James and the Giant Impeachment

[ObamacareForever]

Are you talking about Trump rally chants? We're speaking of you movement automatons...and you've ALREADY demonstrated it here in this very strand.

Tell us how you would describe Trump's actions if you don't think "Abuse of Power" and "Obstruction of Congress" are apt characterizations.

 

[RickWA]

Yes, it's called using precise language. Try it some time.

Indeed. Something I called out that you (and the other forum lefties) will be helpless to wander from in even the slightest rhetorical way. "Precise" indeed.

Click...whirl...whiz...

Bots gonna bot. Drones gotta drone. Protect the hive.

 

[ObamacareForever]

Indeed. Something I called out that you (and the other forum lefties) will be helpless to wander from in even the slightest rhetorical way. "Precise" indeed.

Click...whirl...whiz...

Bots gonna bot. Drones gotta drone. Protect the hive.

It helps when the language is accurate as well as precise.

 

[RickWA]

Tell us how you would describe Trump's actions if you don't think "Abuse of Power" and "Obstruction of Congress" are apt characterizations.

Dunno...merely one week ago the "precise" terms were different. A week before that they were different again.

...And every bloody one of you leftists aligned to the EXACT VERBIAGE like canon.

That was what I wrote about in my very first post in this strand. I simply called it. This is who lefty is - a fully collectivized non-individual who surrenders his very personhood to the hive. You proved it. Yet again.

Have a nice day. Well...as nice as HQ says it is allowed to be anyway.

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

Correct. That part is true. Now do you understand why everyone else combined has a better chance than Trump? Given the +125 rating?

I can explain, or again, if you don't want to know and just want to understand it the way you want to, that's no problem.

LOL oh man did you miss the bus LOL

 

[PhilFish]

He used the Biden's name specifically. And there is a channel designed by treaty for sharing intel on corruption which was not used because there isn't any actual corruption involving the Bidens.

And congress is well with its prerogative to impeach him for obstructing them,

Neither is being impeached for it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_process_against_Richard_Nixon

huh? wouldnt that need to be investigated... that's the precedent set.. you know...

 

[PhilFish]

I'm not a betting man, but those folks in Las Vegas seem to believe Donald Trump has the best odds of any candidate listed to emerge victorious in November 2020, no?

yes. .that is demonstrated

 

[ObamacareForever]

huh? wouldnt that need to be investigated... that's the precedent set.. you know...

wouldn't what need to be investigated?

 

[Zam-Zam]

Yes

Great.

I think what we have established here is that, according to the bookmakers from Las Vegas, Donald Trump has a better shot at wining next November than any other candidate named....

If you have any evidence to the contrary, please feel free to provide it. If not, then I suppose the above argument stands.

 

[ObamacareForever]

Great.

I think what we have established here is that, according to the bookmakers from Las Vegas, Donald Trump has a better shot at wining next November than any other candidate named....

If you have any evidence to the contrary, please feel free to provide it. If not, then I suppose the above argument stands.

Are you going to bet on Trump winning?

 

[Zam-Zam]

Are you going to bet on Trump winning?

I don't wager.

Things change on a daily basis in politics....The last "Sure bet, can't lose" candidate was Hillary Clinton, and we know how that turned out.

 

[ObamacareForever]

I don't wager.

Things change on a daily basis in politics....The last "Sure bet, can't lose" candidate was Hillary Clinton, and we know how that turned out.

So you don't thinks the odds are correct?

 

[Boca]

Nadler better get a better belt for his 'mons pubis' and Vegas is loving libs hearings

2020 US Presidential Election
US Presidential Election 2020 - Odds to Win
Donald Trump +125
Joe Biden +550
Pete Buttigieg +650
Elizabeth Warren +800
Bernie Sanders +850
Michael Bloomberg +1600
Andrew Yang +2000
Hillary Clinton +3000
Mike Pence +4000
Nikki Haley +5000
Amy Klobuchar +5000
Tulsi Gabbard +6000
Kamala Harris +8000
Michelle Obama +8000
Mitt Romney +10000
Cory Booker +15000
Julian Castro +20000
Tom Steyer +20000
William (Bill) Weld +25000
John Kasich +25000
Howard Schultz +25000
Oprah Winfrey +25000
Tammy Duckworth +25000
Trey Gowdy +25000
Mark Cuban +25000
Tim Kaine +30000
Ted Cruz +30000
Marianne Williamson +30000
Marco Rubio +30000
Jeb Bush +30000
Bill de Blasio +50000
George Clooney +90000
Kanye West +90000

And George Clooney/ Kanye West in a deadheat to win?

 

[now_what]

So, if "everyone else combined" runs as a team, they are favored to beat Trump......




This is fun!

LOL, you can look at it that way.

We are talking about two different things. No individual right now has a better chance than Trump. Of course the reason for that is that he doesn't need to go through a primary, while everyone else does. That's clear.

My statement is regarding whether or not Trump will be re-elected in 2020. The figures above say no. That somebody else will be president. That has been my point from the start.

 

[now_what]

LOL oh man did you miss the bus LOL

I'm absolutely correct. If you aren't able to understand it, that's on you. I would stay clear of betting if I were you.

 

[Dawg]

And George Clooney/ Kanye West in a deadheat to win?

libs think they have a better chance of winning than Trump

 

[Dawg]

If you want to pretend that there will be all of those names on the ballot in November.

No one other than you said all those names would be on the ballot...………..they are used to show libs the odds..………….dammmmmm

 

[Dawg]

libs think they have a better chance of winning than Trump

+90,000
vs
+125

 

[now_what]

libs think they have a better chance of winning than Trump

I don't think that, necessarily, but Vegas does.

 

[llovejim]

Focus on what I wrote. Lefty robotically conforms to precise vocabulary... verbatim... with abject 100% automaton unerring precision with the DNC hive monolith.
Every time. You folks who made the immediate shift from CONSTANT references to "quid pro quo" to exclusive use of the term "bribery" under orders of the party will now flip the switch to the precise two terms I noted in my post. "Click" goes the DNC railway turntable...and look at all the lefty drones mindlessly obeying the hardwired directional order. You cannot divert. Not in the slightest. Not even a fraction of a degree.

I observe that you folks have ZERO personal autonomy relative to the hive. You are not sovereign individuals. You are pheromone-whiffing bots. You are dancing rats to the DNC pied piper. You exert no volition. You conform your collective lefty will so completely that your every word - written or spoken - parrots, to the syllable, the prescribed party script.

That is all, Jim.

Laser-like focus and informed brevity is always preferable to meandering lunatic manifestos. Keep it disciplined, buddy.

all that word salad to try and explain how you somehow believe quid pro quo is not exactly the same as bribery which is exactly the same as extortion, except it generally applies to non-public officials, unlike bribery? you spewed a lot of shit when all you had to do was admit how wrong and silly you were to act like the term quid pro quo is somehow different than the term bribery or extortion. get it?

Bribery | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

https://www.law.cornell.edu › Wex
Proof of bribery requires demonstrating a “quid pro quo” relationship in which the ... Solicitation of a bribe also constitutes a crime and is completed regardless of ...