to deceive the American population into handing them all keys to the kingdom and bowing to their dictatorial, “Third Reich” reign over the world.

The American Left (global socialists) are merely the German Nazis (national socialists) on steroids. Fortunately for the world they have been Trumped.