Why is everyone misquoting Pelosi?


You don’t have to “buy” it. Look at the preceding posts. You are so quick to be triggered by my replies that you fail to understand context.

You should take your own advice and READ.

Now would you like to discussion impeachment of the President and the details surrounding the notion that he could be impeached?


No I don’t! Like I said you regularly post Bullshit on this site without actually proving anything! Not to mention having a consistent regular pattern of obfuscating facts and derailing topics! If many others accuse you of this then it must be true.


Campaign finance. For sure…

There are others that he has been implicated in by he former lawyer, under oath with evidence, that needs further investigation but are interesting. Like

Tax Fraud
Bank Fraud

No wonder he doesn’t want anyone looking at his tax returns.


The irony of this line is not lost on me…


But you replied with stupidity…a point he well made in a subsequent post.


Those are accusations, none of which has been proven! Try again! Again provide proof that he actually did what you are alleging!

What impeachable offense has he committed? I will ask this for the third time here!


I can back up anything I state as fact, and I can even admit when I am wrong! Can you say the same thing? Nope! So your false equivalency is phony, there is no irony!


Precedent is always on topic. What one president does says a precedent for the next… and the next…

Same with judicial rulings.

I bring it up also to do a spot check on your intellectual integrity. Clintons’ associates don’t seem to bother you even though Hillaryxs fingerprints were literally found on the evidence.

You cant hide. Clinton set precedent. You want to ignore the precedent.


You are asking the wrong question…

How is impeachment defined in the constitution? What crimes are listed that allows impeachment to proceed.

Btw I never said he will, or should, be impeached


You make an accusation about me posting bullshit… while not providing proof of my bullshit.


It doesn’t matter, and now you are trying to pivot from answering a direct question! You also were asked to prove that he committed a crime, and yet you fail to provide evidence! Without verifiable evidence you have no case in a court of law! See how that works? Anybody can throw hyperbolic accusations which you seem to want to do all the time here, yet when asked to provide proof, you simply pivot to some other bullshit answer that is off topic!


I don’t need to, I didn’t make accusations, the burden of proof is on you not me! Get with the program son!


What nonsense, the people tasked in this country with finding illegality within people’s tax returns have them, we call them the IRS.


Where have a made a comment regarding Clinton in this, or any other thread? You don’t know what I do or don’t think about Clinton.

If you want to know what I think about Whitewater, ask me. Don’t make shit up.


This statement is exactly why I asked the question I did… impeachment is not a judicial proceeding. The standard you are asking for doesn’t apply to the legislative branch… who conducts impeachment proceedings.

Again… I’ve never said he should be impeached. Especially not without the Mueller report.

I actually hope he isn’t impeached.


They also had Manafort and Cohens… just because they have them… doesn’t mean anything


These are your words! These are the accusations that you leveled. So I ask again what proof do you have to prove that the President committed these crimes?


The investigation has found numerous criminal offenses. If it does nothing else, it rooted out those criminals, and served justice.

So, it’s not a witch hunt. There were real crimes committed, investigated and prosecuted.


Why is everyone misquoting Pelosi?

For those juicy, juicy internet clicks.


Where is the proof provided to the American public? Again I am asking this question and all I get from you libbies is speculative talking points repeated from CNN, MSNBC, and the MADCOW.

Show me verifiable proof! Provide evidence that would be upheld in a court of law!