Politics

Out of context: Reply #31207

  • Started
  • Last post
  • 33,784 Responses
  • whatthefunk6

    In response to Moscow Mitch and all other MAGAts and their bad faith arguments regarding due process and impeachment I submit this:

    https://www.politifact.com/truth…

    2015: Republicans change rules in the House so they can subpoena Obama admin officials w/o involving the House minority.
    2019: Democrats subpoena Trump officials using the precedent set in 2015 by Republicans.

    *Dems use impeachment, a process clearly outlined and enshrined in the Constitution to try and remove a POTUS that has broken the law and who is unfit for office*

    Republicans: “That’s not fair, where’s the due process, this is a coup!”



    Who believes this bad faith selective pearl-clutching MAGAt GOP horseshit - oh that's right, the wool over eyes blind sheep low information single issue constituents of red districts who continually vote against their own interests...jfc

    • <---- Yupmathinc
    • You're talking about overturning 60M+ votes... The Uni Prof has his head up his ass if he thinks he's making an apples / apples comparison.PonyBoy
    • Those house rules changes in 2015 had nothing to do w/the anything like impeachment. If you wish to be 'fair' then provide the same...PonyBoy
    • ... rules / access that both Clinton and Nixon had to both witnesses / info etc. Schiff controls the witnesses / the questions... all access.PonyBoy
    • The new 'rules' just released and that will be voted on tomorrow and nothing more than what they've been doing - they're just putting it in writing.PonyBoy
    • *ARE nothing morePonyBoy
    • Are you arguing that impeachment inquiries are not warranted or proceeding constitutionally?monospaced
    • huh? Did you even read what I wrote? Impeach till your heart's content... just be fucking fair to both sides.PonyBoy
    • I did. It was a question.monospaced
    • PB, you realize this is just the info gathering stage? You get that part, right? Before you put a criminal on trial.. you interview witnesses.mathinc
    • These aren’t proceedings. The process hasn’t even begun.monospaced
    • @Pony Did you even read the post? It spells it out quite clearly, and cites a law professor for the Cato Institute ffs.garbage
    • So please spare us this "librals deep state" and "both sides" bullshit. Your sugar might be low, have a juice box.garbage
    • yes, garbage... your post (as does the Prof) forgets that you're pushing to overturn a duly 'lected Preezy in which you'll be shitting on 60M+ Americans.PonyBoy
    • And this juice box I'm drinking is apple-flavored... whereas I bet your Milk is chocolate... comparing the two doesn't make much sense...PonyBoy
    • ... other than they're both wet.PonyBoy
    • and lol @ your attempt to turn this into more than a fairness issue w/your 'libral derp state' comment. Perhaps you should get that juice box, son.PonyBoy
    • Adam Schiff controls every move any Pubby makes during these closed hearings... right down to controlling the Q's of members and A's of witnesses.PonyBoy
    • It is unfair to say the least... but you go ahead and try and tie this to something silly and conspiratorial to clear your conscience I guess. :)PonyBoy
    • PB, did 60M+ Americans vote to have the president shit on the constitution? Probably not.FNP14
    • Maybe they voted to have him shit on poor people, but certainly not the constitution.FNP14
    • I'm curious though... you're quoting the right, garbage w/this 'deep state' stuff. Will you accept Michael Horowitz's report when released?PonyBoy
    • When did he shit on the constitution, FNP? When he asked another country to investigate their and our country's involvement in fucking w/our election?PonyBoy
    • That's not shitting on the constitution... that's doing his job. You might not like the information about come out in the Horowitz report either I'm guessing.PonyBoy
    • Now... I'm walking away from this thread until that report hits cuz we all lack a ton of info right now... nobody knows the truth here yet.PonyBoy
    • I counted 4:
      1. ‘fair’
      2. fucking fair
      3. fairness issue
      4. unfair
      Lol, love the selective unbiasedness of MAGA! Wow, struck a nerve, huh...
      whatthefunk
    • All that shows is I got my point across... if you want to attach me to an entity you obviously hate, wtfunk— then cuddle-up in that security blanket, friend. :)PonyBoy
    • Since you're showing you've obviously picked your reality w/out all the info... will you accept the Horowitz findings, wtfunk?PonyBoy
    • fuck... I said I was stepping awayPonyBoy
    • Actually, it simply proves the point I made in the post. This is anything but secure, the fundamental principles of our democracy are at stake.whatthefunk
    • And MAGA doth protest WAY TOO MUCH!
      If [Strawman argument],
      Then why isn’t [Red Herring]?

      Could it be that
 [Non-Sequitur]?
      Same ol' circular nonsense I fear.
      whatthefunk
    • And let's be crystal clear. Impeachment is separate from removal from office, shouldn't conflate the two. First things first.whatthefunk
    • Gotta say tho, it's telling ur first comment is "overturning 60M+ votes" like u fear a removal vote is forthcoming if impeached ¯\_(ツ)_/¯whatthefunk
    • @whatthefunk Yeah, I didn't bother to respond to PB because he doesn't understand this on a very basic level. Let him eat at the kid's table.garbage
    • It is basic... silly unfair practices that don't equate to that of Clinton, Nixon or Johnson for that matter just go to show what clowns Dems have become...PonyBoy
    • ... the fact they have to have this much control should show you how full of shit they are.PonyBoy
    • The levels of projection by PB here are.... oooof!! Intense. I don’t know how anyone can be that oblivious.scruffics
    • okan. im calling bullshit.who and the fuck Cipollene and specifically regarding gender specifics... actually the whole post is devoid of of a coherent reason
      ********
    • i bet you cant even state any arguemnt you were trying to make. reason and logic is to make a angle and support it no tblindliy linking shit together
      ********
    • another reason i think you are a fuckin flesh light
      ********
    • I can explain it to you but I can’t understand it for you as well.
      #Thoughts&Prayers
      whatthefunk
    • I'll try, speaking in deathboy's native tongue:garbage
    • im how why the perception.of you dont get how im because try to be choherent? if not u have obviosly proved otherwise and now your not ....garbage
    • in theend control is youre own illusion and why you cant admit is is ecause how i what get where you dont make what sense in the first place???garbage
    • ponybyo is right haha but how are we ever toreally know and that is the fact what.you cant admit the source of the porblem is the problme itselfgarbage
    • if we talk about perception then ill intuition it for my why. its served me pretty fuckin well ur such a sex toygarbage
    • be aaa hahahaha. ... did he throw in some gender diarrhea too? the gibberish!monospaced
    • the gender was directly related to the Cipollene... the quote is gender specific, begs to question exactly the context of said quote.
      ********
    • the random slapment of quotes with no context than citing one sided points... which are obviously slighted because they are so obviously partisan. perhaps what
      ********
    • you want to source your first 2015 rep point after teh copy pasta of random out of context quotes?
      ********
    • and what do you think about the change on whistleblower testimony rbefore this? And why are soem whistle blowers protected and others questionable to dronings?
      ********
    • why there is.no ivestigation into the obvious droning of genders is whatthe real question that nobody hasthe guts to ask? if u hadits right in front of your eyegarbage
    • I mean, I tried.garbage
    • garbage .. maybe my fault for trolling shit. I explained the gender quite clearly, but dont want ti writ eto many notes so hoped involved mroe informed and
      ********
    • know my reference. the drone reference is to hillary clinton asking to drone julian assange as as whistleblower by what seems to be an anon source. snopes says
      ********
    • unproven... the hypocrisy in whistleblowing, anon sources and the like is being completely treated differently. Who daraws the legal lines? fair questions to
      ********
    • ask on all fronts. ill end with a good word for you game though. fucknuggets
      ********

View thread