It's only hokum if somehow a large number of common dictionary meanings changed over night while no one was looking; but when I hear phrases like "Didnt care about US foreign policy" and "Sought to further his own political agenda" in the testimonies which are common phrases used from multiple witness testimonies live in public for all to see I know exactly what to think. There is nothing right or justified about the presidents actions. He has only used the presidency to enrich himself and the fickle hyenas he and his friends all are.

Blind and wild accusations without evidence. This is par for the course in anti-Trumpist circles. All we have to do is look at the track-record to finally realize how flimsy and credulous such claims are.

Devon Nunes was recently under fire from CNN for allegedly meeting Ukrainians, as if doing so was illegal or inappropriate. This has led to Dems to raise ethics complaints. Devon Nunes claims “fake news” and will be bringing CNN to federal court shortly after thanksgiving.

Can’t wait to see who is duping whom.

Threads like this make me thing he's not a Russian troll:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/6815/are-there-any-philosophies-of-the-human-body

Threads like this make me thing he's not a Russian troll: — ZzzoneiroCosm

@NOS4A2

I'm not suggesting a troll. I'm suggesting a Russian commandeered individual. Russian talking points and a certain affect that while Russian like could just be my past experiences with russians and other eastern Europeans influencing my imagination.

NOS isn't what I would call a troll. Much too polite and not insecure enough to be one really. However I definitely feel there is something subversive about him a little. Maybe just the Vampyre references haha

Russian talking points? Perhaps you can give me an example of one.

Russian talking points? Perhaps you can give me an example of one. — NOS4A2

Your posts are a litany of them.

I'm not suggesting a troll. — Mark Dennis

A professional. Smart enough to avoid being obvious. Articulate, expert at equivocation, planting doubts, alternative explanations. 'Well, it could have been.....', 'who knows what the truth is...? 'These aren't "Russian talking points", they're just common sense....'

In any case - the upshot from the televised hearings is that even though it has become abundantly obvious that Trump is guilty has charged, he's likely to be absolved by the GOP which has to all intents become a Trump personality cult. He doesn't even defend the charges, simply says that it's a witchhunt, and his hypnotized acolytes will repeat it after him. It's another product of the way Trump has subverted the rule of law and defied the constitution.

Certainly. I've yet to meet a verified Trump supporter calling US foreign Policy in Ukraine "Meddling" however such thick concepts to describe US diplomacy are some things I see in Russian news outlets. Meddling isn't usually used by members of the group doing the meddling. That's all I'm saying. Its suspicious is all. If I'm wrong I'm wrong but then you don't explicitly deny it either.

Actually I have open expectations for the senate trial. Would you like to hear some of my theories on what may happen during the senate trial? Its a minefield for trump I can tell you.

Sure. But I'm hoping against hope that a silent quorum of Republicans are keeping their powder dry until the vote

Me too; I'm also hoping Trump publically testifies in the senate trial answering questions from both sides. He's a Damn liability to himself. It doesn't even matter if a Republican question is friendly to a rational person. This is TRUMP! If he were to start feeling the pressure then how do we know he want have a public meltdown or rant some crazy theory about how the deep state has infiltrated his defense?

If he were to testify it would be a circus; I'm sure it will never happen. All this 'deep state' business is borderline treason from the get go. He's willing to characterize all these State Department and Justice Department officials as 'unelected bureaucrats' trying to 'overthrow the elected government' because of political animosity (we got someone here boosting the argument!), when in reality what you're seeing is the lawful (and desperate) attempt by the organs of Government to reign in a rogue president who routinely violates the Oath of Office.

As Fiona Hill said, there really is a conspiracy afoot, but it's the Republican Party that are the conspirators.

The Republican Party has responded to the increasing diversity of the electorate with an accelerating intolerance for ethnic and religious minorities, and with elaborate schemes to disenfranchise rival constituencies and rig election rules to its advantage. Crucial to this effort is its conviction that the Republican electorate is the only one that can confer legitimacy on elected officials, and that the party’s political opponents are no longer wrong but fundamentally illegitimate, faithless usurpers with no right to determine the direction of the country. This has manifested in the quasi-religious dogma that Trump represents the will of Real America, and therefore defiance of his will is itself a form of treason.

Believing that Republican officials will be convinced by the evidence proffered by Trump’s own staff and political appointees is a mistake, because the underlying facts are not genuinely in dispute. Trumpists are not operating from an ethical framework that even allows acknowledgment that the president is capable of being guilty. Trump is the nation, and the nation cannot commit treason against itself. On the contrary, it is Joe Biden who is guilty of betrayal, defying the tribune of the people by seeking to run against him, and it is Trump’s treacherous staff who convict themselves of treason with every statement that implicates the president. The more evidence of Trump’s misdeeds the Democrats uncover, the more they reveal themselves as traitors. For Trumpists, there is no higher patriotism than bending to Trump’s will, and no more base corruption than defying it.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/trumps-conspiracy-against-democracy/602464/

Does that Atlantic article not generalise a lot of individuals from the common man trump supporter to republican senators? Some of them are genuinely just ignorant. Sometimes wilfully and sometimes because they are just to busy to take the time to educate themselves. I maintain a few conversations with some Republicans on Reddit. One mans beliefs in following trump were very easily dissuaded due to the reasons behind following. They did not know the history of the American contintinent and genuinely thought white Europeans from England were the first to settle here when it was in fact the spaniards who were the first and they colonised much of north america and all of south America without much contest. Then it was the French and then the English. This is only lookijg at the governments undertaking it ignoring the swathes of immigrants from all lands coming peacefully into the Spanish, French and English territories.

Does that Atlantic article not generalise a lot of individuals from the common man trump supporter to republican senators? — Mark Dennis

No. It's completely accurate in my opinion. This is not Republican vs Democrat: this is Democracy vs Dictatorship. That's what you're looking at.

So is that the same as saying all republicans are complicit in being on the Dictatorship side? I don't think that makes them Republican anymore.

I do see what you are saying but I think the enemy of democracy isn't as numerous as it seems to be, they are just louder.

So is that the same as saying all republicans are complicit in being on the Dictatorship side? I don't think that makes them Republican anymore. — Mark Dennis

Many Republicans are repelled by Trump. (On the night of the GOP Conference, when Trump won the nomination, there was a desperate attempt to stop his nomination by Conservative never-trumpers. There were many big names on that list.) But he successfully mounted a 'hostile takeover' of the GoP.

the enemy of democracy isn't as numerous as it seems to be, they are just louder. — Mark Dennis

And they happen to be in the White House!!

Not for much longer. Have faith and heckle the fuck out of your local senator and Republican senators with duties which require them to have open lines of communication with members of the public outside of their districts. Like Moscow Mitch.

That’s quite the theory.

Also, should say either Trump be Impeached or defeated in the 2020 elections there will be one thing that will stop Trumps whitehouse dead in its tracks from mounting any government sanctioned backlash via civil incitement. The thing I love to hate and hate to love; Beaurocracy. Specifically SS Beaurocracy; The secret service unequivocally DO NOT WORK FOR TRUMP. They work for the Office of the President of the United States. Which a convicted or defeated Trump will not be. If any trump supporters try to kickoff civil war then the national guard will probably already be prepared to step in.

Now obviously some things along that road can still go wrong and I still see a good deal of violence happening in some places in the USA :/ not sure how to ease your mind about that.

They each testified to their presumptions, sure, but not to any such fact. Surely they were convinced that he had such motivations just as you guys are, but it was more likely they were convinced of it from some aspect of reporting or dem propaganda than Trump himself. In fact, Trump explicitly said the opposite: no quid pro quo. — NOS4A2

First of all, multiple people reached the same conclusion independent of each other. That's corroborating evidence. You can call it presumptions, I call it a shared understanding of the intent of the president.

Second, when a murderer goes out of his way to deny he didn't murder someone we should all believe him. Where are you getting this sort of reasoning from? Trump's denial isn't worth anything.

Also Trump:

I mean, I asked it very point-blank, because we're looking for corruption. There's tremendous corruption. Why should we be giving hundreds of millions of dollars to countries when there's this kind of corruption? — Trump

Oops.

It does make his intent explicit. The favor is in reference to finding out what happened in 2016, specifically Ukraine’s meddling. He also stated his intention that he wanted Zelensky to speak to the Attorney General regarding these efforts. No where does Trump state he will withhold aid if they do not comply. Two expressions of intent, none of which have anything to do with finding political dirt or the 2020 elections. — NOS4A2

I bolded the word that clearly shows one was dependent on the other. He goes into the rest of the favour later in the call when referencing Hunter Biden. I'm on my phone though and it's annoying to look it up.

lol. They should make one for the alt-right too. Everyone I don't agree with is a neo-Marxist social justice warrior.

Except I'm not saying that of everyone who disagrees with me? Just you. I also don't think you are a "BOT" either. All I've said is you act Russian and say things which are good for Russian foreign policy not the USAs and seeing as fox news if full of Russian talking points this isn't wrong either.

You and Russian media say very similar things. To and see for yourself. Does that not bother you as an American?

First of all, multiple people reached the same conclusion independent of each other. That's corroborating evidence. You can call it presumptions, I call it a shared understanding of the intent of the president.

Second, when a murderer goes out of his way to deny he didn't murder someone we should all believe him. Where are you getting this sort of reasoning from? Trump's denial isn't worth anything.

People once reached a “shared understanding” about the geocentric Universe. Most people in this thread reached a “shared understanding” regarding Trump’s intent independent of the same people. But it’s not so independent when you’re reading the same news and falling for the same anti-Trump propaganda.

I didn’t say you should believe him. Have you heard of the presumption of innocence?

Yes, Trump was looking for corruption. You claim he was engaging in corruption.

But it’s not so independent when you’re reading the same news and falling for the same anti-Trump propaganda. — NOS4A2

Actually, the anti-Trump stuff is true. It's the pro-Trump stuff that's propaganda. You can trust me on this.

Remember when Trump was a Russian agent?

He still is.

It was a neo-McCarthyite conspiracy theory. It won’t be long until they blame this one on the Russians.

But it’s not so independent when you’re reading the same news and falling for the same anti-Trump propaganda — NOS4A2

I'm reading all sides of the news or at least as many as I can. It's not difficult to find sites that indicate political leanings and I'm assuming that as a lot of the people on here are a lot more intelligent than your average person (including yourself) is reading news from both sides and centrist views as well as looking for unpolitically biased news outlets.

So far most of what you have shared is from Fox. However most of the time foxes agenda rarely matches with other news outlets including some conservative ones.

All news is at the very least news of what someone somewhere is perceiving. It is up to us to ask what are they reading which makes them percieve that?

I will move on and subtract my comments about you and Russia but I know you are at least intelligent enough to perform a simple exercise with some news research. Try and imagine you are from a neutral country and just reading about this stuff now and that you have no familiarity with American Politics. Tell us what you experience and think during this exercise. Even if you thought something like "Trump seems bad here" and then come up with an argument for why that view is wrong and that Trump is actually doing good.

Then I want you to try and come up with an argument for why another 4 years of donald trump is actually good for the democratic supporters who hate him. How is another 4 years of trump going to benefit all citizens?

So far most of what you have shared is from Fox. However most of the time foxes agenda rarely matches with other news outlets including some conservative ones.

That’s false. I avoid Fox unless an interview has occurred there because I know this fallacy will come my way. I try to use sources that are acceptable to anti-Trumpers.

Then I want you to try and come up with an argument for why another 4 years of donald trump is actually good for the democratic supporters who hate him. How is another 4 years of trump going to benefit all citizens?

Trump’s track-record is good enough reason to vote for him again. Trump’s roaring and record-breaking economy, the jobs, the historically low unemployment, the defeat of the caliphate, becoming the world’s largest producer of oil, prison reform, legalized hemp, and all of this while embattled by frivolous investigations, an anti-Trump press, and a do-nothing opposition. I can only imagine what he could accomplish if the establishment and celebrity-class could break their fevered anti-Trumpism long enough to get out of his way.

Can anyone name a single person who is better off for having encountered Trump? He has an astonishing record for hurting people and doing damage, beyond all reason and probability. The author M. Scott Peck has the measure and name of such people: evil. Evil, that is, as not-a-joke evil. And primitive communities did not tolerate the presence of evil, because they knew the harm and danger of it, and them. They knew a thing or two, and we've forgot.