Impugn, impeach and repeat
The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Wildear
Retriever Coach
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Impugn, impeach and repeat

  1. #1
    Senior Member swampcollielover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    3,807

    Default Impugn, impeach and repeat

    This short editorial from the Times, summarizes current state in the 'Swamp" pretty well...

    Impugn, impeach and repeat

    By THE WASHINGTON TIMES. 10/23/19
    If there are two sides to every story, they both deserve to be heard. In the epic tale of foreign influence in the 2016 presidential election, the narrative about Russia helping Donald Trump was exhaustively probed and ultimately debunked. As Americans gape at Democrats' current efforts to impugn and impeach President Trump, they should be mindful that the gathering political storm represents the party's desperate efforts to suppress the other side of the story — that it was Hillary Clinton's campaign, together with Obama administration officials, who conspired with foreign governments to steal the election.

    The Truth Will Set Us Free!

  2. Remove Advertisements
    RetrieverTraining.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Senior Member blind ambition's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Vancouver CANADA
    Posts
    2,106

    Default

    Editorials are interesting but they aren't always factual.
    Wasn't it Obama who refused to go public with the Steele dossier ahead of the election because he felt he would be showing bias?
    Wasn't it HRC's presidential hopes which were dashed by FBI head James Comey twice during the campaign the last being on the very eve of the election?
    Wasn't the Mueller Report clear that there had been Russian interference in the US Presidential election and that the interference favoured the Trump campaign and that the there were links between Trump campaign officials and people with ties to the Russian government but that false testimony, and encrypted documents could not provide conclusive proof needed for a recommendation of impeachment?
    Under a Republican President with initial GOP control of the House and Senate there has been nothing factual supporting the claim that either the Democratic Party, HRC campaign or the Obama WH did anything to "conspire with foreign governments to steal the election"....nothing.

    You are correct SCL'r the truth will set you free... but it's really going to hurt you.
    My concurrence is so vigorous that elucidation becomes a challenge I must now, in the interest of time, shrink from.

    Roseberry



  4. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Halls, Tn.
    Posts
    4,032

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blind ambition View Post
    Editorials are interesting but they aren't always factual.
    Wasn't it Obama who refused to go public with the Steele dossier ahead of the election because he felt he would be showing bias?
    Wasn't it HRC's presidential hopes which were dashed by FBI head James Comey twice during the campaign the last being on the very eve of the election?
    Wasn't the Mueller Report clear that there had been Russian interference in the US Presidential election and that the interference favoured the Trump campaign and that the there were links between Trump campaign officials and people with ties to the Russian government but that false testimony, and encrypted documents could not provide conclusive proof needed for a recommendation of impeachment?
    Under a Republican President with initial GOP control of the House and Senate there has been nothing factual supporting the claim that either the Democratic Party, HRC campaign or the Obama WH did anything to "conspire with foreign governments to steal the election"....nothing.

    You are correct SCL'r the truth will set you free... but it's really going to hurt you.
    Oh really??? Did you not hear HRC state that she had talked to MULTIPLE foreign governments that stated that they were concerned that Trump was mentally unstable and they were worried that he might start a nuclear war if elected?? I have no idea if she was simply lying or that she actually talked to foreign governments but it does seem to me that regardless, this was an attempt to affect the election.

  5. Remove Advertisements
    RetrieverTraining.net
    Advertisements
     

  6. #4
    Senior Member blind ambition's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Vancouver CANADA
    Posts
    2,106

    Default

    I see it in no worse light than chants of “Crooked Hillary, lock her up”. I expect a good Secretary of State to know the sentiments of foreign leaders and to know that inducing them to dig up dirt on ones domestic rivals is wrong.

    Would you care to offer an opinion on the other rebuttal points proffered by me in reply to SCL’r?
    My concurrence is so vigorous that elucidation becomes a challenge I must now, in the interest of time, shrink from.

    Roseberry



  7. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Halls, Tn.
    Posts
    4,032

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blind ambition View Post
    I see it in no worse light than chants of “Crooked Hillary, lock her up”. I expect a good Secretary of State to know the sentiments of foreign leaders and to know that inducing them to dig up dirt on ones domestic rivals is wrong.

    Would you care to offer an opinion on the other rebuttal points proffered by me in reply to SCL’r?
    Let's get this statement straight first. HRC was a PRIVATE CITIZEN, nominated by the Democrat Party for President, just as Trump was also a private citizen, nominated by the Republican Party, when she made that statement. When HRC was Seceretary of State, Trump wasn't even RUNNING for the nomination of the Republican party, so no way would Trump even be a discussion concerning him being President.

    Your claim that she would know the sentiments of foreign countries concerning Trump is total nonsense and atently false.

  8. #6
    Senior Member swampcollielover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    3,807

    Default

    [QUOTE=blind ambition;2180242]Editorials are interesting but they aren't always factual.

    Quote Originally Posted by blind ambition View Post
    Editorials are interesting but they aren't always factual.
    Quote Originally Posted by blind ambition View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by blind ambition View Post
    BA you are "stating the obvious" here! That is exactly why I identified it as an editorial and also provided where this could be found if anyone wanted to read more! I FREQUENTLY post sources so that some credibility can be demonstrated. In that way others will know that these comments are not off the top of my head. UNLIKE MOST ALL LIBERAL LEANING PARTICIPANTS on this website! You all know who you are!

    You are correct SCL'r the truth will set you free... but it's really going to hurt you.


    That remains to be seen! I wouldn't 'count your chickens before they hatch' if I were you...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •