But there were Benghazi hearings.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
No. The argument against impeachment isn't that there's nothing there. There's plenty there. The argument against impeachment is that it wouldn't have the intended effect.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'm completely fine with that
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Going through the impeachment process would be upholding the rule of law. Isn't that reason enough? And doesn't the Trump-Russia nonsense occupy the Benghazi slot, or maybe that falls under liberal birtherism?
-
Impeachment is a political process (and wisely so). If you think upholding the rule of law is good politics, have at it, but doing it on principle is not wise.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
They're both rooted in "CIA dickheads stamping around like assholes, as always, screwing things up, as always." so, sure!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Impeachment is, in the eyes of the DOJ, the only available process for upholding the rule of law when it comes to the President breaking the law. It’s not Benghazi.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Global warming is just "letting gays marry will bring about the end times" for liberals.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"2 + 2 = 4" is just "2 + 2 = 5" for people who know math. You hate that I'm right and you know it's true.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.