Impeachment

[Averageman]

Do you have some lofty ideals about Presidents and how things work? There's all kinds of unethical or potentially unethical stuff that goes on in politics. It's not some giant Mother Goose story. It's all dirty and all Presidents have been involved in the same kind of things Trump is being accused of. Have you not listened to the recordings of JFK and RFK in the Oval Office or those of LBJ, Nixon, or even transcripts of Reagan's conversations? The difference now is a more polarized Country and snakes making up the Deep State, all operating with their own agendas and turf wars.

And once again for the record, Hunter Biden's boss in Ukraine was PRO-Russian. He was a minister in the PRO-Russian Yanukovych regime. He made huge amounts of money illegally as such, quite a bit of which it's now alleged was laundered through Democrat linked Franklin Templeton Investments, and some of which was laundered through Hunter's Rosemont Capital firm. We know they got away with the $23M the UK was holding under investigation due to NABU's refusal to cooperate with the investigation, but now there are credible allegations that they laundered $7.4 BILLION and that $900,000 went directly to JOE Biden from the Burisma lobbying budget, through Rosemont Seneca Partners for "consultative services".

If that last bit is true, it would mean that while VP Biden was the Ukraine Special Envoy, he was double dipping by working for the direct benefit of Burisma Holdings.

If true, then why wouldn't the Democrats want that fully investigated unless it was for political purposes???

I have no problem with President Trump leaning on a corrupt nation and their newly elected comedian President for anything tied to taxpayer provided aid. If Trump believed Ukraine was involved in 2016 election meddling and corruption from the Bidens, why not ask for this new leader in Ukraine to open it up for additional sunlight? Joe Biden did the same thing when threatened Ukraine money if they didn't fire a particular prosecutor. Why no outrage then? Because when it comes to dealing with 3rd World Countries, it's all about leaning on them to do one thing or another for taxpayer money.

There is little doubt that Ukraine is and was at the time of the Monetary Aid coming from us to them, a snake pit of corruption.
Demanding a time line for "Giving Them" our money is sketchy at best, demanding they look in to some corruption before we give them our money, is only common sense. If some of the controversy concerning one of the biggest offenders happens to include a member of the board who's Father is a former VPOTUS, so be it.
In my opinion, faulting President Trump for what is a Ukraine, Obama Administration, Joe Biden, Hunter Biden and Burisma problem borders of the lunatic's running the Asylum.
The Obama Administration knew Hunter working with Burisma was potentially a controversial issue, otherwise why have the State Department draw up a letter referring all Burisma/Biden questions to a special service to deal with them?
Any questions needing answered concerning Ukrainian's/Russians attempting to influence the 2016 election need some serious answers before they should be asking for any monetary or military aid. If money we have given them has disappeared, we need answers about that too.

If I've learned anything from these hearings, it is that clearly there is a "Deep State" and clearly the Democrats, the media and elements within the Intelligence community, Federal Law Enforcement and the State Department, specifically our Foreign Service are playing ball with them.
So, if you're expecting Joe Biden to be able to demand the removal of a Prosecutor who's looking in to Burisma to be fine, but expect Trump to walk such a fine line of ethical behavior that nothing he does has even a whiff of a potential propensity of ethical problems, you're not working and thinking in the real world.

[Uni-Vibe]

What's interesting about the Deep State is this:

USA is over 200 years old. In that time, the Deep State has never been observed. Scholars, lawyers, politicians, observers from de Tocqueville on forward, have never noticed it.

Until, that is, Steven Bannon and Breitbart had a revelation worthy of John the Baptist, and made us aware. Suddenly it was smashed into our consciousness that a vast conspiratorial apparatus pulled the levers of American domestic and foreigh politics and policy.

Amplified by Mr. Hannity's radio program, suddenly the phrsase "deep state" were on the lips of half the population. It was spoken in the merest whispers by liberal elites. It was bandied about water coolers at work. It was shouted into conservative microphones by the Limbaughs and the Hannitys.

I would like to suggest that it doesn't exist, except in the imaginations of the conspiratorially-minded; but who am I to contest America's Anchorman?

[THCDDM4]

What's interesting about the Deep State is this:

USA is over 200 years old. In that time, the Deep State has never been observed. Scholars, lawyers, politicians, observers from de Tocqueville on forward, have never noticed it.

Until, that is, Steven Bannon and Breitbart had a revelation worthy of John the Baptist, and made us aware. Suddenly it was smashed into our consciousness that a vast conspiratorial apparatus pulled the levers of American domestic and foreigh politics and policy.

Amplified by Mr. Hannity's radio program, suddenly the phrsase "deep state" were on the lips of half the population. It was spoken in the merest whispers by liberal elites. It was bandied about water coolers at work. It was shouted into conservative microphones by the Limbaughs and the Hannitys.

I would like to suggest that it doesn't exist, except in the imaginations of the conspiratorially-minded; but who am I to contest America's Anchorman?

Sure the terminology of "Deep State" is rather new, but the idea is as old as the Nation itself. Historically it has been referred to as a "Cabal" or "Shadow Government".

The idea that there are smaller more powerful groups of people influencing behind the scenes is not only a very old concept, but rather obvious in so many ways. There are tons of groups on both sides who seek to manipulate with money, influence and power.

Yep, the most current nomenclature- "Deep State" was coined in 2017 and it stuck, but what the "Deep State" name represents has been discussed and lamented over for our entire history as a nation.

Here's the thing, uni-vibe; it is less plausible that men in positions of authority WOULD NOT try to control thing to their benefit by networking with other men/woman of power and influence to guide business and government entities to their benefit and their will.

The term is being used more and more because the people who are behind the scenes pushing there will are doing so with veracity not seen before and showing their cards- so it's seen more and discussed more.

If a crime has been committed, produce evidence and make a charge. Otherwise, all these cucks need to get back to what they were elected for, which is running the country. We have too many issues that need resolved to be fvcking around like this. It's a despicable circus and folks like you should either pony up with some real evidence or just stop and get back to your lives.

What the Democrats are doing right now- is projecting to the rest of the world how weak and split we are as a nation. There are some serious consequences to playing these games, at home and beyond our borders. They need to get their asses out of their heads, quit bitching and get to work solving issues like immigration, budgets, paying down national debt, etc.

[armtx77]

What's interesting about the Deep State is this:

USA is over 200 years old. In that time, the Deep State has never been observed. Scholars, lawyers, politicians, observers from de Tocqueville on forward, have never noticed it.


Until, that is, Steven Bannon and Breitbart had a revelation worthy of John the Baptist, and made us aware. Suddenly it was smashed into our consciousness that a vast conspiratorial apparatus pulled the levers of American domestic and foreigh politics and policy.

Amplified by Mr. Hannity's radio program, suddenly the phrsase "deep state" were on the lips of half the population. It was spoken in the merest whispers by liberal elites. It was bandied about water coolers at work. It was shouted into conservative microphones by the Limbaughs and the Hannitys.

I would like to suggest that it doesn't exist, except in the imaginations of the conspiratorially-minded; but who am I to contest America's Anchorman?

How about in the mind of former Acting Director of the CIA?


“There is something unique you have to agree that now the impeachment inquiry is underway, sparked by a complaint from someone within the intelligence community, it feeds the president’s concern, an often-used term about a ‘deep state’ being there to take him out,” Margaret Brennan, the moderator for the event hosted, asked McLaughlin.

“Thank God for the ‘deep state,'” he responded.

You should probably add a couple more news sources to your daily reading. As that information was disseminated in the past 4 weeks.

A quick search on the Google Machine, brought up a dozen links.

[glocktogo]

What's interesting about the Deep State is this:

USA is over 200 years old. In that time, the Deep State has never been observed. Scholars, lawyers, politicians, observers from de Tocqueville on forward, have never noticed it.

Until, that is, Steven Bannon and Breitbart had a revelation worthy of John the Baptist, and made us aware. Suddenly it was smashed into our consciousness that a vast conspiratorial apparatus pulled the levers of American domestic and foreigh politics and policy.

Amplified by Mr. Hannity's radio program, suddenly the phrsase "deep state" were on the lips of half the population. It was spoken in the merest whispers by liberal elites. It was bandied about water coolers at work. It was shouted into conservative microphones by the Limbaughs and the Hannitys.

I would like to suggest that it doesn't exist, except in the imaginations of the conspiratorially-minded; but who am I to contest America's Anchorman?

It's funny what you can't see when you don't want to see it. Andrew Jackson was censured by Congress 185 years ago. Why? Because he was trying to dismantle the financial sector of the Deep State, that's why.

https://mises.org/wire/deep-state-he...nch-government

We're all here on a gun forum with highly knowledgeable enthusiasts who have a pretty deep understanding of gun laws and the 2nd Amendment. If you need a classic example of "Deep State", may I present Exhibit A: The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

I know you know all about their bizarre and often quite controversial rulings by fiat. I know you're aware of examples where they've dropped or massively reduced charges in order to shield their precious and terribly flawed NFA Registry. I know you're aware of their extremely high profile botched operations. I know you're aware of DoJ offices which will not take ATF cases because they're legally unsound. I know you're aware of Fast & Furious, where whistleblowers were retaliated against while the perpetrators were never prosecuted or fired and in some cases, promoted. I know you're aware that BATFE has never been gutted or overhauled, either by funding or personnel shakeups. We can't even get Trump to do something on suppressors or SBR's.

So I ask, if not "Deep State", how do you explain them? And if you can't explain them, why do you think we should pay no attention to the men and women behind the curtains at other departments and agencies?

The reason it's become a hot-button issue more recently is easy to explain. Our country is as sharply divided as it's been since the Civil War. Unreasonable government actions (both administrative and criminal) increased significantly under Obama's 8 year watch. Then the Fourth Estate/Fifth Column became heavily partisan and shielded governmental leftism while simultaneously attacking governmental conservatism (and I am using both of those terms quite loosely).

So I reject your description of the situation entirely. Scholars, lawyers, politicians and observers HAVE noticed it, and for far longer than a few years.

[glocktogo]

What the Democrats are doing right now- is projecting to the rest of the world how weak and split we are as a nation. There are some serious consequences to playing these games, at home and beyond our borders. They need to get their asses out of their heads, quit bitching and get to work solving issues like immigration, budgets, paying down national debt, etc.

That's something I've been commenting on since Trump was backed into releasing the Zelensky call transcripts and has continued every day since, often in the public hearings themselves. Our Congress has been claiming some mantle of protecting our diplomatic relations in their zeal to prosecute Trump. Yet with every attack on Trump officials and every defense of these DoS "career professionals™", they are laying bare a massive amount of sensitive material, diplomatic conversations and tradecraft that will undermine our diplomatic relations for decades to come. They've literally made off the record conversations disparaging foreign countries, governments and officials a matter of public record and broadcast it worldwide. How is that supposed to help foreign relations?

They don't care so long as they get Trump. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is worth the tradeoff if they can politically harm Trump and by extension, the GOP. They do this because they see themselves as the ONLY way forward for the country. Never mind that their own party members have been raiding the coffers and self-dealing massive amounts of US influence in exchange for personal enrichment.

[Adrenaline_6]

That's something I've been commenting on since Trump was backed into releasing the Zelensky call transcripts and has continued every day since, often in the public hearings themselves. Our Congress has been claiming some mantle of protecting our diplomatic relations in their zeal to prosecute Trump. Yet with every attack on Trump officials and every defense of these DoS "career professionals™", they are laying bare a massive amount of sensitive material, diplomatic conversations and tradecraft that will undermine our diplomatic relations for decades to come. They've literally made off the record conversations disparaging foreign countries, governments and officials a matter of public record and broadcast it worldwide. How is that supposed to help foreign relations?

They don't care so long as they get Trump. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is worth the tradeoff if they can politically harm Trump and by extension, the GOP. They do this because they see themselves as the ONLY way forward for the country. Never mind that their own party members have been raiding the coffers and self-dealing massive amounts of US influence in exchange for personal enrichment.

Add to the fact that they themselves are in danger of being laid bare if they don't get rid of Trump. They were overzealous in the Obama era, never thought that someone like Trump would have a snowballs chance in hell of of winning and throwing the monkey wrench in their plans, and in doing so made Trump a true enemy during the election...and Trump being Trump wants his 7 pounds of flesh for it. They have unwittingly put themselves in a corner and know it and are in desperation mode.

[Outlander Systems]

Daily reminder that the term, "Conspiracy Theorist" is a cheap substitute for the term, "Critical-Thinking."

Because, as we all know, to suggest something audacious like, "powerful people might be working together with their own best interests in mind, and that said interests are most likely not congruent in any way, shape, or form, with our interests, is just absolutely bonkers. We know, unquestionably, that the government is absolutely in the business of always telling the truth, and that the corporate media in this country reports on the news of the day, because they care about you, and desperately seek to provide only the most truthful, objective reporting possible, to ensure we have all the necessary information to become an informed public. These aforementioned parties, who all partake of the same parties, are in the same social circles, belong to the same organizations, and collect funding from the same donors and advertisers, are way too principled to ever even imagine colluding together. Come on guys, you don't honestly believe that powerful people would scheme together in the shadows, do you? You don't honestly believe they would lie, cheat, steal and literally kill, to ensure their agenda is successful do you? I guess you guys probably believe in flat earth if you believe that there would ever be anything but above-board activity from the seats of power in this country? Am I right? We have due process, the rule of Law and the Constitution on our side, which prevents this sort of thing from happening.

[LoboTBL]

What's interesting about the Deep State is this:

USA is over 200 years old. In that time, the Deep State has never been observed. Scholars, lawyers, politicians, observers from de Tocqueville on forward, have never noticed it.

Until, that is, Steven Bannon and Breitbart had a revelation worthy of John the Baptist, and made us aware. Suddenly it was smashed into our consciousness that a vast conspiratorial apparatus pulled the levers of American domestic and foreigh politics and policy.

Amplified by Mr. Hannity's radio program, suddenly the phrsase "deep state" were on the lips of half the population. It was spoken in the merest whispers by liberal elites. It was bandied about water coolers at work. It was shouted into conservative microphones by the Limbaughs and the Hannitys.

I would like to suggest that it doesn't exist, except in the imaginations of the conspiratorially-minded; but who am I to contest America's Anchorman?

You're schtick is getting so old and tiresome.

[Todd.K]

The other guy did it defense shouldn't hold water.

You missed my first paragraph, and the entire point I was making.

No action a President takes can be completely free from political gain. The degree of motive is subjective, so we should let voters decide.

You could honestly say Trump's motive for wanting to improve the economy is, to some degree, to help his reelection.

I can actually imagine Shiff in front of a microphone telling us "Trump used his office in a corrupt effort to improve the economy for personal political purposes".


I was opposed to the Clinton impeachment, and I'm old enough (and objective enough) to remember it was for perjury.