So what was it that I was seeing which wasn’t really there, mhaze?

<<… when you said that I said that you said impeachment was in process, you made it up because I never said what you said I said.>>

You said (trying to quote me):
“"This [Trump's supposed impeachment] is beautiful to watch."”

Immediately following it up with:
“AJ sees lots of beautiful things that actually don't exist.”

Again, you inserted the belief that Trump’s impeachment had begun, into what I had said, to make it look like I’m delusional.

You lied, and you need to take ownership of that.

Apparently, I think a lot of things are “beautiful”, too. You exaggerate slander others.

<<But this is all by the way of you trying to deflect from my original observation that you tend to be easily led down the garden path …>>

No, there is nothing I need to deflect from. You are yet to provide an example of me being “led down the garden path”. You tried that one on before and we all know how that turned out, don’t we?

<<"It looks like he's committed an impeachable offence " that is indeed one of those false "things" since no impeachable offence has occurred, even if you totally accept Comey's version, which you seem to as part of the search for "beautiful things".>>

Obstruction of justice is an impeachable offence. Not even Nixon attempted that one during the Watergate investigation.

<<As to our previous discussions on traditional marriage, it shows impressive chutzpah to assert that your mere assertions are the equivalent of having established as fact my claimed dishonesty.>>

Oh, you were dishonest alright. Remember? You deliberately added things, which weren’t even said, into a past discussion of ours to make me appear foolish:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=7734#238220

You were dishonest.

<<The problem for you in that instance was that you based your refutation of my position upon data which you later had to admit to be wrong ....>>

One relatively minor detail was incorrect. The point was otherwise still valid.

You have a real difficulty with the truth, don’t you?

While not a fan of Trump, I do love the wild hysteria that he generates in the left whingers and the resulting fantastical hyperbole. Trump may be unethical, and even guilty of some of what he is accused, but the gap between perceived and proven guilt is a yawning chasm here.

The problem with this wild enthusiasm to get Trump is that it is indeed trumped up. For example, the main requirement for the charge of "obstruction of justice" is that the prosecution would have to actually show that justice was obstructed. Considering that after Trump's conversation with Comey, (which Comey toono change occurred to any investigation would mean that the validity of the accusation crumbles at the first hurdle.

The same argument applies to his firing of Comey, as not only did nothing change, but a prosecutor would have to show that the intent behind Comey's firing was primarily to stop the investigation, which presently is pure conjecture in the absence of actual evidence.

Of course the final hurdles would be the requirements to get both a majority in Congress and super majority in the senate (>60%) to agree to impeach, and with republican majority in both houses this is a fantasy.

"the wild hysteria that he generates in the left whingers"
Yes agree . Also a bit of mild anxiety in our Malcolm , NATO leaders, White House staffers , his wife , Hillary , Mexico , Beijing , Congress , polar bears , Amerindians , Muslims and stock markets.

The delusional Reflux says:” you are supporting a foreign leader who is a sexist, misogynistic, lying, corrupting buffoon of a man because somehow he speaks to your ideology
How about he is supporting a U S President who is not a racist, anti-American, climate fraud supporting black dunce, and is the reason the black dunce was not followed into office by the criminal Clinton.
Reflux suffers a delusional state which precludes any perception of the truth, or reason.
He is not alone. One State leader in the U S says she is drafting articles of impeachment
The old evidence of an attitude to women in a different era is not evidence of Trump's current attitude,.
Comey has only shown himself to be a liar, not Trump, but Reflux would not notice that.

Dear Leo Lane,

How are we you old reprobate? Still flogging your deceased nag?

You wrote;

“Reflux suffers a delusional state which precludes any perception of the truth, or reason.”

This from a climate denier? Lol.

Malcolm's testimony is in his secret video clip now exposed as a crude cyber send-up of Australia's great ally in the war on everybody.