Kamala Harris

Kyle

Kyle

Beloved Misanthrope
PREMO Member
6aca1ab1629c7de8d8169f28fd8ea71d11-02-joe-biden-finger-nibble-wife.rsquare.w1200.jpg
 
PsyOps

PsyOps

Pixelated
Crabcatcher79 said:
Collusion was proven and Trump was impeached in the house. Only his sycophants wouldn't allow witness's in the senate and dismissed the proceedings.
Click to expand...

You do know liberals were calling for Trump's impeachment before he even entered the White House? Well, no you don't. CNN didn't tell you this.

Democrats in the house would have impeached Trump for making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich without the jelly. I always thought the Mueller report was the end-all for you liberals in getting rid of Trump. Mueller spent 2 years trying to find evidence of collusion; and what was his conclusion Carb? WHAT? From the report Volume I, page 2 :

"the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities"

From Volume I, page 175:

"Although members of the IRA had contact with individuals affiliated with the Trump Campaign, the indictment does not charge any Trump Campaign official or any other U.S. person with participating in the conspiracy."

From Volume II, Page 76:

"the evidence uncovered in the investigation didnot establish that the President orthose closeto him wereinvolved in the charged Russian computer-hacking or active-measure conspiracies, or that the President otherwise had an unlawful relationship with any Russian official."

The impeachment wasn't about collusion anyway. It was about alleged abuse of power, exposed by a whistleblower - WHO WAS NEVER CALLED TO TESTIFY - over a phone call that Trump was accused of "withholding military aid as a means of pressuring newly elected president of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky to pursue investigations of Joe Biden and his son Hunter". Democrats couldn't use collusion, because Mueller popped that balloon. If it wasn't this phone call, it would have been something else from their barrel of tricks. They were determined to impeach Trump.

You're ability to conflate issues really sucks. While you tried, you fail at facts.
 
C

Crabcatcher79

Well-Known Member
PsyOps said:
You do know liberals were calling for Trump's impeachment before he even entered the White House? Well, no you don't. CNN didn't tell you this.

Democrats in the house would have impeached Trump for making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich without the jelly. I always thought the Mueller report was the end-all for you liberals in getting rid of Trump. Mueller spent 2 years trying to find evidence of collusion; and what was his conclusion Carb? WHAT? From the report Volume I, page 2 :

"the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities"

From Volume I, page 175:

"Although members of the IRA had contact with individuals affiliated with the Trump Campaign, the indictment does not charge any Trump Campaign official or any other U.S. person with participating in the conspiracy."

From Volume II, Page 76:

"the evidence uncovered in the investigation didnot establish that the President orthose closeto him wereinvolved in the charged Russian computer-hacking or active-measure conspiracies, or that the President otherwise had an unlawful relationship with any Russian official."

The impeachment wasn't about collusion anyway. It was about alleged abuse of power, exposed by a whistleblower - WHO WAS NEVER CALLED TO TESTIFY - over a phone call that Trump was accused of "withholding military aid as a means of pressuring newly elected president of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky to pursue investigations of Joe Biden and his son Hunter". Democrats couldn't use collusion, because Mueller popped that balloon. If it wasn't this phone call, it would have been something else from their barrel of tricks. They were determined to impeach Trump.

You're ability to conflate issues really sucks. While you tried, you fail at facts.
Click to expand...

Trump and the GOP were claiming Obama wasn't eligible to be president before he was even elected. At least the Democrats and evidence and followed through and impeachment him.

Now Trump is doing the same thing by questioning Harris's eligibility. Don't you guys ever see the pattern or recognize what he is doing?
 
Clem72

Clem72

Well-Known Member
vraiblonde said:
Kamala Harris' ancestors raped their slaves???

Does BLM know about this?
Click to expand...

I have said the same thing multiple times. If white descendants of slave owners owe reparations because of an action their ancestor took, then so do black descendants of slave owners. And if those actions included rape as well, seems like they have even more to answer for.

Seriously. How does committing one act make their descendants responsible, but committing another act erases that responsibility?

What if their white descendants were a product of rape as well? Today we assume those under 18 can't consent, and yet women routinely were married and had children younger than this in those days. By our standards those were all rapes. How about inheritance, do we say someone today born from rape is not due child support, cannot inherit? If not, that means we recognize the connection between a parent and a child of rape. What if it WASN'T rape? Are we to believe 100% of black people today who have white ancestors were the product of rape? What if you are half-black half white born to loving married parents, and there's a slave owner in the ancestry of your white parent. Do you still get a free pass due to the color of your skin?

Either you inherit responsibilities of your ancestors, or you don't.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top