Bribery is a loser

[progressive hunter]

the real problem is you dont know how to assimilate it,,,and let your emotions control you,,,

That’s a cheap shot and not even true. My emotions are a non factor. I’m looking for facts. You can’t provide them. Ok I’m done with this nonsense now... you’ve wasted enough of my time. If you have something smart to say then say it otherwise I’m done with you

you dont like beck so you ignore the evidence he presents,,,

thats pure emotion not rational thought,,,

i like beck and I listen to Beck as I said previously. I just don’t blindly believe everything he says. There’s a ton of conjecture in there

not when its backed up by documents and first hand testimony,,which is the case here,,,

It most certainly is not. The fact that you can’t point to the actual evidence and can only post a 2 hour video shows the flaw in your argument and your lack of intelligence

your opinion is noted and ignored,,,

why are you so afraid of seeing the truth???

 

[Slade3200]

what a

i literally just said all that

No, you did not. Had you read my text closely enough you would have realized I amended your text in several places to demonstrate how you fall short of including several crucial pieces of evidence. But you didn't. And so you still can't quite understand the difference.

The task at hand is not to demonstrate to every bonehead and benighted Trumpleton that Trump's action was corrupt. Demonstrating it so that every reasonable citizen can understand it has to suffice. That is already accomplished. Now we're waiting whether you jump on board or not.

I understand the difference and I noted the differences. My point is that the argument is a losing one. You need consensus from the public to impeach and you aren’t going to get there with bribery. If you don’t get there and try to impeach then trump wins the next election

what an idiot,,, you need proof of a crime to impeach not a consensus,,,

consensus is based on emotions not rational thought

i don’t support impeachment dumbass. Go away now you’re lost and confused and a waste of time.

I never said you did,,,

You need proof of a crime to prosecute in court. Impeachment is a political process so yes you need votes and a consensus

 

[progressive hunter]

what a

No, you did not. Had you read my text closely enough you would have realized I amended your text in several places to demonstrate how you fall short of including several crucial pieces of evidence. But you didn't. And so you still can't quite understand the difference.

The task at hand is not to demonstrate to every bonehead and benighted Trumpleton that Trump's action was corrupt. Demonstrating it so that every reasonable citizen can understand it has to suffice. That is already accomplished. Now we're waiting whether you jump on board or not.

I understand the difference and I noted the differences. My point is that the argument is a losing one. You need consensus from the public to impeach and you aren’t going to get there with bribery. If you don’t get there and try to impeach then trump wins the next election

what an idiot,,, you need proof of a crime to impeach not a consensus,,,

consensus is based on emotions not rational thought

i don’t support impeachment dumbass. Go away now you’re lost and confused and a waste of time.

I never said you did,,,

You need proof of a crime to prosecute in court. Impeachment is a political process so yes you need votes and a consensus

are you saying you dont need proof to impeach??

 

[Olde Europe]

I understand the difference and I noted the differences. My point is that the argument is a losing one. You need consensus from the public to impeach and you aren’t going to get there with bribery. If you don’t get there and try to impeach then trump wins the next election

Now you seem really confused. There is no "consensus" needed to impeach. Moreover, you should separate a "winning" or "losing" argument from the political fall-out of impeachment. These are not the same. Finally, your assertion that Trump would win if impeached is just your opinion, with no basis in fact.

 

[Slade3200]

That’s a cheap shot and not even true. My emotions are a non factor. I’m looking for facts. You can’t provide them. Ok I’m done with this nonsense now... you’ve wasted enough of my time. If you have something smart to say then say it otherwise I’m done with you

you dont like beck so you ignore the evidence he presents,,,

thats pure emotion not rational thought,,,

i like beck and I listen to Beck as I said previously. I just don’t blindly believe everything he says. There’s a ton of conjecture in there

not when its backed up by documents and first hand testimony,,which is the case here,,,

It most certainly is not. The fact that you can’t point to the actual evidence and can only post a 2 hour video shows the flaw in your argument and your lack of intelligence

your opinion is noted and ignored,,,

why are you so afraid of seeing the truth???

ive been asking you to post facts for 40 pages now. Why are you scared to show it. Hiding behind a two hour video is not showing proof. It’s lazy and ineffective

 

[progressive hunter]

you dont like beck so you ignore the evidence he presents,,,

thats pure emotion not rational thought,,,

i like beck and I listen to Beck as I said previously. I just don’t blindly believe everything he says. There’s a ton of conjecture in there

not when its backed up by documents and first hand testimony,,which is the case here,,,

It most certainly is not. The fact that you can’t point to the actual evidence and can only post a 2 hour video shows the flaw in your argument and your lack of intelligence

your opinion is noted and ignored,,,

why are you so afraid of seeing the truth???

ive been asking you to post facts for 40 pages now. Why are you scared to show it. Hiding behind a two hour video is not showing proof. It’s lazy and ineffective

in your opinion,,,
the fact remains its all there for you to view,,,

heck I even posted the interview of the guy that worked with shokin that admitted he was fired because he wanted to reopen the investigation and how it led to biden having him fired,,,

your ignorance is on you,,,stop blaming others for it,,,

 

[Slade3200]

I understand the difference and I noted the differences. My point is that the argument is a losing one. You need consensus from the public to impeach and you aren’t going to get there with bribery. If you don’t get there and try to impeach then trump wins the next election

Now you seem really confused. There is no "consensus" needed to impeach. Moreover, you should separate a "winning" or "losing" argument from the political fall-out of impeachment. These are not the same. Finally, your assertion that Trump would win if impeached is just your opinion, with no basis in fact.

yes it is my opinion. You absolutely need a consensus to impeach... the Dems can get away with filing in the house but the senate will not convict without consensus.

The senate will also control the narrative during the trial in the heart of the campaign. How do you see that playing out as they focus on the corrupt Biden’s and DNC and Hillary and all the other shiny objects Trump will be throwing out? That’s playing right into trumps hands. You don’t see that?

 

[Slade3200]

i like beck and I listen to Beck as I said previously. I just don’t blindly believe everything he says. There’s a ton of conjecture in there

not when its backed up by documents and first hand testimony,,which is the case here,,,

It most certainly is not. The fact that you can’t point to the actual evidence and can only post a 2 hour video shows the flaw in your argument and your lack of intelligence

your opinion is noted and ignored,,,

why are you so afraid of seeing the truth???

ive been asking you to post facts for 40 pages now. Why are you scared to show it. Hiding behind a two hour video is not showing proof. It’s lazy and ineffective

in your opinion,,,
the fact remains its all there for you to view,,,

heck I even posted the interview of the guy that worked with shokin that admitted he was fired because he wanted to reopen the investigation and how it led to biden having him fired,,,

your ignorance is on you,,,stop blaming others for it,,,

While you dismiss my perspective as opinion I guess I can play that same game and say it’s also your opinion that you presented credible evidence and that I’m staying ignorant. That doesn’t make it true.

 

[progressive hunter]

not when its backed up by documents and first hand testimony,,which is the case here,,,

It most certainly is not. The fact that you can’t point to the actual evidence and can only post a 2 hour video shows the flaw in your argument and your lack of intelligence

your opinion is noted and ignored,,,

why are you so afraid of seeing the truth???

ive been asking you to post facts for 40 pages now. Why are you scared to show it. Hiding behind a two hour video is not showing proof. It’s lazy and ineffective

in your opinion,,,
the fact remains its all there for you to view,,,

heck I even posted the interview of the guy that worked with shokin that admitted he was fired because he wanted to reopen the investigation and how it led to biden having him fired,,,

your ignorance is on you,,,stop blaming others for it,,,

While you dismiss my perspective as opinion I guess I can play that same game and say it’s also your opinion that you presented credible evidence and that I’m staying ignorant. That doesn’t make it true.

what makes it true is the fact its right in front of you and refuse to see it,,

 

[colfax_m]

wouldnt want you to spend your whole life an ignorant moron

Beck has made numerous basic factual errors in these videos. Attempting to paint him as an expert in Ukrainian politics is laughable.

 

[progressive hunter]

wouldnt want you to spend your whole life an ignorant moron

Beck has made numerous basic factual errors in these videos. Attempting to paint him as an expert in Ukrainian politics is laughable.

who claimed he was an expert???

I'm talking about what hes backed up with documents and first hand testimony,,

and if theres so many errors then why dont you list them???

 

[Slade3200]

It most certainly is not. The fact that you can’t point to the actual evidence and can only post a 2 hour video shows the flaw in your argument and your lack of intelligence

your opinion is noted and ignored,,,

why are you so afraid of seeing the truth???

ive been asking you to post facts for 40 pages now. Why are you scared to show it. Hiding behind a two hour video is not showing proof. It’s lazy and ineffective

in your opinion,,,
the fact remains its all there for you to view,,,

heck I even posted the interview of the guy that worked with shokin that admitted he was fired because he wanted to reopen the investigation and how it led to biden having him fired,,,

your ignorance is on you,,,stop blaming others for it,,,

While you dismiss my perspective as opinion I guess I can play that same game and say it’s also your opinion that you presented credible evidence and that I’m staying ignorant. That doesn’t make it true.

what makes it true is the fact its right in front of you and refuse to see it,,

just because you call it a fact doesn’t make it a fact. You’ve proven to be a very poor communicator of information. That means you either have trouble comprehending facts or presenting facts... maybe both. This is why your shy to point to specific information and resort to hiding behind videos. You don’t have the chops to keep up in a real debate which is fine... just stop lying to yourself.

 

[progressive hunter]

your opinion is noted and ignored,,,

why are you so afraid of seeing the truth???

ive been asking you to post facts for 40 pages now. Why are you scared to show it. Hiding behind a two hour video is not showing proof. It’s lazy and ineffective

in your opinion,,,
the fact remains its all there for you to view,,,

heck I even posted the interview of the guy that worked with shokin that admitted he was fired because he wanted to reopen the investigation and how it led to biden having him fired,,,

your ignorance is on you,,,stop blaming others for it,,,

While you dismiss my perspective as opinion I guess I can play that same game and say it’s also your opinion that you presented credible evidence and that I’m staying ignorant. That doesn’t make it true.

what makes it true is the fact its right in front of you and refuse to see it,,

just because you call it a fact doesn’t make it a fact. You’ve proven to be a very poor communicator of information. That means you either have trouble comprehending facts or presenting facts... maybe both. This is why your shy to point to specific information and resort to hiding behind videos. You don’t have the chops to keep up in a real debate which is fine... just stop lying to yourself.

me saying it has nothing to do with it,,,its the documents that make it so,,,

 

[colfax_m]

wouldnt want you to spend your whole life an ignorant moron

Beck has made numerous basic factual errors in these videos. Attempting to paint him as an expert in Ukrainian politics is laughable.

who claimed he was an expert???

I'm talking about what hes backed up with documents and first hand testimony,,

and if theres so many errors then why dont you list them???

Well, for starters he couldn't even the the owner of Burisma right. He claimed it was Igor Kolomoisky and that's simply false. If you can't even get something that fundamental right, well, it's not going to go well.

 

[progressive hunter]

wouldnt want you to spend your whole life an ignorant moron

Beck has made numerous basic factual errors in these videos. Attempting to paint him as an expert in Ukrainian politics is laughable.

who claimed he was an expert???

I'm talking about what hes backed up with documents and first hand testimony,,

and if theres so many errors then why dont you list them???

Well, for starters he couldn't even the the owner of Burisma right. He claimed it was Igor Kolomoisky and that's simply false. If you can't even get something that fundamental right, well, it's not going to go well.

is that all???

 

[colfax_m]

wouldnt want you to spend your whole life an ignorant moron

Beck has made numerous basic factual errors in these videos. Attempting to paint him as an expert in Ukrainian politics is laughable.

who claimed he was an expert???

I'm talking about what hes backed up with documents and first hand testimony,,

and if theres so many errors then why dont you list them???

Well, for starters he couldn't even the the owner of Burisma right. He claimed it was Igor Kolomoisky and that's simply false. If you can't even get something that fundamental right, well, it's not going to go well.

is that all???

It's part of the bedrock of his argument and so a lot of the later argument (about investigations into Kolomoisky's bank are ignored) is completely invalidated. Believe me, I listened to the whole thing, including the first 30 minutes where he just talked about how amazing he is for putting this together.

They claim repeatedly to have documentary evidence for all of this, but when you actually look at what they're claiming to have, it's really just testimonials from Viktor Shokin (a bad witness to be sure) and some random low level former employee of Ukrainian's embassy who has no evidence (an no corroboration) of anything he's claimed.

 

[Olde Europe]

yes it is my opinion. You absolutely need a consensus to impeach... the Dems can get away with filing in the house but the senate will not convict without consensus.

The senate will also control the narrative during the trial in the heart of the campaign. How do you see that playing out as they focus on the corrupt Biden’s and DNC and Hillary and all the other shiny objects Trump will be throwing out? That’s playing right into trumps hands. You don’t see that?

For pity's sake, Slade. There is no consensus needed to impeach. There is also no consensus needed to convict. The two are different. All it takes to convict are about 20 Republican Senators finding their misplaced moral spine. Or, failing that, 20 or so Republican Senators facing an increasingly hostile and fed-up electorate at their next re-election campaign.

I agree the Senate trial might play into Trump's hands. Might. Their shenanigans might just as well backfire - not least since Trump is an in-containable loose cannon, impervious to advice and reason itself. If Trump's current trajectory tells us anything, he'll probably lose it completely over the next months. So, I have no bets running on re-election at that time. Your mere assumptions to the contrary I find, to be honest, less than impressive.

 

[Slade3200]

ive been asking you to post facts for 40 pages now. Why are you scared to show it. Hiding behind a two hour video is not showing proof. It’s lazy and ineffective

in your opinion,,,
the fact remains its all there for you to view,,,

heck I even posted the interview of the guy that worked with shokin that admitted he was fired because he wanted to reopen the investigation and how it led to biden having him fired,,,

your ignorance is on you,,,stop blaming others for it,,,

While you dismiss my perspective as opinion I guess I can play that same game and say it’s also your opinion that you presented credible evidence and that I’m staying ignorant. That doesn’t make it true.

what makes it true is the fact its right in front of you and refuse to see it,,

just because you call it a fact doesn’t make it a fact. You’ve proven to be a very poor communicator of information. That means you either have trouble comprehending facts or presenting facts... maybe both. This is why your shy to point to specific information and resort to hiding behind videos. You don’t have the chops to keep up in a real debate which is fine... just stop lying to yourself.

me saying it has nothing to do with it,,,its the documents that make it so,,,

Show me the part of the documents that prove what your trying to say. Proceed to the dodge...

 

[progressive hunter]

wouldnt want you to spend your whole life an ignorant moron

Beck has made numerous basic factual errors in these videos. Attempting to paint him as an expert in Ukrainian politics is laughable.

who claimed he was an expert???

I'm talking about what hes backed up with documents and first hand testimony,,

and if theres so many errors then why dont you list them???

Well, for starters he couldn't even the the owner of Burisma right. He claimed it was Igor Kolomoisky and that's simply false. If you can't even get something that fundamental right, well, it's not going to go well.

is that all???

It's part of the bedrock of his argument and so a lot of the later argument (about investigations into Kolomoisky's bank are ignored) is completely invalidated. Believe me, I listened to the whole thing, including the first 30 minutes where he just talked about how amazing he is for putting this together.

They claim repeatedly to have documentary evidence for all of this, but when you actually look at what they're claiming to have, it's really just testimonials from Viktor Shokin (a bad witness to be sure) and some random low level former employee of Ukrainian's embassy who has no evidence (an no corroboration) of anything he's claimed.

thats a nice cherry picked view,,,

of course you have to ignore a lot of other things to come to that conclusion,,,

 

[Oldstyle]

What makes THAT an illegal act? The President makes foreign policy. If he wants to hold up foreign aid because he's concerned about rampant corruption in a country he's about to give billions of dollars to...then he has every authority to do just that! It isn't his "place"? It's EXACTLY his place!

Except the DoD had already certified that the money was going to go where it was earmarked to go. So the whole, "I was concerned about corruption that happened 4 years ago" doesn't pass the laugh test.

He wasn't looking for corruption. He was looking for someone to smear a rival.

Jimmy Carter was a "good guy with a good heart", Slade! He was also a rather bad President. Let's be honest here...Joe Biden's clueless. He was never that sharp to begin with (had to cheat to get through law school!) but as he's gotten older he's become more and more of a buffoon! You want to hang out with a "good person"? Fine...hang out with Joe! Go for a few beers...check out a game and have some wings! You want a President who's working to fix some serious problems we still have? It's not Joe Biden! I don't think it's any of the other twenty Democrats running for President either to be blunt. Surely there must be some Democrats out there SOMEWHERE who know how to do the hard work of being an effective leader?

You think Trump is fixing the problems? TRUMP IS THE PROBLEM. I mean, I know he indulges your hate of brown people by building a wall that can be foiled with some tools from the Home Depot.... but he isn't fixing any problems.

Seriously? Did you miss the part where the US economy is setting records for low unemployment? Record numbers of people off Food Stamps? Growth in people's take home pay? Oh, let me guess...you think that's due to Barry's economic policies? You know...all the policies that gave us the worst recovery from a recession since The Great Depression?

I know you don't HEAR about that, Joey...because the main stream media is focused on this sham of an investigation...but Trump is KILLING it with the economy!