Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Grebfromgrebland

Also In The News

By Grebfromgrebland, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

Finnaldo

Finnaldo

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

Can’t we just bin all the current politicians off and get a new bunch in? 

 

In a world with one dominant ideology and economic model which rewards individual wealth and status above service and good to your fellow man, I don't think binning the current lot off would change a whole lot without a massive shift in the society itself. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

 

 

Well, yeah. That applies to both sides of the aisle.

In an ideal world, we'd need a new breed of politicians. Independent, not corrupted by lobbyists, young(er), competent and idealistic, yet still close to the voting population.

The closest thing you could do is vote for these people. But from previous experience in European elections, voters tend to have this lemming mentality, blindly following the same old, same old. For various reasons.

 

As for the US, an impeachment is the only remaining weapon the Democrats have against Trump - their last resort, seeing how weak and uncharismatic their presidential candidates are.

They'd all be brushed aside by Trump in a debate and they know it. Hence every attempt at getting him impeached.

Yeah, polarisation is pretty bad right now - that being said, there are some issues - just a few - that are that starkly black and white.

 

As for Trump, the Dems didn't try to impeach either Reagan or Bush43 despite them, as you say, both being able to win landslides. Perhaps, just perhaps, there's some fire to the smoke here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MC Prussian

MC Prussian

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said:

bernie-sanders-polling.jpg

 

105571883-1542138305365gettyimages-10098

I‘d vote for Bernie if I could - and if he were 20 years younger.

The thought of a 78-year old leading the US in his first term is a scary one, especially given the vice president options in case of a sudden death.

Don‘t want Hillary, Warren, Biden, Booker or Harris anywhere near that.

 

As for AOC, no thanks. She‘s an instrument, a blunt tool, picked, brainwashed and shaped by a far-left allegiance.

 

Tulsi Gabbard all the way, man. Or Andrew Yang.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ozleicester

ozleicester

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, MC Prussian said:

Nothing Democrats or Democrat presidents wouldn‘t do...

 

*cough* E-Mails

*cough* Russia

*cough* Clinton campaign

If that needs to be investigated, lets go... but, lets start with THE PRESIDENT who admits to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MC Prussian

MC Prussian

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, ozleicester said:

If that needs to be investigated, lets go... but, lets start with THE PRESIDENT who admits to it.

He has to either admit to it first or the evidence needs to be hard enough. For now that means: Innocent until proven guilty and whatnot.

Trump is about to release an unredacted and unedited transcript of the phone call in question:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/24/trump-says-he-authorized-the-release-of-complete-fully-declassified-and-unredacted-transcript-of-ukraine-call.html

 

And even if an impeachment should be initiated by Congress, it'd still have a hard time passing through the Republican-dominated Senate for the required two-thirds super majority.

 

The fact that even three to four years after Clintons dabbling with Russia, no final conclusion has been made, shows how messy the US legal system is. In comparison, two years were all it took for Trump to be cleared of collusion with Russia by the Mueller Report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ozleicester

ozleicester

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

He has to either admit to it first or the evidence needs to be hard enough. For now that means: Innocent until proven guilty and whatnot.

Trump is about to release an unredacted and unedited transcript of the phone call in question:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/24/trump-says-he-authorized-the-release-of-complete-fully-declassified-and-unredacted-transcript-of-ukraine-call.html

 

And even if an impeachment should be initiated by Congress, it'd still have a hard time passing through the Republican-dominated Senate for the required two-thirds super majority.

 

The fact that even three to four years after Clintons dabbling with Russia, no final conclusion has been made, shows how messy the US legal system is. In comparison, two years were all it took for Trump to be cleared of collusion with Russia by the Mueller Report.

your level of blindness, means further discussion is pointless

 

https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/am/mueller-denies-donald-trump-was-cleared-of-collusion/11344614

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MC Prussian

MC Prussian

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

your level of blindness, means further discussion is pointless

 

https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/am/mueller-denies-donald-trump-was-cleared-of-collusion/11344614

Why go so far when you've got the BBC?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47688187

 

Cleared of conspiracy, but not of obstruction of justice. However, these are two different pair of shoes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MC Prussian

MC Prussian

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49830588

 

Looks like impeachment will happen. Purely symbolic of course because the Senate will never in a million years vote to convict, but at least it'll make for interesting TV.

As far as I can tell, the calls for impeachment are built on very weak grounds. 

 

Asking Ukraine for help solving the Biden issue is hardly controversial nor illegal.

 

This whole affair is a rather big nothingburger and has the potential to weaken the Democrats even further, Pelosi shows no backbone and bends to the leftist Democrats.

 

Meanwhile, Trump can be heard laughing from the Oval Office. He‘s not hurting at all.

 

His approval ratings have gone up again and on the first day of the talk of impeachment alone, Trump‘s campaign raised a million dollars - within six hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

As far as I can tell, the calls for impeachment are built on very weak grounds. 

 

Asking Ukraine for help solving the Biden issue is hardly controversial nor illegal.

 

This whole affair is a rather big nothingburger and has the potential to weaken the Democrats even further, Pelosi shows no backbone and bends to the leftist Democrats.

 

Meanwhile, Trump can be heard laughing from the Oval Office. He‘s not hurting at all.

 

His approval ratings have gone up again and on the first day of the talk of impeachment alone, Trump‘s campaign raised a million dollars - within six hours.

Asking a foreign government to source dirt on a rival domestic candidate is not controversial or illegal? I think there might be some discussion on that score, and as we both know in this era it is often what people believe that is important, rather than what actually is.

 

Pelosi has absolutely refused to go in for impeachment until now, in the face of some pretty stern opposition - one has to wonder what gave.

 

Time is going to have to tell on the approval ratings, from what can be told here https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/?ex_cid=rrpromo they are remaining about the same as they have for some time - if it's an uptick, it's a pretty small one, but I guess we'll see how that changes once this all airs.

 

And if money really was the be all and end all of campaigning, Trump wouldn't even be in the White House right now.

 

Like I said, I think all of this is going to be symbolic more than anything else but if there has been corruption of this type going on, an impeachment hearing is as good a place as any for it to be made public, even if the end result is going to be merely the status quo and folks revving up for 2020.

 

NB. This is likely going to hurt Biden too, I think - which I personally don't mind at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MC Prussian

MC Prussian

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Asking a foreign government to source dirt on a rival domestic candidate is not controversial or illegal? I think there might be some discussion on that score, and as we both know in this era it is often what people believe that is important, rather than what actually is.

 

Pelosi has absolutely refused to go in for impeachment until now, in the face of some pretty stern opposition - one has to wonder what gave.

 

Time is going to have to tell on the approval ratings, from what can be told here https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/?ex_cid=rrpromo they are remaining about the same as they have for some time - if it's an uptick, it's a pretty small one, but I guess we'll see how that changes once this all airs.

 

And if money really was the be all and end all of campaigning, Trump wouldn't even be in the White House right now.

 

Like I said, I think all of this is going to be symbolic more than anything else but if there has been corruption of this type going on, an impeachment hearing is as good a place as any for it to be made public, even if the end result is going to be merely the status quo and folks revving up for 2020.

 

NB. This is likely going to hurt Biden too, I think - which I personally don't mind at all.

Have you seen the transcript?

https://dailycaller.com/2019/09/25/released-transcript-donald-trump-joe-biden-ukraine/

At what point does Trump actually and factually threaten Ukraine?

From what I've read, he simply offers legal aid and asks for cooperation. And there is no quid pro quo ("if you do this, I will do that").

 

Questions remain concerning Hunter Biden's involvement with Burisma.

Hunter Biden has no experience in that field and it was clearly a strategic move. It earned Hunter Biden $50'000 a month for doing what exactly?

The Burisma story had been out for about five years already, so there was nothing new about the ramifications of the case. The Obama administration turned a blind eye to Joe Biden's dealings in Ukraine, I wonder why...

 

Btw, back in 2018, three Democrat senators asked Ukraine to dig up dirt on Trump:

https://dailycaller.com/2019/09/25/democrats-ukraine-investigate-trump-mueller/

https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/5-4-18 Menendez joint letter to General Prosecutor of Ukraine on Mueller investigation.pdf

Then these three people should face an impeachment also...

Edited by MC Prussian
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest MattP

Guest MattP

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49830588

 

Looks like impeachment will happen. Purely symbolic of course because the Senate will never in a million years vote to convict, but at least it'll make for interesting TV.

Probably wins the election for him next year.

 

The democrat campaign over the last three years has been one long hissy fit trying to remove him by any means possible - I'd buckle up for another four if I were you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

Have you seen the transcript?

https://dailycaller.com/2019/09/25/released-transcript-donald-trump-joe-biden-ukraine/

At what point does Trump actually and factually threaten Ukraine?

From what I've read, he simply offers legal aid and asks for cooperation. And there is no quid pro quo ("if you do this, I will do that").

 

Questions remain concerning Hunter Biden's involvement with Burisma.

Hunter Biden has no experience in that field and it was clearly a strategic move. It earned Hunter Biden $50'000 a month for doing what exactly?

The Burisma story had been out for about five years already, so there was nothing new about the ramifications of the case. The Obama administration turned a blind eye to Joe Biden's dealings in Ukraine, I wonder why...

 

Btw, back in 2018, three Democrat senators asked Ukraine to dig up dirt on Trump:

https://dailycaller.com/2019/09/25/democrats-ukraine-investigate-trump-mueller/

https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/5-4-18 Menendez joint letter to General Prosecutor of Ukraine on Mueller investigation.pdf

Then these three people should face an impeachment also...

He doesn't have to threaten them directly - the inference is clear, but of course merely inferring leaves room for implausible deniability.

 

I'm certainly all for Hunter Biden being investigated if there is due course - like I said, his dad getting knocked down a peg or two in the current stakes is something that I wouldn't mind all that much.

 

WRT the three Democrat senators, if they should be impeached, then why haven't they been? The Repubs had, up until late 2018, the entirety of government machinery - Presidency and both houses of Congress to do so - as well as good local support, so why not use it if they believe it's warranted?

 

 

2 hours ago, MattP said:

Probably wins the election for him next year.

 

The democrat campaign over the last three years has been one long hissy fit trying to remove him by any means possible - I'd buckle up for another four if I were you.

Maybe, maybe not - I've long since given up trying to predict how this all plays out. Hell, I didn't see impeachment for something like this vaguely on the horizon when the guy has gotten away with putting children in mesh cages and separating them from their parents as a matter of government policy before. I'm not sure one can really make any kind of call about what this is all going to lead to.

 

One thing I will say with a modicum of certainty however is that if Trump does win four more years (provided the impeachment stuff doesn't end up going all the way which I do think is really unlikely), then it's four years lost on a time-frame we can't really afford to be spending four years on and as the far-right will continue to march and intimidate as they believe he has given them carte blanche to do so (despite his supposed efforts to reign them in) there will likely be more blood on the streets and in schools before it's all done.

 

Edited by leicsmac
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...