• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Now that Trump is impeached...

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The "obstruction of Congress" charge is ridiculous, as it's over Trump's refusal to cooperate in his own impeachment inquiry. In effect, Congress was asking him to try to impeach himself, so naturally he refused, which was his right.

As for "abuse of power, most POTUSes from the 20th century til now have done many of the same things. The most-obvious was FDR's threat to withhold badly-needed destroyers & merchant ships from Britain unless Churchill agreed to FDR's strategy. No one in the OSA cried "Foul" then, even though the stakes were much-higher then. In those days, victory for the Allies was far-from-certain.

And since then, every POTUS has used "foreign aid" as a leverage tool to get certain nations to do certain things our way. And that includes MILITARY aid. Just ask the little oil countries threatened by Saddam's Iraq !

Now, Clinton outright LIED to Congress about Monica & Paula Jones. That CERTAINLY was a CRIME ! But, the Senate didn't come close to removing him. They considered that to be too-harsh a penalty for the minor infractions he'd done. They recognized that no POTUS is perfect, nor is any member of Congress, as all are merely people, not Jesus Himself.

Now, why would Pelosi want to withhold the articles from the Senate, now that the House has passed them? Because she's trying to get Mc Connell to hold the trial HER way. Appears SHE'S obstructing Congress at least as much or more than she accused Trump of doing by holding up the Constitutionally-mandated process of impeachment if she goes through with her threat to withhold those articles !

But she knows the political fallout against the Dems will be immense once the Senate clears Trump, & the GOP starts screaming about the Dems' huge waste of taxpayer $$s. She's trying to mitigate the damage somehow. Remember, she wasn't screaming bloody murder wanting impeachment to start with.

End results: Come Nov. 2020, a plug will be pulled from a big drain pipe in the swamp !
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The "obstruction of Congress" charge is ridiculous, as it's over Trump's refusal to cooperate in his own impeachment inquiry. In effect, Congress was asking him to try to impeach himself, so naturally he refused, which was his right.

As for "abuse of power, most POTUSes from the 20th century til now have done many of the same things. The most-obvious was FDR's threat to withhold badly-needed destroyers & merchant ships from Britain unless Churchill agreed to FDR's strategy. No one in the OSA cried "Foul" then, even though the stakes were much-higher then. In those days, victory for the Allies was far-from-certain.

And since then, every POTUS has used "foreign aid" as a leverage tool to get certain nations to do certain things our way. And that includes MILITARY aid. Just ask the little oil countries threatened by Saddam's Iraq !

Now, Clinton outright LIED to Congress about Monica & Paula Jones. That CERTAINLY was a CRIME ! But, the Senate didn't come close to removing him. They considered that to be too-harsh a penalty for the minor infractions he'd done. They recognized that no POTUS is perfect, nor is any member of Congress, as all are merely people, not Jesus Himself.

Now, why would Pelosi want to withhold the articles from the Senate, now that the House has passed them? Because she's trying to get Mc Connell to hold the trial HER way. Appears SHE'S obstructing Congress at least as much or more than she accused Trump of doing by holding up the Constitutionally-mandated process of impeachment if she goes through with her threat to withhold those articles !

But she knows the political fallout against the Dems will be immense once the Senate clears Trump, & the GOP starts screaming about the Dems' huge waste of taxpayer $$s. She's trying to mitigate the damage somehow. Remember, she wasn't screaming bloody murder wanting impeachment to start with.

End results: Come Nov. 2020, a plug will be pulled from a big drain pipe in the swamp !

You are right that Pelosi is now trying to obstruct Congress. However, all her talk about bipartisanship, etc., was just Pelosi lying. Part of the reason for her lies is that she got her son some cash from Ukraine. She has no honor. She says that she is a Catholic but since 2013 she is not supposed to receive communion from a Catholic church, which of course is a Vatican ruling that has no effect on rich people like Pelosi who can build her own church and staff it with her lackeys. She is just a demagogue. Imagine, God Forbid, that the Democrats would be able to take out Trump and Pence and make Pelosi President. That would be a female dictatorship that would crash the economy in a couple of days. Pelosi should move to Mecca.
 

Scott Downey

Well-Known Member
Let's hope the democrats will be tossed out of power in 2020. They do always have some supporters who don't care, anything democrats will do is ok by them if it is against Trump and republicans. Democrats entirely partisan politics impeach Trump but then demand Senate republicans not be partisan and do things the democrats unfair ways, well this is impossible. Democrats started this war.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
not all that is Democrat is Democrat but ARE the Globalist Elite. AOC being their young firebrand awaiting her 37th birthday and the POTENTIAL presidency of the US.

BUT WAIT!! wont the world have ended by then?

upload_2019-12-19_6-56-18.jpeg
 

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Now, why would Pelosi want to withhold the articles from the Senate, now that the House has passed them? Because she's trying to get Mc Connell to hold the trial HER way. Appears SHE'S obstructing Congress at least as much or more than she accused Trump of doing by holding up the Constitutionally-mandated process of impeachment if she goes through with her threat to withhold those articles !
Exactly, they are trying to wield power that has not been granted to the lower chamber.
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
As for "abuse of power, most POTUSes from the 20th century til now have done many of the same things. The most-obvious was FDR's threat to withhold badly-needed destroyers & merchant ships from Britain unless Churchill agreed to FDR's strategy. No one in the OSA cried "Foul" then, even though the stakes were much-higher then. In those days, victory for the Allies was far-from-certain.

And since then, every POTUS has used "foreign aid" as a leverage tool to get certain nations to do certain things our way. And that includes MILITARY aid. Just ask the little oil countries threatened by Saddam's Iraq !

The difference, of course, is that Trump's actions were related to investigating a political opponent. With an election coming up and the indications that foreign governments had interfered in our 2016 elections, it is not the same thing as FDR and Churchill.

That said, the impeachment process was a sham.
 

Roy

<img src=/0710.gif>
Site Supporter
If I were "Supreme Senatorial Dictator," Pelosi would have a deadline (a day or two) for turning over the impeachment articles. After the deadline, end of ballgame.
 

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
The difference, of course, is that Trump's actions were related to investigating a political opponent. With an election coming up and the indications that foreign governments had interfered in our 2016 elections, it is not the same thing as FDR and Churchill.
And the Democrats might have a leg to stand on if those were not ongoing investigations and if there was an actual quid pro quo involved.
 

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Most quid quo pros aren't illegal. Most of us do them every day, E. G. "You scratch my back; I'll scratch your head."

From the days of the Reagan presidency onward, American foreign aid usually comes with strings attached, as well it should.

And what POTUS or candidate has not tried his best to dig up dirt on his opponents? The gang of Dem POTUS candidates is doing so right now.

Thank you, O Dem House, for committing political suicide !
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Most quid quo pros aren't illegal. Most of us do them every day, E. G. "You scratch my back; I'll scratch your head."

From the days of the Reagan presidency onward, American foreign aid usually comes with strings attached, as well it should.
Well - when we get a loan from a lending institute - yes we'll give you a loan if you will pay our outrageous interest rate.
 

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Well - when we get a loan from a lending institute - yes we'll give you a loan if you will pay our outrageous interest rate.

You know the Golden Rule - "He who has the gold makes the rule!"

BTW, Sportzz Fanzz, Trump raised $ 5 million in campaign funds yesterday alone !
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Most quid quo pros aren't illegal. Most of us do them every day, E. G. "You scratch my back; I'll scratch your head."

From the days of the Reagan presidency onward, American foreign aid usually comes with strings attached, as well it should.

And what POTUS or candidate has not tried his best to dig up dirt on his opponents? The gang of Dem POTUS candidates is doing so right now.

You're missing my point. Even if there were no military aid promised to Ukraine, no quid quo pro, the fact that Trump asked the president of Ukraine to investigate a political opponent is the issue. The fact that it was Ukraine compounds the problem.

I think had Hunter Biden worked for a company in say, Norway, and Trump asked their government to look into corruption it wouldn't have been an issue because Norway is not suspected with interfering in our election. Nor are they warring with Russia, another country suspected with interfering in our elections.
 

agedman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Confusion, accusations, derision, and dissension....

What does that character sound like?

The enemy of Grace or leadership ungodliness?
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
If I were "Supreme Senatorial Dictator," Pelosi would have a deadline (a day or two) for turning over the impeachment articles. After the deadline, end of ballgame.

The next time there is a Dem in the White House and a GOP House, the GOP should impeach the Dem on the first day using this very same resolution of false accusations and false witness passed by Pelosi, no?
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You're missing my point. Even if there were no military aid promised to Ukraine, no quid quo pro, the fact that Trump asked the president of Ukraine to investigate a political opponent is the issue. The fact that it was Ukraine compounds the problem.

I think had Hunter Biden worked for a company in say, Norway, and Trump asked their government to look into corruption it wouldn't have been an issue because Norway is not suspected with interfering in our election. Nor are they warring with Russia, another country suspected with interfering in our elections.

Yes, and if Joe Biden had not bragged at the Council on Foreign Relations that he got Obama to tell the Ukraine to fire the prosecutor looking into Hunter's big paydays, maybe no one would know how Obama operated. Is what Joe Biden did illegal? Probably not. His son was probably broke and needed the money. Biden and Pelosi didn't take money--they just got jobs for kids.
 

Reynolds

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The "obstruction of Congress" charge is ridiculous, as it's over Trump's refusal to cooperate in his own impeachment inquiry. In effect, Congress was asking him to try to impeach himself, so naturally he refused, which was his right.

As for "abuse of power, most POTUSes from the 20th century til now have done many of the same things. The most-obvious was FDR's threat to withhold badly-needed destroyers & merchant ships from Britain unless Churchill agreed to FDR's strategy. No one in the OSA cried "Foul" then, even though the stakes were much-higher then. In those days, victory for the Allies was far-from-certain.

And since then, every POTUS has used "foreign aid" as a leverage tool to get certain nations to do certain things our way. And that includes MILITARY aid. Just ask the little oil countries threatened by Saddam's Iraq !

Now, Clinton outright LIED to Congress about Monica & Paula Jones. That CERTAINLY was a CRIME ! But, the Senate didn't come close to removing him. They considered that to be too-harsh a penalty for the minor infractions he'd done. They recognized that no POTUS is perfect, nor is any member of Congress, as all are merely people, not Jesus Himself.

Now, why would Pelosi want to withhold the articles from the Senate, now that the House has passed them? Because she's trying to get Mc Connell to hold the trial HER way. Appears SHE'S obstructing Congress at least as much or more than she accused Trump of doing by holding up the Constitutionally-mandated process of impeachment if she goes through with her threat to withhold those articles !

But she knows the political fallout against the Dems will be immense once the Senate clears Trump, & the GOP starts screaming about the Dems' huge waste of taxpayer $$s. She's trying to mitigate the damage somehow. Remember, she wasn't screaming bloody murder wanting impeachment to start with.

End results: Come Nov. 2020, a plug will be pulled from a big drain pipe in the swamp !
Its all a sham show and utmost hypocrisy is on display. The Democrats are committing treason
 

agedman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Political quid pro quo

You elect me, then I will take your money, your land, your freedom.

Christian quid pro quo

Hit me I will turn the other cheek

Take my coat, here is also my shirt.
 

BroTom64

Active Member
Site Supporter
The big question in my mind is: Did Trump go after Biden because he was or could become his opponent for the Presidency or did Trump go after Biden because he saw him as corrupt and part of the swamp?

I personally don't think Trump was worried enough about Biden to try to damage him politically. I think Trump would love to have a debate with Joe. I think Trump is past tied of Washington corruption and truly wanted Ukraine to clean it's house which would help Trump drain our swamp.

No documented facts, just my opinion / assessment which makes it as valid as any of the witnesses from the House Impeachment Inquiry.
 
Last edited:

BroTom64

Active Member
Site Supporter
I think had Hunter Biden worked for a company in say, Norway, and Trump asked their government to look into corruption it wouldn't have been an issue because Norway is not suspected with interfering in our election. Nor are they warring with Russia, another country suspected with interfering in our elections.

My thoughts are: Because the countries are suspected of interfering with our election, President Trump had MORE reason to want them to clean house.
What is the evidence that any Russian / Ukrainian meddling was a help to Trump? While the Democrats and the Media don't seem to believe Trump could have without outside help, where is the hard evidence that any Russian interference was more than an attempt to divide the County further. If that was their design they were pretty successful!
Most if not all of what I have heard leads me to believe that Hillary benefited more from Russia than Trump.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
its a call. was Trump actually concerned about corruption coming out of the Ukraine entangled with certain American families and the Ukrainian MAFIA or seeking his own self interest?

Let the voters decide November next.

OK SO HE BENEFITS BY BLOWING THE WHISTLE ON HUNTER B.
IT CANT BE HELPED AND THEREFORE DOESN'T MATTER TO TRUMP AS WELL IT SHOULDN'T.

Wake up America even Hunter said he probably wouldn't have been paid 60K/month if his dad wasn't the VPOTUS.

as the chief guardian of our nation Trump was just doing his job.
 
Top