What does that have to do with Impeaching a sitting president without a shred of proof?
Lets see if you can live up to your moniker “Critical Thinker”
1 Like
For stealing the election through collusion with Russians? What guilty pleas? What indictments?
2 Likes
It’s so fun watching liberals paint themselves into a corner.
2 Likes
Where’s the beef.
Where’s the proof that you refer?
Where’s the collusion from the mueller probe?
Where’s the proof of obstruction?
Where’s the proof that the democrats need to impeach Trump?
The questions are valid and isn’t derail your thread.
1 Like
And not 1 indictment is related to Trump, collusion or obstruction.
Many are years old.
Which indictment can be used to impeach Trump?
“It MAGA country!” 
2 Likes
This never gets old! These are his or it or whatever 71 genders if claims to be generation!
They don’t to them… they will happily accept how incompetent Trumps hiring practices are with several of his TOP campaign or Trump .Org advisors being indicted or in jail… just to be able to say “where’s the collusion”.
If it isn’t collusion, they don’t care about his crimes. Everyone around him can collide be if he isn’t directly involved they stick it to libs
1 Like
Yes, of course…guilty pleas to crimes that have absolutely nothing to do with Trump save the fact that those pleas came from people who knew Trump. Guilt by association is only in the eyes of the accusers. Liberals love to proclaim it.
Most of it is with the SDNY and Mueller… but I assume you are specifically talking about collusion because of your next question.
Why are cons so stuck on collusion? Oh I know why… it’s because it is their last hope to be able to deny the effectiveness of Muellers probe. Only problem is Muellers mandate was not limited to collusion.
Show me where DoJ tells Mueller to investigate collusion
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download
Mueller has the receipts…patiences young grasshopper
Again… Muellers investigation isn’t over… and neither is the house intel committees.
No they aren’t… you have conveniently narrowed your scope to 2 “crimes” that haven’t been used to bring charges YET. Hell collusion isn’t even a crime. You ignore that several of Trumps inner circle have been indicted, found guilty and jailed.
At the very best Trump is a terrible judge of character…at best he is a crook.
1 Like
Except for the fact that Trump hired them or he was long time friends with them.
At the very least, Trump has horrible judgement. Why would we want someone running the country that consistently hires crooks?
1 Like
Man you really are thick! And you wonder why you are probably the most hated poster here? Trying to go off topic again, as you yet again prove my earlier point!
Again, what does any of your stupid diatribe rant has to do with impeachment? Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
Precedent just seems to escape libs these days.
Bill Clinton’s associates went to jail but Libs forget the precedent.
From Wikipedia…
The Clintons were never charged with any crime. Fifteen other people were convicted of more than 40 crimes, including Jim Guy Tucker, who resigned from office.[44]
And dont forget, Clinton was not impeached over these issues.
And don’t give me the narrative’s sophomoric “oh dude, ya know that whataboutism is a tu quoque logical fallacy”. I’m not using these precedents to disprove your assertion that people close to Trump have been arrested. So while you might hope to get a woody using Latin phrases, you will show your impotence by trying to use that particular one.
2 Likes
When the choice is someone who hires crooks or someone who is a crook… I’ll take the one who just hires.
1 Like
Were I indicted for every crime my employees ever committed, I’d be a lifer…or hanged decades ago.
3 Likes
What crimes? You are always speaking about crimes he committed but fail to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that such crimes were committed! Where is the proof of these so called crimes?
This is proof positive how stupid liberals are and their Impeachment narrative derangement syndrome.
Tom Steyer spent 100 million dollars campaigning for impeachment. If this was a joke I might actually be sympathetic, but you can’t make this shit up!
You represent the party of stupid people!
I see stupid people everywhere!
1 Like
I replied to Louman… so if you think I am off topic. Then so is he.
Awwe! SPED’s ! I yield to the purposely mentally challenged! I am sympathetic!
I might actually be inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you do after all have a proven track record here on this forum that says otherwise, so I am not buying it!
Then why are you doing it? It has nothing to do with the topic or the post you replied to. I said that’s Trump hires crooks. I also mentioned that cons are stuck on collusion and obstruction when Trump has been implicated in at least 1 felony (SDNY campaign finance aka Trumps crime).