Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, November 19, 2019

In between public impeachment hearings, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell outlined what would happen when the impeachment process reaches the Senate. McConnell said he did not believe there would be enough votes to remove President Trump from office.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

No matter what Trump has done there would never be enough to convict, does McConnell think we don't know what a complete hack he is. Trump is his owner.

#1 | Posted by danni at 2019-11-19 03:46 PM | Reply

No matter what Trump has done there would never be enough to convict,

FACT

#2 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-11-19 03:54 PM | Reply

There's plenty to convict on it's just that Republicans NEVER hold theirs accountable for anything.

#3 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-11-19 03:54 PM | Reply

McConnell said he did not believe there would be enough votes to remove President Trump from office.

Posted by boaz at 03:34

Probably not. No one sees the GOP as patriots. But, you know, Trump has that certain magic. There's more and more dirt spilled on him every day. One can imagine a story so weird and execrable that everyone will take this handy chance to see him gone.

#4 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-19 03:55 PM | Reply

McConnell said he did not believe there would be enough votes to remove President Trump from office.

Posted by boaz at 03:34

But on a certain level it doesn't matter. Trump's behavior and crimes need to be documented. Future generations might wish to learn from our mistakes. Current generations may wish to take it all into account in November of next year.

#5 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-19 03:57 PM | Reply

My concern is that this dog and pony show will have the opposite affect on the public than what the democrats expect. If this backfires, and they do not deliver an impeachment, they will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2020.

#6 | Posted by Daniel at 2019-11-19 03:58 PM | Reply

they will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2020.

The democrats were in a position of victory? When?

You're fooling yourself if you think these impeachment hearings will do anything.

Those who hate him will continue to hate him and those who blindly support him will continue to blindly support him.

Plus. This will die in the senate.

#7 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-11-19 04:18 PM | Reply

@#2 ... No matter what Trump has done there would never be enough to convict,

FACT ... ,

It sure is a shame for the rule of law in this Country when no matter what someone does, a conviction will not result.

#8 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-11-19 04:26 PM | Reply

It sure is a shame for the rule of law in this Country when no matter what someone does, a conviction will not result.

Thanks Republican Party!

#9 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-11-19 04:49 PM | Reply

It's depressing how easily corruptible republicans are.

#10 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-11-19 04:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

My concern is that this dog and pony show will have the opposite affect on the public than what the democrats expect. If this backfires, and they do not deliver an impeachment, they will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2020.

#6 | Posted by Daniel at 2019

Dog and pony show? OK.

An impeachment will be delivered. Any educated person know that the chance of conviction is unlikely. Perceptible, but unlikely.

"Backfires"? Sorry, I don't see any massive up-swelling of sympathy or support for Trump if he is cut lose in the Senate. Donald Trump is held in contempt by most Americans. I guess he could charge into a burning home and save a four year old and her kitten to change that, but I don't really see that happening.

#11 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-19 05:27 PM | Reply

"My concern is that this dog and pony show will have the opposite affect on the public than what the democrats expect. If this backfires, and they do not deliver an impeachment, they will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2020."

Oh. I bet you are soooo "concerned".

Trumps reputation will be destroyed By this impeachment. Do you really think America will still want that worthless POS after the dems are thru skewering him?

Donald Trump is no Bill Clinton my friend.

And his crime is way worse than lying about -------- with a consenting adult.

But you keep believing that if it makes you feel better and it gets you thru the night!

#12 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-11-19 07:07 PM | Reply

This is great news
{house is on fire}

- booazi

#13 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-11-19 07:27 PM | Reply

The biggest problem for conviction is that the very worst thing he has done, his collusion with Putin, there is no paperwork or phone call evidence. But that suits Moscow Mitch just fine because he is just as bad of a traitor.

#14 | Posted by grumpy_too at 2019-11-19 10:46 PM | Reply

My concern is that this dog and pony show will have the opposite affect on the public than what the democrats expect. If this backfires, and they do not deliver an impeachment, they will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2020.

#6 | POSTED BY comrade DANIEL
Lots of ignorant wishful thinking in your post there Skippy.
Your Orange Fuhrer will be removed from office by either impeachment, the 25th amendment of the constitution, or the American people via the voting both.

If your fellow traitor (R)tards in Congress want to go down with the Trumptanic, so be it.
What are you going to do when your favorite political party loses the senate and most of the key players for your team lose their elections as well?

#15 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-11-19 11:20 PM | Reply

The biggest problem for conviction is that the very worst thing he has done, his collusion with Putin, there is no paperwork or phone call evidence.

IKR

-Robert Mueller

"We did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple efforts from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign."

#16 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-11-19 11:30 PM | Reply

I think a formal introduction of articles of impeachment is at most 50/50, based upon what has come out so far. I think the likelihood of a formal vote is 25/75 and an actual referral fo the Senate is 10/90. This is all based upon what has transpired thus far.

#17 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-19 11:35 PM | Reply

Why?

You don't think what's been revealed is bad enough?

Or are you playing the "it's hearsay" BS game?

#18 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-20 12:00 AM | Reply

#18

JPW's narrative that he has been told to believe is crumbling around him and he is ANGRY!!!

#19 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-11-20 12:04 AM | Reply

How exactly has it been crumbling?

Other than Repub word games and simple ignoring uncomfortable realities I see nothing I need to worry about.

Well, except Republicans being corrupt, party before country POSes.

#20 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-20 12:10 AM | Reply

*chirp chirp*

#21 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-20 12:32 AM | Reply

Right-o, I knew what Mueller had said, "we did not *find* (any evidence)... The virtual parenthetical qualifier is hovering there for those not wearing orange goggles.

Due to Putin's impeccable tradecraft the evidence is not available but that does not mean collusion did not happen, and it is still taking place on a daily basis. This is the unfortunate reality which all his actions related to Russia demonstrate. But you don't care.

Treason is what he deserves the most to be convicted for. It is damnable that the Senate will be allowed to pretend this is not the matter in question.

#22 | Posted by grumpy_too at 2019-11-20 01:23 AM | Reply

... Republicans NEVER hold theirs accountable for anything.

Before your birth date so it "NEVER" happens? Ridiculous hyperbole.

"... a Republican delegation led by Barry Goldwater told Richard Nixon he had lost almost all his remaining support in Congress. The next day, he resigned." www.csmonitor.com

Sage advice from a mentor, "Never assume. Never say never."

#23 | Posted by et_al at 2019-11-20 01:29 AM | Reply

ZED @ #5

"But on a certain level it doesn't matter. Trump's behavior and crimes need to be documented. Future generations might wish to learn from our mistakes. Current generations may wish to take it all into account in November of next year.

I think you just hit on "Plan A."

#24 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-11-20 03:25 AM | Reply

JPW,

The public opinion on impeachment has barely moved since the Ukraine story broke.

So far, with these public hearings, nothing new is coming out.

Too many vulnerable House Dems in blue districts.

It's one thing to hold these show trials - this looks more like political campaigning than a serious inquiry - it's quite another to introduce articles of impeachment based on this and force a vote.

Who knows? Maybe Schiff has something that is nuclear. I'm not seeing it so far though.

#25 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 07:28 AM | Reply

McConnell is who all the Republicans posting here or voting in this nation want to be. He is you. You are McConnell, without you he could not undermine democracy so easily. You all own McConnell and he owns you. When you look in the mirror you should see McConnell because he is you. Own it.

#26 | Posted by danni at 2019-11-20 08:30 AM | Reply

"Who knows? Maybe Schiff has something that is nuclear. I'm not seeing it so far though."

Because you have voluntary blindness. They have already provided proof, including Trump's own release of the fake transcript. He did withhold the military aid in order to force Zelensky to order an investigation of the Bidens. You can pretend they haven''t provided enough evidence but to do so you have to lie to yourself and you don't fool anyone. Y'all lose all right to ever call out a Democratic President no matter what he/she does because you won't apply the same standards to Republicans. Hypocrites not deserving of any respect.

#27 | Posted by danni at 2019-11-20 08:33 AM | Reply

Wow Jeff. You've sunk so low. You really need to take a step back and examine yourself.

#28 | Posted by JOE at 2019-11-20 08:44 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Because you have voluntary blindness.

#27 | Posted by danni at 2019-11-20 08:33 AM | Reply

JEFF apparently doesn't view Trump's behavior as another attempt to steal an election.

#29 | Posted by Zed at 2019-11-20 08:46 AM | Reply

No one sees the GOP as patriots.

Donald Trump is held in contempt by most Americans.

Posted by Zed

Classic thinking that your circle of friends and echo chamber is "most Americans".

LOL..

#30 | Posted by boaz at 2019-11-20 09:08 AM | Reply

#25 and we wonder why we got a reality TV POTUS...

This isnt entertainment, JeffJ. Bombshells and revealing things that are "nuclear" shouldn't be guiding your judgement of the gravity of the situation.

When you boil it down we have a POTUS who used the power of the office and resources of the United States as leverage to attain personal gain.

I can think of fewer things that make somebody unfit for the office.

#31 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-20 09:10 AM | Reply

Also, how does that suggest my view is crumbling, as was suggested?

Stop viewing things through a lens of upvotes and you'll see where I'm coming from.

#32 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-20 09:12 AM | Reply

#30 his favorability rating has consisted of his base and only his base pretty much since he was elected. No other modern POTUS has had such flat and low poll numbers.

#33 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-20 09:13 AM | Reply

It sure is a shame for the rule of law in this Country when no matter what someone does, a conviction will not result.

#8 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER

Conservatives, YOU built that!

#34 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-11-20 09:24 AM | Reply

Can anyone honestly claim that holding up military aid for Ukraine didn't cost lives in Ukraine just so that President Zelensky would investigate American citizens. I am listening to the hearings right now as Nunes is now demanding to question the Whistle Blower, despicable.

#35 | Posted by danni at 2019-11-20 09:32 AM | Reply

30 his favorability rating has consisted of his base and only his base pretty much since he was elected.
#33

I'm sure they exist, but it's hard to imagine a person who was on the fence in 2016 becoming a fan.

"I admit I wasn't sure back then. But after seeing the way he can't complete a sentence without lying, watching him attack any person who doesn't show blind loyalty, tweeting the nation into a collective migraine, groveling at the feet of our enemies, all while he wears diapers...Well! I must say - put me on that train!"

#36 | Posted by schifferbrains at 2019-11-20 09:37 AM | Reply

It sure is a shame for the rule of law in this Country when no matter what someone does, a conviction will not result.

#8 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER

Third world behavior.

Moscow Mitch has turned the Senate into a Kangaroo Court.

No matter the evidence and verdict the outcome is already decided.

Will he even allow a debate and vote? Hopefully it is not up to him. But, we are learning how clever our founding father Really were.

Impeachment is a constitutional process.

And Humpy is finally getting what he wants. A good fight.

Thunderdome!

#37 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-11-20 10:17 AM | Reply

My comments are couched by wearing a political hat. It's purely political analysis.

Personally, I think Trump is toxic and if Democrats throw in obstruction per the Mueller report, I think removal is a possibility. I still think removing him via the ballot box is the best way to go, but I wouldn't cry into my cereal if congress removed him via impeachment.

Having said that, what he's being (correctly IMO) accused of is precisely the same thing the Obama administration was guilty of. Biden absolutely set up a quid pro quo to kill an investigation into Burisma, which is a company his son was profiting handsomely from despite any qualifications other than his dad being VP to Obama.

After 2 years of extreme hype over Russian collusion I think that because the Mueller report was such a dud on that front and this his testimony was such a disaster that much of the public is just fatigued over the constant outrage. It really is the boy who cried wolf scenario. We have a couple of House Democrats speaking out against this process. Nancy Pelosi had to be dragged into agreeing to this. Unless Schiff has something new under wraps, we really aren't learning anything new through these hearings. Democrats might bring articles of impeachment for a vote, but I think that's unlikely. As I said, way too many vulnerable Dems in red districts and if Team Schiff can't build strong unity and consensus within his own party there is no way he's going to build Republican support. As it is, this inquiry is structured to be very one-sided. If articles are introduced and the House votes to impeach the power then shifts to the Senate and puts the ball in McConnell's court. That means that the whistleblower will be compelled to testify as will Adam Schiff. The big wild card in all of this is the impending release of the Horowitz IG report and, to a lesser extent, the outcome of the Michael Flynn trial. Ultimately, my belief is that Democrats will use this as campaign fodder but won't bring impeachment up for a vote.

#38 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 10:27 AM | Reply

Wow Jeff. You've sunk so low. You really need to take a step back and examine yourself.

#28 | POSTED BY JOE A

I just completed my self-examination.

Here are my observations:

At 48 my hair is starting to turn grey. My hairline is receding a bit and it's a bit thin on the top of my head. I have a bit of a beer gut and enormous genitalia. I'm unfortunately sporting 3 paper cuts on my left hand and they are pretty nasty as far as paper cuts go. I'm wearing jeans and a blue Polo sweatshirt. Pretty boring stuff...

#39 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 10:44 AM | Reply

"Biden absolutely set up a quid pro quo to kill an investigation into Burisma" -- #38 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Link up Jeff. Show me where you see that the Burisma investigation was on-going at the time of the Biden incident. Everything I have found says it had long been dormant and was one of the reasons the prosecutor was believed to be corrupt. They all say there is no evidence of wrong doing on Biden's part and that many other countries supported his actions. I am all for calling Biden out if he was wrong.

On the other hand, can you show me where Trump had support from other countries in the actions he was taking? Can you show me the LEGAL avenues he was using to start the investigation? Going after one specific company, that you know will target your opponent, and through shady back door deals is not the way I expect my leaders to conduct themselves.

#40 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-11-20 11:04 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Idaho,

I'm going by Biden's own words:

So they said they had " they were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, I'm not going to " or, we're not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You're not the president. The president said " I said, call him. I said, I'm telling you, you're not getting the billion dollars. I said, you're not getting the billion. I'm going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I'm leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you're not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. (Laughter.) He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.

For the record, Biden is my preferred candidate. If the election were tomorrow I'd vote for him and that takes the whole Burisma thing into account.

#41 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 11:11 AM | Reply

"I'm going by Biden's own words:'

Well, then go with Portman (R) and Johnson's (R) words, which agree with Biden:
www.vox.com

#42 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-20 11:15 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"...that takes the whole Burisma thing into account."

So you took a fake "investigation" into account? Wow...how non-partisan.

#43 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-20 11:16 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

#41 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Can you bold the section in Biden's words that says he did it to, as you put it "kill an investigation into Burisma"? I have yet to see proof. I expect you to provide it or admit you are wrong.

#44 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-11-20 11:20 AM | Reply

So, I say that I'd vote for Biden tomorrow and that still isn't good enough for Donkey Suit Dan.

#45 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 11:37 AM | Reply

Jeff, Shokin wasn't investigating Burisma. He also wasn't co-operating with British courts requests for info on the company's owner. Shokin wasn't investigating a lot of Ukrainian oligarchs, which was the problem and the reason the Obama administration, European leaders and Ukrainian anti-corruption activists wanted him out.

#46 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-11-20 11:42 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#45 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

It isnt good enough for me either. I want you to either admit you were wrong and never repeat your lie, or show us proof of your statement above. Spreading false information is BS and I am calling you out.

#47 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-11-20 11:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#47 He got the prosecutor fired by withholding aid, or so he claimed. Said prosecutor happened to be investigating the company his son worked for. Snopes says that wasn't the reason why Biden sought to get the prosecutor fired. Fine by me. Even though Snopes is biased and sometimes produces shoddy work, I think they generally strive to get it right. That coupled with Gal's #46 and I'm good with the argument that investigating Burisma wasn't the reason that Biden wanted the prosecutor fired.

#48 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 11:52 AM | Reply

Idaho,

The reason it's not good enough for you is not the same reason it's not good enough for Danforth.

#49 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 11:52 AM | Reply

"Said prosecutor happened to be investigating the company his son worked for." -- #48 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Still waiting for a link to prove the investigation was on-going. As Gal posted the investigation had been tabled. Everything I find says it was NOT happening at the time Shokin was fired. Either stop repeated a proven lie, or prove it is not a lie.

#50 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-11-20 11:55 AM | Reply

"So, I say that I'd vote for Biden tomorrow and that still isn't good enough"

I wasn't taking that to task, I was taking your "I've included Burisma" bullschitt, as if it means anything other than Republicans want to cheat, and point to a false "investigation", to be announced by an ally under duress during a hot war, for fear of losing Congressionally-approved aid.

What will be your next generous inclusion of nonsense? Have you included the Cadillac Tax in your considerations?

#51 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-20 11:56 AM | Reply

"The reason it's not good enough for you is not the same reason it's not good enough for Danforth."

Yup. Because you refer to known bullschitt, and then pat yourself on the back for "considering" it.

#52 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-20 12:00 PM | Reply

Jeff, please read:

But Ukrainian prosecutors and anti-corruption activists with knowledge of the matter argue that the timeline of developments in the Burisma case and Shokin's stint as chief prosecutor simply does not fit the narrative being put forward by Trump and his allies.

Moreover, they say that Shokin himself was the biggest obstacle standing in the way of the investigation.

Daria Kaleniuk, executive director of the Kyiv-based Anti-Corruption Action Center (AntAC), told RFE/RL that Shokin "dumped important criminal investigations on corruption associated with [former President Viktor] Yanukovych, including the Burisma case."

Ukrainian prosecutors and anti-corruption advocates who were pushing for an investigation into the dealings of Burisma and its owner, Mykola Zlochevskiy, said the probe had been dormant long before Biden leveled his demand.

"There was no pressure from anyone from the United States" to close the case against Zlochevskiy, Vitaliy Kasko, who was a deputy prosecutor-general under Shokin and is now first deputy prosecutor-general, told Bloomberg News in May. "It was shelved by Ukrainian prosecutors in 2014 and through 2015," he added.

Activists say the case had been sabotaged by Shokin himself. As an example, they say two months before Hunter Biden joined Burisma's board, British authorities had requested information from Shokin's office as part of an investigation into alleged money laundering by Zlochevskiy. Shokin ignored them.


www.rferl.org

#53 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-11-20 12:06 PM | Reply

FFS Idaho.

I already ceded Gal's and Snopes' explanation. What do you want? Blood?

I know Danforth won't accept anything less than full Hodgkinson, but you are usually more reasonable than that.

#53 - Thanks for that.

#54 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 12:14 PM | Reply

#53 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

Jeff doesnt care, that is why he avoids my direct challenge. He wants to remain intentionally ignorant so he can continue to spew false information and pretend he would still vote for Biden. I no longer believe anything he says and wouldn't doubt he voted for Trump and just tells us he voted for Johnson.

#55 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-11-20 12:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#54 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

No Jeff, you didnt cede it. You specifically stated "Said prosecutor happened to be investigating the company his son worked for." That is a lie and I will not let it stand. I put in bold what I wanted from you and now I am done with you. I can not trust a single word you type.

#56 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-11-20 12:21 PM | Reply

#55 You officially have JDS.

Re-read #54 and #48 as many times as necessary for it to sink in.

I'll even repost #48 and put the key part in bold:

#47 He got the prosecutor fired by withholding aid, or so he claimed. Said prosecutor happened to be investigating the company his son worked for. Snopes says that wasn't the reason why Biden sought to get the prosecutor fired. Fine by me. Even though Snopes is biased and sometimes produces shoddy work, I think they generally strive to get it right. That coupled with Gal's #46 and I'm good with the argument that investigating Burisma wasn't the reason that Biden wanted the prosecutor fired.

#48 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

#57 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 12:21 PM | Reply

Gal's #53 provides some nice clarity.

#58 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 12:23 PM | Reply

Biden absolutely set up a quid pro quo to kill an investigation into Burisma,

Pure garbage.

Biden overseeing the firing of the prosecutor was part of agreed upon conditions between Ukraine, the US, IMF ect ect.

Trump's demands were not predicated on agreed upon conditions, but were a legit QPQ of his making for his personal benefit.

The right and false equivalencies. Without them, they have nothing.

#59 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-20 12:23 PM | Reply

Jeff, Shokin wasn't investigating Burisma. He also wasn't co-operating with British courts requests for info on the company's owner. Shokin wasn't investigating a lot of Ukrainian oligarchs, which was the problem and the reason the Obama administration, European leaders and Ukrainian anti-corruption activists wanted him out.

#46 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday

Doesn't matter. Reality means nothing to righties.

The fact that the Burisma angle is made up garbage by Trump to go after a political rival doesn't mean it should be disregarded in their minds.

Despite saying Trump is wrong, they still insist on following up on the substance of what he's wrong about.

It's obvious circular thinking that they can't shake themselves of, likely because they think it makes them look reasonable and interested in "transparency".

#60 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-20 12:25 PM | Reply

I admit that I've never closely followed the Hunter Biden/Ukraine/prosecutor firing story very closely because I never thought it was a big deal. I apologize for inaccurate statements I've made pertaining to it. I will try to be more accurate with my comments moving forward.

#61 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 12:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

No worries.

I haven't followed it terribly closely either because, truthfully, it's really confusing owing to all the noise and misinformation put out there by Trump and his supporters.

And although my last post probably sounded like it was directed at you personally, it really was broadly aimed. For instance, this morning I stopped on rightwing noise radio on my commute just in time to hear a phone call on whatever show was running right before Kilmeade.

The caller was all indignant because according to him (and the host...) QPQs happen all the time, just look at Elizabeth Warren saying she has a plan to reduce veteran suicide IF she's elected! AH HA! Take that Dems!

It's patently stupid and false yet this is what people apparently believe and think.

#62 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-20 12:44 PM | Reply

"I haven't followed it terribly closely either because, truthfully, it's really confusing owing to all the noise and misinformation put out there by Trump and his supporters."

It's also confusing because there a lot of unfamiliar Ukrainian players/names, many of whom are corrupt. Often one corrupt official or prosecutor is replaced by another who is just as corrupt.

#63 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-11-20 12:49 PM | Reply

It's also confusing because there a lot of unfamiliar Ukrainian players/names, many of whom are corrupt. Often one corrupt official or prosecutor is replaced by another who is just as corrupt.

#63 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

I think it's safe to say that corruption abounds in Ukraine.

#64 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 12:51 PM | Reply

#62 JPW My #61 was directed more at Idaho than you. It was pretty obvious to me that you were speaking in a more general sense than a personal one.

#65 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 12:53 PM | Reply

#57 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

I will accept nothing less than you stating that you were wrong. Literally typing: I was wrong and to never be caught stating that the investigation into Burisma was killed or even affected by Biden's actions. I would like to see you acknowledge that the "said prosecutor" was NOT "investigating the company his son worked for" at the time. If you will bleed by posting that you were wrong, then blood it is Jeff.

So FFS: Either stop repeating a proven lie, or prove it is not a lie.

#66 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-11-20 01:11 PM | Reply

#61 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

I did not read all the comments and had not seen 61 until now. I appreciate it, but hope that you have learned a valuable lesson. Today is not the first time you have been called on this exact situation with Biden. Normally you run away.

#67 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-11-20 01:13 PM | Reply

Normally you run away.

#67 | POSTED BY JUSTAGIRL_IDAHO

That's because I need to get more exercise.

#68 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 01:17 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

"Today is not the first time you have been called on this exact situation with Biden. Normally you run away."

True, and it's not the first time you, I and others have posted the real story behind Shokin's own corruption with regard to Burisma and its owner.

#69 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-11-20 01:25 PM | Reply

#69 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

Exactly Gal. Today I got really irritated with Jeff though. He pretends to be moderate but has no difficulty spreading false information if it will help his team and then will say, oh I didnt know... He even continued to say it while also saying he ceded the point. Obviously not if you have to say 'I believe you, but it did happen' in the same paragraph.

#70 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-11-20 01:33 PM | Reply

#70 Idaho.

I admitted my ignorance regarding the Burisma story. I admitted that due to my ignorance I made false statements regarding it.

I admitted my error and even apologized for it. That is more than 90% of the people who post on this site would do. Yet, you still feel inclined to pile on.

Why is that?

#71 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 01:35 PM | Reply

#71 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Because this is just one instance and it took an awful lot to get that from you. I'm feeling rather irritated with you today.

#72 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-11-20 01:37 PM | Reply

"I admitted my ignorance regarding the Burisma story. I admitted that due to my ignorance I made false statements regarding it."

I think that for some of us, who have repeatedly corrected the record on Biden/Shokin/Burisma, it felt more like you were engaging in willful ignorance than plain old I-didn't-know-better ignorance. Hence, the frustration.

"I admitted my error and even apologized for it. That is more than 90% of the people who post on this site would do."

True.

#73 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-11-20 01:43 PM | Reply

I'm feeling rather irritated with you today.

#72 | POSTED BY JUSTAGIRL_IDAHO

I noticed.

#74 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 01:44 PM | Reply

"...it felt more like you were engaging in willful ignorance than plain old I-didn't-know-better ignorance. Hence, the frustration."

I can understand that, but you need to recognize that frustration is your fault, not Jeff's.

Same goes for Idaho girl. Her frustration is HER fault, not Jeff's.

Nobody is obligated to come here and be in a state of frustration with another poster.

challenge them...if they are incorrigibly unwilling to cooperate, then plonk them, avoid them, or have some fun with them, your choice.

But you can take your collective "I"m frustrated with you" ---- and cram it up your cramhole.

Geez...it's as if you hold people here on a blog accountable for your happiness.

#75 | Posted by eberly at 2019-11-20 02:11 PM | Reply

I'm feeling rather irritated with you today.

#72 | POSTED BY JUSTAGIRL_IDAHO

I noticed.

#74 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Jeff... I still love you.

I am still going to needle you every chance I get over impeachment, because you STILL haven't been willing to tell me ANYTHING that you think WOULD be impeachable for a conservative president, but I don't actually blame you for that. Trump has burned you so many times in the past that it would be stupid for you to draw any lines in the sand when you know you will eventually have to push the goalposts over them.

But, it has been kinda unfair how you have been raked over the coals over it. You are willing to continue to logically argue your (to be fair, somewhat untenable) position. I think that is why you get blasted for it. You SHOULD, logically (at least from my perspective), be in support of impeachment and in opposition to what the GOP is currently doing, but you do not agree ideologically with liberals. So, from an emotional point you cannot abandon your party and betray your ideological tribe. Which is why I am sure, if someone had presented a hypothetical to you six months ago describing the evidence we have now of Trump's actions you would have said it justified his removal. But now that it is a real life actuality, due to emotional aspects (loyalty to tribe) you feel like it would not at all justify removal.

But, I do think you are TRYING to be intellectually honest about it, unlike most of the conservatives on this site, and I do appreciate that. All of us are human and have emotional aspects affect what decisions we make, usually without realizing it is happening. So, while I will continue to try to force you to confront the cognitive dissonance between your intellect and emotions, I realize that while your responses may come across as dishonest they are not intentionally so.

And I appreciate that you continue to allow me to poke and prod at your psyche like you are some sort of experimental lab rat. :)

So, you have taken a lot more abuse as a "fence sitter" than a lot of absolute Trump sycophants have had to endure, which I think is unfair. Even though I can understand their frustration that you seem to be perched precariously on this fence, yet we can NEVER seem to push you off regardless of the strength of the argument provided.

I would say that it should get better, but it probably won't for a while. More and more evidence is going to come out against Trump, and as it gets stronger and stronger it is just going to make people that much more frustrated that you are still perched high up on your fence. Good luck.

#76 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-11-20 02:15 PM | Reply

'I can understand that, but you need to recognize that frustration is your fault, not Jeff's.

Same goes for Idaho girl. Her frustration is HER fault, not Jeff's. "

Couldn't have been said better by Epictetus himself.

#77 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-11-20 02:17 PM | Reply

I agree Eberly, my frustration is due to the fact that I believed in Jeff and his intelligence. I was let down by what appeared to be willful ignorance and the disappointment made me mad. I cant believe that any honest and logical thinker could still be parroting lies and turn a blind eye on what is being shown regarding Ukraine.

#78 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-11-20 02:26 PM | Reply

I can understand that, but you need to recognize that frustration is your fault, not Jeff's.

I don't recall saying I personally was frustrated with Jeff. I don't think any of my posts directed at him indicated I was. I was, however, trying to explain to Jeff, who seemed puzzled and somewhat frustrated himself by Idaho's responses to him, how/why a sense of frustration might have come about.

#79 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-11-20 02:32 PM | Reply

Justagirl and GTBrit,

I think what happens is I like to comment while wearing my politics hat. So, when I say, "I don't think Trump will be impeached", it gets misconstrued as me saying I don't think Trump should be impeached.

I also try to view politics from a historical perspective. Example: Have prior presidents engaged in similar actions, and if so, what were the repercussions? That kind of question comes off as whataboutism as a means of deflecting criticism, which isn't my intent.

What I need to do a better job of doing is offering up qualifiers so people don't misconstrue what I'm saying. I'll work on that.

As for impeachment...

Trump has been a sleaze-ball his whole life and I knew that being elected president wouldn't change who he is. The problem is the voters put him into office in spite of all of his personal baggage (which was and is considerable).

I certainly believe that taking his corrupt acts in sum, a case for impeachment can be made. Having said that, Trump is far from the first president who has proven corrupt and whilst I'll shed no tears if he's impeached and removed, I'd much rather see him removed via the ballot box.

#80 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-20 02:35 PM | Reply

I can understand that, but you need to recognize that frustration is your fault, not Jeff's.

Same goes for Idaho girl. Her frustration is HER fault, not Jeff's.

Nobody is obligated to come here and be in a state of frustration with another poster.

challenge them...if they are incorrigibly unwilling to cooperate, then plonk them, avoid them, or have some fun with them, your choice.

But you can take your collective "I"m frustrated with you" ---- and cram it up your cramhole.

Geez...it's as if you hold people here on a blog accountable for your happiness

#75 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Apparently you've never corrected somebody X number of times only to see the same false information presented on X+1.

So no, the frustration is not the fault of the person using facts and correct information.

So you can take your "just ignore people spreading false information" approach and put it where? That's right.

Your cramhole.

#81 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-20 02:38 PM | Reply

#80 I am worried that only removing via the ballot box would not send a strong signal to the next president (no matter party affiliation) that we do not allow the abuse of power that we are seeing here. If using federal funds for private political gain is allowed this time, what will be allowed next?

#82 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-11-20 02:39 PM | Reply

I admitted my ignorance regarding the Burisma story. I admitted that due to my ignorance I made false statements regarding it.
#71 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-11-20 01:35 PM | REPLY

So let's take things to the next logical step.

You've stated that the story about Biden getting a quid pro quo to stop an investigation is false. Do you think the GOP is aware this story is false? If so, why do they keep making false statements to the press and to their base?

The GOP isn't spinning this story anymore, they're straight up lying about it. Why do you think that is, and do you think lying - not spinning, not leaving some details out, but lying - to protect Trump is an appropriate exercise for our elected leaders?

And if they're willing to lie about this story that's easy to disprove, what else might they be lying about?

#83 | Posted by bartimus at 2019-11-20 03:58 PM | Reply

78/79

fair enough from both of you.

81

not so fair....but everything here is fair.

"Apparently you've never corrected somebody X number of times only to see the same false information presented on X+1."

Yes I have. It's not your job to keep track of that...but yes I have.

My frustration with others is my choice. You apparently believe your emotions, choices of words, overall control, etc is someone else's responsibility.

Not yours.

"just ignore people spreading false information"

wow, complain about people lying and to prove your point......post a lie. nice one.

I don't come on this place to lie. I might get something wrong but I don't come here to lie and parrot misinformation knowingly.

If you still have a problem with me.....then ignore me.

#84 | Posted by eberly at 2019-11-20 04:08 PM | Reply

then ignore me.

#84 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Some of us hovering about here don't ignore it when others distort the truth

It is not in our nature.

Especially when it appears to be intentional.

Your speech is free. We are just providing some accountability.

Also for free!

You should be grateful for the free feedback.

#85 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-11-20 04:13 PM | Reply

"I don't come here to lie and parrot misinformation knowingly"

Citation needed

#86 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-11-20 04:16 PM | Reply

here is my impression of Eberly of past, (AKA OBAMA Eberly)

"OBAMA want to Destroy Private insurers"
Then
"OBAMA wants to Enrich Private Insurers"
Then
"OBAMA Hates Private Insurers"
Then
"OBAMA and Private Insurers are in Cahoots"

lie and parrot misinformation knowingly here on the DR indeed.

#87 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-11-20 04:20 PM | Reply

#84 you suggested plonking people who require constant correction.

How is that not suggesting ignoring them? So I fail to see how and where I lied...

#88 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-20 04:21 PM | Reply

"Apparently you've never corrected somebody X number of times only to see the same false information presented on X+1."
Yes I have. It's not your job to keep track of that...but yes I have."

^
I think it's all of our jobs to keep track of that.
There are some real snakes in the grass here, who do come here to lie and parrot misinformation knowingly.

In point of fact, a few of the Russian Facebook memes were parroted here, by users whose names you can certainly guess.
Earlier, these same posters were adamant that the Ukraine government was run by Nazis, and that Ukraine shot down MH-17.

That matters.
It matters a lot.

#89 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-11-20 04:24 PM | Reply

-You should be grateful for the free feedback.

In your case, it's worth what I paid for it.

JPW,

see 87...see what I mean? Not a truth in it. Happens everytime I post here. It's personal with that phugstick. He's got a special attraction to me...

But it's okay....I'll let him make a fool out of himself.

#90 | Posted by eberly at 2019-11-20 04:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"see 87...see what I mean? Not a truth in it. "

Can you rephrase #87 to set the record straight, maybe by toning it down a little, or is it like completely out of left field?

#91 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-11-20 04:35 PM | Reply

"I admitted that due to my ignorance I made false statements regarding it."

Speak the truth then.
Don't just regret your lies.

Sheesh!

#92 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-11-20 05:41 PM | Reply

McConnell is very good with predictions. I distinctly remember him saying Obama would be a one term president.

#93 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-11-20 07:08 PM | Reply

McConnell won't let impeachment happen until it effects whether he gets re-elected.

Wait 2 months.

#94 | Posted by Sycophant at 2019-11-21 02:15 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort