When winning is a high crime or misdemeanor.

A guy walks into a bar in Fort Worth Texas where there is a robot bartender! The robot says “what will you have”? The guy replies “whiskey”, the robot brings his drink and asks “what’s your IQ? The guy replies “168”. The robot continues to talk about physics, space exploration and medical technology. After the guy leaves, he was curious, so he goes back. The robot said “what’s your drink”? They guy says “whiskey”! The robot brings the drink and asks “what’s your IQ? The guy says “100”. The robot continues to talk about NASCAR, Budweiser, the Cowboys and Baylor football! The guy finishes his drink and is so interested in his “experiment” that he decides to try again, so once more, he enters the bar as usual, the robot asks what he’s drinking. They guy says “whiskey”! The robot brings his drink and asks “what’s your IQ”? The guy answers “35”. The robot leans in real close and asks “ so.... do you folks really think you’re going to impeach President Trump?

Not realistic. Ask any leftist what his IQ is and he'll swear it's over 9000

Did you mean over -9000?

I must be too drunk to get this joke..

Nice. Upvoted.
36ipyx.jpg (click to show)

Outstanding! Wish I had thought of it. Exceptional meme 👍

nice one!

Luckily he will have the cowardly Republican "party" to back him up. Even though they take a vow "to support and defend the Constitution" and not the President that they suck up to like a bunch of Hoover Vacuums. Let's see who the first whiner will be to complain about me? Bunch of pathetic f**king snowflakes on this site. Trump is impeached motherf**kers.... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

As a Canuck, toast away, it means nothing to Americans

No whining here. I support your right to say whatever you want. Even if you are a completely tool and moron.

I've been called worse, RightiesandLefties. I take pride in that. I also take pride in not being fooled by a professional conman who has made a living out of screwing over other people by running fake charities and fake universities.

He made America great again tho

Did he? You know what makes America great? The fact you are able to choose who you support and I am. The fact that we're a melting pot. That's not just a little catchphrase. America was great before Trump it will be great after Trump. We're not a dictatorship, despite the fact that Donnie does love him some dictators. He'd love it if it were though.

Well we're still able to choose who we support, we're still a melting pot, and we're still not a dictatorship so I guess Trump has kept America great?
:P
hehe

What kind of logic is that? We are more in danger now of a dictatorship. No other "President" has "joked" about eliminating term limits for Presidents. Only Donnie.

Yabut.. HILLARY!
and OBAMA!!

were neither impeached.

In real news, the Afghanistan war was exposed as fake and desperate, Crossfire Hurricane was exposed as fake and desperate, the Mueller Investigation was exposed as fake and desperate, and the Syrian Gas Attacks were exposed as fake and desperate. Seeing the pattern yet? Like everything leftists do, it's fake and desperate, just like your "HAHA"
This impeachment bullshit is just the next on the exposure list. Probably around the time the third witness for the Senate trial details the Democrats' money laundering corruption in Ukraine it will really sink in.

Now that's just plain stupid.

As is your comment.

No, it's not.

Whatever. Never have I seen so many leftists like you on here who get so pathetically butthurt over memes and be devoid of a sense of humor. My name is MiniAppleIs. It is my mission on imgflip to be butthurt about things with which I disagree.

At least his not racist against apples and short people

the corrupt media, the deep state and the insane screaming non gendered liberals showed us in 2016 that for any honest english speaking american legal citizen, tho only choice was, ABC. anyone but clinton.

Didn’t read the 300-page impeachment report or even the 9-page Articles, did you?

It is more than “Orange Man Bad.” Much more.

Those of you who claim to care so much about our country and republic... surely you’ll bother to read at least the condensed version?

https://intelligence.house.gov/report/

https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=6572310-Text-Articles-of-Impeachment-Against-President

I prefer non-fiction.

No. Biden's son should be investigated. Who gets $50,000 if your daddy isn't the corrupt politician that he is.

What qualifications does Shoe Designer Barbie have to work in the White House? Or her husband, son of a criminal? What qualifications does Rudy's son have to work in the White House to bring sports teams to visit Trump once every month? If even that? Why aren't we investigating them?

Plenty of company board members around the world get paid that much, and more.

Trump's kids get paid a lot and acquire a lot of other perks and business opportunities as a direct result of their connection to POTUS. Is Trump a corrupt politician on this basis?

Trump definitely is not. Biden sure is and Hunter would NEVER EVER get a job like that here. He is UN-qualified.

Trump's children grift more in a day than Hunter is capable of grifting in a year. There is no telling what they would be doing now if their dad wasn't President Donald Trump. They are not that smart, honestly: even you guys know that.

3jvjvk.jpg (click to show)

Trumps kids may be privileged, but that was all before he was president. They have gotten nothing BECAUSE he is president. You can not say that about Hunter Biden.

Hunter Biden should be investigated as well as Sleepy Joe.

That part doesn't even come close to showing an impeachable offense. Your assertion that "you don't trust that trump had any idea what he was talking about" doesn't change the fact that the paragraph you circled quite clearly states he was interested in Ukraine investigating possible corruption. You're letting your dislike of the president put words into his mouth that aren't there.

What I circled is just the tip of the iceberg. I keep citing it because these are Trump's own words, released directly from the WH, and therefore can't be contradicted by you guys who love to believe Democratic bias against Trump taints everything Democrats touch.

There has been a lot more evidence than this, fleshed out in sworn testimony that indicates this call was the culmination of a months-long effort to pressure Ukraine to publicly announce an investigation on Hunter Biden (as well as another investigation on alleged Ukrainian "interference" in the 2016 election, a BS theory promoted by Russia). This effort involved multiple people in the Trump Administration and his own personal lawyer.

Regardless of whether the critical military aid was made contingent upon opening these investigations -- and there's evidence both ways on that -- the request and pressure campaign itself is impeachment-worthy.

If you are unbaised enough to read the full House report and really think about its contents, I encourage it. https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=6579566-House-Judiciary-Committee-Impeachment-Report

KylieFan_89 is a living meme lol

Yeah. I love that. They want to impeach him because of crimes he MAY commit. What is this the "Minority Report". Good movie (and short story by the late great Phil Dick), but science fiction.

It's not a "belief" in democratic bias.. in another thread you TOLD me that the reason you had an issue with the circled paragraph is because you didn't think Trump was competent enough to have meant what he said. And the investigation requested was of JOE Biden's corrupt dealings with Ukraine, not his son's. If you don't even understand the paragraph you circled how are we supposed to take you seriously when you make claims on what its legality is?

And you're right, the withholding of military aid is irrelevant, because the US uses aid packages as bargaining chips all the time - there is nothing illegal or unconstitutional about it.

I doubt that Trump is competent enough to provide us with a persuasive reason for us to believe the underlying substance of what he said here -- i.e. that Hunter Biden was actually corrupt in any way. Setting aside his own mental acuity, I have no reason to believe that Trump has the time in his busy life as POTUS, or the background or expertise, to know how to properly investigate a complex legal issue such as international corruption.

However, I fully believe that he is self-interested and cynical enough to have intended for his words to achieve their purpose: opening an investigation on Biden's son. (Again, "Biden's son," a telling phrase.)

Sure, aid can be a "bargaining chip" but it is an abuse of power to use it as a bargaining chip for obtaining election-related help. Recall these are taxpayer dollars, appropriated by Congress for a specific purpose. Not Trump's personal gift to bestow or revoke at will because he wants a political rival's family member investigated.

Again, you don't "believe". Your beliefs are completely irrelevant legally. It's your way of spinning what was said to color events in a way more palatable to you. And the president, as head of the executive branch, is the chief law enforcement officer in the USA and head of the department of justice. It is literally in his job description to be involved in investigations. Unless it can be PROVED that he did it specifically to taint the elections, there is no case for impeachment. And so far, not a single person called up to testify has proven that, nor is there ANYTHING in the articles of impeachment that amount to any more than unfounded allegations or hearsay (And even that is to the effect of whether he held back aid or pressured ukraine to begin with, none relating to motive). Maybe the Dems are holding back their smoking gun for the trial, but smart betting odds are that they've blown their load and have nothing substantial.

I've already circled the smoking gun evidence. If you've combed through the House report, really thought about its contents, read the House Republicans' joke of a "rebuttal" report, and still don't see it that way: then, well, okay.

That's the thing about "high crimes and misdemeanors." It's a loose political definition, open to interpretation by Congress. Beliefs are not irrelevant.

We're in uncharted waters now: this is only the 3rd time impeachment has happened in our country's history (Johnson, Clinton, and now Trump: Nixon resigned before impeachment was formally opened). Because it's so unprecedented, and the issues are necessarily new and complex each time, people are going to see things differently. And to your credit: you are offering some of the more reasoned arguments in defense of Trump that I've seen here, and you seem open-minded and intelligent.

But I promise you, the vast majority of Trump's defenders here haven't really engaged with the evidence and the testimony, and they don't intend to. They dismiss it out of hand as a product of Democratic "bias."

No thanks. Don't want to waste a bunch of time reading a partisan hit job. Will let hacks like you do that.

By the way genius, there was bipartisan support against impeaching Trump. I guess you are going to ignore the sane Dems that voted against it. What will you call them? DINOs?

The “lot more evidence” you speak of is a bunch of secondhand hearsay and presumptions by people who weren’t involved with the conversation. Most importantly the person who Democrats claim was pressured to start an investigation has repeatedly said that he was not. He also never did an investigation.

This whole impeachment fiasco is a disgrace to the country and the Democrats who put on the show should be ashamed. The vote to impeach was 100% partisan. The only part that was bipartisan was the votes to not impeach. The House Democrats have made a mockery of the impeachment process and they know it but don’t care. All they care about is their hatred of Trump and the fact that he beat their candidate in 2016 and will most likely do it again in 2020.

If you actually believe this is an abuse of power then you should also believe that VP Biden withholding $billions of aid for Ukraine until they fire the person investigating the company his son works for was an impeachable offense.

Is the impeachment report bipartisan?

Did House Republicans participate in this in any meaningful way? Or did they kick, scream, stonewall, and blow smoke the entire time?

But as a thought experiment: If you wanted to, you can take the House Democrat report and the House Republican "rebuttal" report, mash them together, and read them as a "bipartisan" report. But if you did that, unfortunately the parts authored by the Republicans aren't going to make a whole lot of sense.

Oh I know, I know. Democrats = saints, Republicans = evil, KylieFan_89 = bloviator and leftist tyrannical ideologue who thinks he's the smartest person on a meme site where nobody really gives two shits about his OPINION.

Have fun wasting a bunch of time writing your useless and boring essays on imgflip.

Mine are not many multi paragraph essays on completely partisan opinions whilst yours are. And unlike you I have a life outside of trolling on imgflip. KylieFan_89 = Over 2000 comments since November, RightiesAndLefties = Almost 200. What a colossal waste of your time and making no headway. God bless your heart.

And that's 200 since July!!! Wow, Kylie must be really triggered so much to get his useless point across.

https://imgflip.com/i/3jwmxp

It's a meme page, dummy. We're here for funny memes based on reality, not your boring, nonsensical attempts to convince normal people that asking a foreign leader who ran on fighting corruption to investigate obvious corruption within his jurisdiction is a crime. If running for president actually protects a senile old kiddy-sniffer from being investigated after confessing to corruption on video, there would be a thousand Democrat candidacies announced per hour.

Yeah I almost pointed our the baseless pedo shit for him but felt like not prodding him in that direction this time

Sometimes these guys really don’t know what words mean and just resort to posting a stream-of-consciousness of impressive-sounding phrases lifted from Ben Shapiro and conservative talk radio

Thoughts? Lol no. Feelings you can't distinguish from thoughts? Yes, and that troubles everyone.

Quid pro quo? It's a great question, there's evidence both ways on that, but not necessary to show abuse of office. The words quid pro quo are nowhere in the Constitution. You Constitutional scholars know that, right?

If it wasn't necessary then why was that the only issue stated by the whistlegossiper? There was no other complaint than that. Why was "bribery" floated around after QPQ was disproved? Why did they have to invent nonsense like "Contempt of Congress" if there was an actual crime? This is why you can't understand you're delusional and boring.

Responding to what you said below about Trump failing to respond to Congressional subpoenas as obstruction. The President of the US can exercise executive privilege which the US Supreme Court ruled is a part of separation of powers. Many presidents have used in the past both Democrat and Republican. So if Trump is doing it to obstruct without any evidence or being compelled to do it via the federal courts, then you must state that all of them were obstructing justice when they invoked it. Executive privilege is there for good reason, and it’s not just to the advantage of one party.

I can't claim to be an expert on the precise scope of Executive privilege (few can), but I know enough to know it isn't unlimited. It's at its strongest when the sought-after information impacts issues of national security (such as the process of classifying terrorist detainees, for example). Whatever Hunter Biden did or didn't do collecting $50,000 a month on the board of Burisma, it's plain as day was not a national security threat.

The U.S. Supreme Court has only directly weighed in on Executive privilege one time: In the case of U.S. v. Nixon. That case did not involve congressional subpoenas, but a subpoena from a special prosecutor.
https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/10/executive-privilege-congress-subpoena-power-and-the-courts-a-brief-overview-of-a-complex-topic/

And if Congress wants to have a say about its congressional subpoenas to the Executive Branch being blocked, then it certainly can, up to and including through impeachment. We are truly in uncharted waters now: a direct impasse between the U.S. Legislative and Executive branches that is not being resolved through the usual process of negotiation and horse-trading.

Now that impeachment is formally on the table, any Executive privilege arguments invoked thus far are going to get weaker and weaker. How far can this privilege avail to block an inquiry pursued directly by Congress, using a process provided for under the Constitution of the United States?

Finally: If Trump did nothing wrong and just wants to exonerate himself, why doesn't he just release all the documents and witnesses now?

You contradict yourself. On the one hand you say that you are not an expert on Executive Privilege and yet you go around saying Trump has obstructed justice. Therefore IMO you are either intentionally gaslighting or speaking as if you know what you are talking about When you don’t. You ask why doesn’t Trump just release everything if he doesn’t have anything to hide. Well because then he could potentially be releasing peoples names and methods that are supposed to remain confidential in that material. Would you agree with that? And please don’t just automatically say, there is nothing like that that would be released when you have absolutely no clue what that material my contain. And lastly, why didn’t Obama or Bush, or Clinton, or Reagan, et al just release everything when claiming EP if they had nothing to hide?

We still get to have opinions on politics, even if we aren't experts. You guys certainly do all the time.

And even if I'm not an "expert": it seems I know more about these issues than pretty much anyone here, Left or Right.

Sad lies are all you have. You can keep them to yourself, because you're the only one who believes them.