Tammy Duckworth

[FordGT90]

The only picks that are "maybes" for me are Bottoms, Abrams, and Whitmer. The rest have too much baggage or are too far left:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN2532TT

Harris: Her performance in Senate committees is repulsive, specifically during Kavanaugh confirmation hearings. She's strikes me as hyper-racist, ill-tempered, and hyper-partisan. The party itself wasn't interested in her on the ballot because these problems are obvious whenever she speaks. She's not leader material. Voted for impeachment which had no Constitutional basis.

Rice: Literally the only thing she is known for was being thrown in front of the Benghazi bus by Obama. Not leadership material.

Bass: One of the rare Democrats to support Green New Deal, hard pass. Voted for impeachment which had no Constitutional basis.

Demmings: Had enough of her as one of the House Managers during the trial. That raspy voice is unforgettable for all the wrong reasons. Voted for impeachment which had no Constitutional basis.

Duckworth: Likely doesn't pass the Constitutional test for "natural born citizen;" ergo, unqualified to hold the position.

Bottoms: Actions as mayor caused a massive drop in morale by police officers in the city leaving the city virtually undefended at a time when it is most needed. I might forgive this but she's lacking in political experience and publication of policy positions.

Warren: Almost as far left as Sanders and that's a serious problem. Hard pass.

Abrams: Maybe okay but there's a lack of experience/information around her. What little is available on her, she strikes me as the most moderate of those named...potentially too moderate. She might fit in with the group of religious black Democrats that agree more with religious white Republicans than the Democratic base. As such, the Democratic party may have a problem with her.

Grisham: What she did vis-à-vis electricity in New Mexico is the surest sign of a politician that doesn't understand the ramifications of her actions. She also sued the surgeon whom attempted to save her husband's life, later dropping the suit. There's not much information available on her but half of what I'm finding is not good.

Whitmer: Not much information again. What little is available is balanced in favor rather than opposed.

[donquixote99]

The crime of bribery is committed both by the person who offers an illegal inducement, and the person who accepts one. If I offer you $100 to do something, that's an inducement. If I already owe you $100 and I offer to not withhold payment, that's an inducement too.

You'll find the word bribery right there in the impeachment clause, in the Constitution.

[Pio1980]

Opinions that defy facts are worthless.

[RickeyM]

Originally Posted by Pio1980

Opinions that defy facts are worthless.

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by Waggs098

Here it is.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...EE8B&FORM=VIRE

For the record I never held it against Obama that he mispronounced a word.

Bullshit whataboutism. Trump mispronounces a plethora of words because he's so fucking intellectually lazy, and has never had a moment of intellectual curiosity that didn't involve the next creative way he could fuck over the next innocent victim who had the misfortune of crossing his path.

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by FordGT90

The only picks that are "maybes" for me are Bottoms, Abrams, and Whitmer. The rest have too much baggage or are too far left:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN2532TT

Harris: Her performance in Senate committees is repulsive, specifically during Kavanaugh confirmation hearings. She's strikes me as hyper-racist, ill-tempered, and hyper-partisan. The party itself wasn't interested in her on the ballot because these problems are obvious whenever she speaks. She's not leader material. Voted for impeachment which had no Constitutional basis.

Rice: Literally the only thing she is known for was being thrown in front of the Benghazi bus by Obama. Not leadership material.

Bass: One of the rare Democrats to support Green New Deal, hard pass. Voted for impeachment which had no Constitutional basis.

Demmings: Had enough of her as one of the House Managers during the trial. That raspy voice is unforgettable for all the wrong reasons. Voted for impeachment which had no Constitutional basis.

Duckworth: Likely doesn't pass the Constitutional test for "natural born citizen;" ergo, unqualified to hold the position.

Bottoms: Actions as mayor caused a massive drop in morale by police officers in the city leaving the city virtually undefended at a time when it is most needed. I might forgive this but she's lacking in political experience and publication of policy positions.

Warren: Almost as far left as Sanders and that's a serious problem. Hard pass.

Abrams: Maybe okay but there's a lack of experience/information around her. What little is available on her, she strikes me as the most moderate of those named...potentially too moderate. She might fit in with the group of religious black Democrats that agree more with religious white Republicans than the Democratic base. As such, the Democratic party may have a problem with her.

Grisham: What she did vis-à-vis electricity in New Mexico is the surest sign of a politician that doesn't understand the ramifications of her actions. She also sued the surgeon whom attempted to save her husband's life, later dropping the suit. There's not much information available on her but half of what I'm finding is not good.

Whitmer: Not much information again. What little is available is balanced in favor rather than opposed.

Feh. Impeachment was the US House doing it's job, and the US Senate proving that the GOP side is, to a member, full of co-conspirators in the criminal enterprise running the executive.

If the analysis of Harris hadn't made me gag, I would have been ROTFLMAO.

[Chicks]

Originally Posted by Ike Bana

Feh. Impeachment was the US House doing it's job, and the US Senate proving that the GOP side is, to a member, full of co-conspirators in the criminal enterprise running the executive.

If the analysis of Harris hadn't made me gag, I would have been ROTFLMAO.

This Ford Pinto clown clearly believes his uninformed, idiotic opinions are "facts". ROFL.

[FordGT90]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

The crime of bribery is committed both by the person who offers an illegal inducement, and the person who accepts one. If I offer you $100 to do something, that's an inducement. If I already owe you $100 and I offer to not withhold payment, that's an inducement too.

You'll find the word bribery right there in the impeachment clause, in the Constitution.

Except POTUS, as chief diplomat, is literally in charge of brokering deals with other nations. POTUS sets the tone and priorities in diplomacy as well, and Trump's focus in Ukraine was corruption, especially carried out by the previous administration.

Further, not one first hand witness said the act was bribery or extortion. They said it was odd. When the same witnesses were asked if they think Trump did anything illegal, none said yes. That's why none of it came to light until many months later when a partisan far down the chain of command saw the memo of the call and forwarded it to investigators...whom also said nothing illegal happened. Didn't stop Schiff and co, did it? Remember what the Senate trial concluded? Nothing illegal happened: acquitted on both charges.

All of those members of the House that didn't listen/heed the advice/warnings of the minority grievously errored: this was the first, and only impeachment to date, where no crime was alleged. It was a purely partisan attack and those three I pointed out were party to it. Pelosi knew a disaster brewing when not one Republican voted in favor of impeachment and not one Democrat against. The Senate exists as a barrier to mob rule and it served its function.

[watsup1000]

Originally Posted by FordGT90

Except POTUS, as chief diplomat, is literally in charge of brokering deals with other nations. POTUS sets the tone and priorities in diplomacy as well, and Trump's focus in Ukraine was corruption, especially carried out by the previous administration.

Further, not one first hand witness said the act was bribery or extortion. They said it was odd. When the same witnesses were asked if they think Trump did anything illegal, none said yes. That's why none of it came to light until many months later when a partisan far down the chain of command saw the memo of the call and forwarded it to investigators...whom also said nothing illegal happened. Didn't stop Schiff and co, did it? Remember what the Senate trial concluded? Nothing illegal happened: acquitted on both charges.

All of those members of the House that didn't listen/heed the advice/warnings of the minority grievously errored: this was the first, and only impeachmentt to date, where no crime was alleged. It was a purely partisan attack and those three I pointed out were party to it. Pelosi should have she had a disaster brewing when not one Republican voted in favor of impeachment and not one Democrat against. The Senate exists as a barrier to mob rule and it served its function.

Guess who’s been drinking the FOX Kool-aid?

[RickeyM]

Originally Posted by FordGT90

Except POTUS, as chief diplomat, is literally in charge of brokering deals with other nations. POTUS sets the tone and priorities in diplomacy as well, and Trump's focus in Ukraine was corruption, especially carried out by the previous administration.

If you're gullible enough to believe that you're gullible enough to believe tRump's a great president. No, let me change that. tRump was focused on corruption alright, engaging in it. Even with his pet AG in charge no corruption of the previous administration has been found. Oh they've alluded to some but none of it has yet to see the light of day.

Originally Posted by watsup1000

Guess who’s been drinking the FOX Kool-aid?

By the gallon, straight up-no chaser.