The Impeachment Process Has Officially Begun (3 Viewers)

[Andrus]

By Laura Bassett

After months of internal arguing among Democrats over whether to impeach President Donald Trump, the dam is finally breaking in favor of trying to remove him from office. The Washington Post reported that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would announce a formal impeachment inquiry on Tuesday, following a bombshell report that Trump illegally asked Ukraine’s government to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, one of his political opponents. (He essentially admitted to having done so over the weekend.)

“Now that we have the facts, we’re ready,” Pelosi said Tuesday morning at a forum hosted by The Atlantic. At 5 p.m. the same day, she was back with more. "The actions taken to date by the president have seriously violated the constitution, especially when the president says Article Two says I can do whatever I want," referring to the segment of the Constitution that defines the power of the executive branch of the government. Pelosi's message was that checks and balances of those branches are just as central to the Constitution. And one more thing: "Today, I am announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry," she said at a conference broadcast on Twitter by the Huffington Post. ...

Read the Full Story - InStyle

 

[not2rich]

What does that have to do with the video clip of Graham other than some random Twitter poster referencing QAnon?

It has to do with the credibility of the source, and by extension the credibility of the person posting the content.

 

[Beach Friends]

It has to do with the credibility of the source, and by extension the credibility of the person posting the content.

Lol, how does the credibility of the source even come into play here? It's a video clip of a Lindsey speaking on a panel. I made absolutely no mention of any of the comments made by anyone in the Twiiter thread.

 

[MT15]

SFL, you think there’s a vast conspiracy then? Because that’s what Graham is saying, right? He’s saying that Vindman, an active duty LTC, is plotting against Trump, along with some FBI agents, some CIA agents and some DOJ lawyers.

QAnon believes this, along with some other really crazy stuff. They are classified as a cult, and identified as a domestic terror threat.

These are essentially the same people responsible for a man walking into a DC pizza parlor and firing his weapon because they were supposedly running a child porn scheme or something from their basement. The pizza parlor doesn’t even have a basement. They made up all these signs and signals that were supposedly being given by politicians to direct their beliefs. They are looney tunes, but not in an endearing weird uncle way, rather in a dangerous may turn violent at any time way.

This is Graham pandering to them (or more accurately, to Trump). Trump has retweeted some of their nut job tweets and we all know he loves a nonsensical conspiracy theory, which is why he pushed birtherism for years and years. Only now he’s the president, and it’s incredibly damaging both to the individuals he targets as well as our country to indulge his crazy theories as if there is any basis behind them.

Which is why you should rethink what you just said below. You’re suggesting that a war hero Army Ranger who has served this country in an exemplary way should be investigated because of a crazy conspiracy theory cooked up by people who believe that John Kennedy Jr. faked his death and is leading the crusade they champion secretly. They also believe that when everything goes down Obama, Clinton and innumerable other Democrats will be rounded up and sent to Gitmo. I’m sure they have just added Mitt Romney and Vindman to their list. They believed that McCain was faking his cancer and using his wheelchair to hide the ankle bracelet that he was wearing because he was really in custody and being sent to prison, and his death was faked to hide that fact.

Didnt you get fairly indignant that Trump got investigated on what you thought was flimsy evidence? But now you’re fine with investigating folks on no evidence at all?

I'm not a fan of Graham, but I support what he's saying as far as what should be looked into.

 

[not2rich]

Lol, how does the credibility of the source even come into play here? It's a video clip of a Lindsey speaking on a panel. I made absolutely no mention of any of the comments made by anyone in the Twiiter thread.

The fact you posted the video from this particular source tells us a lot. Thanks, lol.

 

[MT15]

The fact you posted the video from this particular source tells us a lot. Thanks, lol.

I don’t know how I didn’t figure it out before now, honestly.

 

[wardorican]

It would be interesting to see how Vindman does with his peers at the War College.

Words you will never hear, "hey Vindman, you have plans for lunch?

Seems an odd assumption to make.

 

[Beach Friends]

Seems an odd assumption to make.

If you were making such assumptions I might agree that you don't have any basis for that. I grew up around the military, have attended officer schools (although not the one he is going to) and spoke with someone this past week who recently graduated from the war college who had the same sentiments.

 

[wardorican]

If you were making such assumptions I might agree that you don't have any basis for that. I grew up around the military, have attended officer schools (although not the one he is going to) and spoke with someone this past week who recently graduated from the war college who had the same sentiments.

So, you attended an officer school? I didn't think you were an officer. And that's enough to know how it will play out for Vindman?

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure anyone at the War College would think about it, while Trump is in office. Don't want their careers derailed by the vindictive guy.

Also, not sure why you felt the need to add that first sentence.

 

[not2rich]

If you were making such assumptions I might agree that you don't have any basis for that. I grew up around the military, have attended officer schools (although not the one he is going to) and spoke with someone this past week who recently graduated from the war college who had the same sentiments.

I didn't grow up in the military, but I was actually in the military. And it's a lot like society generally - there are lots of different personality types with different beliefs. But I understand the power of anecdotal experience in shaping one's assumptions.

 

[SaintForLife]

SFL, you think there’s a vast conspiracy then? Because that’s what Graham is saying, right? He’s saying that Vindman, an active duty LTC, is plotting against Trump, along with some FBI agents, some CIA agents and some DOJ lawyers.

QAnon believes this, along with some other really crazy stuff. They are classified as a cult, and identified as a domestic terror threat.

These are essentially the same people responsible for a man walking into a DC pizza parlor and firing his weapon because they were supposedly running a child porn scheme or something from their basement. The pizza parlor doesn’t even have a basement. They made up all these signs and signals that were supposedly being given by politicians to direct their beliefs. They are looney tunes, but not in an endearing weird uncle way, rather in a dangerous may turn violent at any time way.

This is Graham pandering to them (or more accurately, to Trump). Trump has retweeted some of their nut job tweets and we all know he loves a nonsensical conspiracy theory, which is why he pushed birtherism for years and years. Only now he’s the president, and it’s incredibly damaging both to the individuals he targets as well as our country to indulge his crazy theories as if there is any basis behind them.

Which is why you should rethink what you just said below. You’re suggesting that a war hero Army Ranger who has served this country in an exemplary way should be investigated because of a crazy conspiracy theory cooked up by people who believe that John Kennedy Jr. faked his death and is leading the crusade they champion secretly. They also believe that when everything goes down Obama, Clinton and innumerable other Democrats will be rounded up and sent to Gitmo. I’m sure they have just added Mitt Romney and Vindman to their list. They believed that McCain was faking his cancer and using his wheelchair to hide the ankle bracelet that he was wearing because he was really in custody and being sent to prison, and his death was faked to hide that fact.

Didnt you get fairly indignant that Trump got investigated on what you thought was flimsy evidence? But now you’re fine with investigating folks on no evidence at all?

I'm not sure you know how Twitter works. The video of Graham on Fox News has nothing to do with some random Twitter post that mentioned QAnon. So you think that Graham is speaking directly to QAnon and Trump? I'm not to the point of claiming there was a conspiracy, but there sure are a lot of red flags to anyone who doesn't hate Trump.

 

[Beach Friends]

So, you attended an officer school? I didn't think you were an officer. And that's enough to know how it will play out for Vindman?

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure anyone at the War College would think about it, while Trump is in office. Don't want their careers derailed by the vindictive guy.

Also, not sure why you felt the need to add that first sentence.

What was wrong with the first sentence? I said I "might," which reflects that I recognize that we don't really know as much about each other as we think.

 

[SaintForLife]

Lindsey Graham is an appeasing coward. It's funny that his appeasing cowardice makes him a "truth teller" for the Trump crowd.

Yeah we can't have any investigations of Democrats or the illegal spying on the Trump campaign. We just had 3 years of non stop investigations. What is the left scared of? Do they think the Republicans will make stuff up and hype it on TV for 3 years like the zero credibility Schiff?

 

[SaintForLife]

Is this a serious question?

Sorry. You are right. We all should be livid that Trump might sell Alaska to Russia or refuse to leave the White House if he loses the election. Let's take it to the streets!

 

[Beach Friends]

I'm not sure you know how Twitter works. The video of Graham on Fox News has nothing to do with some random Twitter post that mentioned QAnon. So you think that Graham is speaking directly to QAnon and Trump? I'm not to the point of claiming there was a conspiracy, but there sure are a lot of red flags to anyone who doesn't hate Trump.

Hah, I am not sure if she really believes she is "on to something." She might, but shifting focus from the subject matter to the "sources" is an old trick. It's brought into play even in an instance like this, when there is no reason to question the actual video.

 

[RobF]

No, I'm OK with him getting transferred out of a position at the White House to a position at the Pentagon while keeping his rank and pay.
Serving at the White House is a duty position, held only so long as the appointing authority wants to keep you there.

Those are apologist arguments: "It's not a bad thing that they were removed, because they'll otherwise be OK." No. "It's not bad if they're removed because they can be removed." Come on.

What determines whether his removal is a bad thing or not is why he was removed, whether it was justified, and what that removal represents in a wider context. Not whether he's left destitute or not.

In this case, Vindman did his job. He gave his opinion and testified as he was required to do by his country. And that's what he's being removed for. That's bad. The President has subsequently lied about that and publicly smeared him. That is also bad. And while the President can remove him from his position, he's supposed to do according to rational principle in the best interests of the nation, not because someone doing their job makes him look bad. The former is fine. The latter is petty tyranny.

Vindman is being removed from his position because he's been doing his job in the interests of the nation, and Trump has been doing his job in the interests of Trump.

That is a bad thing. And anyone should be concerned by that, whether they're on the right, left, up or down.

 

[MT15]

I'm not sure you know how Twitter works. The video of Graham on Fox News has nothing to do with some random Twitter post that mentioned QAnon. So you think that Graham is speaking directly to QAnon and Trump? I'm not to the point of claiming there was a conspiracy, but there sure are a lot of red flags to anyone who doesn't hate Trump.

Leaving aside the insulting condescension, which is not a good look for you, honestly, I’m not claiming that Graham is speaking directly to QAnon, they are. This is exactly how the whole pizza conspiracy played out, and that was such a success they’re reprising the crazy, only now with the whole federal government. Graham is just pandering to Trump, like he always does. Trump is so amoral that he actually encourages the crazy because they support him. You‘re being sucked in as collateral damage with your “red flags”. You scoffed at actual suspicious behavior from the Trump campaign, and called that investigation illegitimate, yet you want a full on investigation now over no facts at all?

That BF had this particular twitter source on his feed presumably, or at least at the ready, speaks volumes. It really does. These are dangerously crazy people. And that isn’t some random mention, it’s a guy who is, as far as I can tell, in the middle of promoting the conspiracy theory. He doesn’t just pop up randomly on someone’s twitter feed, if you know how twitter works.

I took a lot of grief for posting some YouTube videos from a journalist because DD said he was an anarchist. Even though there was no hint of a discussion of anarchism in his videos. DD acted like he couldn’t watch the video without being recruited or something, and I sort of chuckled at him. And I do know we are all capable of reading viewpoints from other philosophies without instantly subscribing to those philosophies.

But this is a bit different. This isn’t some alternate philosophy. These people are seriously advocating for massive imprisonments for political reasons. They are bat shirt insane. Nobody should be advancing their cause, they are dangerous.

 

[Dadsdream]

Those are apologist arguments: "It's not a bad thing that they were removed, because they'll otherwise be OK." No. "It's not bad if they're removed because they can be removed." Come on.

What determines whether his removal is a bad thing or not is why he was removed, whether it was justified, and what that removal represents in a wider context. Not whether he's left destitute or not.

In this case, Vindman did his job. He gave his opinion and testified as he was required to do by his country. And that's what he's being removed for. That's bad. The President has subsequently lied about that and publicly smeared him. That is also bad. And while the President can remove him from his position, he's supposed to do according to rational principle in the best interests of the nation, not because someone doing their job makes him look bad. The former is fine. The latter is petty tyranny.

Vindman is being removed from his position because he's been doing his job in the interests of the nation, and Trump has been doing his job in the interests of Trump.

That is a bad thing. And anyone should be concerned by that, whether they're on the right, left, up or down.

No, those are not apologist arguments.
Military personnel assigned to the White House are there to serve the Commander-in-Chief.
If the Commander-in-Chief no longer desires their services, they are transferred elsewhere.
Did he lose his rank? No
Did he lose his pay? No
Did he lose his time in grade or time in service? No
Was he transferred to Alaska? No.
People are rotated through those jobs on a 2-3 year basis anyway.
Did he act like a rat? Depends on who you ask.

 

[Beach Friends]

That BF had this particular twitter source on his feed presumably, or at least at the ready, speaks volumes. It really does.

You certainly are running hard with a presumption that you should know is obviously flawed. Why would I say it is "obviously" flawed? The answer to that question is staring you in the face.