A moral obligation to impeach

**DitkasSausage** · 01-28-2020, 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by cjandrze

As someone who is often considered a "lib" down here, I find it immensely hilarious and entertaining to hear libs pound the table for John Fucking Bolton as the savior of all this horseshit.

HAHAHA! If I ever called you a "lib" I apologize... I actually like you a lot, and think you make some decent points from your side. I will say this though... I have thought the EXACT same thing! LOL. Imagine you had a time machine, and went back 2 years and said to your liberal friends, "Don't attack him too much.... you'll be begging for more of him one day!"... you'd have gotten punched.

**darb72** · 01-28-2020, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by blueridgemtnman

Like a horse?

A deranged horse that has taken the idea of humans who have not been stomped as a personal affront.

**wickedsolo** · 01-28-2020, 07:19 PM

I have a hard time taking anyone with that kind of mustache seriously.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**CarrollCoRaven** · 01-28-2020, 10:25 PM

Originally Posted by cjandrze

As someone who is often considered a "lib" down here, I find it immensely hilarious and entertaining to hear libs pound the table for John Fucking Bolton as the savior of all this horseshit.

I think you have always had a respectful way of voicing your different opinions down here without being condescending. It's appreciated.

**bacchys** · 01-29-2020, 01:18 AM

Bolton is a warmonger and a nutjob, but he's been an honest warmonger and nutjob.

Same can't be said of Trump.

**bacchys** · 01-29-2020, 01:20 AM

Originally Posted by DitkasSausage

The Federal government had an uptick in revenues after the tax cuts... technically, the country MADE more from the Tax cuts... they didn't cost us at all. Trump does have a spending problem, but Democrats act like they are the alternative to that. It's like saying that you want to quit smoking so you decide to cure it by taking heroine. Democrats are literally the answer to zero questions...

Revenues were down from what they were projected to be without the tax cuts, and cutting taxes when we're running deficits is fiscally irresponsible.

Spending and taxes aren't completely separate things. Spending gets set at those levels because the electorate demands it. Taxes need to be set at levels to cover the demanded spending.

**wickedsolo** · 01-29-2020, 08:46 AM

Originally Posted by bacchys

Bolton is a warmonger and a nutjob, but he's been an honest warmonger and nutjob.

Same can't be said of Trump.

Left: Bolton is just going to get us into another war. He’s a loose cannon that can’t be trusted!

Also Left: Bolton is an honest and impartial guy. We should hear his testimony.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

**JAB1985** · 01-29-2020, 08:53 AM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

Left: Bolton is just going to get us into another war. He’s a loose cannon that can’t be trusted!

Also Left: Bolton is an honest and impartial guy. We should hear his testimony.

being trusted to make a good decision is different than being trusted to tell the truth of something hes witnessed, under oath.

I get the irony of relying on him when they didnt want him in the first place, but I dont see the hypocrisy in those views.

**NCRAVEN** · 01-29-2020, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by JAB1985

being trusted to make a good decision is different than being trusted to tell the truth of something hes witnessed, under oath.

I get the irony of relying on him when they didnt want him in the first place, but I dont see the hypocrisy in those views.

It may not be hypocrisy directly. But to never trust something until it's time and only if they could help your cause does show a bit of lacking in your character.

**Vlad the lad** · 01-29-2020, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by JAB1985

being trusted to make a good decision is different than being trusted to tell the truth of something hes witnessed, under oath.

I get the irony of relying on him when they didnt want him in the first place, but I dont see the hypocrisy in those views.

I see a couple of issues with Bolton testifying.

First of all, there is probably a legal issue with him testifying since he was An advisor
Second. It was his responsibility to know the rights and wrongs. That is why presidents have advisors. If Bolton is saying he knew something was wrong, but didn’t act on that until he wanted to make money from a book, it makes his testimony sketchy
Third. This is still an unconfirmed leak from the NYT. They have a history of making up crap just to get a little attention

The GOP doesn’t own the dems any favors. If Bolton has important info, it should have been discovered in shifts basement last year. Too little too late.

**JAB1985** · 01-29-2020, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

It may not be hypocrisy directly. But to never trust something until it's time and only if they could help your cause does show a bit of lacking in your character.

lacking character? thats quite a judgement.

i think it shows policy variation. they didnt like that hes a war-hawk. thats about it.

**JAB1985** · 01-29-2020, 09:39 AM

Originally Posted by Vlad the lad

I see a couple of issues with Bolton testifying.

First of all, there is probably a legal issue with him testifying since he was An advisor
Second. It was his responsibility to know the rights and wrongs. That is why presidents have advisors. If Bolton is saying he knew something was wrong, but didn’t act on that until he wanted to make money from a book, it makes his testimony sketchy
Third. This is still an unconfirmed leak from the NYT. They have a history of making up crap just to get a little attention

The GOP doesn’t own the dems any favors. If Bolton has important info, it should have been discovered in shifts basement last year. Too little too late.

I dont know if theres any protections for that, especially when this whole thing was started by a whistleblower in the first place, and is following checks and balances.

I think its also on the president to know right from wrong, but yes, if he knew something illegal was directed and didnt speak up, hed have to answer to that as well. Trump can claim ignorance, not that its a good excuse, but Bolton in that case wouldnt. From what I gather, he was not for Trumps tactics and was quite vocal about it, whether or not that was to Trump directly Id like to know as well.

100% correct. The NYT article should not be taken as fact, but it does open the door to a clear reason to ask that question and get to the bottom of it. Based on McConnell's comments about being upset the WH knew about this book and didnt tell them, Id say hes verified the NYTs article, that its at least accurate in thats what it says. Whether he changes his tune under oath is more important to me. As far as I know hell add context that supports Trump, which is fine by me, but im not sure how anybody in the senate can see that statement and not want to bring him in to at least hear him out. If it wasnt the vast majority of Trump's defense that he never told anybody this, and it directly countering that, id be much more understanding of not bringing him in, but this seems like confirmation bias to ignore it.

I dont think the GOP owes Dems anything. they owe us.