Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Politics In General Where have all the conservatives gone?

The Trump Loyalty Test is a personal loyalty to Mr Trump, above the law, above the Constitution. We can see precisely why that statement is true and valid if you would consider what AG Barr, Whittiker, Sen Graham, etc has said. They place Mr trump above the law. If you don't believe that, then consider what Mr Trump's attorneys told a Circuit Court. Mr Trump can not be investigated, or indicted, or encumbered by any legal proceeding as he is president and therefore above the law. Does he require and demand loyalty? Damn right in spades.

I retract my statement you would not read the report.

It is not my opinion but the opinion of SP Mueller. He concluded there was insufficient evidence to prove a criminal conspiracy between the campaign and the Russian meddlers. Note he did not conclude there was no evidence. It was insufficient.

SP Mueller concluded there was sufficient evidence of obstruction of an investigation, however he also stated he would not pursue an indictment pursuant to OLC memo on indictment of sitting presidents.

Not my conclusions but after having read the report, they were reasonable conclusions.

I never expect anyone to agree with anything I say and I don't try to persuade anyone to believe what I believe. However, I will try to convince people of the facts. The Ukraine Phone Call. It is obviously a QPQ. I would try to convince you it is because I can not see how it is anything but a QPQ. I got military aid but I need an investigation for it. QPQ.

Now should you finally agree it is a QPQ, I would expect you to also conclude it is impeachable but you may not. People disagree on interpretation of the facts. I have a higher standard than you so the QPQ is impeachable regardless of who is president, congressman, or student council member.

I don;t think I have stated that.

The complaint did not have all the supporting evidence we have now from public sources. We now know the call was but one piece of an ongoing conspiratorial effort led by Mr Trump to find political dirt on a future probable political opponent and to undermine the Mueller investigation as well as the IC conclusions regarding Russian meddling.

While the call is damning, it could have been explained away in a variety of ways which would not have led to impeachment. It is in fact all the supporting testimony and evidence which makes the case. Mr Trump and his closest advisors, Sec Pompeo, AG Barr, and rogue attorney Giuliani were engaged in a conspiracy contrary to FEC laws regarding solicitation from foreign nationals. Proof positive? Let's get all the evidence and see what there is. I think that has been my position all along. I am always last to confirm a conclusion, as I wait for all the evidence to be collected before I give a complete analysis and derive a conclusion. Unfortunately for you in this case a lot of evidence is now public, so not much is left to the imagination.

You used the word Democrats. Not one Democrats, not Rep Green, but Democrats. And you know Rep Pelosi for months kept the small group of Democrats who vocally wanted to impeach at bay. Even now (as of Sept 24) only 207 Democrats are on the record for impeachment in the House. I am sure you can do the arithmetic from that.

I don't know what your whistleblower comments mean. There is only one which has become public. It has been reported there is another regarding another matter. So I don't know of what you speak.

Here is the question I like to ask conservatives and never get an answer. 27 countries had demonstrations as a result of THE VIDEO. The day before in Cairo the walls of the embassy were breached by demonstrators. So my question is why would you not thing THE VIDEO had nothing to do with Benghazi????

She of course changed the narrative as better factual information was collected from the site, as any reasonable person would ... and I hope that would include you.

It was not a lie. It was best guess at the time.

Rabid hyperpartisan you are. Are the Clinton's the personification of Satan????

OMG progress ... I think. While you did not say that would be a deal breaker, you are suggesting it. So now I know ... there are things which would change your mind about Mr Trump. Now I know somewhere between puzzygrabbing and killing kids you would stop supporting Mr trump. Now I have to find out what that is.

Based on my research but not just based on the call. You continue to forget all the supporting evidence and testimony.

Yes the whistleblower complaint was second hand reporting but why do you fail to mention the ICIG did an investigation to the complaint. Do you really think the ICIG would simply pass it along as credible without an investigation? really???? So there is supporting evidence which makes the complaint credible for the ICIG and now we know from pubic testimony and other evidence the complaint has been corroborated.

So no, not based on just the call. Typical conservative TP.

you cite right wing nut sites. Please cite primary sources not opinions of nuts.

Can you give me a reason why he should have been impeached? I hope you didn't buy in to the nuts who wanted to impeach him. Here from wiki
Sooooo ....

In general I agreed with a lot of his positions. The ones which I did not agree did not deserve a rebuttal. I think the biggest one was his frequent interjection into local events. Stay out of it is my advice.

So Let's see ... he wasn't grabbing puzzy, he wasn't claiming ethnic minorities were bad people, etc .... he was trying to support our allies, he was trying to bring troops home, etc

Gee unlike you who I can strongly speculate you believed everything Fox News said, I did the research.

I will not re-litigate the accusation but will comment that almost all of right wing talking points were wrong factually. As an IT guy I analyzed the HD info, the server info, BU policy etc and found no conservative knew what the hell they were talking about. I don't know if that means they are dumb or ignorant of IT or intentionally lied, but whichever it was they were way off base.

The fundamental problem was Citizens United. As soon as the SC ruled in their favor it was noted by the IRS they should be on the alert for increased political groups trying to get 501c4 exemptions. The facts were yes there was an increase from 50 a year to 1500 in the first year. The IRS had no choice but to try and figure out how to handle the influx with limited resources. Because they knew many groups would be conservatives groups the initial search parameters were geared for conservative groups and later included liberal groups, and in fact more liberal groups were targeted in searches than conservative groups (bet you didn't know that). No liberal group got an exemption (bet you didn't know that). 33% of conservative groups got exemptions almost immediately. Of the rest, they were either non-compliant, slow responders, or dropped out of process. Many of these finally got exemptions.

So your right wing talking point not based on the facts is suspect. My conclusion was they could have done a better job by being better prepared.

So no, Pres Obama did not use the IRS to target conservative groups. Conservative paranoia is the only reason this became an issue, as no liberal group made an issue of being "targeted".

I don;t have a partisan hatred of him. I do have a human dislike of him. I do not associate with arrogant puzzygrabbing egotists who have no portfolio. At the same time I also feel sorry for him because he suffers from NPD. Nothing partisan about personal perspective at all.

Do I dislike his actions and what he says? yep yes Da Si

Your rabid hyperpartisan nonsense has clouded your judgement. While I disagree with a lot of what he does, none of it amounts to an impeachable offense. Taken altogether it does not amount to a set of impeachable offenses. So for you to say I have a desire to impeach is nonsensical. Here is the problem, over the years I have noticed conservatives believe everyone is as hyperpartisan as they are. Breaking news!!!! that is not true nor valid. Everyone is not as partisan as you are. You in fact remind me of a guy whom I see frequently who believes Mr Trump is God incarnate ... and for him everyone but Mr trump lies ... only Mr trump is good ... etc

There is a pattern of bad behavior by Mr Trump. He did not get rid of his businesses. He has executed Russian prerogatives. He abandons allies. He obstructed an investigation. He elevates white supremacists. And he has entered into a QPQ, soliciting campaign research from a foreign national.

Of these only the last is clearly an impeachable offense. Was I waiting on him to breach Constitutional protocols? It was inevitable. He is a narcissist and believes he is above the law. Even his attorneys argued it. He believes that wholeheartedly that he thought he could release a transcript of the memo of a call and tell people like you, that is not a QPQ, and he knows you will believe it.

Try using facts and not your emotional hyperpartisan crapola.

will the madness ever end????

No.

I can still hear the echo

If people here are wondering where all the conservative that were on the Rant have gone I do not know where they went. But I do know why they left. When a person posts that everyone who attends a Trump rally is a member of the KKK and that they are bused in to attend them is so ludicrous that it boggles my imagination. If I or any other conservative post an article from any conservative sources it is dismissed solely because it is from a conservative source. Yet if the same article is posted from a liberal source it accepted without question.

That may be what you perceive, but what I see is that most of what you call ‘rejected due to source’ is actually rebutted due to false content.

On the subject of bad sources, those can be identified generally by a lack of independently corroborating source material that shows the substance to be non-temious. As it happens, over time some purveyors news and facts establish a reputation for only pitching fake news and alternative facts. Because of that demonstrated lack of trustworthiness they will be quickly rejected as sources if there is no validating corroboration.

Of course, we are all free to express opinions, even opinions unsupported by solid factual information. But those can be rebutted by opinions, too. A good argument, on the other hand, needs more than that.

I agree with LogT's following comment.

Here is a current example. John Solomon who writes for The Hill. He has been writing right wing conspiracy theories for a while. In fact he recently was involved in writing articles based on information provided by Parnas, the Giuliani associate recently indicted for FEC violations. He of course claims his articles are well sourced, however, his sources are Russian backed Ukrainians and oligarchs. Should anyone believe what he has written? I would be highly suspicious. O BTW, The Hill has moved him from reporting to opinion.

Now as to the accusation that to you it appears everyone says all the Trump supporters at rallys are KKK members etc, I would say your perception is formed from the pervasive problem of conservative paranoia. Clearly you have not lived in the South. But in the South I can guarantee should anyone do a real poll of the correlation between Trump supporters and bigotry I suspect it would be very high. In fact in a poll of Tea people, it was found there was about a 70% probability any Tea person was a bigot. I suspect the number is about the same in the South. I understand why Republican elites deny the character of the base, and it is precisely why Mr Trump is their voice and of course why elected officials fear it. They can't tell the truth and expect to be re-elected.

So the appropriate way to say what you will always deny is, in general at any Trump rally, there is a high probability a large chunk of the people who attend are bigots.

My recollection is they left because they could no longer defend the actions of the Bush administration regarding the invasion of Iraq. Remember all those WMD's?

Especially given that when the PNAC Doctrine was exposed, Bush/Cheney's pre-meditated foray into the middle east could not be waved-off as a mere "mistake" any longer.

Please cite that post, Senator.