Quid Pro Impeachment Thread

[Walt]

The MAGAts don't like the results of our Constitutional process.

I remember Stone's repeated posts about "suspending" the Constitution for a few years in order to install trump. You cannot do that and still have a Constitution.

Like Kyle Rittenhouse, I strongly doubt Sybil was ever fit to serve.

I have known people as pudgy as Rittenhouse who have made it in the US Marines, but they checked all the other boxes, especially focus and discipline. Rittenhouse clearly does not have the drive to be a Marine. A few generations ago, the US Army might have been willing to try to beat some discipline into him, but these days I doubt any uniform service would take him. They cannot beat discipline into recruits anymore. these days, recruits have the desire to have discipline, or they don't. Clearly, Rittenhouse has no desire to have discipline.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I remember Stone's repeated posts about "suspending" the Constitution for a few years in order to install trump. You cannot do that and still have a Constitution.


I have known people as pudgy as Rittenhouse who have made it in the US Marines, but they checked all the other boxes, especially focus and discipline. Rittenhouse clearly does not have the drive to be a Marine. A few generations ago, the US Army might have been willing to try to beat some discipline into him, but these days I doubt any uniform service would take him. They cannot beat discipline into recruits anymore. these days, recruits have the desire to have discipline, or they don't. Clearly, Rittenhouse has no desire to have discipline.

Agreed. Stone took the oath and he's advocated breaking it. It's why I consider him to be a MAGAt traitor.

True, but you know recruitment is based upon the needs of the service. During Iraq, the needs were high. Now, not so much.

 

[Walt]

True, but you know recruitment is based upon the needs of the service. During Iraq, the needs were high. Now, not so much.

During the Iraq War, they started allowing GEDs into the Marines. In my day, GEDs were not allowed in. During the Vietnam War, they actually drafted people into the Marines. That still blows my mind.

Anyway, Rittenhouse was never going to be, and will never be a US Marine. Even without shooting people, it was not going to happen

I just looked it up, and some of McNamara’s Morons were US Marines, so maybe Rittenhouse could have gotten into the US Marines during the Vietnam War.

The U.S. Army received 71% of recruits, followed by 10% by the Marines, 10% by the Navy, and 9% by the Air Force.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_100,000

 

[Dutch Uncle]

During the Iraq War, they started allowing GEDs into the Marines. In my day, GEDs were not allowed in. During the Vietnam War, they actually drafted people into the Marines. That still blows my mind.

Anyway, Rittenhouse was never going to be, and will never be a US Marine. Even without shooting people, it was not going to happen

I just looked it up, and some of McNamara’s Morons were US Marines, so maybe Rittenhouse could have gotten into the US Marines during the Vietnam War.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_100,000

Yes, needs of the service. When our civilian government sends our troops into battle, it's often after a few years of budget cuts and downsizing. Ergo, when going to war, it's necessary to lower standards in order to upsize.

I think his association with a white supremacist militia is the main reason he was found unfit for service.

He would have been drafted and allowed to select the Marines...who, at the time, would likely have taken him.

 

[Into the Night]

A leader can conduct a coup.

No, he can't.

It is called a self-coup,

No such thing.

and is when a leader tries to stay in office, or expand his control through violence, or the threat of violence.

The violence was by Democrats.

trump says he wants to be a dictator too.

He was talking about Democrats.

This is one of the few subjects that I believe trump on.

Trump never said he wants to be a Democrat or a dictator.

This is what the alt right keeps saying. If you disagree with their interpretation of the Constitution, they say you despise it.

You despise it. No 'interpretation' is necessary. The Constitution is plainly written.

You and Democrats:
* Despise the 1st amendment, and try to use the federal government to impose censorship.
* Despise the 2nd amendment, by usurping power from the States to defend themselves, and by banning and limiting guns.
* Despise the 4th amendment, by snooping and seizing property and personal effects without due process.
* Despise the 5th amendment, by attempting to get a defendant to testify against himself, and by taking private property without due process.
* Despise the 6th amendment, by prohibiting trial by jury.
* Despise the 7th amendment, by prohibiting trial by jury.
* Despise the 8th amendment, by imposing excessive fines and punishments, depending on political opinion.
* Despise the 9th amendment, by insisting that the constitution lays out all rights of Man.
* Despise the 10th amendment, by attempting to usurp power from the States on abortion and commerce.
* Despise the 11th amendment, by attempting to punish as a 'crime' events that occurred out of jurisdiction.
* Despise the 12th amendment, by election fraud.
* Despise the 13th amendment, by attempting to reimpose slavery.
* Despise the 14th amendment, by applying the law unequally (depending on political leaning or wealth), and by ignoring the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th amendments.
* Despise the 15th amendment, by their own racism.
* Despise the 16th amendment, by imposing unequal taxes 'on the rich'.
* Despise the 20th amendment, by attempting to impeach people that are not in office.
* Despise the 22nd amendment, by providing Obama an effective 3rd term in office using his puppet Joe Biden.
* Despise the 26th amendment, by discriminating by age the right to run for office (and to vote).
* Despise Article I by demanding fiat currency (stealing gold and silver to do it), usurping authority from the States, and usurping authority of different branches of government to another.
* Despise Article II by insisting that the President is elected by popular vote, or that he has authority over Congress.
* Despise Article III by insisting that the Supreme Court has the authority to interpret or change the Constitution.
* Despise Article IV by denouncing a republic as a form of government.
* Despise Article V by attempting to go around State authority using the courts.
* Despise Article VI by attempting to go around State, Congressional, and Presidential authority using the courts.
* Despise all State constitutions.

Don't try to hide behind the Constitution you despise, Sock.

Any disagreement is treason in their world.

Treason is defined by the Constitution you despise, Sock.
Joe Biden has committed several acts of treason:

* He gave weapons and supplies to the enemy in time of war.
* He invited open invasion of the United States, even attempting to prevent a State from defending it's own borders.
* Espionage.

All three of these are acts of treason as defined by the Constitution that you despise.

I disagree with Doc Dutch on some interpretations,

Of course you do, Sock. You are the same person.

but I do not deny he loves the Constitution he swore to defend.

You never swore to defend the Constitution. You despise it.

 

[Into the Night]

Thank you for your service.

You never served, Sock.

 

[Into the Night]

What Sybil is also missing

You are missing a lot, Sock.

is that the coup was to stop the process of deposing Trump.

The coup was by Democrats, Sock...so far successful.

Trump still claims the election was stolen

It was.

and that he's the rightful president.

Unknown. The 2020 election faulted due to election fraud by Democrats. You cannot make the evidence of that election fraud just disappear, Sock.

Sybil and other RWNJs believe him.

You don't believe Trump, Sock.

The MAGAts

MAGA isn't a person, Sock.

don't like the results of our Constitutional process.

The Constitution is not a 'process', Sock.

They make wild claims about violently "restoring the Constitution",

Don't try to hide behind the Constitution you despise, Sock.

that elections were stolen

They were.

and other fantasies

Not a fantasy, Sock. The 2020 election faulted. Several 2022 elections also faulted. ALL due to election fraud by Democrats.

in order to justify overthrowing the Federal government along with several state governments.

You cannot project YOUR problem on me or anybody else, Sock.

Like Kyle Rittenhouse, I strongly doubt Sybil was ever fit to serve.

Kyle is not you, Sock. Imaginary voices that you hear are not fit to serve in the military.

 

[Into the Night]

Most sane, educated and intelligent adults can see that you are "off", Sybil. They can see that you have sock puppets no matter how hard you try to deny them. I, for one, believe that you truly believe those alter ego accounts are different people, your "friends", as you called them. It's why I believe you are an unmedicated paranoid schizophrenic. For that reason, I forgive you since you are not in control of your faculties.

Yes, you have a lot of socks, Sock. Yes, you have mental problems. Sybil is YOU, Sock.

 

[Into the Night]

I remember Stone's repeated posts about "suspending" the Constitution for a few years in order to install trump. You cannot do that and still have a Constitution.



I have known people as pudgy as Rittenhouse who have made it in the US Marines, but they checked all the other boxes, especially focus and discipline. Rittenhouse clearly does not have the drive to be a Marine. A few generations ago, the US Army might have been willing to try to beat some discipline into him, but these days I doubt any uniform service would take him. They cannot beat discipline into recruits anymore. these days, recruits have the desire to have discipline, or they don't. Clearly, Rittenhouse has no desire to have discipline.

You are hallucinating again, Sock. You never served.

 

[Into the Night]

Yes, needs of the service. When our civilian government sends our troops into battle, it's often after a few years of budget cuts and downsizing. Ergo, when going to war, it's necessary to lower standards in order to upsize.

I think his association with a white supremacist militia is the main reason he was found unfit for service.

He would have been drafted and allowed to select the Marines...who, at the time, would likely have taken him.

You are still hallucinating, Sock.

 

[Walt]

You never served, Sock.

I was thanking Doc Dutch for his service. I agree with you, I never served. I technically served for six months waiting for medical appeals, and have an honorable discharge, but I did not really serve.

 

[Into the Night]

I was thanking Doc Dutch for his service. I agree with you, I never served. I technically served for six months waiting for medical appeals, and have an honorable discharge, but I did not really serve.

Paradox. Irrational. You cannot say you never served and you served at the same time, Sock!

You never served. You can't thank yourself for service that you never rendered.

 

[Walt]

Paradox. Irrational. You cannot say you never served and you served at the same time, Sock!

You never served. You can't thank yourself for service that you never rendered.

I never really served, but I did technically serve. I am not going to dumb this down any more for you.

 

[IBDaMann]

trump says he wants to be a dictator too.

Your posts would have a lot more potential if you would keep your TDS in check and not allow it to compel you to make shit up.

This is what the alt right keeps saying.

There is no "alt right" or "Qanon" or "Proud Boys" or any other leftist-invented term created for the consumption of mindless gullibles. When you or any other leftist starts throwing around these terms, you are literally talking about nobody.

I disagree with Doc Dutch on some interpretations,

The "interpretations" on which you agree with Terry reflect the extent to which you are brain dead, or better worded, to which you will not expend any cognitive activity.

but I do not deny he loves the Constitution

... then you're a moron.

Let me know if you require any clarification.

 

[Walt]

There is no "alt right" or "Qanon" or "Proud Boys" or any other leftist-invented term created for the consumption of mindless gullibles.

The alt right called itself the alt right until they polluted the term with their own actions. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with the term. The problem is with the alt right actions themselves.

The Proud Boys still call themselves the Proud Boys. Again, nothing intrinsically wrong with the term. The problem is in the people and organization.

QAnon refers to an anonymous person who called himself variations on the name Q. He claimed to have Q Clearance, not realizing that does not give him humint clearance.

 

[IBDaMann]

The alt right called itself the alt right

There was never any "alt right" to call themselves "alt right." It was an entirely leftist-fabricated term to describe a fabricated political enemy, knowing that other leftists, being as gullible as they are, would never question the use of the new term, because they never question any undefined buzzwords, and would just become angy and attack like mindless guard dogs who have been instructed to "hit!"

You happen to fall into that category. Perhaps if you had developed the habit of making a modicum of independent verification and of applying critical reasoning, you wouldn't be as manipulated as you are.

The Proud Boys still call themselves the Proud Boys.

There are no "Proud Boys". You simply fell hook, line and sinker for the term as it was thrown around by the leftist media in a campaign to fabricate a fictional political enemy around which to rally. You were manipulated.

QAnon refers to an anonymous person who called himself variations on the name Q.

There is no Qanon. Every leftist has an explanation of what "Qanon" means or to what it refers and they all differ.

This is a writeup I made a long time ago and I'll leverage the opportunity to reuse it here:

---------------

QAnon is a fictitious and totally undefined buzzword invented by leftists attempting to create a panicked frenzy among their gullible, stupid mind-slaves around which to "rally the troops."

1. Conservatives and Trump supporters are legion across the country, yet none are associated/affiliated with QAnon. In fact, none know anyone who knows anyone associated/affiliated with QAnon.

2. All references to QAnon come from leftists.

3. All references to QAnon are totally vague, leaving the question of exactly what QAnon actually is wide open to speculation, i.e. it could be a "movement" but then again it could be an actual "organization" or possibly even a danish pastry.

4. The only "evidence" presented are Twitter tweets and meme images of the type that are easily created using Photoshop or GIMP. There are never any videos of people stating their names and stating their reasons for associating with the movement/organization/pastry. Nonetheless, every occurrence of the letter "Q", regardless of where it might reside in the world, is presented as "evidence" of QAnon.

5. No leftist whose arguments are based on this "QAnon" ever provide any sort of concrete information, speaking volumes about what one would actually discover in any rigorous independent research.

In fact, here is what one will glean from websites with information on QAnon, noting that every single one of these sites is a rabidly leftist disinformation center.

* Wikipedia: The wiki implies that QAnon is a collection of WACKY conspiracy theories, like Aesop's Sinister Fables or something ... with a heavy dose of historical revisionism thrown in for good measure.

* BBC: uses the word "QAnon" as a slur for Trump supporters.

* Anti-Defamation League: wields the word "QAnon" as a doctrine of "support for Trump" and proceeds to totally defame it from all angles.

* CNN: doesn't want to commit to any definition of QAnon, and instead just wants the world to know that "Born on the dark fringes of the internet, QAnon is now infiltrating mainstream American life and politics." If you didn't catch that, QAnon is "infiltrating" American life, and was born on the "dark fringes" of the internet. Your guess is as good as mine as to what kind of thing fits that description.

* CBS News: decided to characterize QAnon as an "effect" but otherwise plagiarized CNN's party line: "What started as a fringe movement among former President Trump's supporters, confined to the shadier corners of the internet, has taken a mainstream turn."

* Christianity Today [My Second Favorite]: Whatever this publication might have been was taken over by Christian-hating Marxists and now it mocks Christians for not falling in line with Climate Change. CT has an article on what the Bible says about QAnon, and of course the article's take is that God should be consulted for help and strength with the following questions: "How can I confidently assess this theory that I'm believing in? How could I be wrong about this? And how would I know that I was wrong if I were?"

* The Sun: flat out declares QAnon a disproven and discredited far-right conspiracy theory alleging that a secret cabal of Satan-worshipping, cannibalistic pedophiles is running a global child sex-trafficking ring and plotted against former U.S. president Donald Trump while he was in office. Apparently there is no "membership" or "movement" or people or pastries involved.

* The New York Times: explains that the reason we haven't heard anything lately is that QAnon is "being quiet" but most assuredly "lives on". The NYT take is that now QAnon has no leader so now everyone is free to tailor his own WACKY conspiracy theories to his liking.

* VICE.com [My Favorite]: I recommend this one to everyone. Apparently Tucker Carlson asked the same questions I did and decided to do the same research I did. Tucker devoted an episode to saying essentially what I have said in this post. Along comes VICE.com to mock Tucker for having asked in the first place.

I think this is enough for now.

 

[Walt]

There was never any "alt right" to call themselves "alt right."

Steve Bannon referred to Breitbart saying, "we’re the platform for the alt right." There is nothing wrong with the term as such. The alt right just polluted it with the violence.

There are no "Proud Boys".

Gavin McInnes went to a lot of trouble founding a group for that group to have never existed.

There is no Qanon.

Clearly there was a person who called himself "Q Clearance Patriot" on 4chan. He had some wild conspiracy theories. He is as real as you are.

 

[Into the Night]

The alt right called itself the alt right until they polluted the term with their own actions. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with the term. The problem is with the alt right actions themselves.

No 'alt right' to call themselves the 'alt right', Sock.

The Proud Boys still call themselves the Proud Boys. Again, nothing intrinsically wrong with the term. The problem is in the people and organization.

Funded and supported by Democrats.

QAnon refers to an anonymous person who called himself variations on the name Q. He claimed to have Q Clearance, not realizing that does not give him humint clearance.

No one calls himself a variation on the name 'Q', Sock.

 

[Into the Night]

There was never any "alt right" to call themselves "alt right." It was an entirely leftist-fabricated term to describe a fabricated political enemy, knowing that other leftists, being as gullible as they are, would never question the use of the new term, because they never question any undefined buzzwords, and would just become angy and attack like mindless guard dogs who have been instructed to "hit!"

You happen to fall into that category. Perhaps if you had developed the habit of making a modicum of independent verification and of applying critical reasoning, you wouldn't be as manipulated as you are.


There are no "Proud Boys". You simply fell hook, line and sinker for the term as it was thrown around by the leftist media in a campaign to fabricate a fictional political enemy around which to rally. You were manipulated.


There is no Qanon. Every leftist has an explanation of what "Qanon" means or to what it refers and they all differ.

This is a writeup I made a long time ago and I'll leverage the opportunity to reuse it here:

---------------

QAnon is a fictitious and totally undefined buzzword invented by leftists attempting to create a panicked frenzy among their gullible, stupid mind-slaves around which to "rally the troops."

1. Conservatives and Trump supporters are legion across the country, yet none are associated/affiliated with QAnon. In fact, none know anyone who knows anyone associated/affiliated with QAnon.

2. All references to QAnon come from leftists.

3. All references to QAnon are totally vague, leaving the question of exactly what QAnon actually is wide open to speculation, i.e. it could be a "movement" but then again it could be an actual "organization" or possibly even a danish pastry.

4. The only "evidence" presented are Twitter tweets and meme images of the type that are easily created using Photoshop or GIMP. There are never any videos of people stating their names and stating their reasons for associating with the movement/organization/pastry. Nonetheless, every occurrence of the letter "Q", regardless of where it might reside in the world, is presented as "evidence" of QAnon.

5. No leftist whose arguments are based on this "QAnon" ever provide any sort of concrete information, speaking volumes about what one would actually discover in any rigorous independent research.

In fact, here is what one will glean from websites with information on QAnon, noting that every single one of these sites is a rabidly leftist disinformation center.

* Wikipedia: The wiki implies that QAnon is a collection of WACKY conspiracy theories, like Aesop's Sinister Fables or something ... with a heavy dose of historical revisionism thrown in for good measure.

* BBC: uses the word "QAnon" as a slur for Trump supporters.

* Anti-Defamation League: wields the word "QAnon" as a doctrine of "support for Trump" and proceeds to totally defame it from all angles.

* CNN: doesn't want to commit to any definition of QAnon, and instead just wants the world to know that "Born on the dark fringes of the internet, QAnon is now infiltrating mainstream American life and politics." If you didn't catch that, QAnon is "infiltrating" American life, and was born on the "dark fringes" of the internet. Your guess is as good as mine as to what kind of thing fits that description.

* CBS News: decided to characterize QAnon as an "effect" but otherwise plagiarized CNN's party line: "What started as a fringe movement among former President Trump's supporters, confined to the shadier corners of the internet, has taken a mainstream turn."

* Christianity Today [My Second Favorite]: Whatever this publication might have been was taken over by Christian-hating Marxists and now it mocks Christians for not falling in line with Climate Change. CT has an article on what the Bible says about QAnon, and of course the article's take is that God should be consulted for help and strength with the following questions: "How can I confidently assess this theory that I'm believing in? How could I be wrong about this? And how would I know that I was wrong if I were?"

* The Sun: flat out declares QAnon a disproven and discredited far-right conspiracy theory alleging that a secret cabal of Satan-worshipping, cannibalistic pedophiles is running a global child sex-trafficking ring and plotted against former U.S. president Donald Trump while he was in office. Apparently there is no "membership" or "movement" or people or pastries involved.

* The New York Times: explains that the reason we haven't heard anything lately is that QAnon is "being quiet" but most assuredly "lives on". The NYT take is that now QAnon has no leader so now everyone is free to tailor his own WACKY conspiracy theories to his liking.

* VICE.com [My Favorite]: I recommend this one to everyone. Apparently Tucker Carlson asked the same questions I did and decided to do the same research I did. Tucker devoted an episode to saying essentially what I have said in this post. Along comes VICE.com to mock Tucker for having asked in the first place.

I think this is enough for now.

There is a 'Proud Boys' organization. It promotes racism, like Democrats. It is funded and supported by Democrats.

 

[Into the Night]

Steve Bannon referred to Breitbart saying, "we’re the platform for the alt right." There is nothing wrong with the term as such. The alt right just polluted it with the violence.

There is no 'alt right'. You are hallucinating again.

Gavin McInnes went to a lot of trouble founding a group for that group to have never existed.

It does exist. It is funded and supported by Democrats.

Clearly there was a person who called himself "Q Clearance Patriot" on 4chan. He had some wild conspiracy theories. He is as real as you are.

There is no such thing as 'QAnon' or any other variation of someone naming themselves 'Q'.