Is this finally The impeachable crime?

Post Reply New Topic

http://huffp.st/tCTTmDe

It's already been debunked by Mueller's office itself as 'fake news' as they say....it got a lot of hearts pounding though! I look at Huffpo a lot. Check it again now...

Not debunked, they didn't say "This entire report is false" which they easily could have said. What they said was they take issue with the "characterization" of certain documents and witnesses mentioned in the article. Buzzfeed has responded asking them specifically what Mueller's team are taking issue with. I don't know if Mueller has responded yet with more specifics.

Yep. Just saw & read this: https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/18/politics ... index.html

Soon.. we still don't know - but it certainly hasn't been debunked as fake news.

I'm watching Lawrence O'Donnell now to follow the story.

If there was any validity to impeachment claims so far, he would have been impeached numerous times already.

Exaggerating the contents of a federal inquiry damages the integrity of the case in public opinion.

This will just drag out the investigation so this can be corroborated outside the public eye.

They literally couldn't move to impeach before the midterm elections because the republicans were not going to allow any movement for impeachment to be passed. I think you're being disingenuous because you must have heard that before now if you follow the news at all. I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing, because you constantly claim anything "liberal" is based in hysteria--that's the only explanation I can see for you making such an easily disprovable claim here.

the only thing that will get that fascist tyrant out of office, is being caught in bed with a dead boy. IOW a coffin will be the only thing which facilitates that SOB's exit unless amuuuricans WAKE THE PHUQ UP en masse and DEMAND IN UNISON something decent.

Well sleaze was proven to be impeachable so I'm not so terribly concerned.

It's an easily disprovable "opinion", that's why I think you're being disingenuous. Why say something (opinion, claim, whatever you want to call it) you know is easily proven false unless you have some kind of agenda? Also I'm not sure where you got "worked up" from my comment. I used no caps or exclamation points or emojis. I just made a simple statement that what you said was false, he couldn't have been impeached before the election in November because before then there weren't enough democrats to pass a motion to impeach, and stating otherwise when the truth is so evident just makes it look like you're the one arguing from emotion or from some agenda.

Why do you always claim anyone who expresses any kind of "liberal" view is excessively emotional or hysterical? This all gives the impression of an agenda, like I said. That's not a legitimate way to debate ideas, to just say anything you don't like is coming from someone who's hysterical.

EDIT: spelling.

You post pages of partisan rationalization. I wouldn't call a paragraph a molehill next to that.

This is rather rude and uncivil, but it doesn't go without noting that you never answered any of my questions. It's telling. I think it best that we not speak to each other if you can't be civil and refuse to answer simple questions about something you post (the whole point of this forum is discussion, eh?)

I understand your tactics now.

This is ridiculous sensationalisation. Mueller has now come out and said it's "not accurate." In other words, there is no smoking gun here.

This investigation has been going on for nearly two years and hasn't found any collusion between Trump and Russia. All they've managed to do is convict people for financial crimes and some campaign finance laws. For the latter, there is no evidence that Trump committed a crime. All they have is the claim of a now-convicted felon.

I doubt the near daily talk, since before he was even sworn in, about him getting impeached and or indicted will ever slow down. It will continue be headline news.

I think it best that we not speak to each other