The Right Side of the News

Jews have achieved those positions to a disproportionate percentage of their population is because they've sufficiently convinced those they serve that they have superior ability to perform those tasks. Blacks hold many sports positions that are disproportionate to their population percentage, most notably football and basketball, for the same reason. I simply don't believe that gay people have a special talent for reporting news better than straight people. They're selected because of their political positions, because in most cases (not all) their political views tend to lean left. Because unlike being Jewish, or being black, being gay is pretty clearly condemned by the word of God. Anti Christian people tend to worship and trust government. Some gays honestly claim to be Christian, and I don't judge them. As a fundie, I don't believe their lives are any of my business. But I do object to their politically seeking special rights. Since those of them who claim to be Christian bend and shape the word of God to include themselves, it's only logical that they would tend to bend and shape the U.S. constitution to achieve leftist goals. It's not hard to notice the defiant attitude that some of them display.WATCH: Don Lemon’s Trump Hate Goes So Low, Chris Cuomo Calls Him Out On-Air: ‘You’re Petty And Small’ | The Daily Wire Agreed, they're the ones who don't seek special rights. Fox didn't start out as mainstream, they started out as cable station balance to the rest of the news media that was so obviously left, there was a market for what Fox had to offer, when they started up back in 1996. I don't necessarily disagree that they're mainstream by now, considering their comparable ratings, but they still don't seem to me to have the over-the-air access like the rest of the long-traditional news media, their TV access is usually included in pay packages only.They are biased right, no doubt, but they do have a lot of liberal representation on their discussion shows. They outnumber them with conservatives, and constantly destroy and laugh at them though. They keep coming back for more - Fox must pay them really well.

Abuse of power that can be noticed in the everyday lives of the population. The Democrats current definition of "abuse of power" doesn't get anywhere near that. I'll be glad to give you a reason;Page not found | IJROne Democrat representative, (who WON'T be condemned for it in the mainstream media) is suggesting that they'll impeach Trump again if he wins in 2020. No idea on what grounds, but they'll think of something.Do you think the current Democrat party hates democracy? Polls show the majority of Americans don't support the current impeachment fiasco. They're the ones who democratically elected him.

quote:

---

Abuse of power that can be noticed in the everyday lives of the population. The Democrats current definition of "abuse of power" doesn't get anywhere near that.

---

You still provide zero evidence that the Founders agreed with you. Using Presidential powers to coerce a foreign nation to interfere with the US electoral process on the other hand, is as clear an example of abuse of power as you will get.

quote:

---

I'll be glad to give you a reason;

​

Page not found | IJR

---

The suggestion is that Trump has done or will do other things that deserve impeachment. Which is practically certain. So you’ve clearly failed. On the other hand Faith is all for impeaching a Democrat President - whoever it is - without any other reason at all.

quote:

---

Do you think the current Democrat party hates democracy? Polls show the majority of Americans don't support the current impeachment fiasco. They're the ones who democratically elected him.

---

Hilary Clinton won the popular vote. More Americans support impeachment than oppose it. And the Republican Party is the party of gerrymandering, voter suppression and electoral fraud.

And no such thing happened, that's all made up, at best a misreading of the transcript of the phone call or a gross lack of knowledge of that kind of relationship Presidents always have with foreign leaders. Besides which Zelensky keeps saying there was no coercion of any sort. Uh yeah, that's how they think sort of except in reality they have to hallucinate or invent the impeachable offenses as they've been doing for three years now. Since it's all nothing but hteful hot air they can go right on doing it unless saner heads prevail. They didn't find Russian collusion so they tried to concoct obstruction of justice and then that didn't work either. Meanwhile long lists of supposed impeachable offenses kept being conjured up and going poof, and every day the media reported on a new one that would surely do Trump in, and instead of giving up based on the utter lack of evidence of any wrongdoing they went right on inventing new ones. So then they invented a supposedly illegal quid pro quo in the phone call to Zelensky although the only quid pro quo found was by Joe Biden which does seem to have been for personal advantage. Then cuz that wasn't working either they changed it to "bribery" using the word in a sense the Founders didn't have in mind, but that kind of evaporated on them too so what is it now "abuse of power" which is not specificed in the Constitution and has no clear meaning and if anybody' guilty of it that would be Adam Schiff in particular and Pelosi and various FBI leaders and others who have been working to find something to impeach Trump for. Remarkable how when the Dems keep failing they peer into the fog and make the failure of the right instead. The only failure on the rigtht is the failure to knock some sense into the Left. Because Trump is being impeached without any reason and that would be the only way to try to undo the damage done by the Democrats to our Constitutional Republic over the last few years. Levin proposed it and I don't know if it would work but I get his idea that it is needed in order to demonstrate the debths of depravity engaged in against Trump and the need to put the government back on a Constitutional footing. It would only work if at every step the shame nature of the proceeding was pointed out and the comparison made to the current witch hunt.I'm also in favor of impeaching a clew of Dem House members, ub this case not for no reason but for a witch hunt against a President.I've also heard a different statistic than you report, that most Americans are against impeachment.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

And no such thing happened, that's all made up, at best a misreading of the transcript of the phone call or a gross lack of knowledge of that kind of relationship Presidents always have with foreign leaders. Besides which Zelensky keeps saying there was no coercion of any sort.

---

Rubbish. In the phone call Trump responded to the mention of the aid by asking for personal favours. Trump did halt the aid without offering any adequate explanation to even the Republicans in the Senate. Then there is the whole question of Giuliani’s involvement. Further there is witness testimony. Not to mention the fact that announcing an investigation which never happens is hardly a blow against corruption, nor is it plausible that Biden should be such a high priority to the Ukraine.So all you’ve got is Zelensky’s say-so despite all the other evidence. And Zelensky is still hoping for a meeting in the White House, not to mention how admitting to the coercion might affect the future relationship with Trump who still has a good chance of remaining in office.

quote:

---

Uh yeah, that's how they think sort of except in reality they have to hallucinate or invent the impeachable offenses as they've been doing for three years now.

---

Except that they haven’t. Trump is a crook. Everyone knows that. It’s no surprise that he committed an impeachable offence.

quote:

---

They didn't find Russian collusion so they tried to concoct obstruction of justice and then that didn't work either so then they invented a quid pro quo in the phone call to Zelensky although the only quid pro quo found was by Joe Biden

---

Mueller - not the Democrats - did find obstruction of justice, but the Democrats decided not to act on it. So to say that the Democrats tried it is bizarre. And no personal quid pro quo has been shown in Biden’s case - but Trump was asking for one.

quote:

---

Becauswe Trump is being impeached without any reason and that would be the only way to try to undo the damage done by the Democrats to our Constitutional Republic over the last few years.

---

But Trump is being impeached for a valid reason. And there is no way that abusing the impeachment power would undo any damage. It would just do more damage.It is at best a petty act of revenge that would grievously hurt the Republic. At worst an intentional attempt to destroy the Constitutional checks and balances. And you support it.

quote:

---

Levin proposed it and I don't know if it would work but I get his idea that it is needed in order to demonstrate the debths of depravity engaged in against Trump and the need to put the government back on a Constitutional footing.

---

It would demonstrate that the Republicans had hit new depths of depravity and it would greatly damage the Constitution.

quote:

---

It would only work if at every step the shame nature of the proceeding was pointed out and the comparison made to the current witch hunt.

---

The hypocritical lying would certainly illustrate Republican depravity, so I suppose that part really is intentional.And to deal with a point you’ve added by edit

quote:

---

I'm also in favor of impeaching a clew of Dem House members, ub this case not for no reason but for a witch hunt against a President.

---

Yes, you are all in favour of persecuting political opponents on false grounds. You’ve already made that plain. Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

You are making perfectly ordinary standard communications into something criminal.

quote:

---

You are making perfectly ordinary standard communications into something criminal.

---

Because it is perfectly ordinary for a President to ask another country to damage his political opponents ?No, it is at best highly inappropriate especially with the aid question hanging in the balance.This is a better account The dueling US foreign policy approaches to Ukraine pose a risk for Kyiv by Steven Pifer of the Brookings Institute.Pifer picks up on exactly the things I saw in the transcript. For instance: And, of course, investigation has confirmed the suspicions raised by the transcript.Maybe you should have applied basic critical thinking to the transcript instead of blindly refusing to see the serious issues it raised.

PaulK writes: Typo? or a marvelous -if not perhaps an intentional - Freudian slip regarding Madame Speaker?:-)

Typo. Corrected now. But if Hilary Clinton got the nomination again, I’d have to reconsider :-)

No because that isnh't what he was doing. He was prodding Zelensky to do what Zelensky had won his election to do, root out corruption in his country, and check particularly on how they interfered in the 2016 American election against Trump and then as a sort of afterthought look into the Biden quid pro quo on behalf of his son. Biden not the candidate, and would hardly be a threat to Trump anyway, ridiculous to think it had anything to do with the upcoming election. Aid is customarily withheld from corrupt countries.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

there was no quid pro quo on behalf of Biden's son, the firing of the prosecutor had bipartisan and international backing, you agreed to this fact long ago in message 3008. Biden is the current leader among the democratic candidates and polls very well against trump, to pretend otherwise is to stick your head in the sand.

quote:

---

No because that isnh't what he was doing

---

Yes it was. It’s right there in the transcript.

quote:

---

He was prodding Zelensky to do what Zelensky had won his election to do, root out corruption in his country, and check particularly on how they interfered in the 2016 American election against Trump and then as a sort of afterthought look into the Biden quid pro quo on behalf of his son.

---

The whole story of Ukrainian interference - which was minimal - is intended to help Trump (and the Russians). And Zelensky certainly wasn’t elected to go off on a wild goose chase, trying to clear the GRU of hacking the DNC!And Trump makes no mention of going after corruption in general - just going after Biden.

quote:

---

Biden not the candidate, and would hardly be a threat to Trump anyway, ridiculous to think it had anything to do with the upcoming election.

---

Biden is a front-runner for the nomination and widely considered to be one of the most electable candidates.

quote:

---

Aid is customarily withheld from corrupt countries.

---

Except that obviously isn’t what is going on. Trump didn’t talk about corruption - he was meant to, but he dropped that part completely. Nor does it explain the secrecy about the withholding of aid.If you were any good at critical thinking you’d know these lame excuses wouldn’t fly.

No, you don't know how to read the transcrip6t. You have no idea what is being said in the transcript, you have no idea what is normal communication between heads of state and you have no idea that what Trump is saying is absolutelty normal communication. He kept saying the conversation was "perfect" which may be a term we wish he hadn't used but the point is that HE SAID ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG. The idea that he did anything wrong is just a bizarre misreading based on ignorance at best, or worse, an intentional lying mispresentation.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

No, you don't know how to read the transcrip6

---

By which you mean I’m not desperately trying to exonerate Trump.

quote:

---

You have no idea what is being said in the transcript

---

Since I accurately reported on what was said in the transcript that is obviously untrue.

quote:

---

you have no idea what is normal communication between heads of state

---

And nor do you. But I’m not the one trying to argue about that.

quote:

---

Trump is saying is absolutelty normal communication.

---

He is still asking for personal favours, and in context it looks very much as if he is implying that the military aid is dependent on those favours.

quote:

---

The idea that he did anything wrong is just a bizarre misreading at best or an intentional lying mispresentation.

---

Then you don’t think that there is anything wrong in withholding aid from an important ally just to get personal favours.

STOP TELLING ME WHAT I "MEAN!!!!!!!!" I MEAN WHAT I SAID. YOU ARE DOING WHAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE DOING, JUST MAKING IT UP TO SUIT YOURSELF, MAKING ME SAY WHAT YOU THINK JUST AS THEY ARE MAKING TRUMP SAY WHAT THEY THINK. THIS IS EVIL EVIL EVIL. STOP IT!!!!!!