Extra Extra Read All About It - It's Official: Trump has been IMPEACHED

[jamil]

Nah. The denizens of DC continue to show that someone being a character doesn't mean they have any.

That proves my point. This election isn't about actual character. It's about people thinking the character they support has it and the other doesn't. None of them do. This election is therefor about potential outcomes.

 

[Doug]

The content of their characters is, at most, on par with the person they comment references. You must see that, right? I doubt one can complain about their character, if they choose to defend someone who is equally as bad.

I don't know who they are defending who is equally bad as someone who casually uses that kind of language with her 12-year-old and screams it in public.
Or are you saying that since Trump is rude, it is acceptable to be just as rude or more so in retaliation?

 

[jamil]

How about just don't defend bad behavior. Supporting a candidate who behaves badly, over another candidate who behaves badly, isn't supporting bad behavior. Better yet, support an outcome instead.

 

[NKBJ]

The drive to impeach the president has had it's source where?
What are your opinions on the reason(s) the power brokers are so rabidly moved to remove him?
I've come to think that the answer is what you're physically looking at this very moment, the interseine.
For the first time in human history the majority of the people have become politically aware.
Controlling the content of those minds is priority number one until such time as social credit systems are adequate to force people to censor themselves.
You can see this all the time on televised broadcasts, the content of the writings of the functionaries, the presentations they give. You can even see gate keepers on websites, on blogs, on comments to presentations, people hired to squelch unacceptable lines of thinking (a function being shifted over to AI). As zee big new order Brzezinski said it's much easier to kill a million now than to control them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO2U9jJoWsM
So with President Trump, he has successfully packaged that increased political awareness into a political movement. The people themselves, that rising enemy of the globalist corruption, was provided a rallying point, a leader. Their formless energy has been formed into a physical presence backing a man who is now the commander in chief of the very weapon forged by the globalist to beat the world into submission. And that man is telling the globalist that he'll stick it where the sun don't shine.
Fellas, no matter how this turns out I'm glad I got to see it.

 

[Doug]

It seems to me that saying someone is a bad person isn't the same as calling them a m****rf****r, but I guess that's just my opinion. I see that in many people's eyes Trump is so evil that simulating his be-heading would be cause for celebration. I'm surprised Rashida didn't do that at a rally; there's still time.
Oh, well.
The Dems will gleefully impeach Trump, call him all forms of foul names (not just say he's a bad person), and accuse him of all sorts of evil.
If it blows up in their face, the Democrat/Media Complex will denounce it as a Trump plot.

 

[NKBJ]

That proves my point. This election isn't about actual character. It's about people thinking the character they support has it and the other doesn't. None of them do. This election is therefor about potential outcomes.

Spot on.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I don't know who they are defending who is equally bad as someone who casually uses that kind of language with her 12-year-old and screams it in public.
Or are you saying that since Trump is rude, it is acceptable to be just as rude or more so in retaliation?

Absolutely, at least in the real world, where you can't be banned.

 

[BugI02]

This is the interseine. You don't need to bob and weave.
But everyone in the entire world needs to read what the fed said.

G'nite yall.

Some of us have, hence the skepticism. Assuming you'll accept Fortune as a source?

https://fortune.com/2019/09/23/repo-market-big-deal-400-billion-bailout-unnerving/

Even though the Fed has routinely used open market operations in the past to stabilize these funding markets, it doesn’t look like a few routine interventions will be sufficient. Moreover, it’s becoming clear banks need more reserves on hand. On Friday, the Fed pledged to allow roughly two more weeks of overnight repo transactions, each injecting around $75 billion daily into the economy, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York said in a news release on Friday.


Put otherwise, the Fed is back where it was roughly a decade ago, effectively buying U.S. Treasuries from banks on an indefinite basis. But the difference this time? There’s no financial crisis in sight, just the uncomfortable fact that private capital markets once again need public support.


“For all intents and purposes, this will be equivalent to QE, with scheduled purchases of securities. We estimate that over the first year, the Fed would need to buy roughly $400bn of Treasury securities to achieve an appropriate level of reserves, plus a buffer,” the Bank of America wrote in a research note.

The estimated total is only $400 billion for the next year. It would seem the maximum of $75 billion per day is not thought to likely be reached every day ($400 billion over 260 trading days averages out to about $1.54 billion per day). I acknowledge that some of the people reassuring us are liars but I doubt all of them are

The actual fed statement here:
https://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/opolicy/operating_policy_190920

Please note that the Fed has made no committments to injecting liquidity into the repo market beyond 10 October 2019, with the last of three 14 day terms expiring on 11 October 2019. I acknowledge that that doesn't mean they won't continue the process beyond that time, but i think I'll wait and see whether this is a short term liquidity crisis in an obscure market or a full blown crisis

 

[Doug]

Absolutely, at least in the real world, where you can't be banned.

I see, a constant race to the bottom. What an excellent way to promote cooperation and get things done!
No problem, though, you can always say it's Trump's fault because he started it.

 

[BugI02]

Copied this of the book of faces, but it does make you think...


LET THEM GO AHEAD AND IMPEACH TRUMP.... HERE'S WHAT HAPPENS THEN......
By: Hyram F. Suddfluffel, PhD, (Political Science)
I have a degree in Political Science, and I am a card-carrying Libertarian. I've been studying politics and political history for the past 30 years. My specialty is U.S. Presidents. That said, I hope that the House of
Representatives impeaches Trump. Let me tell you what will happen next!
1. The House can pass articles of impeachment over the objections of the
Republicans, and refer to the Senate for trial.
2. The Senate will conduct a trial. There will be a vote, and the Republicans will vote unanimously, along with a small number of Democrats, to not convict the President. Legally, it will all be over at that point.
3. However, during the trial, and this is what no one is thinking about right now, the President's attorneys will have the right to subpoena and question ANYONE THEY WANT.. That is different than the special counsel
investigation, which was very one-sided. So, during the impeachment trial, we will be hearing testimony from James Comey, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr, Glenn Simpson, Donna Brazile, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch,
Christopher Steele, Hillary Clinton, John Brennan, James Clapper, and a whole host of other participants in this whole sordid affair and the ensuing cover up activities.
A lot of dirt will be dug up; a lot of truth will be unveiled. Finger pointing will occur. Deals will start being made, and suddenly, a lot of democrats will start being charged and going to prison.
All this, because, remember, the President's team will now, for the first time, have the RIGHT to question all of these people under oath – and they will turn on each other. That is already starting.
4. Lastly, one more thing will happen, the Senate will not convict the President. Nothing will happen to Trump. Most Americans are clueless about political processes, the law, and the Constitution. Most Americans believe
that being impeached results in removal from office. They don't understand that phase 2 is a trial in and by the Senate, where he has zero chance of conviction. Remember, the Senate is controlled by Republicans; they will determine what testimony is allowed -- and **everything** will be allowed, including: DNC collusion with the Clinton campaign to fix the election in favor of Hillary, the creation of the Trump dossier, the cover up and
destruction of emails that very likely included incriminating information.
They will incriminate each other for lying to the FISA court, for spying and wiretapping the Trump campaign, and for colluding with foreign political actors, especially George Soros. After the Senate declines to convict the
President, we will have an election, and Trump will win. It will be a backlash against democrat petulance, temper tantrums, hypocrisy and dishonesty. Even minorities will vote for Trump, because, for the first time, they will see that democrats have spent 2+ years focused on maintaining their own power, and not doing anything at all about black murders in Chicago, homelessness, opioids, and other important issues that are actually killing people. And, we will spend the following four years listening to politicians and pundits claim that the whole impeachment was rigged.
So let's move on to impeachment.
Hyram F. Suddfluffel, PhD

I don't think that poster has considered what could happen if the impeachment probe is drawn out over the election year. You wind up with a very one sided probe where the president and Republicans do not have any control over the direction of the hearings; and if Trump's supposed corruption can be played up enough to take the senate, could certainly result in the conviction of the president therein. In fact, that is the scenario I see as most likely the game plan

Luckily, conviction requires a super majority (two thirds) but don't think we can sit back and not fight this at all levels. Failure to re-elect Trump and a majority of Republicans is an extinction level event for what makes the US exceptional, with the jackals quickly dividing the corpse. A third party challenge is ritual suicide in the current environment

Edit: IMO the impeachment gun will remain cocked and locked even if this particular ginned-up scandal evaporates. Sonner or later (and likely sooner) they will pull the trigger. This could quite likely be it, the tell will be how doggedly they stick to this script even after the facts fail to support it

 

[Kutnupe14]

I see, a constant race to the bottom. What an excellent way to promote cooperation and get things done!
No problem, though, you can always say it's Trump's fault because he started it.

I'm from the force continuum school.

 

[BugI02]

That stain was a direct result of the electorate's decision to hand the bottle of wine to a drunkard.

This is a rabid dog ****ting in its bed.

Yesss. But it is still the electorates decision to make, whether we vote the way 'our betters' believe we should or not

 

[KG1]

The president made an arms sale contingent on a foreign nation investigating a political rival. That's illegal. Impeachment is an excellent idea.

You are reaching abit here again Kut. There is no implicit statement of such in the transcript. I know the section you've been referring to to make your case where Trump said "he would like you to do us a favor though" that sentence was'nt directly referring to asking the Ukrainian leader to consider re-opening an investigation into Biden's alleged impropriaties. If you go back and re-read the section of the transcript it was prefacing a different issue altogether concerning knowledge of Ukraines potential involvement with the Hillary email scandal and the subsequent origin of the Mueller Russian Collusion hoax investigation which Trump has been wanting to get to the bottom of.

 

[Doug]

I'm from the force continuum school.

I do not see politics as a life or death struggle where one must totally destroy one's opponents. I believe even my adversaries are worth listening to.
I understand your viewpoint more clearly now.

 

[BugI02]

Oh. So it's already been investigated? It's really ready to charge? Or are you being less critical of news reports which bring you the news you want to hear? Impeachment is a big deal. It should be considered carefully. Not merely because you don't like the guy sitting in the chair.

And this is only what's alleged. Was it indeed pay to play? I don't know. I don't have all the facts. It's reasonable not to trust any media who has a person to protect or condemn. We've heard this kind of **** before for two ****ing years, 24/7 and $25M worth of Russian collusion "news". And it turned out to be bull****.

The allegation is made. We're quite short on solid facts other than what we've heard from people with a reason to lie. Everyone involved, the press, the president, the democrats, have a reason to lie. So I'm fine with investigating the allegations, but I'm not fine with an abrupt call for impeachment. They've been calling for and ready to impeach him since before he took office, and just waiting for something they can claim rises to the level. And if whatever Trump did rises to the level of impeachment, then make the case. Anything more than that is hyperbole. And you're pounding down the hyperbole like Zima's. It's not rational.

Correct. One tell, for me, is the attempt to allude sinister motivations for classifying the transcript of the call when this president has had the content of at least two other phone calls to foreign leaders leaked by fifth-columnists embedded within the apparatus of state - not for reasons of national security, but only to embarass him or make it easier to challenge his policies in court. "By any means necessary" should be incompatible with the rule of law and those who adopt it should be scorched along with the earth in any response

 

[BugI02]

It's my understanding that the only transcript in the public is the one the administration released. I've read it start to finish. It's where I derived my hunch about what happened.

Someone described the transcript as a rorschach test because it doesn't factually rise to the level of a prosecutable quid pro quo, but it doesn't exonerate either. If you hate Trump and want him out of office even to the exclusion of the people's right to decide otherwise, you'll think it condemns him. If you're an avid Trumper, you'll be like, it's nothing, move along, he's just playing 4d chess, whatever. I don't agree with either. I think it is a rorschach test, let people vote according to what they think. Why do you hate a democratic process?

It is enlightening how a similar BAMN process is playing out over Brexit in parliament. It is apparent that the creatures of government will strive mightily to do what they want and what is good for them; the more delusional will convince themselves that they are saving the people from themselves - that 'we are better than that' (by which they really mean they know better than us). The parallels are there to see as their entrenched political class throws over centuries of tradition in a paroxysm of self-interest

 

[Kutnupe14]

You are reaching abit here again Kut. There is no implicit statement of such in the transcript. I know the section you've been referring to to make your case where Trump said "he would like you to do us a favor though" that sentence was'nt directly referring to asking the Ukrainian leader to consider re-opening an investigation into Biden's alleged impropriaties. If you go back and re-read the section of the transcript it was prefacing a different issue altogether concerning knowledge of Ukraines potential involvement with the Hillary email scandal and the subsequent origin of the Mueller Russian Collusion hoax investigation which Trump has been wanting to get to the bottom of.

Question? From the transcript of the call... if you had to make a choice.... are the details of the conversation more to benefit "the nation (United States)," or "Donald Trump the person."

 

[KG1]

About this whole Biden thing having already been investigated there is new information being reported that casts doubt on Joe Biden's Ukraine story. If this is indeed legit information coming out then it would certainly be within reason for the President to make a request of the Ukrainian leader to consider re-opening the investigation concerning the Biden matter.

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaig...-memos-cast-doubt-on-joe-bidens-ukraine-story

[FONT=&amp]Former Vice President Joe Biden, now a 2020 Democratic presidential contender, has locked into a specific story about the controversy in Ukraine.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]He insists that, in spring 2016, he strong-armed Ukraine to fire its chief prosecutor solely because Biden believed that official was corrupt and inept, not because the Ukrainian was investigating a natural gas company, Burisma Holdings, that hired Biden's son, Hunter, into a lucrative job.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
There’s just one problem.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Hundreds of pages of never-released memos and documents — many from inside the American team helping Burisma to stave off its legal troubles — conflict with Biden’s narrative.[/FONT]

 

[BugI02]

Question? From the transcript of the call... if you had to make a choice.... are the details of the [STRIKE]conversation[/STRIKE] [impeachment probe] more to benefit "the nation (United States)," or "[STRIKE]Donald Trump the person[/STRIKE] [the Democrats as a party]."

I am appalled that you would consider any Democrat of the current crop better for the nation. Do not attempt the pretty lie that if Trump is removed that Pence would be president, the knives would immediately be out for him and he is too weak a player to hold Trump's base together or enlarge it's reach. He would be subject to a debilitating primary by the [STRIKE]Mitt Romneys[/STRIKE] ambitious self-serving Republicans waiting in the wings and likely would lose the election if he survived the primary. If you'd rather see any one of the Democrat 20 in the oval office over Trump then just admit it (to yourself, we've already come to that conclusion)

 

[KG1]

Question? From the transcript of the call... if you had to make a choice.... are the details of the conversation more to benefit "the nation (United States)," or "Donald Trump the person."

If indeed there was Ukrainian involvement in matters that are related to and somehow could have possibly affected the American Democratic election process then it could be beneficial to both. Trump is certainly part of that election process as a whole.