• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.

Majority of Americans now support Trump's impeachment

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
44,467
87,822
1,355
Why on Earth would Trump care about corruption in Ukraine unless it benefited him?

It benefits him as well as the American people. I for one would like to know if there was corruption on their end like Biden claimed he was a part of.
 
Last edited:

Moneal

Member
Sep 13, 2013
3,706
3,860
945
Why on Earth would Trump care about corruption in Ukraine unless it benefited him?
It would benefit him. If they found corruption associated with the Biden's deal, and some of the same people were associated with Russiagate he gets to show that off to further point to his witch hunt claims.
 

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
3,616
3,449
515
TheContact TheContact you are clearly being trolled. Any shmuck can tell Trump was clearly going after Biden. Don't feed the trolls more than you need to (though it's fun to see them squirm and "orange man good" reee....)
Biden went after Biden. His age is getting to him. If the MSM wasn't in democrats pockets, bragging about having a prosecutor fired in exchange for aid, would raise all sorts of questions.
 
Last edited:

Texas Pride

Banned
Feb 27, 2018
3,007
5,656
665
Texas
Polls aren't foolproof but polls are population-based. The electoral college is not. Hillary won the popu- yeah you know that line. Why is it dirty to investigate crimes? If no crimes were commited, nothing will be found. If someone said I killed someone and I know I didn't, and they asked me for things, I would hand it over to them in an attempt to show them how wrong they are, not obstruct and say No to requested information. Two people have already been arrested in the Ukraine investigation so far. All you're doing is spewing talking points from your favorite main stream media outlet.


I'm giving my opinion just as you are. If you don't like it hit the little ignore button. It's fucking shady how the connections between the Bidens and Ukraine as it pertains to this impeachment bullshit are ignored. There's clearly an agenda here alright but by the Democrats. I don't have a cable subscription to watch MSM but your the second motherfucker to throw out that accusation without any evidence. It seems to be a pattern with you and your party to make accusations without proof try to push investigations through and come out looking like fucking idiots I wouldn't trust with special ED kids at a fairground. I think for myself I'm not chained to any party telling me what to think or who I should like. I could throw up accusations at you but they like yours would be baseless bcs I don't know you. I was raised to read the book instead of judging it from the cover. You should try it sometime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pramod

TheContact

Gold Member
Jan 22, 2016
6,326
5,893
850
I'm giving my opinion just as you are. If you don't like it hit the little ignore button. It's fucking shady how the connections between the Bidens and Ukraine as it pertains to this impeachment bullshit are ignored. There's clearly an agenda here alright but by the Democrats. I don't have a cable subscription to watch MSM but your the second motherfucker to throw out that accusation without any evidence. It seems to be a pattern with you and your party to make accusations without proof try to push investigations through and come out looking like fucking idiots I wouldn't trust with special ED kids at a fairground. I think for myself I'm not chained to any party telling me what to think or who I should like. I could throw up accusations at you but they like yours would be baseless bcs I don't know you. I was raised to read the book instead of judging it from the cover. You should try it sometime.

Na I don’t ignore people I don’t agree with. Appreciate your response and input though.
 

danielberg

Neophyte
Jun 20, 2018
2,718
3,180
410
You cannot compete in mental gymnastics with trumpers. Save yourself the energy.

Anyone with half a brain cell can see why Trump asked for Zelensky to do him a favor. It wasn’t due to some benevolent crusade against corruption.
Democrats accuse the US president of something he literally didnt do according to the supposed victim of the incident and the actual transcript of the phone call itself, at the same time democrats want to replace the US president with biden who they defended during all of this and who actually is corrupt and bragged on live TV about his corruption.
Tell me where i am wrong.. oh wait you cant.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: oagboghi2

Tesseract

Crushed by Thanos
Dec 7, 2008
61,283
69,446
1,875
You cannot compete in mental gymnastics with trumpers. Save yourself the energy.

Anyone with half a brain cell can see why Trump asked for Zelensky to do him a favor. It wasn’t due to some benevolent crusade against corruption.

it's not what you think you know, it's what you can prove
 

womfalcs3

Banned
May 11, 2007
6,331
1,657
1,550
 
  • Like
Reactions: n64coder

#Phonepunk#

Banned
Sep 4, 2018
18,567
36,241
885
39
lol "yes she can"

what is this CHILDRENS CANCER CHARITY i am supposed to be worried about all of a sudden?

LOL. oh im sure Mitt Romney never did anything to hurt anybody, running Bain capital. this is your "good guy"?

also please with the "oh our poor US intelligence agents" bullshit. nobody gives a crap about these millions of gov't spooks spying on us. they can all go fuck themselves IMO.
 
Last edited:

Eiknarf

Member
Mar 25, 2019
2,104
2,990
465
It took a while, but even the Republican crowd is starting to turn. Given his acting out and enormous ego, I can see him making more and more mistakes until eventually calling it quits. Just today Pence was repeatedly in denial that Trump ever asked Ukraine to gather information on Biden. It looks really bad. Unlike the Trump/Russia collusion, Kavanaugh witch hunt, or various sexual harassment allegations, I think Trump stepped in it this time. Though I don't see it as a big deal, this little mole hill is already turning into a giant mountain for him as he's showing signs of cracking. Cue the Trump Defense Force soundtrack.


Ummmmmm

What's the point of “impeached but not removed”?

Sounds like some people are idiots or eat their own shit or something
 

Hotspurr

Banned
Jan 27, 2018
1,267
1,449
450
Wanna post a source for that one, champ?

Or is the sentiment "orange man bad" all that is needed to reach your standard for evidence?


Do they not teach people how to use Google search in highschool anymore?
 

Whitesnake

Banned
Jan 31, 2018
2,206
6,676
650

Do they not teach people how to use Google search in highschool anymore?

They weren't mad that he kept money, they were mad that he used the money he kept for his political campaign. He didn't actually "steal" anything.

Most major "charities" have higher-ups who pay themselves the big bucks. I don't see how this is different. You may find that behavior from other charities morally repugnant as well, but do not act like this something uncommon.
 

Hotspurr

Banned
Jan 27, 2018
1,267
1,449
450
They weren't mad that he kept money, they were mad that he used the money he kept for his political campaign. He didn't actually "steal" anything.

Most major "charities" have higher-ups who pay themselves the big bucks. I don't see how this is different. You may find that behavior from other charities morally repugnant as well, but do not act like this something uncommon.

Did you read the bits about how charity funds were misused for political and other purposes? If this was common practice he wouldn't have needed to dissolve his charity and they wouldn't have sued to bar his kids from being at the held of any charity.

Also saying "but look, other heads of charities are also sometimes pieces of shit" doesn't help here at all.

How about the Trump University fraud, is that also not something uncommon?
 

Moneal

Member
Sep 13, 2013
3,706
3,860
945

Do they not teach people how to use Google search in highschool anymore?
Do they not teach reading comprehension anymore either?

The lawsuit against the Donald J. Trump Foundation also seeks to recoup $2.8 million and ban Trump and his three eldest children from leadership roles in any other New York charity.

The agreement, which must be approved by a New York state judge, would give state Attorney General Barbara Underwood the power to vet the charities that receive the foundation’s remaining assets.

Notice that there are two different things being talked about. A lawsuit, that has not been adjudicated yet from any searches I have done, and an agreement to dissolve the charity, which did not include the ban.
 

Whitesnake

Banned
Jan 31, 2018
2,206
6,676
650
Did you read the bits about how charity funds were misused for political and other purposes? If this was common practice he wouldn't have needed to dissolve his charity and they wouldn't have sued to bar his kids from being at the held of any charity.

Also saying "but look, other heads of charities are also sometimes pieces of shit" doesn't help here at all.

I literally addressed both of these things in the comment you just responded to. I addressed the political bit literally in the first sentence. Can you read?

Also, it's not "sometimes". Charities are businesses and are ran like businesses. As in, the guy at the top can give himself however much money he wants because it's his money to give. Different jurisdictions have different minimum amounts of revenue that need to be given to be consider a "charity" or "nonprofit" or whatever, but that's usually a very small percentage. It'd be very difficult to find a major charity where the owner doesn't take a shit-ton of money.

How about the Trump University fraud, is that also not something uncommon?

So you're gonna keep changing controversies hoping that one of them will finally take down Trump?

I'm gonna keep it real with you chief, that has never worked.
 
Last edited:

Hotspurr

Banned
Jan 27, 2018
1,267
1,449
450
Do they not teach reading comprehension anymore either?



Notice that there are two different things being talked about. A lawsuit, that has not been adjudicated yet from any searches I have done, and an agreement to dissolve the charity, which did not include the ban.

Did I say anything opposite to this? The point is they were able to show that unethical things were done forcing Trump to dissolve his charity. He used charity funds for personal gain. If I remember correctly with the Clinton foundation was accused of using their funds for Chelsea's wedding people lost their minds.

I literally addressed both of these things in the comment you just responded to. I addressed the political bit literally in the first sentence. Can you read?

Also, it's not "sometimes". Charities are businesses and are ran like businesses. As in, the guy at the top can give himself however much money he wants because it's his money to give. Different jurisdictions have different minimum amounts of revenue that need to be given to be consider a "charity" or "nonprofit" or whatever, but that's usually a very small percentage. It'd be very difficult to find a major charity where the owner doesn't take a shit-ton of money.



So you're gonna keep changing controversies hoping that one of them will finally take down Trump?

I'm gonna keep it real with you chief, that has never worked.

You didn't address anything. Did you read the article? Any money he makes is his money and he is free to do what he pleases. There would be no way to discern where the money came from if it was his own income. The point was that he took money directly from the foundation and directed it towards personal use that was not part of his income payout.

If you want to continue being ignorant that's up to you.
 

Moneal

Member
Sep 13, 2013
3,706
3,860
945
Did I say anything opposite to this? The point is they were able to show that unethical things were done forcing Trump to dissolve his charity. He used charity funds for personal gain. If I remember correctly with the Clinton foundation was accused of using their funds for Chelsea's wedding people lost their minds.
No one asked for citation on the charity being bad. The fake meme said they were banned from leading charities.
Wanna post a source for that one, champ?

Or is the sentiment "orange man bad" all that is needed to reach your standard for evidence?
Guess you were just citing the article in bad faith since your now stated point was not in the meme or your condescending post about teaching to google.

Also no they didn't show that as of yet. As I said the lawsuit has not concluded. They reached an agreement to dissolve the charity, which Trump's lawyers said they were already trying to do and the lawsuit caused that to be delayed. You don't have to believe his lawyers on that, but there has been no verdict reached that you can point to that shows they proved anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Whitesnake

Hotspurr

Banned
Jan 27, 2018
1,267
1,449
450
No one asked for citation on the charity being bad. The fake meme said they were banned from leading charities.


Guess you were just citing the article in bad faith since your now stated point was not in the meme or your condescending post about teaching to google.

Also no they didn't show that as of yet. As I said the lawsuit has not concluded. They reached an agreement to dissolve the charity, which Trump's lawyers said they were already trying to do and the lawsuit caused that to be delayed. You don't have to believe his lawyers on that, but there has been no verdict reached that you can point to that shows they proved anything.

There absolutely was a resolution. The resolution was signed by Trump lawyer that the remaining assets of the foundation would be distributed under judicial oversight and the foundation is to be dissolved. The judge signed off on this deal. What do you think that means? It's an obvious admission of guilt of misusing charity funds. What will follow is likely additional penalties. Had the judge thrown out the case and Trump was allowed to dissolve his charity as he planned, I would have agreed with you.

Orange man good. I am doing it right?
 

Moneal

Member
Sep 13, 2013
3,706
3,860
945
There absolutely was a resolution. The resolution was signed by Trump lawyer that the remaining assets of the foundation would be distributed under judicial oversight and the foundation is to be dissolved. The judge signed off on this deal. What do you think that means? It's an obvious admission of guilt of misusing charity funds. What will follow is likely additional penalties. Had the judge thrown out the case and Trump was allowed to dissolve his charity as he planned, I would have agreed with you.

Orange man good. I am doing it right?
Again bad faith argument. No a settlement is not an admission of guilt. Some settlements require admissions of guilt but this one doesn't seem to do that. Also it was a partial resolution, that's why I said the lawsuit is still ongoing. It only dealt with the dissolution of the charity. It did not have anything to do with guilt in the actual lawsuit. Trump wanted the charity dissolved, because there are ongoing costs associated with keeping it running. Whether his reasoning was due to the lawsuit or not doesn't change that the lawsuit kept it open, and incurred those previously mentioned costs. An agreement was reached on how he would close the charity, that was it. Either learn even the slightest bit about settlement law or fuck off with your inaccurate takes.
 

Joe T.

Member
Oct 3, 2004
4,453
7,250
1,770
Montreal, Quebec
Did I say anything opposite to this? The point is they were able to show that unethical things were done forcing Trump to dissolve his charity. He used charity funds for personal gain. If I remember correctly with the Clinton foundation was accused of using their funds for Chelsea's wedding people lost their minds.

People are urging Chelsea to run for Congress right now, so it's not like that did anything to damage her image.
 

#Phonepunk#

Banned
Sep 4, 2018
18,567
36,241
885
39
i fully support them just getting it over with. if they have the goods to impeach them, then do so. put up your evidence and put up a vote. i am tired of hearing about this shit for year after year. Mueller was on this guy for several years, then everyone went quite.

i am tired of the hype tho. please, by all means, do the process. you have had years to work on this so far, we have given Mueller tens of millions of dollars. you still need more paperwork? what is the hold up? overall it just feels like the media trying to influence reality again. they are largely polling their own influence here. wow, yes people support impeachement, because impeachment is constantly on the news, no crap?

is it still going to be a thing in 2020? or will people tire of it? personally i was tired of the Mueller thing when that dropped and nothing happened. now this thing is happening, i guess. yet they said that was happening as well. honestly, if they had some results, say an impeachment vote, i would believe them. as is, it is hard to see this as anything but a political move by a party that is desperate and out of power.
 

Hotspurr

Banned
Jan 27, 2018
1,267
1,449
450
Again bad faith argument. No a settlement is not an admission of guilt. Some settlements require admissions of guilt but this one doesn't seem to do that. Also it was a partial resolution, that's why I said the lawsuit is still ongoing. It only dealt with the dissolution of the charity. It did not have anything to do with guilt in the actual lawsuit. Trump wanted the charity dissolved, because there are ongoing costs associated with keeping it running. Whether his reasoning was due to the lawsuit or not doesn't change that the lawsuit kept it open, and incurred those previously mentioned costs. An agreement was reached on how he would close the charity, that was it. Either learn even the slightest bit about settlement law or fuck off with your inaccurate takes.

Yep let's continue ignoring all their assets got seized. Sorry, but you're going to have to try harder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AfricanKing

Moneal

Member
Sep 13, 2013
3,706
3,860
945
Yep let's continue ignoring all their assets got seized. Sorry, but you're going to have to try harder.
try harder to do what? Point out your understanding of settlements is entirely inadequate tohave your commentary taken seriously. You did that by Saying a settlement was an admission of guilt. If that were the case the lawsuit would be over already.

Most settlements are done to save money. Its almost always cheaper to settle than to go through a full trial paying all the lawyers involved.
 

Hotspurr

Banned
Jan 27, 2018
1,267
1,449
450
try harder to do what? Point out your understanding of settlements is entirely inadequate tohave your commentary taken seriously. You did that by Saying a settlement was an admission of guilt. If that were the case the lawsuit would be over already.

Most settlements are done to save money. Its almost always cheaper to settle than to go through a full trial paying all the lawyers involved.

So your take on it is that all the evidence the prosecutor collected was just BS, that Trump was just tired of being accused, so he settled? There was no wrong doing at all? Just like the settlement for Trump University fraud doesn't show any guilt.

I love seeing people double down on things they can't defend. Orange man good! Orange man good!

Edit: in case you're an aspiring law student, people also often settle to mitigate even greater damages from their wrong doing. Better remember that for your exams.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AfricanKing

Moneal

Member
Sep 13, 2013
3,706
3,860
945
So your take on it is that all the evidence the prosecutor collected was just BS, that Trump was just tired of being accused, so he settled? There was no wrong doing at all? Just like the settlement for Trump University fraud doesn't show any guilt.

I love seeing people double down on things they can't defend. Orange man good! Orange man good!
Again bad faith. The settlement was only for the dissolution of the Charity. It had nothing to do with anything else. Lets repeat it a little slower so you understand, That. Is. Why. The. Lawsuit. Is. Still. Ongoing. The settlement did not end the lawsuit. Why would he settle admit guilt and the suit continue? If as you say the settlement was an admission of guilt the suit would have been over right after the settlement was reached. Then it would have moved on to the punishment phase. But that didn't happen, because there was no guilt associated with the settlement. Again your posts shows you clearly lack a basic understanding of how any of this works.
 

Hotspurr

Banned
Jan 27, 2018
1,267
1,449
450
Again bad faith. The settlement was only for the dissolution of the Charity. It had nothing to do with anything else. Lets repeat it a little slower so you understand, That. Is. Why. The. Lawsuit. Is. Still. Ongoing. The settlement did not end the lawsuit. Why would he settle admit guilt and the suit continue? If as you say the settlement was an admission of guilt the suit would have been over right after the settlement was reached. Then it would have moved on to the punishment phase. But that didn't happen, because there was no guilt associated with the settlement. Again your posts shows you clearly lack a basic understanding of how any of this works.

"How this works" - you just said a few messages back that people settle to avoid costly fees. People generally don't settle if they can afford lawyers and know they are in the right. Now whose arguing in bad faith?

Trump had to settle the charity bit of his lawsuit because it's indefensible. He has been caught with his pants down. The other bits are the 2.8 million and barring him and his family from ever starting non profit foundations. The latter is an immense potential loss for him and I can see him fighting that to some moderate success, as I don't find it particularly fair.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AfricanKing

Moneal

Member
Sep 13, 2013
3,706
3,860
945
2
"How this works" - you just said a few messages back that people settle to avoid costly fees. People generally don't settle if they can afford lawyers and know they are in the right. Now whose arguing in bad faith?

Trump had to settle the charity bit of his lawsuit because it's indefensible. He has been caught with his pants down. The other bits are the 2.8 million and barring him and his family from ever starting non profit foundations. The latter is an immense potential loss for him and I can see him fighting that to some moderate success, as I don't find it particularly fair.
I said:

try harder to do what? Point out your understanding of settlements is entirely inadequate tohave your commentary taken seriously. You did that by Saying a settlement was an admission of guilt. If that were the case the lawsuit would be over already.

Most settlements are done to save money. Its almost always cheaper to settle than to go through a full trial paying all the lawyers involved.
So yea, I guess you are again the one arguing in bad faith. Yes people generally do settle even if they can afford lawyers and know they are in the right. Especially if it would cost more to not settle. Money is the big thing in settlements. Most are lawsuits are looked at and the costs of a full trial are estimated. Then an attempt to settle is done at less than those costs.

If the lawsuit was indefensible, why is the lawsuit still ongoing?
 

danielberg

Neophyte
Jun 20, 2018
2,718
3,180
410

You should do stand up.. you would suck at that too but at least i wouldnt have to look at your literal fakenews you bought again all while other leftwingers try to deflect and jump from one democrat media produced "scandal" to the other when nothing sticks, just like the entire fucking last 3 years.
I wonder what it actually takes for delusional people like you to get a clue, being lied to for two years 24/7 on a global scale didnt seem to do the trick so nothing ever will, this is a fucking mental health issue at this point.
 
Last edited:

Hotspurr

Banned
Jan 27, 2018
1,267
1,449
450
2

I said:


So yea, I guess you are again the one arguing in bad faith. Yes people generally do settle even if they can afford lawyers and know they are in the right. Especially if it would cost more to not settle. Money is the big thing in settlements. Most are lawsuits are looked at and the costs of a full trial are estimated. Then an attempt to settle is done at less than those costs.

If the lawsuit was indefensible, why is the lawsuit still ongoing?

If people are in the right and they win they can get lawyer costs among other damages recouped. Why do I have to explain these basic things to a person claiming to know "how these things work".

Your question is what's still ongoing because you don't read my messages. They have to justify that barring Trump from future foundations is an appropriate course of action given what he did. He clearly does not think so.

The point is, we have evidence of wrongdoing, we have a settlement where Trump loses out by having his charity assets seized, and we have an ongoing lawsuit that hasn't been tossed. These are the facts, everything else is conjecture. You gave it a good effort, I'll give you that much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AfricanKing

danielberg

Neophyte
Jun 20, 2018
2,718
3,180
410
If people are in the right and they win they can get lawyer costs among other damages recouped. Why do I have to explain these basic things to a person claiming to know "how these things work".

All you are doing is literally changing rules, now suddenly its "anyone that settles is guilty by default" (so why is it a thing?) this is a completely new view never
held by you or any sane person for that matter before. But you now want to hold that BULLSHIT view and change rules and equality (which in your mind doesnt count for trump and family) all because it is about trump.
You are not subtle, your are not smart, the only person you are fooling is yourself.
 
Last edited:

Joe T.

Member
Oct 3, 2004
4,453
7,250
1,770
Montreal, Quebec
A couple of stories from Trump-lovin' CNN to counterbalance the narrative of this thread:




Trump visited Minneapolis for a large rally a couple of days ago. He and his campaign team are putting in the necessary work to turn blue states red. If this impeachment attempt backfires on them the way the Russian collusion story did Dems are going to be facing a world of hurt.
 

Hotspurr

Banned
Jan 27, 2018
1,267
1,449
450
All you are doing is literally changing rules, now suddenly its "anyone that settles is guilty by default" (so why is it a thing?) this is a completely new view never
held by you or any sane person for that matter before. But you now want to hold that BULLSHIT view and change rules and equality (which in your mind doesnt count for trump and family) all because it is about trump.
You are not subtle, your are not smart, the only person you are fooling is yourself and to everyone else you look like a dishonest fool because Everyone knows dude EVERYONE.

I don't think I've ever seen someone so triggered on here. And here I thought the leftists were supposed to be the emotional ones.

By the way, the point is to figure out whether you think he is guilty or not based on the facts. Given his history of slimey dealings and the evidence presented, in my opinion this looks like an admission of guilt. You can choose to call it whatever you want. I never said in all cases settling is an admission of full guilt. That's something you came up with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AfricanKing

Moneal

Member
Sep 13, 2013
3,706
3,860
945
If people are in the right and they win they can get lawyer costs among other damages recouped. Why do I have to explain these basic things to a person claiming to know "how these things work".

Your question is what's still ongoing because you don't read my messages. They have to justify that barring Trump from future foundations is an appropriate course of action given what he did. He clearly does not think so.

The point is, we have evidence of wrongdoing, we have a settlement where Trump loses out by having his charity assets seized, and we have an ongoing lawsuit that hasn't been tossed. These are the facts, everything else is conjecture. You gave it a good effort, I'll give you that much.
Lawyer fees are not always recouped, and in many cases capped. Also we have the "American rule" where fees are not instantly given too the winner.