I mean, I'm just saying other peoples opinions should be respected when discussing politics.  Even if you disagree.

I can provide plenty of facts though, if that's what you're interested in.

For example:

- I didn't say what you just quoted me as saying.

- The House said they sent subpoenas to Rudy and Pompeo before Oct 31st.

- The current month is November.

- Rudy and Pompeo confirmed they received the subpoenas.

- Trump was elected president over 3 years ago.

- The 2020 Summer Olympics will be in Tokyo.

- Roger Stone, Michael Cohen, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Michael Flynn, Papadopolous are all convicted felons.

- Hillary has no criminal record - not even an indictment (!)



^^^Theses are all facts....right?

It's pretty clear they are primarily trying to impeach him for abusing his power to influence the election.  Are you really only paying attention to media sources that point out why he shouldn't be impeached?

They will probably tack on a couple obstruction articles for ordering everyone he can to not cooperate and also attacking the witness on twitter last week mid-testimony.  

If you aren't interested in other people words, opinions, and assumptions the P&S forum is a waste of your time.

edit: unless you're just here to troll

No. 

I think FiveThirtyEight does of pretty good job of building models based on all the major poll results over time and explaining how the models work.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/impeachment-polls/?ex_cid=rrpromo

Should the Impeachment Inquiry Proceed:


Should Trump Be Impeached or Impeached and Removed from Office:


General Support of Impeachment

Just want to point out that the Mueller investigation was not all about Trump, despite Trump making it seem like it was.  The investigation concluded that Russia did in fact interfere with the 2016 election.  They also figured out how they did it, which will help to defend against it in the future.

Also, as of last week, 6 Americans directly involved with the Trump campaign are convicted felons for things like failing to register as a foreign agent and lying to congress about Trumps business deals in Russia.  Many of these guys were also convicted of Bank/Tax fraud which resulted in the overall investigation being profitable for the federal government.  This will discourage future campaigns from doing illegal things, or hiring people that do illegal, which is a good thing for the country as a whole.

Just sayin.

^

Lol, that whole things started on World News Daily Report, a satirical fake news site.

Be less gullible.

One of Taylors aids got deposed today, the guy that told Taylor he overheard a phone call between Trump and Sonland at a restaurant in Ukraine. They talked about how Trump "doesn't give a shit about Ukraine", cares a lot about the Biden investigation, president of Ukraine "loves your ass" (Trumps), Sweden should've let A$AP Rocky out because Trump told them to but at least Kim Kardashian will be happy he tried...lol

Here's his opening statement

I feel like the guy is likely telling the truth, and there were 2 other people at the lunch that might be deposed also, but the whole "I over heard him on the phone thing" is just such an easy target for the GOP I suspect they will probably pass on grilling him publicly.

Sonland is one of the witnesses the Republicans requested and scheduled to testifies next week. He's already had to change his testimony from "there was no quid pro quo" to "oh, now I remember, there was some quid pro quo" after every other witness' testimony was in direct conflict with his.

---

Ok.  I won't assume you are defending Trump anymore unless you say so explicitly, sorry.  There wasn't any sort of bad faith argument on my part though, the "descriptive phrases" you used are also being used to argue why Trump shouldn't be impeached, and this is a thread about the Impeachment hearings, so I think my assumption that you were presenting a defense was reasonable.  

Not just longest running on Bitcointalk, it's the longest running flat earth thread on the internet.  At least according to this site: https://www.brandwatch.com/blog/a-year-on-flat-earth/

If notbatman is a troll, he's a world class, gold medal, brilliant expert in the art of trolling.

I think he's probably just an idiot though.




Oh look who made #1!

Actually the words of others are absolutely a 'standard of evidence'.  In fact, believe it or not, subpoenas are often used to get people to say words that are then used to as evidence.  It's true that people talk about lots of things that don't exist, so you should consider the credibility of the person speaking as well as what they are saying.

If, for example, the Secretary of State says he received a subpoena, and he had no motive to lie about receiving that subpoena, then it should definitely be taken into consideration when considering whether or not the subpoena actually exists. 

Considering all available evidence, I think it's very reasonable to assume that the democrats filled out the official subpoena forms and included them with all of the subpoena letters they sent out in regards to the impeachment inquiry, even before October 31.

I understand that the only evidence that you are willing to consider is whether or not you are able to see a picture of the actual subpoena, and think it's reasonable to assume that the democrats didn't fill out the official subpoena forms and include them with the subpoena letters.

Didn't mean to mis-represent.  I don't think the fact that the Democrats are sore losers is a valid defense either.  Or the fact that the media suggested Obama was looking and acting king-like.  Neither of these things have anything to do with whether or not Trump did what he is being accused, and if he did, whether or not they are impeachable offenses.  I feel like saying bad things about Democrats, past or presently in office is a bit of a cop out when it comes to discussing the impeachment hearings.  I'd feel the same way if someone tried to bring up Stormy Daniels or his Bankrupt Casinos when trying to argue that Trump should be impeached.




I agree, the Republicans seem to be trying to make it look like the Democrats are arguing things that they're not.  

Democrats: The President had every right to fire the ambassador.
Ambassador:  I served at the pleasure of the president, he had the right to fire me at any time.
Republicans: They're trying to impeach the president for firing the Ambassador, he's allowed to do that!!!

(yes I'm paraphrasing here)

What that woman went through was pretty fucked up though.

Little ironic today, while Trump was attacking the witness on Twitter today, Roger Stone got convicted for witness tampering (and 6 other felonies).

American Astronaut  Shares video of entire orbit of globe shaped earth from space !!!! -- https://twitter.com/i/status/913079786066526209

If all 50-100 were newbies with 0 or almost 0 post history, probably.

If many of the 50-100 were users with a history on the forum, I don't think it would be fair to tag them all.


One of their history consists of a single post in 2017 in a Betking thread.


Are any of them you?

At what point in your life did you decide that the earth was flat?  Just curious.

On break for Day 2 of hearings.  I wasn't able to watch it from the beginning, but Trump is having a bit of a melt down on Twitter, attacking Marie Yovanovitch mid testimony.





I don't think "Party A is better than Party B" is a valid argument, or even relevant, when it comes to whether or not a president should be impeached.  

I can't find them.  I've only found 8 congressional subpoenas in total from the past 7 years.
 
Show me where there are hundreds of other congressional subpoenas (ballerinas  ).