What's new

Impeachment Proves Nancy Pelosi Is an Idiot

Crepitus

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
29,593
Reaction score
2,527
Points
290


Nancy Pelosi is a genius in her own mind. She calls herself a political genius.....but in fact the only thing she's good at is dreaming up hoaxes. She lies.....she cheats....she stabs people in the back.....she's the most unethical Speaker Of The House in United States history.



John Nolte1 Feb 2020 Nolte: Impeachment Proves Nancy Pelosi Is an Idiot
For more than a decade the media have told us House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is some kind of master strategist. Oh, yes, President Trump has met his match in Madam Pelosi…

Me? Well, I’ve always found her to be something closer to an idiot. But even with my low opinion of her, never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined she would botch this impeachment as badly as she did.

Seriously… wow.

What I mean is, even when a particular strategy is a bad one, it is at least a strategy. You can at least see the strategy in a bad strategy. For example, I understood why John McCain quit his 2008 presidential campaign to go off and try and save the economy. He was hoping to throw the game board over, a game he was losing. It was terrible strategy, laughably terrible, but you could at least see the strategy.

I even understood why Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) released a DNA test that definitively proved she was not an American Indian with the claim it proved she was. It was a terrible strategy, but I get what she was going for. It was neurotic and moronic, but it was at least a strategy.

Pelosi’s impeachment “strategy” baffles me beyond words, because I see no strategy. In fact, when I close my eyes and attempt to picture Pelosi’s impeachment strategy, I see Brian Stelter giggling as he tries to snatch a pork chop away from a ravenous Rosie O’Donnell. In other words, no strategy, just impulse and appetite that cannot end well.

Forget your biases, your own beliefs, your likes or dislike of those involved, and ask yourself what in the world Pelosi was thinking as I tick through these…


Impeaching the President with No Crime
The questions surrounding Joe Biden’s corruption in Ukraine are not only legitimate, Trump has a responsibility to look into it. Pelosi impeached him for something that was not only not a crime, it wasn’t even unethical.



Impeaching the President for Asking for a Judicial Ruling
Every defendant in the country has the right to go to court to challenge every aspect of the prosecution’s case, from witnesses to search warrants to document requests, and so on… This is the backbone of our legal system. Trump was perfectly within his rights — legally and with regard to historical impeachment precedent — to go to court for a judicial ruling on the issue of subpoenas and documents … and this dizzy broad impeached him for it.

That’s not a strategy. That’s insanity.



There Was No Quid Pro Quo
Even if a quid pro quo was a crime (it’s not), it has been firmly established by 18 witnesses and thousands and thousands of documents that Ukraine did not know Trump had paused the aid package.

If the second party doesn’t know about the carrot, there can be no bribery.

If the second party doesn’t know about the stick, there can be no extortion.

Johnnie Cochran might have put it this way, “If Ukraine didn’t know, there can be no quid pro quo.”



Rushing Impeachment
This is the one that baffles me more than any other.

In the House, Pelosi has total control over the process. She runs the House of Representatives, and as Speaker, she has even more power than the Senate Majority Leader.

Why rush things? Why the hurry to give up a process you have total control over?

Let me back up just a bit…

I don’t think it was good strategy, but I do understand why Pelosi violated Trump’s due process rights and precedent. I get why she refused to allow the president to cross examine witnesses, or to bring on his own witnesses, or face his accuser (the fake whistleblower). She rigged the process so that he had no chance of winning. I get that.

It’s the rushing that I can’t wrap my mind around. It’s the haste to give up a process she controls to hand it over to a Senate that she not only doesn’t control, but that is controlled by a legitimate master strategist, Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

Not that anything would have turned out different as far as Trump’s acquittal, but had Pelosi kept the process in the House, under her control, she could have 1) probably got most if not all the witnesses she wanted, 2) got most if not all of the documents she wanted, 3) left Trump twisting in the wind for months, 4) bought more time for a legitimate bombshell to drop, and 5) handed a respectable impeachment over to the Senate with all the crossed “T’s” and dotted “I’s.”

“Impeaching Donald Trump before Christmas” is not a strategy; it’s a giggling Brian Stelter trying to take that pork chop from Rosie — a baby move, all impulse, no thought. Dumb.



Sitting on the Impeachment Articles for a Month
Pelosi said her strategy in holding on to the impeachment articles for a month was to force McConnell to agree to her terms on the Senate trial, but come on…

Come on, that’s not a strategy, that’s a temper tantrum. Holding your breath while the other side enjoys watching you turn blue, is not a strategy.

Out of one side of this ditzy dame’s mouth, we were told impeachment must be rushed in order to save the country. Then, in the same breath, she holds up impeachment a full month…

You want to know how dumb Nancy Pelosi is…?

She thinks Twitter and CNN are the real world; because that’s where she got this irrational idea from. Holding up the impeachment articles wasn’t a strategy; it was a way to get the elite bubble to cheer her on by giving the extremist animals what they want.

Granted, there’s an argument out there that Pelosi sat on everything hoping against hope (after 18 witnesses and thousands and thousands of documents) that some bombshell would come out and save an impeachment she already knew was doomed, an impeachment that had not even proved there was a quid pro quo, much less a crime.

Okay, but if that was the case, why not wait for the Hail Mary while you’re waiting for the court to rule on those additional witnesses and documents? Stupid.



Demanding the Senate Do What She Refused to Do
You want to know when I knew there would be no witnesses, and therefore no hope of dragging this out to embarrass the president, and therefore absolutely no hope of conviction? Over two weeks ago when Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) publicly complained that the House was asking the Senate to do what the House refused to do: namely, fight Trump in court to gain access to certain witnesses and documents.

“Wait a minute, wait a minute,” Murkowski was saying. “You assholes want us to do all the work you not only refused to do but that the Constitution and over a century of precedent says you’re supposed to do? Sorry, no.”

Had that come from a Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), I wouldn’t have given it a second thought. But this is Lisa Murkowski we’re talking about, one of the top three cucks in the Senate.

Seriously, Nancy, if you’ve lost Murkowski…



Terrible Choice of House Managers
As I tweeted yesterday, an unappreciated fact of the Senate trial was Trump’s astute decision to not use House Managers from the House. Instead of Republican Representatives, instead of politicians as his defense counsel — who would arrive with a ton of baggage and be seen as fire-breathing partisans — Trump brought on a real legal team, a team of brilliant lawyers like Patrick Philbin, Alan Dershowitz, Jay Sekulow, and Ken Starr.

Pelosi chose Laurel & Hardy — Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler.

The contrast was striking: smirking, hyper-partisan politicians up against mature, thoughtful, well-prepared lawyers.

Trump knew his audience, and I’m not just talking about the very few people who watched this farce at home. The Senate likes to see itself as above politics, as superior to the rowdy House. Had Trump brought over the stars of the House trial — Reps. Mark Meadows (R-NC), Jim Jordan (R-OH), Elise Stefanik (R-NY) etc. — that would have been nowhere near as effective as sober, qualified, respected attorneys.​
Lol, no.

All it means is republicans are ok supporting a criminal.

I appreciate you wasting all that space with your useless 2,000 word post though.
You got this!

View attachment 305985
So, you aren't a big fan of the Constitution, then?
 

Crepitus

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
29,593
Reaction score
2,527
Points
290


Nancy Pelosi is a genius in her own mind. She calls herself a political genius.....but in fact the only thing she's good at is dreaming up hoaxes. She lies.....she cheats....she stabs people in the back.....she's the most unethical Speaker Of The House in United States history.



John Nolte1 Feb 2020 Nolte: Impeachment Proves Nancy Pelosi Is an Idiot
For more than a decade the media have told us House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is some kind of master strategist. Oh, yes, President Trump has met his match in Madam Pelosi…

Me? Well, I’ve always found her to be something closer to an idiot. But even with my low opinion of her, never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined she would botch this impeachment as badly as she did.

Seriously… wow.

What I mean is, even when a particular strategy is a bad one, it is at least a strategy. You can at least see the strategy in a bad strategy. For example, I understood why John McCain quit his 2008 presidential campaign to go off and try and save the economy. He was hoping to throw the game board over, a game he was losing. It was terrible strategy, laughably terrible, but you could at least see the strategy.

I even understood why Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) released a DNA test that definitively proved she was not an American Indian with the claim it proved she was. It was a terrible strategy, but I get what she was going for. It was neurotic and moronic, but it was at least a strategy.

Pelosi’s impeachment “strategy” baffles me beyond words, because I see no strategy. In fact, when I close my eyes and attempt to picture Pelosi’s impeachment strategy, I see Brian Stelter giggling as he tries to snatch a pork chop away from a ravenous Rosie O’Donnell. In other words, no strategy, just impulse and appetite that cannot end well.

Forget your biases, your own beliefs, your likes or dislike of those involved, and ask yourself what in the world Pelosi was thinking as I tick through these…


Impeaching the President with No Crime
The questions surrounding Joe Biden’s corruption in Ukraine are not only legitimate, Trump has a responsibility to look into it. Pelosi impeached him for something that was not only not a crime, it wasn’t even unethical.



Impeaching the President for Asking for a Judicial Ruling
Every defendant in the country has the right to go to court to challenge every aspect of the prosecution’s case, from witnesses to search warrants to document requests, and so on… This is the backbone of our legal system. Trump was perfectly within his rights — legally and with regard to historical impeachment precedent — to go to court for a judicial ruling on the issue of subpoenas and documents … and this dizzy broad impeached him for it.

That’s not a strategy. That’s insanity.



There Was No Quid Pro Quo
Even if a quid pro quo was a crime (it’s not), it has been firmly established by 18 witnesses and thousands and thousands of documents that Ukraine did not know Trump had paused the aid package.

If the second party doesn’t know about the carrot, there can be no bribery.

If the second party doesn’t know about the stick, there can be no extortion.

Johnnie Cochran might have put it this way, “If Ukraine didn’t know, there can be no quid pro quo.”



Rushing Impeachment
This is the one that baffles me more than any other.

In the House, Pelosi has total control over the process. She runs the House of Representatives, and as Speaker, she has even more power than the Senate Majority Leader.

Why rush things? Why the hurry to give up a process you have total control over?

Let me back up just a bit…

I don’t think it was good strategy, but I do understand why Pelosi violated Trump’s due process rights and precedent. I get why she refused to allow the president to cross examine witnesses, or to bring on his own witnesses, or face his accuser (the fake whistleblower). She rigged the process so that he had no chance of winning. I get that.

It’s the rushing that I can’t wrap my mind around. It’s the haste to give up a process she controls to hand it over to a Senate that she not only doesn’t control, but that is controlled by a legitimate master strategist, Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

Not that anything would have turned out different as far as Trump’s acquittal, but had Pelosi kept the process in the House, under her control, she could have 1) probably got most if not all the witnesses she wanted, 2) got most if not all of the documents she wanted, 3) left Trump twisting in the wind for months, 4) bought more time for a legitimate bombshell to drop, and 5) handed a respectable impeachment over to the Senate with all the crossed “T’s” and dotted “I’s.”

“Impeaching Donald Trump before Christmas” is not a strategy; it’s a giggling Brian Stelter trying to take that pork chop from Rosie — a baby move, all impulse, no thought. Dumb.



Sitting on the Impeachment Articles for a Month
Pelosi said her strategy in holding on to the impeachment articles for a month was to force McConnell to agree to her terms on the Senate trial, but come on…

Come on, that’s not a strategy, that’s a temper tantrum. Holding your breath while the other side enjoys watching you turn blue, is not a strategy.

Out of one side of this ditzy dame’s mouth, we were told impeachment must be rushed in order to save the country. Then, in the same breath, she holds up impeachment a full month…

You want to know how dumb Nancy Pelosi is…?

She thinks Twitter and CNN are the real world; because that’s where she got this irrational idea from. Holding up the impeachment articles wasn’t a strategy; it was a way to get the elite bubble to cheer her on by giving the extremist animals what they want.

Granted, there’s an argument out there that Pelosi sat on everything hoping against hope (after 18 witnesses and thousands and thousands of documents) that some bombshell would come out and save an impeachment she already knew was doomed, an impeachment that had not even proved there was a quid pro quo, much less a crime.

Okay, but if that was the case, why not wait for the Hail Mary while you’re waiting for the court to rule on those additional witnesses and documents? Stupid.



Demanding the Senate Do What She Refused to Do
You want to know when I knew there would be no witnesses, and therefore no hope of dragging this out to embarrass the president, and therefore absolutely no hope of conviction? Over two weeks ago when Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) publicly complained that the House was asking the Senate to do what the House refused to do: namely, fight Trump in court to gain access to certain witnesses and documents.

“Wait a minute, wait a minute,” Murkowski was saying. “You assholes want us to do all the work you not only refused to do but that the Constitution and over a century of precedent says you’re supposed to do? Sorry, no.”

Had that come from a Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), I wouldn’t have given it a second thought. But this is Lisa Murkowski we’re talking about, one of the top three cucks in the Senate.

Seriously, Nancy, if you’ve lost Murkowski…



Terrible Choice of House Managers
As I tweeted yesterday, an unappreciated fact of the Senate trial was Trump’s astute decision to not use House Managers from the House. Instead of Republican Representatives, instead of politicians as his defense counsel — who would arrive with a ton of baggage and be seen as fire-breathing partisans — Trump brought on a real legal team, a team of brilliant lawyers like Patrick Philbin, Alan Dershowitz, Jay Sekulow, and Ken Starr.

Pelosi chose Laurel & Hardy — Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler.

The contrast was striking: smirking, hyper-partisan politicians up against mature, thoughtful, well-prepared lawyers.

Trump knew his audience, and I’m not just talking about the very few people who watched this farce at home. The Senate likes to see itself as above politics, as superior to the rowdy House. Had Trump brought over the stars of the House trial — Reps. Mark Meadows (R-NC), Jim Jordan (R-OH), Elise Stefanik (R-NY) etc. — that would have been nowhere near as effective as sober, qualified, respected attorneys.​
Lol, no.

All it means is republicans are ok supporting a criminal.

I appreciate you wasting all that space with your useless 2,000 word post though.
You got this!

View attachment 305985
Hope so. May the CEO power rule forever.
You people need to go back to the monarchy where you belong.

The founding fathers must be spining in their graves.
 
OP
mudwhistle

mudwhistle

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
91,775
Reaction score
17,393
Points
2,220
Location
Clarksville, TN...Born in Missoula MT


Nancy Pelosi is a genius in her own mind. She calls herself a political genius.....but in fact the only thing she's good at is dreaming up hoaxes. She lies.....she cheats....she stabs people in the back.....she's the most unethical Speaker Of The House in United States history.



John Nolte1 Feb 2020 Nolte: Impeachment Proves Nancy Pelosi Is an Idiot
For more than a decade the media have told us House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is some kind of master strategist. Oh, yes, President Trump has met his match in Madam Pelosi…

Me? Well, I’ve always found her to be something closer to an idiot. But even with my low opinion of her, never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined she would botch this impeachment as badly as she did.

Seriously… wow.

What I mean is, even when a particular strategy is a bad one, it is at least a strategy. You can at least see the strategy in a bad strategy. For example, I understood why John McCain quit his 2008 presidential campaign to go off and try and save the economy. He was hoping to throw the game board over, a game he was losing. It was terrible strategy, laughably terrible, but you could at least see the strategy.

I even understood why Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) released a DNA test that definitively proved she was not an American Indian with the claim it proved she was. It was a terrible strategy, but I get what she was going for. It was neurotic and moronic, but it was at least a strategy.

Pelosi’s impeachment “strategy” baffles me beyond words, because I see no strategy. In fact, when I close my eyes and attempt to picture Pelosi’s impeachment strategy, I see Brian Stelter giggling as he tries to snatch a pork chop away from a ravenous Rosie O’Donnell. In other words, no strategy, just impulse and appetite that cannot end well.

Forget your biases, your own beliefs, your likes or dislike of those involved, and ask yourself what in the world Pelosi was thinking as I tick through these…


Impeaching the President with No Crime
The questions surrounding Joe Biden’s corruption in Ukraine are not only legitimate, Trump has a responsibility to look into it. Pelosi impeached him for something that was not only not a crime, it wasn’t even unethical.



Impeaching the President for Asking for a Judicial Ruling
Every defendant in the country has the right to go to court to challenge every aspect of the prosecution’s case, from witnesses to search warrants to document requests, and so on… This is the backbone of our legal system. Trump was perfectly within his rights — legally and with regard to historical impeachment precedent — to go to court for a judicial ruling on the issue of subpoenas and documents … and this dizzy broad impeached him for it.

That’s not a strategy. That’s insanity.



There Was No Quid Pro Quo
Even if a quid pro quo was a crime (it’s not), it has been firmly established by 18 witnesses and thousands and thousands of documents that Ukraine did not know Trump had paused the aid package.

If the second party doesn’t know about the carrot, there can be no bribery.

If the second party doesn’t know about the stick, there can be no extortion.

Johnnie Cochran might have put it this way, “If Ukraine didn’t know, there can be no quid pro quo.”



Rushing Impeachment
This is the one that baffles me more than any other.

In the House, Pelosi has total control over the process. She runs the House of Representatives, and as Speaker, she has even more power than the Senate Majority Leader.

Why rush things? Why the hurry to give up a process you have total control over?

Let me back up just a bit…

I don’t think it was good strategy, but I do understand why Pelosi violated Trump’s due process rights and precedent. I get why she refused to allow the president to cross examine witnesses, or to bring on his own witnesses, or face his accuser (the fake whistleblower). She rigged the process so that he had no chance of winning. I get that.

It’s the rushing that I can’t wrap my mind around. It’s the haste to give up a process she controls to hand it over to a Senate that she not only doesn’t control, but that is controlled by a legitimate master strategist, Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

Not that anything would have turned out different as far as Trump’s acquittal, but had Pelosi kept the process in the House, under her control, she could have 1) probably got most if not all the witnesses she wanted, 2) got most if not all of the documents she wanted, 3) left Trump twisting in the wind for months, 4) bought more time for a legitimate bombshell to drop, and 5) handed a respectable impeachment over to the Senate with all the crossed “T’s” and dotted “I’s.”

“Impeaching Donald Trump before Christmas” is not a strategy; it’s a giggling Brian Stelter trying to take that pork chop from Rosie — a baby move, all impulse, no thought. Dumb.



Sitting on the Impeachment Articles for a Month
Pelosi said her strategy in holding on to the impeachment articles for a month was to force McConnell to agree to her terms on the Senate trial, but come on…

Come on, that’s not a strategy, that’s a temper tantrum. Holding your breath while the other side enjoys watching you turn blue, is not a strategy.

Out of one side of this ditzy dame’s mouth, we were told impeachment must be rushed in order to save the country. Then, in the same breath, she holds up impeachment a full month…

You want to know how dumb Nancy Pelosi is…?

She thinks Twitter and CNN are the real world; because that’s where she got this irrational idea from. Holding up the impeachment articles wasn’t a strategy; it was a way to get the elite bubble to cheer her on by giving the extremist animals what they want.

Granted, there’s an argument out there that Pelosi sat on everything hoping against hope (after 18 witnesses and thousands and thousands of documents) that some bombshell would come out and save an impeachment she already knew was doomed, an impeachment that had not even proved there was a quid pro quo, much less a crime.

Okay, but if that was the case, why not wait for the Hail Mary while you’re waiting for the court to rule on those additional witnesses and documents? Stupid.



Demanding the Senate Do What She Refused to Do
You want to know when I knew there would be no witnesses, and therefore no hope of dragging this out to embarrass the president, and therefore absolutely no hope of conviction? Over two weeks ago when Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) publicly complained that the House was asking the Senate to do what the House refused to do: namely, fight Trump in court to gain access to certain witnesses and documents.

“Wait a minute, wait a minute,” Murkowski was saying. “You assholes want us to do all the work you not only refused to do but that the Constitution and over a century of precedent says you’re supposed to do? Sorry, no.”

Had that come from a Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), I wouldn’t have given it a second thought. But this is Lisa Murkowski we’re talking about, one of the top three cucks in the Senate.

Seriously, Nancy, if you’ve lost Murkowski…



Terrible Choice of House Managers
As I tweeted yesterday, an unappreciated fact of the Senate trial was Trump’s astute decision to not use House Managers from the House. Instead of Republican Representatives, instead of politicians as his defense counsel — who would arrive with a ton of baggage and be seen as fire-breathing partisans — Trump brought on a real legal team, a team of brilliant lawyers like Patrick Philbin, Alan Dershowitz, Jay Sekulow, and Ken Starr.

Pelosi chose Laurel & Hardy — Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler.

The contrast was striking: smirking, hyper-partisan politicians up against mature, thoughtful, well-prepared lawyers.

Trump knew his audience, and I’m not just talking about the very few people who watched this farce at home. The Senate likes to see itself as above politics, as superior to the rowdy House. Had Trump brought over the stars of the House trial — Reps. Mark Meadows (R-NC), Jim Jordan (R-OH), Elise Stefanik (R-NY) etc. — that would have been nowhere near as effective as sober, qualified, respected attorneys.​
Lol, no.

All it means is republicans are ok supporting a criminal.

I appreciate you wasting all that space with your useless 2,000 word post though.
You got this!

View attachment 305985
Hope so. May the CEO power rule forever.
You people need to go back to the monarchy where you belong.

The founding fathers must be spining in their graves.
Projection..........
 

Crepitus

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
29,593
Reaction score
2,527
Points
290


Nancy Pelosi is a genius in her own mind. She calls herself a political genius.....but in fact the only thing she's good at is dreaming up hoaxes. She lies.....she cheats....she stabs people in the back.....she's the most unethical Speaker Of The House in United States history.



John Nolte1 Feb 2020 Nolte: Impeachment Proves Nancy Pelosi Is an Idiot
For more than a decade the media have told us House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is some kind of master strategist. Oh, yes, President Trump has met his match in Madam Pelosi…

Me? Well, I’ve always found her to be something closer to an idiot. But even with my low opinion of her, never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined she would botch this impeachment as badly as she did.

Seriously… wow.

What I mean is, even when a particular strategy is a bad one, it is at least a strategy. You can at least see the strategy in a bad strategy. For example, I understood why John McCain quit his 2008 presidential campaign to go off and try and save the economy. He was hoping to throw the game board over, a game he was losing. It was terrible strategy, laughably terrible, but you could at least see the strategy.

I even understood why Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) released a DNA test that definitively proved she was not an American Indian with the claim it proved she was. It was a terrible strategy, but I get what she was going for. It was neurotic and moronic, but it was at least a strategy.

Pelosi’s impeachment “strategy” baffles me beyond words, because I see no strategy. In fact, when I close my eyes and attempt to picture Pelosi’s impeachment strategy, I see Brian Stelter giggling as he tries to snatch a pork chop away from a ravenous Rosie O’Donnell. In other words, no strategy, just impulse and appetite that cannot end well.

Forget your biases, your own beliefs, your likes or dislike of those involved, and ask yourself what in the world Pelosi was thinking as I tick through these…


Impeaching the President with No Crime
The questions surrounding Joe Biden’s corruption in Ukraine are not only legitimate, Trump has a responsibility to look into it. Pelosi impeached him for something that was not only not a crime, it wasn’t even unethical.



Impeaching the President for Asking for a Judicial Ruling
Every defendant in the country has the right to go to court to challenge every aspect of the prosecution’s case, from witnesses to search warrants to document requests, and so on… This is the backbone of our legal system. Trump was perfectly within his rights — legally and with regard to historical impeachment precedent — to go to court for a judicial ruling on the issue of subpoenas and documents … and this dizzy broad impeached him for it.

That’s not a strategy. That’s insanity.



There Was No Quid Pro Quo
Even if a quid pro quo was a crime (it’s not), it has been firmly established by 18 witnesses and thousands and thousands of documents that Ukraine did not know Trump had paused the aid package.

If the second party doesn’t know about the carrot, there can be no bribery.

If the second party doesn’t know about the stick, there can be no extortion.

Johnnie Cochran might have put it this way, “If Ukraine didn’t know, there can be no quid pro quo.”



Rushing Impeachment
This is the one that baffles me more than any other.

In the House, Pelosi has total control over the process. She runs the House of Representatives, and as Speaker, she has even more power than the Senate Majority Leader.

Why rush things? Why the hurry to give up a process you have total control over?

Let me back up just a bit…

I don’t think it was good strategy, but I do understand why Pelosi violated Trump’s due process rights and precedent. I get why she refused to allow the president to cross examine witnesses, or to bring on his own witnesses, or face his accuser (the fake whistleblower). She rigged the process so that he had no chance of winning. I get that.

It’s the rushing that I can’t wrap my mind around. It’s the haste to give up a process she controls to hand it over to a Senate that she not only doesn’t control, but that is controlled by a legitimate master strategist, Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

Not that anything would have turned out different as far as Trump’s acquittal, but had Pelosi kept the process in the House, under her control, she could have 1) probably got most if not all the witnesses she wanted, 2) got most if not all of the documents she wanted, 3) left Trump twisting in the wind for months, 4) bought more time for a legitimate bombshell to drop, and 5) handed a respectable impeachment over to the Senate with all the crossed “T’s” and dotted “I’s.”

“Impeaching Donald Trump before Christmas” is not a strategy; it’s a giggling Brian Stelter trying to take that pork chop from Rosie — a baby move, all impulse, no thought. Dumb.



Sitting on the Impeachment Articles for a Month
Pelosi said her strategy in holding on to the impeachment articles for a month was to force McConnell to agree to her terms on the Senate trial, but come on…

Come on, that’s not a strategy, that’s a temper tantrum. Holding your breath while the other side enjoys watching you turn blue, is not a strategy.

Out of one side of this ditzy dame’s mouth, we were told impeachment must be rushed in order to save the country. Then, in the same breath, she holds up impeachment a full month…

You want to know how dumb Nancy Pelosi is…?

She thinks Twitter and CNN are the real world; because that’s where she got this irrational idea from. Holding up the impeachment articles wasn’t a strategy; it was a way to get the elite bubble to cheer her on by giving the extremist animals what they want.

Granted, there’s an argument out there that Pelosi sat on everything hoping against hope (after 18 witnesses and thousands and thousands of documents) that some bombshell would come out and save an impeachment she already knew was doomed, an impeachment that had not even proved there was a quid pro quo, much less a crime.

Okay, but if that was the case, why not wait for the Hail Mary while you’re waiting for the court to rule on those additional witnesses and documents? Stupid.



Demanding the Senate Do What She Refused to Do
You want to know when I knew there would be no witnesses, and therefore no hope of dragging this out to embarrass the president, and therefore absolutely no hope of conviction? Over two weeks ago when Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) publicly complained that the House was asking the Senate to do what the House refused to do: namely, fight Trump in court to gain access to certain witnesses and documents.

“Wait a minute, wait a minute,” Murkowski was saying. “You assholes want us to do all the work you not only refused to do but that the Constitution and over a century of precedent says you’re supposed to do? Sorry, no.”

Had that come from a Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), I wouldn’t have given it a second thought. But this is Lisa Murkowski we’re talking about, one of the top three cucks in the Senate.

Seriously, Nancy, if you’ve lost Murkowski…



Terrible Choice of House Managers
As I tweeted yesterday, an unappreciated fact of the Senate trial was Trump’s astute decision to not use House Managers from the House. Instead of Republican Representatives, instead of politicians as his defense counsel — who would arrive with a ton of baggage and be seen as fire-breathing partisans — Trump brought on a real legal team, a team of brilliant lawyers like Patrick Philbin, Alan Dershowitz, Jay Sekulow, and Ken Starr.

Pelosi chose Laurel & Hardy — Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler.

The contrast was striking: smirking, hyper-partisan politicians up against mature, thoughtful, well-prepared lawyers.

Trump knew his audience, and I’m not just talking about the very few people who watched this farce at home. The Senate likes to see itself as above politics, as superior to the rowdy House. Had Trump brought over the stars of the House trial — Reps. Mark Meadows (R-NC), Jim Jordan (R-OH), Elise Stefanik (R-NY) etc. — that would have been nowhere near as effective as sober, qualified, respected attorneys.​
Lol, no.

All it means is republicans are ok supporting a criminal.

I appreciate you wasting all that space with your useless 2,000 word post though.
You got this!

View attachment 305985
Hope so. May the CEO power rule forever.
You people need to go back to the monarchy where you belong.

The founding fathers must be spining in their graves.
Projection..........
Lol, no.

Stupid of you to even suggest it.
 

San Souci

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2020
Messages
397
Reaction score
75
Points
45
Lol, no.

All it means is republicans are ok supporting a criminal.

I appreciate you wasting all that space with your useless 2,000 word post though.
You got this!

View attachment 305985
Hope so. May the CEO power rule forever.
You people need to go back to the monarchy where you belong.

The founding fathers must be spining in their graves.
Projection..........
Lol, no.

Stupid of you to even suggest it.
CEO's ,inventors ,investors ,and engineers made this country great. Proven fact.
 

San Souci

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2020
Messages
397
Reaction score
75
Points
45


Nancy Pelosi is a genius in her own mind. She calls herself a political genius.....but in fact the only thing she's good at is dreaming up hoaxes. She lies.....she cheats....she stabs people in the back.....she's the most unethical Speaker Of The House in United States history.



John Nolte1 Feb 2020 Nolte: Impeachment Proves Nancy Pelosi Is an Idiot
For more than a decade the media have told us House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is some kind of master strategist. Oh, yes, President Trump has met his match in Madam Pelosi…

Me? Well, I’ve always found her to be something closer to an idiot. But even with my low opinion of her, never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined she would botch this impeachment as badly as she did.

Seriously… wow.

What I mean is, even when a particular strategy is a bad one, it is at least a strategy. You can at least see the strategy in a bad strategy. For example, I understood why John McCain quit his 2008 presidential campaign to go off and try and save the economy. He was hoping to throw the game board over, a game he was losing. It was terrible strategy, laughably terrible, but you could at least see the strategy.

I even understood why Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) released a DNA test that definitively proved she was not an American Indian with the claim it proved she was. It was a terrible strategy, but I get what she was going for. It was neurotic and moronic, but it was at least a strategy.

Pelosi’s impeachment “strategy” baffles me beyond words, because I see no strategy. In fact, when I close my eyes and attempt to picture Pelosi’s impeachment strategy, I see Brian Stelter giggling as he tries to snatch a pork chop away from a ravenous Rosie O’Donnell. In other words, no strategy, just impulse and appetite that cannot end well.

Forget your biases, your own beliefs, your likes or dislike of those involved, and ask yourself what in the world Pelosi was thinking as I tick through these…


Impeaching the President with No Crime
The questions surrounding Joe Biden’s corruption in Ukraine are not only legitimate, Trump has a responsibility to look into it. Pelosi impeached him for something that was not only not a crime, it wasn’t even unethical.



Impeaching the President for Asking for a Judicial Ruling
Every defendant in the country has the right to go to court to challenge every aspect of the prosecution’s case, from witnesses to search warrants to document requests, and so on… This is the backbone of our legal system. Trump was perfectly within his rights — legally and with regard to historical impeachment precedent — to go to court for a judicial ruling on the issue of subpoenas and documents … and this dizzy broad impeached him for it.

That’s not a strategy. That’s insanity.



There Was No Quid Pro Quo
Even if a quid pro quo was a crime (it’s not), it has been firmly established by 18 witnesses and thousands and thousands of documents that Ukraine did not know Trump had paused the aid package.

If the second party doesn’t know about the carrot, there can be no bribery.

If the second party doesn’t know about the stick, there can be no extortion.

Johnnie Cochran might have put it this way, “If Ukraine didn’t know, there can be no quid pro quo.”



Rushing Impeachment
This is the one that baffles me more than any other.

In the House, Pelosi has total control over the process. She runs the House of Representatives, and as Speaker, she has even more power than the Senate Majority Leader.

Why rush things? Why the hurry to give up a process you have total control over?

Let me back up just a bit…

I don’t think it was good strategy, but I do understand why Pelosi violated Trump’s due process rights and precedent. I get why she refused to allow the president to cross examine witnesses, or to bring on his own witnesses, or face his accuser (the fake whistleblower). She rigged the process so that he had no chance of winning. I get that.

It’s the rushing that I can’t wrap my mind around. It’s the haste to give up a process she controls to hand it over to a Senate that she not only doesn’t control, but that is controlled by a legitimate master strategist, Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

Not that anything would have turned out different as far as Trump’s acquittal, but had Pelosi kept the process in the House, under her control, she could have 1) probably got most if not all the witnesses she wanted, 2) got most if not all of the documents she wanted, 3) left Trump twisting in the wind for months, 4) bought more time for a legitimate bombshell to drop, and 5) handed a respectable impeachment over to the Senate with all the crossed “T’s” and dotted “I’s.”

“Impeaching Donald Trump before Christmas” is not a strategy; it’s a giggling Brian Stelter trying to take that pork chop from Rosie — a baby move, all impulse, no thought. Dumb.



Sitting on the Impeachment Articles for a Month
Pelosi said her strategy in holding on to the impeachment articles for a month was to force McConnell to agree to her terms on the Senate trial, but come on…

Come on, that’s not a strategy, that’s a temper tantrum. Holding your breath while the other side enjoys watching you turn blue, is not a strategy.

Out of one side of this ditzy dame’s mouth, we were told impeachment must be rushed in order to save the country. Then, in the same breath, she holds up impeachment a full month…

You want to know how dumb Nancy Pelosi is…?

She thinks Twitter and CNN are the real world; because that’s where she got this irrational idea from. Holding up the impeachment articles wasn’t a strategy; it was a way to get the elite bubble to cheer her on by giving the extremist animals what they want.

Granted, there’s an argument out there that Pelosi sat on everything hoping against hope (after 18 witnesses and thousands and thousands of documents) that some bombshell would come out and save an impeachment she already knew was doomed, an impeachment that had not even proved there was a quid pro quo, much less a crime.

Okay, but if that was the case, why not wait for the Hail Mary while you’re waiting for the court to rule on those additional witnesses and documents? Stupid.



Demanding the Senate Do What She Refused to Do
You want to know when I knew there would be no witnesses, and therefore no hope of dragging this out to embarrass the president, and therefore absolutely no hope of conviction? Over two weeks ago when Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) publicly complained that the House was asking the Senate to do what the House refused to do: namely, fight Trump in court to gain access to certain witnesses and documents.

“Wait a minute, wait a minute,” Murkowski was saying. “You assholes want us to do all the work you not only refused to do but that the Constitution and over a century of precedent says you’re supposed to do? Sorry, no.”

Had that come from a Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), I wouldn’t have given it a second thought. But this is Lisa Murkowski we’re talking about, one of the top three cucks in the Senate.

Seriously, Nancy, if you’ve lost Murkowski…



Terrible Choice of House Managers
As I tweeted yesterday, an unappreciated fact of the Senate trial was Trump’s astute decision to not use House Managers from the House. Instead of Republican Representatives, instead of politicians as his defense counsel — who would arrive with a ton of baggage and be seen as fire-breathing partisans — Trump brought on a real legal team, a team of brilliant lawyers like Patrick Philbin, Alan Dershowitz, Jay Sekulow, and Ken Starr.

Pelosi chose Laurel & Hardy — Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler.

The contrast was striking: smirking, hyper-partisan politicians up against mature, thoughtful, well-prepared lawyers.

Trump knew his audience, and I’m not just talking about the very few people who watched this farce at home. The Senate likes to see itself as above politics, as superior to the rowdy House. Had Trump brought over the stars of the House trial — Reps. Mark Meadows (R-NC), Jim Jordan (R-OH), Elise Stefanik (R-NY) etc. — that would have been nowhere near as effective as sober, qualified, respected attorneys.​
Lol, no.

All it means is republicans are ok supporting a criminal.

I appreciate you wasting all that space with your useless 2,000 word post though.
You got this!

View attachment 305985
So, you aren't a big fan of the Constitution, then?
The Wicked witch of the West sure ain't.
 
OP
mudwhistle

mudwhistle

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
91,775
Reaction score
17,393
Points
2,220
Location
Clarksville, TN...Born in Missoula MT
Lol, no.

All it means is republicans are ok supporting a criminal.

I appreciate you wasting all that space with your useless 2,000 word post though.
You got this!

View attachment 305985
Hope so. May the CEO power rule forever.
You people need to go back to the monarchy where you belong.

The founding fathers must be spining in their graves.
Projection..........
Lol, no.

Stupid of you to even suggest it.
I'm just pointing out the obvious.
You Socialism loving nut-cases have a habit of claiming the founding fathers wanted anything to do with Socialism.

You also have a habit of telling us we support a king when Trump can't do anything without being impeached. What kind of a king is that? Your mind is clearly twisted.

And what's ironic is you idiots supported a POS who even today gets everything he wants, including an Academy Award (Oscar) last Sunday. His wife was also just awarded a friggen Grammy a couple of weeks ago for the spoken word....just like your king Obama was given a Grammy.....and a Nobel Prize for giving a speech.

The hypocrisy of you leftist folks knows no bounds.
 

Crepitus

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
29,593
Reaction score
2,527
Points
290
Hope so. May the CEO power rule forever.
You people need to go back to the monarchy where you belong.

The founding fathers must be spining in their graves.
Projection..........
Lol, no.

Stupid of you to even suggest it.
I'm just pointing out the obvious.
You Socialism loving nut-cases have a habit of claiming the founding fathers wanted anything to do with Socialism.

You also have a habit of telling us we support a king when Trump can't do anything without being impeached. What kind of a king is that? Your mind is clearly twisted.

And what's ironic is you idiots supported a POS who even today gets everything he wants, including an Academy Award (Oscar) last Sunday. His wife was also just awarded a friggen Grammy a couple of weeks ago for the spoken word....just like your king Obama was given a Grammy.....and a Nobel Prize for giving a speech.

The hypocrisy of you leftist folks knows no bounds.
Actually I had no idea about any of that stuff, and couldn't care less about it.

Obama was a good president, maybe even a great president, but not perfect,.and certainly not worthy of worshipping.

That's a republican thing.

So, as I already said, projection.
 
Joined
Feb 12, 2020
Messages
12
Reaction score
5
Points
1
Location
Communist CA
And also baffling considering Joe Biden was the dnc establishments choice. Not only is he a known commodity, easily blackmail-able, and will go with the plan, but he was also the only one capable of peeling away a rural/southern/'flyover' state to their side. Her actions completely destroyed his chances of being President. I imagine she is suffering fallout from her own party's elites for this blunder

I also find her fight with Trump over funding the wall to be foolish. It used to be the President got the blame for the rising debt, but she made it clear to all who holds the purse. Trump had trouble spending even a billion dollars. Meanwhile Trump is renegotiating trade deals, looking into billions of foreign aid going to corrupt countries (such as this), and enacting tariffs; the previously unthinkable act of taxing transnational mega corporations who undercut American companies that have to deal with things like environmental regulations and worker protections.
 

regent

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2012
Messages
10,459
Reaction score
1,116
Points
245
Is Trump now an impeached president and will he go into the history books as one of the impeached presidents?
 

Zorro!

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2019
Messages
7,221
Reaction score
994
Points
245
Is Trump now an impeached president and will he go into the history books as one of the impeached presidents?
This House brought impeachment articles that failed. Just like any other failed indictment that was tested before a Jury and failed.
 

Meister

Diamond Member
Staff member
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
36,920
Reaction score
10,440
Points
1,400
Location
Conservative part of the Northwest
Historians will look back to this era and understand the political games that the dems were playing.
From the Steele Dossier, to the Kavanaugh Hearings, to the Ukrainian impeachment, ending with
Pelosi tearing up the State of the Union speech. Nan' says that Trump has been branded,
well, historians will know that it was Nan' and the dems who were branded, not Trump.
 

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
91,844
Reaction score
25,819
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Historians will look back to this era and understand the political games that the dems were playing.
From the Steele Dossier, to the Kavanaugh Hearings, to the Ukrainian impeachment, ending with
Pelosi tearing up the State of the Union speech. Nan' says that Trump has been branded,
well, historians will know that it was Nan' and the dems who were branded, not Trump.

tis a consummation Devoutly to be wished.

Only if we wrest the education system back from them... otherwise it will be as rare as honest appraisals of Franklin Roosevelt.
 

Meister

Diamond Member
Staff member
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
36,920
Reaction score
10,440
Points
1,400
Location
Conservative part of the Northwest
Historians will look back to this era and understand the political games that the dems were playing.
From the Steele Dossier, to the Kavanaugh Hearings, to the Ukrainian impeachment, ending with
Pelosi tearing up the State of the Union speech. Nan' says that Trump has been branded,
well, historians will know that it was Nan' and the dems who were branded, not Trump.

tis a consummation Devoutly to be wished.

Only if we wrest the education system back from them... otherwise it will be as rare as honest appraisals of Franklin Roosevelt.
Sadly, true, PC. It's why I keep praying that wisdom and common sense will prevail.
 

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
91,844
Reaction score
25,819
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Historians will look back to this era and understand the political games that the dems were playing.
From the Steele Dossier, to the Kavanaugh Hearings, to the Ukrainian impeachment, ending with
Pelosi tearing up the State of the Union speech. Nan' says that Trump has been branded,
well, historians will know that it was Nan' and the dems who were branded, not Trump.

tis a consummation Devoutly to be wished.

Only if we wrest the education system back from them... otherwise it will be as rare as honest appraisals of Franklin Roosevelt.
Sadly, true, PC. It's why I keep praying that wisdom and common sense will prevail.

From your keyboard to God's in-box.....
 

regent

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2012
Messages
10,459
Reaction score
1,116
Points
245
Historians will look back to this era and understand the political games that the dems were playing.
From the Steele Dossier, to the Kavanaugh Hearings, to the Ukrainian impeachment, ending with
Pelosi tearing up the State of the Union speech. Nan' says that Trump has been branded,
well, historians will know that it was Nan' and the dems who were branded, not Trump.

tis a consummation Devoutly to be wished.

Only if we wrest the education system back from them... otherwise it will be as rare as honest appraisals of Franklin Roosevelt.
So has any American president been impeached? If so, which ones?
 

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
91,844
Reaction score
25,819
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Historians will look back to this era and understand the political games that the dems were playing.
From the Steele Dossier, to the Kavanaugh Hearings, to the Ukrainian impeachment, ending with
Pelosi tearing up the State of the Union speech. Nan' says that Trump has been branded,
well, historians will know that it was Nan' and the dems who were branded, not Trump.

tis a consummation Devoutly to be wished.

Only if we wrest the education system back from them... otherwise it will be as rare as honest appraisals of Franklin Roosevelt.
So has any American president been impeached? If so, which ones?
Now focus like a laser:

What does your query have to do with the post you linked to?
 

regent

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2012
Messages
10,459
Reaction score
1,116
Points
245
Historians will look back to this era and understand the political games that the dems were playing.
From the Steele Dossier, to the Kavanaugh Hearings, to the Ukrainian impeachment, ending with
Pelosi tearing up the State of the Union speech. Nan' says that Trump has been branded,
well, historians will know that it was Nan' and the dems who were branded, not Trump.

tis a consummation Devoutly to be wished.

Only if we wrest the education system back from them... otherwise it will be as rare as honest appraisals of Franklin Roosevelt.
So has any American president been impeached? If so, which ones?
Now focus like a laser:

What does your query have to do with the post you linked to?
Will Trump forever be known as an impeached president?
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Top