Impeachment Hoax

1,688 views • 52 upvotes • Made by thenukeman123 5 years ago in politics
28 Comments
enochthewatcher
3 ups, 5y
thenukeman123
4 ups, 5y
I  will vote for Trump again in 2020 based on facts not feelings.  Putin will have NOTHING to  do 

 with my  vote.  He  had nothing to do with my vote in 2016. Liberals are so delusional  they believe that the Russians cost them  the election in 2016.  No   it  was their contempt for  the United States and its people.  These are the FACTS,  Almost 4 million jobs created since election.

More Americans are now employed than ever recorded before in our history.

We have created more than 400,000 manufacturing jobs since my election.

Manufacturing jobs growing at the fastest rate in more than THREE DECADES.

Economic growth last quarter hit 4.2 percent.

New unemployment claims recently hit a 49-year low.

Median household income has hit highest level ever recorded.

African-American unemployment has recently achieved the lowest rate ever recorded.

Hispanic-American unemployment is at the lowest rate ever recorded.

Asian-American unemployment recently achieved the lowest rate ever recorded.

Women’s unemployment recently reached the lowest rate in 65 years.

Youth unemployment has recently hit the lowest rate in nearly half a century.

Lowest unemployment rate ever recorded for Americans without a high school diploma.

Under my Administration, veterans’ unemployment recently reached its lowest rate in nearly 20 years.

Almost 3.9 million Americans have been lifted off food stamps since the election.
thenukeman123
3 ups, 5y
Truth!!
thenukeman123
3 ups, 5y
thenukeman123
0 ups, 5y
FACTS
thenukeman123
0 ups, 5y
FACTS!!
America-s_Greatness_Is_Now_Over
1 up, 5y, 1 reply
thenukeman123
0 ups, 5y, 1 reply
Liberals these are the FACTS, Democrats accuse President Trump of being a yes man for Russian President Vladimir Putin. Yet, President Trump directly confronted Putin by helping Ukraine better defend against Russian tanks. Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a main accuser in the Democrats’ impeachment drive, wrongly credited President Obama for sending advanced anti-tank weapons to Ukraine when President Trump was the first.

The claim from Col. Vindman, the White House National Security Council staff expert on Ukraine, came in closed-door testimony for which the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released a transcript.

Obama talked internally about sending lethal aid but did not.
VagabondSouffle
0 ups, 5y
Those are NOT facts.



2017, first week in office Trump tried use Exectutive Order to rescind Obama's sanctions on Russia and return property in the US conficated from them. He was rebuffed by Congress.

2018 Trump wanted to veto the next round of such sanctions but was stopped by Congress that told him they can outvote his veto.

2019 Trump got caught holding aid hostage in order to coerce Ukraine into digging up dirt on his political opponent. Impeachment, Google.



Like Trump, Obama could not give  military aid - monetary or weapons - to anyone. Congress grants that. THAT'S why Obama "talked internally about sending lethal aid but did not." The do-nothing Congress, like they had for 6 years, stymied him.
KylieFan_89
2 ups, 5y, 1 reply
thenukeman123
2 ups, 5y
Liberals sorry   here are the Facts,  Democrats accuse President Trump of being a yes man for Russian President Vladimir Putin. Yet, President Trump directly confronted Putin by helping Ukraine better defend against Russian tanks. Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a main accuser in the Democrats’ impeachment drive, wrongly credited President Obama for sending advanced anti-tank weapons to Ukraine when President Trump was the first.

The claim from Col. Vindman, the White House National Security Council staff expert on Ukraine, came in closed-door testimony for which the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released a transcript.

Obama talked internally about sending lethal aid but did not.
low rated comment (click to show)
SPatoine
5 ups, 5y, 4 replies
Giantsquonk
6 ups, 5y, 1 reply
If propaganda was illegal all your heroes would be going to prison .
low rated comment (click to show)
SPatoine
3 ups, 5y, 1 reply
Giantsquonk
6 ups, 5y
Brennan was most of the problem
WiseCracker
4 ups, 5y, 1 reply
"hacked" - that's hilarious.  The DNC refused to let the FBI examine the server, instead sending it to the Ukraine (Crowdstrike - look it up).  There is no proof that it was hacked, but there is plenty of evidence that the DNC server was compromised from the inside.



That is, unless, you're talking about Hillary's illegal server.  There is evidence suggesting there was a back door left open by the Awan brothers for intrusion.



If you're more offended that emails were leaked than you are the content of those emails, it shows where your true allegiance lies - with party and not country.



Facebook confirmed that there was very little spent by Russians on Facebook ads - far less than Hillary spent.



https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/01/russian-facebook-ad-spend/
SPatoine
2 ups, 5y
The bureau wanted access to the DNC’s network while the Russians were still in it, most likely to stage a counter operation against the GRU. The DNC declined, perhaps reluctant to have two intelligence agencies playing capture-the-flag in their systems five months before a presidential election. The DNC later authorized Crowdstrike to share full copies of the hacked servers with the bureau, giving the FBI access to the same evidence Crowdstrike had. 



Yes, I did look it up. You have inaccurate information.



The DNC NEVER sent the server to the Ukraine. The Ukraine does not have the, "missing" server. There is no such thing. Crowdstrike had a mirror image of it only.



Virtually every US agency says it was hacked and hacked by the Russians.
enochthewatcher
1 up, 5y
[deleted]
0 ups, 5y, 1 reply
Would it no longer be America with 4 years of trump? Why does it have to be 4 more years?
SPatoine
1 up, 5y, 2 replies
After only three years, we've reached a point where Republicans are willing to overlook a President asking a foreign nation for help in an upcoming election. After 4 more years they'll be willing to allow unlimited length of term for a President.
WiseCracker
3 ups, 5y, 1 reply
Except, there is no evidence of that, no matter how much the House Democrats try to pretend that there is.  It's not in the transcripts, Trump denies it, Zelenski denies it, every "witness" the Democrats deposed in their sham impeachment hearings said that it wasn't in the call...
SPatoine
2 ups, 5y, 1 reply
Which leads to the other impeachment article. Virtually no papers handed over by this admin. Virtually a complete shut off from admin officials testifying. 



Sorry but you can't claim no evidence when absolutely everyone who did testify had the same exact story and the admin obstructs to prevent first account people from testifying and lock up all documentation. 



Obstruction in this instance, is case closed.
WiseCracker
4 ups, 5y, 1 reply
Funny you should say "case closed", because the Democrats never actually opened it.  They subpoena'd documents/people and when they were faced with a claim of Executive Privilege, instead of going to the courts (where they knew they would lose), they made up an article of impeachment for it.  And by made up, I mean made up - Obstruction of Congress?  Such a thing does not exist for Congress - that's a Judicial branch charge.  It could exist - but they would need to pass a law to make it so, and they're too busy investigating Trump to actually do their jobs (for three years).



The judicial branch exists with its powers to be referee between the other two branches of government.  You can't hold the Executive branch responsible for the Legislative branch not utilizing the Judicial branch.
SPatoine
0 ups, 5y, 1 reply
The admin is required by law to release information. Schiff explained why they did not pursue that avenue. It would take more than two years. I agree that they should still be pursuing it anyway, even if Trump is not President by the time the information is released. Maybe then he could be tried as an American citizen and go to jail. Either way, he must be held accountable for his actions, like any other American would be. He is not a king.
WiseCracker
0 ups, 5y, 1 reply
The Executive has the constitutional authority to claim executive privilege, and it's up to the Judicial to decide if it's warranted or not.



Schiff and Pelosi said they wanted to get impeachment done before Christmas.  The speed of the judicial branch is what it is.  Schiff didn't want to do it the right way, so he did it the wrong way - and his legacy will bear that record, as will Pelosi and Nadler bear it.
SPatoine
0 ups, 5y, 1 reply
A senate that acquits him without calling witnesses will have to bear their own legacy as well.
WiseCracker
0 ups, 5y
The argument against the Democrats isn't that there be no witnesses, the argument is that witnesses who did not testify to the house should not testify in the Senate.  The House felt that it had enough evidence to impeach when it voted, but now feels that it does not have enough evidence to convict, and is demanding that the Senate do investigation that was the responsibility of the House.



It looks like there will be witnesses though, according to McConnell - now the dems are screwed.  Joe, Hunter, the whistleblower, Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi, every White House staffer who jumped ship to work for Schiff......  you begged for it - now you're gonna get it.
[deleted]
0 ups, 5y
Hello? There’s the 22nd amendment? Even if he is re-elected, you would need 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of states to approve. Not gonna happen. Don’t be delusional about Trump. No major political party has endorsed a removal of the 22nd amendment.
Show More Comments
Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
THE IMPEACHMENT HOAX EXPLAINED!