Predisent Donald J. Skroob: Episode X: Purple Raining to Impeachment

[Zealot]

Not to mention that impeachment isn't even a legal proceeding.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[guartz]

No I mean I feel bad because the topic about banning you has come up repeatedly today and I would never be for it except that you just came in and are bringing up the Mueller report again despite it being exhaustively laid out how bad a result the report was for Trump so at this point you're either remaining aggressively ignorant or just seeing what you can say to get a reaction. Either way, changes my opinion greatly.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

toe the line or get banned, got it chief. Thanks for the warning.

[Zealot]

Bzzt, wrong.

Stand up for your side in a way that's not clearly just trying to elicit a reaction.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Zealot]

You know what? I said that twice, three different times now, and you're responding by saying the same thing you always do, so really that's just further evidence toward my point.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[guartz]

Now I'm officially a democrat socialist, I've bookmarked CNN and Democray Now! (pls no ban) look at this amazing beautiful intelligent woman reminding us that really, it was Trump who started with the quid quo pro and we as socialist democrats shouldn't focus on proving quid quo pro but focusing on the fact that trump is just guilty. Hail Bernie comrades.

[guartz]

Bzzt, wrong.

Stand up for your side in a way that's not clearly just trying to elicit a reaction.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Bzzt, half the country believes the things I do. If that elicits a reaction from you, YOU are the problem.

edit: no that's not fair, you can react any way you want I don't mind.

[Zealot]

Incorrect on both counts.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Zealot]

Also doesn't address what I said at all. "Gosh I feel sorry for you guys, letting Democrats lead you around by the nose! Mueller report!"

Then again not all of us are reading your alternative news sources.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Zealot]

Also while it's close, there are more Americans who favor impeachment than not (48.5% to 45.6%), and while 52% don't approve of the handling of the inquiry that doesn't exactly speak to why they don't approve.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Mrbeansman]

Lol thinking the republicans having any power is because their represent half the country and not because the way the maps are drawn gives them an unfair advantage.

[guartz]

Zealot you ever read "Ordinary Men" by Browning?

[guartz]

Lol thinking the republicans having any power is because their represent half the country and not because the way the maps are drawn gives them an unfair advantage.

Also imagine thinking CIA has your best interest at heart.

[guartz]

Better yet, imagine thinking CIA was telling the truth.

[Zealot]

Oh Jesus please do explain the relevance of Ordinary Men in this context.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Zealot]

Better yet, imagine thinking CIA was telling the truth.

I'm assuming this is about the whistleblower who many think is a CIA agent? So your contention is that everyone who's testified since then corroborating what the whistleblower said is also lying because the whistleblower is CIA?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Xno Kappa]

Lol thinking the republicans having any power is because their represent half the country and not because the way the maps are drawn gives them an unfair advantage.

Is this the part where liberals pretend to know what’s better for the lowly common folk who are too stupid for their own good?

That is, of course, until it affects them directly.

[guartz]

Oh Jesus please do explain the relevance of Ordinary Men in this context.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Well, we are accusing each other of being unwitting pawns to villains. I just wondered if you ever read it. I had while back, the lesson stuck with me, keeps creeping up even in ordinary day to day interactions just wonder if that book that to you as well.

[guartz]

I'm assuming this is about the whistleblower who many think is a CIA agent? So your contention is that everyone who's testified since then corroborating what the whistleblower said is also lying because the whistleblower is CIA?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Think more broadly with historical context.

[Zealot]

No, I absolutely refuse, because what you're trying to connect has absolutely nothing to do with what's happening. You're living in fantasy where you think if you can extrapolate enough from speculation you can deny reality.

At this point it could come out that the whistleblower is Lying McLyerson, Liar for Hire for the Government Department of Lies, and it wouldn't matter because we're well past the point where the whistleblower has any bearing on anything.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Zealot]

https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/...chment-hearing

This sums things up pretty well.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk