• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 13
 
alfa164
Posts: 3057
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:47 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Thu Sep 26, 2019 4:50 am

casinterest wrote:
Facts and logic are out there , and the details are damning. the Fact that neither of you are posting in response to the plethora of facts being posted is rather telling.


:checkmark: As soon as the Ukrainian President brought up the issue of the military funding, the next words from Trump's mouth were:

"I would like you to do us a favor, though..."

Even an elementary school student can put 2+2 together. I don't understand why the diehard Trump puppets can't.
I'm going to have a smokin' hot body again!
I have decided to be cremated....
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9848
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Thu Sep 26, 2019 6:46 am

alfa164 wrote:
casinterest wrote:
Facts and logic are out there , and the details are damning. the Fact that neither of you are posting in response to the plethora of facts being posted is rather telling.


:checkmark: As soon as the Ukrainian President brought up the issue of the military funding, the next words from Trump's mouth were:

"I would like you to do us a favor, though..."

Even an elementary school student can put 2+2 together. I don't understand why the diehard Trump puppets can't.


Interesting backstory here on that from
conservative Tim Miller:

You know who else was obsessed with the CrowdStrike conspiracy? Longtime Trump henchman Roger Stone. Stone and his attorneys argued that the 2016 DNC hack was an inside job and that CrowdStrike tampered with the server. He submitted affidavits claiming that Russia was an unlikely source for the files and thus the warrants for his arrest for his collusion with Russian hackers Guccifer 2.0.

So when Trump asked Zelensky about the “server” that Ukraine has, it seems likely that he is hoping to get information that will prove once and for all that Russia didn’t actually do what it did, that Vladimir Putin can be the friend that he’s always wanted, and that he is a legitimate president and a very good boy indeed.


https://thebulwark.com/about-that-favor ... m-ukraine/

So we have two crazy straws drawn simultaneously - shaking down a foreign leader for conspiracy theory followup, and deploying a personal attorney on campaign prep work in a foreign land in blatant violation of FEC rules and law. The funny thing is Rudy has already said enough that he’ll be sitting in front of a House committee sooner rather than later.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
ltbewr
Posts: 14382
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Thu Sep 26, 2019 2:16 pm

The release of a partially redacted letter of the alleged 'whistleblower' seems to help the Impeachment process for the Democrats. Basically Trump and his staff put the records of his conversations with the Ukrainian leader to an inappropriate and more restrictive confidential classification to hide them. In part cover ups of information is what got Nixon forced out of office.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 9446
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Thu Sep 26, 2019 3:15 pm

ltbewr wrote:
The release of a partially redacted letter of the alleged 'whistleblower' seems to help the Impeachment process for the Democrats. Basically Trump and his staff put the records of his conversations with the Ukrainian leader to an inappropriate and more restrictive confidential classification to hide them. In part cover ups of information is what got Nixon forced out of office.


Trump , Barr, and Giuliani are screwed. So are those that clung to those coattails.
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
mysfit
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Thu Sep 26, 2019 3:33 pm

It's always the cover up.

If the GOP doesn't want to run an impeached president candidate they better reinstate all those primaries they cancelled.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 20958
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Thu Sep 26, 2019 5:44 pm

alfa164 wrote:
casinterest wrote:
Facts and logic are out there , and the details are damning. the Fact that neither of you are posting in response to the plethora of facts being posted is rather telling.


:checkmark: As soon as the Ukrainian President brought up the issue of the military funding, the next words from Trump's mouth were:

"I would like you to do us a favor, though..."

Even an elementary school student can put 2+2 together. I don't understand why the diehard Trump puppets can't.


Ukraine wanted to speak to him but he made a condition of any meeting they they discuss Biden.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ukraini ... d=65863043

But, it is all fine and this too shall pass because it is all fake news and the fake media making up lies. I want to find that disgusting press conference he did where he just kept going on and on about the lies and fake news and I think he even said "do your job" or something when he was at the UN. This will be the MAGA talking points.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 9446
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Fri Sep 27, 2019 1:41 pm

https://thehill.com/policy/national-sec ... ting-trump

To be clear, we do not wish to prejudge the totality of the facts or Congress’ deliberative process. At the same time, there is no escaping that what we already know is serious enough to merit impeachment proceedings," the officials wrote.

"President Trump appears to have leveraged the authority and resources of the highest office in the land to invite additional foreign interference into our democratic processes. That would constitute an unconscionable abuse of power," the statement continued.



The letter was signed by Obama and Bush Administration officials.

This impeachment is going to be going forward in full force. You can tell by Trump's tweets today that he is panicked, and not acting rational at all.
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
mham001
Posts: 5623
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Fri Sep 27, 2019 6:44 pm

This is why an impeachment circus makes sense now, just as the news leaks of impending disaster for the DNC's preferred choice....follow the money, honey.


Wall Street Democratic donors warn the party: We’ll sit out, or back Trump, if you nominate Elizabeth Warren
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/26/wall-st ... nated.html

Democratic donors on Wall Street and in big business are preparing to sit out the presidential campaign fundraising cycle — or even back President Donald Trump — if Sen. Elizabeth Warren wins the party’s nomination.

In recent weeks, CNBC spoke to several high-dollar Democratic donors and fundraisers in the business community and found that this opinion was becoming widely shared...............


She (Warren) finished raising at least $19 million in the second quarter mainly through small-dollar donors. The third quarter ends Monday.

Trump, has been raising hundreds of millions of dollars, putting any eventual 2020 rival in a bind as about 20 Democrats vie for their party’s nomination.

Trump’s campaign and the Republican National Committee have raised over $100 million in the second quarter. A large portion of that haul came from wealthy donors who gave to their joint fundraising committee, Trump Victory. In August, the RNC raised just over $23 million and has $53 million on hand.

The Democratic National Committee have struggled to keep up. The DNC finished August bringing in $7.9 million and has $7.2 million in debt.


Biden, who has courted and garnered the support of various wealthy donors, has started to lag in some polls..................
 
wingman
Posts: 3796
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Fri Sep 27, 2019 6:48 pm

mham001 wrote:
This is why an impeachment circus makes sense now, just as the news leaks of impending disaster for the DNC's preferred choice....follow the money, honey.


Wall Street Democratic donors warn the party: We’ll sit out, or back Trump, if you nominate Elizabeth Warren
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/26/wall-st ... nated.html

Democratic donors on Wall Street and in big business are preparing to sit out the presidential campaign fundraising cycle — or even back President Donald Trump — if Sen. Elizabeth Warren wins the party’s nomination.

In recent weeks, CNBC spoke to several high-dollar Democratic donors and fundraisers in the business community and found that this opinion was becoming widely shared...............


She (Warren) finished raising at least $19 million in the second quarter mainly through small-dollar donors. The third quarter ends Monday.

Trump, has been raising hundreds of millions of dollars, putting any eventual 2020 rival in a bind as about 20 Democrats vie for their party’s nomination.

Trump’s campaign and the Republican National Committee have raised over $100 million in the second quarter. A large portion of that haul came from wealthy donors who gave to their joint fundraising committee, Trump Victory. In August, the RNC raised just over $23 million and has $53 million on hand.

The Democratic National Committee have struggled to keep up. The DNC finished August bringing in $7.9 million and has $7.2 million in debt.


Biden, who has courted and garnered the support of various wealthy donors, has started to lag in some polls..................


You're right. The Whistleblower Report had nothing to do with it. Dems just got lucky it magically appeared right after this WSJ article. The synaptic sparks are becoming less and less frequent with this one.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 9446
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Fri Sep 27, 2019 6:51 pm

The drums of impeachment beat louder.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... peachment/

A YouGov/Economist poll released Wednesday found that 52 percent of Americans said it is inappropriate for the president to request a foreign government open an investigation into a potential political opponent. (By contrast, 22 percent said it was appropriate, and 26 percent said they weren’t sure.) And in that same poll, 62 percent of Americans said that it is inappropriate for the president to threaten withholding foreign aid to a country if it refuses to “take an action which personally benefits the President.” (Only 14 percent said it is appropriate, and 24 percent were not sure.)

Where ever you go, there you are.
 
mham001
Posts: 5623
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:02 pm

Huh, more and more inconsistencies in what is said to be known about the whistleblower report. And amazing that while the media and Democrat politicians fall all over themselves about supposed quid pro quo for the frozen aid money, NYT reported this almost a week ago...

A Ukrainian official said Mr. Zelensky’s government did not learn of the delay until about one month after the call.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/23/us/p ... collection
 
mham001
Posts: 5623
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:05 pm

casinterest wrote:
The drums of impeachment beat louder.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... peachment/

A YouGov/Economist poll released Wednesday found that 52 percent of Americans said it is inappropriate for the president to request a foreign government open an investigation into a potential political opponent. (By contrast, 22 percent said it was appropriate, and 26 percent said they weren’t sure.) And in that same poll, 62 percent of Americans said that it is inappropriate for the president to threaten withholding foreign aid to a country if it refuses to “take an action which personally benefits the President.” (Only 14 percent said it is appropriate, and 24 percent were not sure.)



A pertinent question would be to ask if a candidate and his family should be immune to investigation while running for president and is it appropriate a president request his DOJ to do that?
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 9446
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:23 pm

mham001 wrote:
casinterest wrote:
The drums of impeachment beat louder.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... peachment/

A YouGov/Economist poll released Wednesday found that 52 percent of Americans said it is inappropriate for the president to request a foreign government open an investigation into a potential political opponent. (By contrast, 22 percent said it was appropriate, and 26 percent said they weren’t sure.) And in that same poll, 62 percent of Americans said that it is inappropriate for the president to threaten withholding foreign aid to a country if it refuses to “take an action which personally benefits the President.” (Only 14 percent said it is appropriate, and 24 percent were not sure.)



A pertinent question would be to ask if a candidate and his family should be immune to investigation while running for president and is it appropriate a president request his DOJ to do that?


Not pertinent at all. Another misfire. Trump didn't do that. When you get back from Wacky what - absolutism land, let's deal with the facts, of what Trump did do.

Trump, on a state call, asserted a personal attack on a political rival using extortion, and violated Campaign Finance laws.
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 3522
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:40 pm

As someone old enough to remember both the Clinton and Nixon investigations, I am not looking forward to what lies ahead over the next few months. While my opinion of Trump is that he's a lying weasel that is wholly unfit for the office he holds, the better course of action would be to beat him at the polls in 2020. He will never be convicted by the Senate and removed from office even if all the allegations (and probably many, many more) are true. For those of you who didn't live through the previously mentioned investigations (and impeachment of Clinton), if you think nothing gets done in Washington now, you ain't seen nothin' yet. This will consume 100% of congress' time and energy and no meaningful legislative work will get done at all.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 9446
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:49 pm

ER757 wrote:
As someone old enough to remember both the Clinton and Nixon investigations, I am not looking forward to what lies ahead over the next few months. While my opinion of Trump is that he's a lying weasel that is wholly unfit for the office he holds, the better course of action would be to beat him at the polls in 2020. He will never be convicted by the Senate and removed from office even if all the allegations (and probably many, many more) are true. For those of you who didn't live through the previously mentioned investigations (and impeachment of Clinton), if you think nothing gets done in Washington now, you ain't seen nothin' yet. This will consume 100% of congress' time and energy and no meaningful legislative work will get done at all.


The Impeachment will not be easy. It was never meant to be. But it is wholly applicable to this current WH occupant. We must investigate to see how deep this Swamp really is that Trump has brought in while dismissing hard working career employees that cared about this country.
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 20958
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:50 pm

mham001 wrote:
casinterest wrote:
The drums of impeachment beat louder.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... peachment/

A YouGov/Economist poll released Wednesday found that 52 percent of Americans said it is inappropriate for the president to request a foreign government open an investigation into a potential political opponent. (By contrast, 22 percent said it was appropriate, and 26 percent said they weren’t sure.) And in that same poll, 62 percent of Americans said that it is inappropriate for the president to threaten withholding foreign aid to a country if it refuses to “take an action which personally benefits the President.” (Only 14 percent said it is appropriate, and 24 percent were not sure.)



A pertinent question would be to ask if a candidate and his family should be immune to investigation while running for president and is it appropriate a president request his DOJ to do that?


It has already been shown there is no smoke and no fire with Biden. There is no "there" there with Biden.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 9446
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Fri Sep 27, 2019 8:42 pm

The House has issued subpoenas. Begun it has. this impeachment investigation.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/27/house-p ... probe.html

In a letter to the top U.S. diplomat dated Friday, the heads of the House Foreign Affairs, Oversight and Intelligence committees requested relevant documents by Oct. 4. Democratic Reps. Eliot Engel, Elijah Cummings and Adam Schiff wrote that they sought the records as they investigate “the extent to which President Trump jeopardized national security by pressing Ukraine to interfere with our 2020 election and by withholding security assistance provided by Congress to help Ukraine counter Russian aggression.”

The committee heads said they sent a separate letter to Pompeo alerting him that they have scheduled depositions for five state department officials over the next two weeks. Those officials are:

Former Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch
Special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker
Deputy Assistant Secretary George Kent
Counselor of the State Department T. Ulrich Brechbuhl
U.S. Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
ArchGuy1
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2019 11:35 pm

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 2:46 am

This is the fourth time impeachment inquiries have been used against a president, the others being Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton.
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 13197
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 3:01 am

MikeDrop wrote:
jdstJD wrote:
You mean like the republicans did for Obama when he took office? Like McConnell saying on the day of his inauguration that their one goal from then on out was to make Obama a one term president. How gracious, cooperative and patriotic they were!!


Sure, you can be upset at these things, and I understand your frustration. But I really hope that your desire for impeachment isn't based on your anger at perceived mistreatment of President Obama and a need for revenge.

Mike Drop



I see it as what goes around, comes around. I do not see all this as trump being trump. I see it as trump being am idiot unlike his army of defenders and apologists. A lot at stake here, like the stability of our nation.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
User avatar
einsteinboricua
Posts: 7654
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 3:30 am

casinterest wrote:
The House has issued subpoenas. Begun it has. this impeachment investigation.

Mr Volker has resigned his post, and it wouldn't surprise me if more folks head for the doors in the coming days.

It would be interesting to see any of the subpoenaed people plead the 5th and see Trump supporting it. It would mark yet another reversal...after all, only guilty people plead the 5th.
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1510
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 5:51 am

mysfit wrote:
It's always the cover up.

If the GOP doesn't want to run an impeached president candidate they better reinstate all those primaries they cancelled.


Go ahead and impeach him. The Senate will put it in the circular file where it belongs. No one is going to care. Trump wanted some Intel from Ukraine vs Warren coming for your guns, reparations, and a 90% tax for those awful rich people. Who wouldn't want that? It will just be all the more embarrassing for the Dem that gets beat by an impeached president.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9848
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:10 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
mysfit wrote:
It's always the cover up.

If the GOP doesn't want to run an impeached president candidate they better reinstate all those primaries they cancelled.


Go ahead and impeach him. The Senate will put it in the circular file where it belongs. No one is going to care. Trump wanted some Intel from Ukraine vs Warren coming for your guns, reparations, and a 90% tax for those awful rich people. Who wouldn't want that? It will just be all the more embarrassing for the Dem that gets beat by an impeached president.


Politics above country is all this commentary is about. #FailedPatriot

Good observation from a real conservative:

If White House lawyers were worried, they should still be. Government lawyers work for the American people, not any one person in office. They owe a duty of fealty to the rule of law and the Constitution. If they do their job properly, it inevitably means upsetting Donald J. Trump, which many people in his orbit refuse to do.

https://thebulwark.com/the-whistleblowe ... americans/
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 1800
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:33 am

wingman wrote:
mham001 wrote:
This is why an impeachment circus makes sense now, just as the news leaks of impending disaster for the DNC's preferred choice....follow the money, honey.


Wall Street Democratic donors warn the party: We’ll sit out, or back Trump, if you nominate Elizabeth Warren
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/26/wall-st ... nated.html

Democratic donors on Wall Street and in big business are preparing to sit out the presidential campaign fundraising cycle — or even back President Donald Trump — if Sen. Elizabeth Warren wins the party’s nomination.

In recent weeks, CNBC spoke to several high-dollar Democratic donors and fundraisers in the business community and found that this opinion was becoming widely shared...............


She (Warren) finished raising at least $19 million in the second quarter mainly through small-dollar donors. The third quarter ends Monday.

Trump, has been raising hundreds of millions of dollars, putting any eventual 2020 rival in a bind as about 20 Democrats vie for their party’s nomination.

Trump’s campaign and the Republican National Committee have raised over $100 million in the second quarter. A large portion of that haul came from wealthy donors who gave to their joint fundraising committee, Trump Victory. In August, the RNC raised just over $23 million and has $53 million on hand.

The Democratic National Committee have struggled to keep up. The DNC finished August bringing in $7.9 million and has $7.2 million in debt.


Biden, who has courted and garnered the support of various wealthy donors, has started to lag in some polls..................


You're right. The Whistleblower Report had nothing to do with it. Dems just got lucky it magically appeared right after this WSJ article. The synaptic sparks are becoming less and less frequent with this one.


The report was probably written by someone like Shiff. Scrubbed by the party and handed in. These clowns have lost it with their coup attempt. They know Biden is a joke and the rest of the clown show on stage doesn’t stand a chance. Smear Trump up to Election Day with the hope that one of the turds slips through.
Welcome to Nothingburgers. May I take your order?
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 1800
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:45 am

trpmb6 wrote:
Here is what I think.

Pelosi is smart. Very calculated. I think this is about 2020. This is her conceding that Trump will very likely win reelection. She was holding out, hoping something else would sink him. But time has forced her hand. The only way to defeat him is with impeachment.


It’s an attempt to keep the House. Keeps all the cry babies from 2016 in line.
Welcome to Nothingburgers. May I take your order?
 
LittleSprocket
Posts: 282
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:56 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:58 am

Y’all really need to re-read the story of the boy who cried wolf. Democrats have been looking to impeach Trump since the day that he was elected. What you folks need to understand is the during an impeachment inquiry, this will be tried in the Senate where ALL evidence will be presented, not just that which the Democrats have cherry picked. This will hurt the democratic candidates running for President and will not result in Trump being removed from office. This is literally blindly pursuing the removal of a duly elected President because your sacred one lost...
 
LittleSprocket
Posts: 282
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:56 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:00 am

seb146 wrote:
mham001 wrote:
casinterest wrote:
The drums of impeachment beat louder.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... peachment/



A pertinent question would be to ask if a candidate and his family should be immune to investigation while running for president and is it appropriate a president request his DOJ to do that?


It has already been shown there is no smoke and no fire with Biden. There is no "there" there with Biden.


Except it hasn’t been disproven, hence the President asking about possible corruption related to it...why would he ask the President of Ukraine to investigate possible corruption related to the firing of an official that was investigating a company linked to Hunter Biden?

All of this will come out in time. I just love how he plays you folks like fools.
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 1800
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:05 am

seb146 wrote:
mham001 wrote:
casinterest wrote:
The drums of impeachment beat louder.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... peachment/



A pertinent question would be to ask if a candidate and his family should be immune to investigation while running for president and is it appropriate a president request his DOJ to do that?


It has already been shown there is no smoke and no fire with Biden. There is no "there" there with Biden.


Gimmie a break. He bragged about his shakedown. Response from the left? Nada.
Welcome to Nothingburgers. May I take your order?
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9848
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:05 am

LittleSprocket wrote:
This is literally blindly pursuing the removal of a duly elected President because your sacred one lost...


Literally not the case. HRC was ‘sacred’ to only 26% of eligible voters, nearly the same as DJT. That means damn-near 50% hated both or couldn’t be bothered. In light of the embarrassing daily shitshow that is this WH, this comes down to fitness and conduct unbecoming of the office. We’re only lucky there are real patriots still around represented by the whistleblower and WH staffers/intelligence pros involved.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9848
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:09 am

DL717 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
mham001 wrote:

A pertinent question would be to ask if a candidate and his family should be immune to investigation while running for president and is it appropriate a president request his DOJ to do that?


It has already been shown there is no smoke and no fire with Biden. There is no "there" there with Biden.


Gimmie a break. He bragged about his shakedown. Response from the left? Nada.


He was acting on behalf of stated US policy toward Ukraine at the time supported by every EU ally. A far cry from Giuliani’s one-man pseudo-State Dept pet project.

Some prescient commentary from a real conservative:

If the president acted with utter propriety — and not only does he say he did, but the ever-honest Lindsey Graham assures us that the declassified documents back him up, then there’s no reason to be advocating deadly retribution against the whistleblower, who must be cowed and embarrassed.

Right?


https://thebulwark.com/memo-to-trump-th ... not-a-spy/
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
LittleSprocket
Posts: 282
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:56 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:19 am

Aaron747 wrote:
LittleSprocket wrote:
This is literally blindly pursuing the removal of a duly elected President because your sacred one lost...


Literally not the case. HRC was ‘sacred’ to only 26% of eligible voters, nearly the same as DJT. That means damn-near 50% hated both or couldn’t be bothered. In light of the embarrassing daily shitshow that is this WH, this comes down to fitness and conduct unbecoming of the office. We’re only lucky there are real patriots still around represented by the whistleblower and WH staffers/intelligence pros involved.


I’d love to stay and chat but the squat rack just opened up. Here’s the thing about all this impeachment nonsense that is going on. The story of the boy who cried wolf is well at work here. The Democratic Party has been calling for his impeachment since the day that he was elected. Every single charge that they have levied hasn’t held up, to include the Russian collusion narrative. The problem that the Democrats have now is that they lack any credibility with a good portion of the American people that any real attempt to remove a duly elected President that they voted for will result in a massive backlash against the Democrats, no matter if the claims are valid or not.

For those that don’t know the story, http://www.storyarts.org/library/aesops ... s/boy.html
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9848
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:23 am

LittleSprocket wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
LittleSprocket wrote:
This is literally blindly pursuing the removal of a duly elected President because your sacred one lost...


Literally not the case. HRC was ‘sacred’ to only 26% of eligible voters, nearly the same as DJT. That means damn-near 50% hated both or couldn’t be bothered. In light of the embarrassing daily shitshow that is this WH, this comes down to fitness and conduct unbecoming of the office. We’re only lucky there are real patriots still around represented by the whistleblower and WH staffers/intelligence pros involved.


I’d love to stay and chat but the squat rack just opened up. Here’s the thing about all this impeachment nonsense that is going on. The story of the boy who cried wolf is well at work here. The Democratic Party has been calling for his impeachment since the day that he was elected. Every single charge that they have levied hasn’t held up, to include the Russian collusion narrative. The problem that the Democrats have now is that they lack any credibility with a good portion of the American people that any real attempt to remove a duly elected President that they voted for will result in a massive backlash against the Democrats, no matter if the claims are valid or not.

For those that don’t know the story, http://www.storyarts.org/library/aesops ... s/boy.html


Factually incorrect - there was not enough evidence collected on the Russia stuff. Three years of legal stonewalling prevented seeing anything from Duetsche Bank AG - and only recently does it look like actual tax docs will be made available to Congress. Your statement is only accurate once ALL evidence has been evaluated and still nothing holds up.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
LittleSprocket
Posts: 282
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:56 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:32 am

Aaron747 wrote:
LittleSprocket wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

Literally not the case. HRC was ‘sacred’ to only 26% of eligible voters, nearly the same as DJT. That means damn-near 50% hated both or couldn’t be bothered. In light of the embarrassing daily shitshow that is this WH, this comes down to fitness and conduct unbecoming of the office. We’re only lucky there are real patriots still around represented by the whistleblower and WH staffers/intelligence pros involved.


I’d love to stay and chat but the squat rack just opened up. Here’s the thing about all this impeachment nonsense that is going on. The story of the boy who cried wolf is well at work here. The Democratic Party has been calling for his impeachment since the day that he was elected. Every single charge that they have levied hasn’t held up, to include the Russian collusion narrative. The problem that the Democrats have now is that they lack any credibility with a good portion of the American people that any real attempt to remove a duly elected President that they voted for will result in a massive backlash against the Democrats, no matter if the claims are valid or not.

For those that don’t know the story, http://www.storyarts.org/library/aesops ... s/boy.html


Factually incorrect - there was not enough evidence collected on the Russia stuff. Three years of legal stonewalling prevented seeing anything from Duetsche Bank AG - and only recently does it look like actual tax docs will be made available to Congress. Your statement is only accurate once ALL evidence has been evaluated and still nothing holds up.


Not enough evidence, AKA not enough evidence to prove that there was Russian collusion. Have you ever argued to convict someone for murder based on a lack of evidence? That’s exactly what you are calling for here.

Now, as far as the boy who cried wolf, the following lists in detail the entire effort to unseat Trump. I know that it is Wikipedia but it’s a convenient source to give with everything in one place. This all started when the Democrats tried passing a law requiring divestiture of assets and failing to do so becoming a “high crime and misdemeanor”.

I’m sorry but the Democrats are crooked as hell.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efforts ... nald_Trump
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1510
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:38 am

This is just sad. You all have gotten your hopes up so many times. And every time Trump rips the rug out from under you.

Do you know what matters most to people when they enter the voting location? The only thing that matters to the majority is how well they are doing at that time. That's why Bill Maher wants a recession with it's massive job loss and people depressed. He knows that's the only way Trump leaves the White House. But the fact of the matter is that all groups have done well and are sitting pretty under Trump. I'm afraid you are in for a world of disappointment. Pelosi doesn't want this. She is scared to death but was railroaded by the likes of the squad, lying Schiff, and the human paperweight Ted Lieu.
Last edited by TTailedTiger on Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9848
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:38 am

LittleSprocket wrote:
Not enough evidence, AKA not enough evidence to prove that there was Russian collusion. Have you ever argued to convict someone for murder based on a lack of evidence? That’s exactly what you are calling for here.


Yet another classic non sequitur. We're not talking about a murder case - that's an entirely different investigative process and chain of evidence.

And since you paraphrased my words inaccurately - I did not state I am calling for a conviction. I'll repeat - we cannot *factually* state that a conclusion has not held up until ALL relevant evidence has been examined. It was stated both in the report and in the factual record that there were records and documents germane to the investigation that could not be obtained. That means additional pertinent evidence exists and remains unexamined.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
LittleSprocket
Posts: 282
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:56 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:46 am

Aaron747 wrote:
LittleSprocket wrote:
Not enough evidence, AKA not enough evidence to prove that there was Russian collusion. Have you ever argued to convict someone for murder based on a lack of evidence? That’s exactly what you are calling for here.


Yet another classic non sequitur. We're not talking about a murder case - that's an entirely different investigative process and chain of evidence.

And since you paraphrased my words inaccurately - I did not state I am calling for a conviction. I'll repeat - we cannot *factually* state that a conclusion has not held up until ALL relevant evidence has been examined. It was stated both in the report and in the factual record that there were records and documents germane to the investigation that could not be obtained. That means additional pertinent evidence exists and remains unexamined.


You don’t seem to comprehend that a criminal investigation, which the Mueller fiasco was follows the same constitutional principles as any other criminal investigation. You have to have EVIDENCE in order to get a conviction, which is exactly why there were several criminal convictions brought about from his investigation. I understand that you want to think that there are several types of investigations but in EVERY investigation you have to present evidence as a prosecutor to show guilt otherwise the person being tried or investigated isn’t guilty of a crime. These are outline exclusively in the 4th and 5th amendments of our Constitution. It’s not that hard to comprehend once you take the political binders off.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9848
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 10:23 am

LittleSprocket wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
LittleSprocket wrote:
Not enough evidence, AKA not enough evidence to prove that there was Russian collusion. Have you ever argued to convict someone for murder based on a lack of evidence? That’s exactly what you are calling for here.


Yet another classic non sequitur. We're not talking about a murder case - that's an entirely different investigative process and chain of evidence.

And since you paraphrased my words inaccurately - I did not state I am calling for a conviction. I'll repeat - we cannot *factually* state that a conclusion has not held up until ALL relevant evidence has been examined. It was stated both in the report and in the factual record that there were records and documents germane to the investigation that could not be obtained. That means additional pertinent evidence exists and remains unexamined.


You don’t seem to comprehend that a criminal investigation, which the Mueller fiasco was follows the same constitutional principles as any other criminal investigation. You have to have EVIDENCE in order to get a conviction, which is exactly why there were several criminal convictions brought about from his investigation. I understand that you want to think that there are several types of investigations but in EVERY investigation you have to present evidence as a prosecutor to show guilt otherwise the person being tried or investigated isn’t guilty of a crime. These are outline exclusively in the 4th and 5th amendments of our Constitution. It’s not that hard to comprehend once you take the political binders off.


That was clearly not my point - not going to play junior high level games and walk you through intricacies of contextual reference. In any case, investigations under 28 CFR 600 are not expressly limited to criminal matters and the original mandate from the Deputy AG pertained to 'Russian interference with 2016 election and RELATED matters'.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17676
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 2:33 pm

LittleSprocket wrote:
The story of the boy who cried wolf is well at work here.


Great analogy. Except you'll be hoping the ending is different! :rotfl:
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 20958
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 4:23 pm

DL717 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
mham001 wrote:

A pertinent question would be to ask if a candidate and his family should be immune to investigation while running for president and is it appropriate a president request his DOJ to do that?


It has already been shown there is no smoke and no fire with Biden. There is no "there" there with Biden.


Gimmie a break. He bragged about his shakedown. Response from the left? Nada.


What is interesting is that it is the exact same response from Republicans. Until their own dear leader is caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Now, we are not supposed to look at his crimes, we are supposed to look at Joe and Hunter. After Republicans said nothing and did nothing.

Again: Republicans were in control of Congress for four years. Crickets. Not a peep about this. In fact, there was bipartisan support! Yes, that's right. Both parties agreed on a military funding package for Ukraine while Biden was VP. Now, we have to go after Joe Biden for what he did and Republicans supported.

Excuse me. I think I have whiplash.....
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 20958
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 4:34 pm

LittleSprocket wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
LittleSprocket wrote:

I’d love to stay and chat but the squat rack just opened up. Here’s the thing about all this impeachment nonsense that is going on. The story of the boy who cried wolf is well at work here. The Democratic Party has been calling for his impeachment since the day that he was elected. Every single charge that they have levied hasn’t held up, to include the Russian collusion narrative. The problem that the Democrats have now is that they lack any credibility with a good portion of the American people that any real attempt to remove a duly elected President that they voted for will result in a massive backlash against the Democrats, no matter if the claims are valid or not.

For those that don’t know the story, http://www.storyarts.org/library/aesops ... s/boy.html


Factually incorrect - there was not enough evidence collected on the Russia stuff. Three years of legal stonewalling prevented seeing anything from Duetsche Bank AG - and only recently does it look like actual tax docs will be made available to Congress. Your statement is only accurate once ALL evidence has been evaluated and still nothing holds up.


Not enough evidence, AKA not enough evidence to prove that there was Russian collusion. Have you ever argued to convict someone for murder based on a lack of evidence? That’s exactly what you are calling for here.

Now, as far as the boy who cried wolf, the following lists in detail the entire effort to unseat Trump. I know that it is Wikipedia but it’s a convenient source to give with everything in one place. This all started when the Democrats tried passing a law requiring divestiture of assets and failing to do so becoming a “high crime and misdemeanor”.

I’m sorry but the Democrats are crooked as hell.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efforts ... nald_Trump


The whole world has had to listen to Republicans whine "BUT CLINTON!!!" since 1992. You can not possibly be serious when comparing actual crimes actually being pointed out in real time to big nothing burgers?

Recall that Ken Starr kept changing the scope and goal posts of his investigation every time he came up empty. There simply was no there there. So, he changed the narrative until he found something. And that was a stained dress. Not shaking down a foreign leader for dirt on his opponent.

Compare that with now. No special council changing the scope and focus of investigations. We had one man keeping a very narrow focus showing that, yes, Russia did get involved in our elections. Now, on a completely unrelated topic with no special council or any provocation from any political party, a whistle blower comes forward.

Republicans are so shook they are comparing apples to Plymouth Reliant.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 9446
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:47 pm

LittleSprocket wrote:
seb146 wrote:
mham001 wrote:

A pertinent question would be to ask if a candidate and his family should be immune to investigation while running for president and is it appropriate a president request his DOJ to do that?


It has already been shown there is no smoke and no fire with Biden. There is no "there" there with Biden.


Except it hasn’t been disproven, hence the President asking about possible corruption related to it...why would he ask the President of Ukraine to investigate possible corruption related to the firing of an official that was investigating a company linked to Hunter Biden?

All of this will come out in time. I just love how he plays you folks like fools.


Biden was already cleared in the Ukraine, and if had to prove he had US marching orders, he could provide them .But there was no real benefit to his son as the corruption that everyone was worried about happened with the company, not the recent advisers they took on.

Trump is really petty for going after a nothing issue.
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9848
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sun Sep 29, 2019 12:30 am

casinterest wrote:
LittleSprocket wrote:
seb146 wrote:

It has already been shown there is no smoke and no fire with Biden. There is no "there" there with Biden.


Except it hasn’t been disproven, hence the President asking about possible corruption related to it...why would he ask the President of Ukraine to investigate possible corruption related to the firing of an official that was investigating a company linked to Hunter Biden?

All of this will come out in time. I just love how he plays you folks like fools.


Biden was already cleared in the Ukraine, and if had to prove he had US marching orders, he could provide them .But there was no real benefit to his son as the corruption that everyone was worried about happened with the company, not the recent advisers they took on.

Trump is really petty for going after a nothing issue.


Investigate both and we’ll see who is above board. All I know is once the inquiry committees subpoena the hidden transcripts of calls with Saudi and Russia, we may see stuff really hit the fan.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 9446
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Sun Sep 29, 2019 1:46 am

Aaron747 wrote:
casinterest wrote:
LittleSprocket wrote:

Except it hasn’t been disproven, hence the President asking about possible corruption related to it...why would he ask the President of Ukraine to investigate possible corruption related to the firing of an official that was investigating a company linked to Hunter Biden?

All of this will come out in time. I just love how he plays you folks like fools.


Biden was already cleared in the Ukraine, and if had to prove he had US marching orders, he could provide them .But there was no real benefit to his son as the corruption that everyone was worried about happened with the company, not the recent advisers they took on.

Trump is really petty for going after a nothing issue.


Investigate both and we’ll see who is above board. All I know is once the inquiry committees subpoena the hidden transcripts of calls with Saudi and Russia, we may see stuff really hit the fan.

The oversight committees have a lot of leeway to investigate, and Trump gives plenty of reasons to investigate.
I think Biden is above board, but I still have reservations into the motives of the Ukrainian company for hiring Hunter. Seems too much like a Honey Trap.
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 9446
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:08 am

What is wrong with this President?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... gr%5Etweet

He is accusing a good faith Government employee of Treason for filing a whistleblower report?

This is dangerous and the President is a Clear and Present Danger to a citizen of the United States, by making such threats of treason.
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9848
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:39 am

casinterest wrote:
What is wrong with this President?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... gr%5Etweet

He is accusing a good faith Government employee of Treason for filing a whistleblower report?

This is dangerous and the President is a Clear and Present Danger to a citizen of the United States, by making such threats of treason.


He has lost the plot even more - he demands to meet the guy who is in protective custody?? Accuses someone of treason for spying on POTUS? That’s not even remotely within the definition of treason in Article III. Unfit for the office - full stop.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
Spar
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2019 7:37 pm

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Mon Sep 30, 2019 1:22 am

mham001 wrote:
Huh, more and more inconsistencies in what is said to be known about the whistleblower report. And amazing that while the media and Democrat politicians fall all over themselves about supposed quid pro quo for the frozen aid money, NYT reported this almost a week ago...

A Ukrainian official said Mr. Zelensky’s government did not learn of the delay until about one month after the call.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/23/us/p ... collection

You highlight in block letters the byline for that piece so as to add emphasis, but when I check out the article, all I find to support that claim is a single sentence: "A Ukrainian official said Mr. Zelensky’s government did not learn of the delay until about one month after the call", which is unattributed and unbelievable. Large sums of money like this create a cascade of action and these actions require planning. It is simply unbelievable that the Ukrainians didn't know that a hold had been placed on the money. However it is very believable that Rudy Giuliani could press any of a number of his contacts in the factious Ukraine to make such a claim. I give that claim four pinocchios.

Btw
A few days ago you posted an article by John Helmer explaining all about the British Serious Fraud Office's investigation of Burisma and its owner Mykola Zlochevsky which of course was meant to throw shade on Hunter Biden.
http://johnhelmer.net/the-hunt-for-buri ... nt-to-see/

Did you know that your source, John Helmer was a KGB agent? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Helmer_(journalist)

How long have you been using the KGB as a resource for understanding political events?
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 20958
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Mon Sep 30, 2019 5:38 pm

He is now talking about civil war and arresting Adam Schiff

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/civil-war- ... impeached/
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/30/trump-a ... probe.html

This
Is
Not
Normal

This is not how our leader is supposed to act. Our leader is not supposed to say things like this. If he were as innocent as he claims, he would sit back and watch Democrats implode. Instead, he goes on rants about arresting people and rioting and war. I disagreed with 90% of what GWB did but at least I respected him as our leader. This guy needs to be removed and psychologically evaluated.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
einsteinboricua
Posts: 7654
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Mon Sep 30, 2019 5:55 pm

seb146 wrote:
If he were as innocent as he claims, he would sit back and watch Democrats implode.

What's funny is seeing how many conservatives go with "innocent until proven guilty" as a principle of law. If I know I'm innocent and believe this principle will govern the proceedings (and also have evidence that exonerates me from the inquiry objectives), I would be calm as a millpond. Instead, conservatives' principle is "innocent without any proof".

If I am not beholden to Russian interests, what's my reason for not releasing my tax returns? The IRS has said an audit does not preclude a person from releasing the information.

If there was nothing wrong with the Ukraine call, what was the reason for placing it in a secure server if nothing of personal or national security was at risk?
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9848
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Mon Sep 30, 2019 6:04 pm

einsteinboricua wrote:
seb146 wrote:
If he were as innocent as he claims, he would sit back and watch Democrats implode.

What's funny is seeing how many conservatives go with "innocent until proven guilty" as a principle of law. If I know I'm innocent and believe this principle will govern the proceedings (and also have evidence that exonerates me from the inquiry objectives), I would be calm as a millpond. Instead, conservatives' principle is "innocent without any proof".

If I am not beholden to Russian interests, what's my reason for not releasing my tax returns? The IRS has said an audit does not preclude a person from releasing the information.

If there was nothing wrong with the Ukraine call, what was the reason for placing it in a secure server if nothing of personal or national security was at risk?


If I hired people with integrity and managed a professional WH operation with procedures and mutual respect, why would I need to worry about devastating leaks..?
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 9446
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Mon Sep 30, 2019 7:32 pm

einsteinboricua wrote:
seb146 wrote:
If he were as innocent as he claims, he would sit back and watch Democrats implode.

What's funny is seeing how many conservatives go with "innocent until proven guilty" as a principle of law. If I know I'm innocent and believe this principle will govern the proceedings (and also have evidence that exonerates me from the inquiry objectives), I would be calm as a millpond. Instead, conservatives' principle is "innocent without any proof".

If I am not beholden to Russian interests, what's my reason for not releasing my tax returns? The IRS has said an audit does not preclude a person from releasing the information.

If there was nothing wrong with the Ukraine call, what was the reason for placing it in a secure server if nothing of personal or national security was at risk?


What is truly scary is how scattershot the GOP defense is currently. They don't know where to go, and they are backed into a corner. I notice Trump has started grasping for any economic good news in his twitter feed.
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
Spar
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2019 7:37 pm

Re: Impeachment: for real this time?

Mon Sep 30, 2019 7:41 pm

The current talk on the Hill is that Trump's 'Civil War' Quote Tweet Is Actually Grounds for Impeachment,.
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-civil-wa ... nt-1462044
And if not that, then his actively seeking the identity of the whistleblower is.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/30/us/p ... eason.html
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 13

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: qf789 and 28 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos