Oopsy.  Wrong once again!  That's like 0/30

They'd be stupid to impeach over this.  The Senate will never support it - Graham has already came out saying so.  This was a nothing burger, once again.  I'm all ears for people who've read it to explain what happened that was illegal and improper.  I didn't see anything about demanding dirt for aide, as was claimed 24 hours ago.  So let's watch the goal post move once again.

If Trump said "If you don't investigate Biden and his son, we'll withhold aide", that's a problem and is unacceptable.  But after the Mueller report which absolutely exonerated Trump from claims of collusion, and the countless bogus articles and claims pushed by partisan Democrats, I have to wait for actual evidence.  None of the democrats have seen the report, and every article I've read has said not only was the whistleblower repeating 3rd hand information (they never saw the transcript), they're a partisan as well.  The IG report says Comey acted inappropriately - he leaked information to get an independent counsel that eventually found "no evidence" that any American worked with Russia.  We had members of congress and the media spreading lies about attacks on our election system, and at the end of the day, Russia spent 100k on Facebook advertisements and this is somehow the reason Hillary lost?  You have to be really ignorant to buy into that.

So yea, if the transcript comes out and Trump threatened to withhold aide unless they investigated his political opponent, impeachment needs to be considered.  But the way Nadler and Schiff and the myriad of other low level congressional Dems have handled themselves the past 2 years, they have zero confidence from me. 

But Hillary can delete 30k emails, destroy evidence under subpoena, hire a foreign agent to create a dossier that has been universally debunked or lacks a single shred of proof to support a claim, and they hyper partisans remain silent.  I have no use for those people and don't believe they give a fuck about democracy, the rule of law, and above all else - the constitution.

Yea, solar is nice if you’re in a temperate region with open skies facing north/south. A lot of houses around me have them, but I don’t consider it a sound investment. You’re talking decades to break even, and most solar panels are below 50% efficiency within the first decade. Manufacturing and installation have to considered. To say nothing of the reality solar is primarily made in China and I don’t know if pumping billions into the biggest threat to western supremacy is a good idea.

But solar is useless in the urban centers where progressives and the bulk of climate hysterics reside. Putting solar panels on every NYC skyscraper isn’t going to power the city.

Yes, nuclear is the best option at the present. But rather than redesigning the world economy so twitter can pat themselves on the back, why don’t we invest in Fusion?  Like a hundred billion dollar project to create it like we did with the manhattan project. There’s a joint nation venture expected to go live in France in 2 years that’s supposedly going to create the world’s first sustained reactor.  I’m all for that, but the US and any allied nation that really cares about energy policy should be pumping hundreds of billions into creating reactors that will be state owned and provide essentially free energy with no emissions. It’s not a pipe dream. The math and physics support it. We can end the majority of carbon emissions within 30 years if we can create a functioning reactor in the next 5. And best of all, fusion will run on the excess sea water that will drown us all in the next 12 years.

Nor do they ever address how their own policies increase the amount of CO2. What happens when we bring in millions of destitute people from Central America to the US?  How much does their carbon foot print increase?  What happens when people in their 40s have a 3rd child?

http://terra.oregonstate.edu/2011/05/one-less-child/

We could dramatically cut carbon emissions by building nuclear plants. But guess who opposes that? Wind and solar aren’t replacements for fossil fuels. They’re not, and anyone claiming they are is an idiot.

That’s why the Green New Deal is estimated to cost the global GDP several times over, and that’s just for the US. What about the other 95% of the world?

Not a single climate model has been accurate. Not a single one. Virtually every prediction has been false (much like those who claimed treason and collusion and will latch on to anything without evidence to justify their fantasies), and if people really thought the world is ending in 10 years, why are they still investing in their 401k or having children?

If people really feel climate change is a threat, they wouldn’t oppose nuclear and wouldn’t advocated tens on millions of poor migrants from the third would be handed a car and air conditioner in the first world.

It’s a power grab, no more, no less.