That would be part of why it is called a “soft coup”.
Instead of being accomplished with violence it’s being accomplished by abusing the law and powers of congress.
coup’s are ok now
interesting
1 Like
is “soft coup” a legal term like “coup” and “treason?”
Given this is heading to a trial in a legislative body majority-composed of Republican Senators duly elected to their seats by Republican voters across the country, let me first laugh my face off, and second just call this the most flaccid coup ever.
1 Like
Words don’t have meaning now, they’re just playthings, interesting.
1 Like
yeah ever since a lefty trump hater admitted to it, the meaning of “coup” became “thrown around a lot these days”
1 Like
Sounds like a perfect troll job to me
tell that to zaid who 5 seconds after the innaug thought it wouldnt be such an desperate, obvious purely partisan campaign of power abuse by democrats
yeah i know he didnt mean it
Definitely a troll job. Just like Trump asking China to investigate the Bidens.
Has anyone here found out what the whistleblower’s Uber driver tweeted two years ago?
Because dammit it’s really an important piece of evidence!
1 Like
No, that would be called a “term of art”.
There appears to be a paucity of details to inform posters what this thread is supposed to be about. Does anyone know what it is about?
Which provision or provisions of the USA constitution is being violated in this impeachment inquiry?
Only surpassed by Trump acolytes’ denials of any poor behaviour by Trump.
I particularly liked this prediction, which he got completely backwards. -
" Then, in July 2017, Zaid remarked,
“I predict @CNN will play a key role in @realDonaldTrump not finishing out his full term as president.”
That should say,
" Then, in July 2017, Zaid remarked, “I predict
@realDonaldTrump will play a key role in
@CNN
not finishing out his full term as president.”
Coups are unconstitutional, whereas impeachmeant is constitutional.
Allan
oh that’s right i forgot how he implicated cnn in his coup plans
i know apple, banana…
This does not help the D cause.
Seems like it does.
Instead of putting their collective mind together to mount a defense against the heavy mist of legal jeopardy surrounding this administration, Rs are distracted by a cancel campaign against a lawyer who isn’t beholden to the whims of their mob in any way.
He could have ten thousand posts of coupe stuff, and that still doesn’t make any of the sworn testimony coming out of this inquiry untrue.
