Late Stage Impeach Phase: Trump Doesn’t Have to Break a Law to Be Impeached

[MisterBeale]

From your own link;

". . . Madison objected to “maladministration.” He thought this term was so vague that it would threaten the separation of powers. Congress could remove any president it disagreed with on grounds of “maladministration.” This would give Congress complete power over the executive.. . . "

I think, at worst, the POTUS could only, at this point, be guilty of this. This is what you don't like, and refuse to admit, because these proceedings, are, in the end, just political in nature and a violation of the separation of powers.

Nope, at this point, he could be guilty of violating...

§30121 Contributions and donations by foreign nationals​

O.K.

Sure. . .

Prove it in such a way that the Clinton's or Al Gore or Obama weren't guilty of doing the same thing.

fer fucks sake. . . really?

Clinton WAS impeached, idiot.
Not for taking money for favors, not for getting a blow job, but for lying under oath about getting a blow job.

Ken Starr turned over every fucking rock he could find about Clinton and finally ended up with Clinton getting a blow job.

Trump is holding out Congressionally approved funds to a country in a hot war in order to get info that would benefit his fucking 2020 campaign.
Why don't you redneck idiots SEE THIS?
It's right in front of you.
Mick Mulvaney ADMITTED TO IT ON CAMERA.
Trump released the TRANSCRIPT with "I need a favor, though."
Why did he do that?
Because somebody inside that White House got it through his thick skull that if it can be proved, he wouldn't want to be impeached for lying under oath.

Of course Clinton was impeached. He lied to a special investigator under oath. It was on record.

I never said he wasn't impeached.

What I asked for, was evidence that the Trump campaign took funds directly from a foreign entity, and did not funnel them like every other pol in D.C. has already done.

You probably do not know shit about China-gate and the folks that fled the nation for that and served time for it, do you?

"FBI agents were also denied the opportunity to ask President Clinton and Vice President Gore questions during Justice Department interviews in 1997 and 1998 and were only allowed to take notes. During the interviews, neither Clinton nor Gore were asked any questions about fund-raisers John Huang and James Riady, nor the Hsi Lai Buddhist Temple fund-raising event led by Maria Hsia and attended by Huang and Ted Sioeng.[57]"
1996 United States campaign finance controversy - Wikipedia

LOL!
I guess you forgot that Trump said he was going to drain the swamp.
He IS the fucking swamp, moron.

Don't hold back Faun, tell us what you really think. . mmmmkay?

 

[Faun]

That's a fact. No crime required to impeach. BTW, "high" crimes refers to high office - not the severity of the crime.

Dream on.
Article 2, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.

[...]

After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

more...

From your own link;

". . . Madison objected to “maladministration.” He thought this term was so vague that it would threaten the separation of powers. Congress could remove any president it disagreed with on grounds of “maladministration.” This would give Congress complete power over the executive.. . . "

I think, at worst, the POTUS could only, at this point, be guilty of this. This is what you don't like, and refuse to admit, because these proceedings, are, in the end, just political in nature and a violation of the separation of powers.

Nope, at this point, he could be guilty of violating...

§30121 Contributions and donations by foreign nationals​

O.K.

Sure. . .

Prove it in such a way that the Clinton's or Al Gore or Obama weren't guilty of doing the same thing.

fer fucks sake. . . really?

Well first you would have to show where they solicited help for their campaigns from foreign nationals ...

 

[Syriusly]

Late Stage Impeach Phase: Trump Doesn’t Have to Break a Law to Be Impeached

That's a fact. No crime required to impeach. BTW, "high" crimes refers to high office - not the severity of the crime.

Dream on.
Article 2, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.

[...]

After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

more...

From your own link;

". . . Madison objected to “maladministration.” He thought this term was so vague that it would threaten the separation of powers. Congress could remove any president it disagreed with on grounds of “maladministration.” This would give Congress complete power over the executive.. . . "

I think, at worst, the POTUS could only, at this point, be guilty of this. This is what you don't like, and refuse to admit, because these proceedings, are, in the end, just political in nature and a violation of the separation of powers.

The proceedings can't be any violation of separation of powers- since impeachment is provided for in the Constiution.

I think that Trump could be guilty of many crimes at this point- but we only have evidence for a few crimes- that is what investigations are for.

 

[Syriusly]

That's a fact. No crime required to impeach. BTW, "high" crimes refers to high office - not the severity of the crime.

Dream on.
Article 2, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.

[...]

After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

more...

From your own link;

". . . Madison objected to “maladministration.” He thought this term was so vague that it would threaten the separation of powers. Congress could remove any president it disagreed with on grounds of “maladministration.” This would give Congress complete power over the executive.. . . "

I think, at worst, the POTUS could only, at this point, be guilty of this. This is what you don't like, and refuse to admit, because these proceedings, are, in the end, just political in nature and a violation of the separation of powers.

Nope, at this point, he could be guilty of violating...

§30121 Contributions and donations by foreign nationals​

O.K.

Sure. . .

Prove it in such a way that the Clinton's or Al Gore or Obama weren't guilty of doing the same thing.

fer fucks sake. . . really?

I can't find any record of Clinton, Gore or Obama soliciting a foreign government to dig up dirt on his political opponent.

 

[MisterBeale]

Dream on.
Article 2, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.

[...]

After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

more...

From your own link;

". . . Madison objected to “maladministration.” He thought this term was so vague that it would threaten the separation of powers. Congress could remove any president it disagreed with on grounds of “maladministration.” This would give Congress complete power over the executive.. . . "

I think, at worst, the POTUS could only, at this point, be guilty of this. This is what you don't like, and refuse to admit, because these proceedings, are, in the end, just political in nature and a violation of the separation of powers.

Nope, at this point, he could be guilty of violating...

§30121 Contributions and donations by foreign nationals​

O.K.

Sure. . .

Prove it in such a way that the Clinton's or Al Gore or Obama weren't guilty of doing the same thing.

fer fucks sake. . . really?

Well first you would have to show where they solicited help for their campaigns from foreign nationals ...

Chinagate and the Clintons | The American Spectator | Politics Is Too Important To Be Taken Seriously.

 

[Syriusly]

What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.

[...]

After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

more...

From your own link;

". . . Madison objected to “maladministration.” He thought this term was so vague that it would threaten the separation of powers. Congress could remove any president it disagreed with on grounds of “maladministration.” This would give Congress complete power over the executive.. . . "

I think, at worst, the POTUS could only, at this point, be guilty of this. This is what you don't like, and refuse to admit, because these proceedings, are, in the end, just political in nature and a violation of the separation of powers.

Nope, at this point, he could be guilty of violating...

§30121 Contributions and donations by foreign nationals​

O.K.

Sure. . .

Prove it in such a way that the Clinton's or Al Gore or Obama weren't guilty of doing the same thing.

fer fucks sake. . . really?

Clinton WAS impeached, idiot.
Not for taking money for favors, not for getting a blow job, but for lying under oath about getting a blow job.

Ken Starr turned over every fucking rock he could find about Clinton and finally ended up with Clinton getting a blow job.

Trump is holding out Congressionally approved funds to a country in a hot war in order to get info to benefit his fucking 2020 campaign.
Why don't you redneck idiots SEE THIS?
It's right in front of you.
Mick Mulvaney ADMITTED TO IT ON CAMERA.
Trump released the TRANSCRIPT with "I need a favor, though."
Why did he do that?
Because somebody inside that White House got it through his thick skull that if it can be proved, he wouldn't want to be impeached for lying under oath.

isn't that what biden did with urkraine? I mean really, are you going to out yourself that easily? I hope so, but still, we have it on video in here about fifty times now. need again? I'm happy to post that idiot bragging about his quid pro quo. here anyway, please show all your hypocrisy

Biden bragged about getting the prosecutor fired- as part of official U.S. policy, supported by U.S. Senators, the EU and anti-corruption NGO's.
Trump secretly called the President of Ukraine to ask him to dig up dirt on his political opponent- and Trump insisted that the President of the Ukraine himself announce the investigation into Joe Biden.

To Trumpettes what Biden did was illegal -and Trump was just being Trump.

 

[Syriusly]

Nope, at this point, he could be guilty of violating...

§30121 Contributions and donations by foreign nationals​

O.K.

Sure. . .

Prove it in such a way that the Clinton's or Al Gore or Obama weren't guilty of doing the same thing.

fer fucks sake. . . really?

Clinton WAS impeached, idiot.
Not for taking money for favors, not for getting a blow job, but for lying under oath about getting a blow job.

Ken Starr turned over every fucking rock he could find about Clinton and finally ended up with Clinton getting a blow job.

Trump is holding out Congressionally approved funds to a country in a hot war in order to get info that would benefit his fucking 2020 campaign.
Why don't you redneck idiots SEE THIS?
It's right in front of you.
Mick Mulvaney ADMITTED TO IT ON CAMERA.
Trump released the TRANSCRIPT with "I need a favor, though."
Why did he do that?
Because somebody inside that White House got it through his thick skull that if it can be proved, he wouldn't want to be impeached for lying under oath.

Of course Clinton was impeached. He lied to a special investigator under oath. It was on record.

I never said he wasn't impeached.

What I asked for, was evidence that the Trump campaign took funds directly from a foreign entity, and did not funnel them like every other pol in D.C. has already done.

You probably do not know shit about China-gate and the folks that fled the nation for that and served time for it, do you?

"FBI agents were also denied the opportunity to ask President Clinton and Vice President Gore questions during Justice Department interviews in 1997 and 1998 and were only allowed to take notes. During the interviews, neither Clinton nor Gore were asked any questions about fund-raisers John Huang and James Riady, nor the Hsi Lai Buddhist Temple fund-raising event led by Maria Hsia and attended by Huang and Ted Sioeng.[57]"
1996 United States campaign finance controversy - Wikipedia

LOL!
I guess you forgot that Trump said he was going to drain the swamp.
He IS the fucking swamp, moron.

so why is the swamp trying to remove him if he fits in?

Trump is the swamp.

Hell Trump has hired half the lobbyists in DC to work in his administration.

 

[MisterBeale]

Dream on.
Article 2, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.

[...]

After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

more...

From your own link;

". . . Madison objected to “maladministration.” He thought this term was so vague that it would threaten the separation of powers. Congress could remove any president it disagreed with on grounds of “maladministration.” This would give Congress complete power over the executive.. . . "

I think, at worst, the POTUS could only, at this point, be guilty of this. This is what you don't like, and refuse to admit, because these proceedings, are, in the end, just political in nature and a violation of the separation of powers.

Nope, at this point, he could be guilty of violating...

§30121 Contributions and donations by foreign nationals​

O.K.

Sure. . .

Prove it in such a way that the Clinton's or Al Gore or Obama weren't guilty of doing the same thing.

fer fucks sake. . . really?

I can't find any record of Clinton, Gore or Obama soliciting a foreign government to dig up dirt on his political opponent.

Of course not.

FACT CHECK: Did Republicans Pay For The Trump Dossier?

Flashback: That Time The WSJ Said The Trump Dossier Could Be A Hillary-Funded Effort

Meet the espionage firm which ordered Trump 'dirty dossier' | Daily Mail Online

https://nypost.com/2017/06/24/inside-the-shadowy-intelligence-firm-behind-the-trump-dossier/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/campfin/stories/fifth060998.htm

 

[Faun]

Nope, at this point, he could be guilty of violating...

§30121 Contributions and donations by foreign nationals​

O.K.

Sure. . .

Prove it in such a way that the Clinton's or Al Gore or Obama weren't guilty of doing the same thing.

fer fucks sake. . . really?

Clinton WAS impeached, idiot.
Not for taking money for favors, not for getting a blow job, but for lying under oath about getting a blow job.

Ken Starr turned over every fucking rock he could find about Clinton and finally ended up with Clinton getting a blow job.

Trump is holding out Congressionally approved funds to a country in a hot war in order to get info that would benefit his fucking 2020 campaign.
Why don't you redneck idiots SEE THIS?
It's right in front of you.
Mick Mulvaney ADMITTED TO IT ON CAMERA.
Trump released the TRANSCRIPT with "I need a favor, though."
Why did he do that?
Because somebody inside that White House got it through his thick skull that if it can be proved, he wouldn't want to be impeached for lying under oath.

Of course Clinton was impeached. He lied to a special investigator under oath. It was on record.

I never said he wasn't impeached.

What I asked for, was evidence that the Trump campaign took funds directly from a foreign entity, and did not funnel them like every other pol in D.C. has already done.

You probably do not know shit about China-gate and the folks that fled the nation for that and served time for it, do you?

"FBI agents were also denied the opportunity to ask President Clinton and Vice President Gore questions during Justice Department interviews in 1997 and 1998 and were only allowed to take notes. During the interviews, neither Clinton nor Gore were asked any questions about fund-raisers John Huang and James Riady, nor the Hsi Lai Buddhist Temple fund-raising event led by Maria Hsia and attended by Huang and Ted Sioeng.[57]"
1996 United States campaign finance controversy - Wikipedia

LOL!
I guess you forgot that Trump said he was going to drain the swamp.
He IS the fucking swamp, moron.

Don't hold back Faun, tell us what you really think. . mmmmkay?

Umm, psycho... I didn't post that.

 

[MisterBeale]

It continually boggles the mind that you partisans think your president is somehow better than the next.

The current resident of the White House is no better, nor any worse than the last.

 

[MisterBeale]

O.K.

Sure. . .

Prove it in such a way that the Clinton's or Al Gore or Obama weren't guilty of doing the same thing.

fer fucks sake. . . really?

Clinton WAS impeached, idiot.
Not for taking money for favors, not for getting a blow job, but for lying under oath about getting a blow job.

Ken Starr turned over every fucking rock he could find about Clinton and finally ended up with Clinton getting a blow job.

Trump is holding out Congressionally approved funds to a country in a hot war in order to get info that would benefit his fucking 2020 campaign.
Why don't you redneck idiots SEE THIS?
It's right in front of you.
Mick Mulvaney ADMITTED TO IT ON CAMERA.
Trump released the TRANSCRIPT with "I need a favor, though."
Why did he do that?
Because somebody inside that White House got it through his thick skull that if it can be proved, he wouldn't want to be impeached for lying under oath.

Of course Clinton was impeached. He lied to a special investigator under oath. It was on record.

I never said he wasn't impeached.

What I asked for, was evidence that the Trump campaign took funds directly from a foreign entity, and did not funnel them like every other pol in D.C. has already done.

You probably do not know shit about China-gate and the folks that fled the nation for that and served time for it, do you?

"FBI agents were also denied the opportunity to ask President Clinton and Vice President Gore questions during Justice Department interviews in 1997 and 1998 and were only allowed to take notes. During the interviews, neither Clinton nor Gore were asked any questions about fund-raisers John Huang and James Riady, nor the Hsi Lai Buddhist Temple fund-raising event led by Maria Hsia and attended by Huang and Ted Sioeng.[57]"
1996 United States campaign finance controversy - Wikipedia

LOL!
I guess you forgot that Trump said he was going to drain the swamp.
He IS the fucking swamp, moron.

Don't hold back Faun, tell us what you really think. . mmmmkay?

Umm, psycho... I didn't post that.

My apologies. . . you all sort of blend together. . .

 

[CowboyTed]

The cycle repeats yet again. We got nothing on Trump but we can impeach him for beating Hillary.

You don't have to break a law to be impeached. Trump's defenders need a better argument.

I told you that weeks ago...

Impeachment means you are getting fired...You can break the law and not get fired and you also can get fired with out breaking the law.

 

[Faun]

What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.

[...]

After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

more...

From your own link;

". . . Madison objected to “maladministration.” He thought this term was so vague that it would threaten the separation of powers. Congress could remove any president it disagreed with on grounds of “maladministration.” This would give Congress complete power over the executive.. . . "

I think, at worst, the POTUS could only, at this point, be guilty of this. This is what you don't like, and refuse to admit, because these proceedings, are, in the end, just political in nature and a violation of the separation of powers.

Nope, at this point, he could be guilty of violating...

§30121 Contributions and donations by foreign nationals​

O.K.

Sure. . .

Prove it in such a way that the Clinton's or Al Gore or Obama weren't guilty of doing the same thing.

fer fucks sake. . . really?

Well first you would have to show where they solicited help for their campaigns from foreign nationals ...

Chinagate and the Clintons | The American Spectator | Politics Is Too Important To Be Taken Seriously.

Umm, your article points out the DNC gave all the money back. It also points out that Clinton was paid $500K for a speech in Russia. But that's in line with other speeches he was giving around the world. And he wasn't running for office so it couldn't be construed as a campaign donation.

 

[Faun]

What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.

[...]

After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

more...

From your own link;

". . . Madison objected to “maladministration.” He thought this term was so vague that it would threaten the separation of powers. Congress could remove any president it disagreed with on grounds of “maladministration.” This would give Congress complete power over the executive.. . . "

I think, at worst, the POTUS could only, at this point, be guilty of this. This is what you don't like, and refuse to admit, because these proceedings, are, in the end, just political in nature and a violation of the separation of powers.

Nope, at this point, he could be guilty of violating...

§30121 Contributions and donations by foreign nationals​

O.K.

Sure. . .

Prove it in such a way that the Clinton's or Al Gore or Obama weren't guilty of doing the same thing.

fer fucks sake. . . really?

I can't find any record of Clinton, Gore or Obama soliciting a foreign government to dig up dirt on his political opponent.

Of course not.

FACT CHECK: Did Republicans Pay For The Trump Dossier?

Flashback: That Time The WSJ Said The Trump Dossier Could Be A Hillary-Funded Effort

Meet the espionage firm which ordered Trump 'dirty dossier' | Daily Mail Online

https://nypost.com/2017/06/24/inside-the-shadowy-intelligence-firm-behind-the-trump-dossier/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/campfin/stories/fifth060998.htm

Hillary hired Fusion GPS, an American based firm. There are no laws against that.

 

[Faun]

Clinton WAS impeached, idiot.
Not for taking money for favors, not for getting a blow job, but for lying under oath about getting a blow job.

Ken Starr turned over every fucking rock he could find about Clinton and finally ended up with Clinton getting a blow job.

Trump is holding out Congressionally approved funds to a country in a hot war in order to get info that would benefit his fucking 2020 campaign.
Why don't you redneck idiots SEE THIS?
It's right in front of you.
Mick Mulvaney ADMITTED TO IT ON CAMERA.
Trump released the TRANSCRIPT with "I need a favor, though."
Why did he do that?
Because somebody inside that White House got it through his thick skull that if it can be proved, he wouldn't want to be impeached for lying under oath.

Of course Clinton was impeached. He lied to a special investigator under oath. It was on record.

I never said he wasn't impeached.

What I asked for, was evidence that the Trump campaign took funds directly from a foreign entity, and did not funnel them like every other pol in D.C. has already done.

You probably do not know shit about China-gate and the folks that fled the nation for that and served time for it, do you?

"FBI agents were also denied the opportunity to ask President Clinton and Vice President Gore questions during Justice Department interviews in 1997 and 1998 and were only allowed to take notes. During the interviews, neither Clinton nor Gore were asked any questions about fund-raisers John Huang and James Riady, nor the Hsi Lai Buddhist Temple fund-raising event led by Maria Hsia and attended by Huang and Ted Sioeng.[57]"
1996 United States campaign finance controversy - Wikipedia

LOL!
I guess you forgot that Trump said he was going to drain the swamp.
He IS the fucking swamp, moron.

Don't hold back Faun, tell us what you really think. . mmmmkay?

Umm, psycho... I didn't post that.

My apologies. . . you all sort of blend together. . .

At least you finally recognize your severely limited attention span. Good for you.

 

[SAYIT]

The cycle repeats yet again. We got nothing on Trump but we can impeach him for beating Hillary.

You don't have to break a law to be impeached. Trump's defenders need a better argument.

 

[K9Buck]

Trump's defenders need a better argument.

Here's my argument:

 

[SAYIT]

From now on when anyone is elected to any office, let's just go ahead and set up an impeachment inquiry.

I fear that is our new political paradigm. Clearly the bitter, petulant Democrats don't care how much damage they do. In fact, one could easily make the argument that destroying this country is precisely what they have in mind.

 

[MisterBeale]

From your own link;

". . . Madison objected to “maladministration.” He thought this term was so vague that it would threaten the separation of powers. Congress could remove any president it disagreed with on grounds of “maladministration.” This would give Congress complete power over the executive.. . . "

I think, at worst, the POTUS could only, at this point, be guilty of this. This is what you don't like, and refuse to admit, because these proceedings, are, in the end, just political in nature and a violation of the separation of powers.

Nope, at this point, he could be guilty of violating...

§30121 Contributions and donations by foreign nationals​

O.K.

Sure. . .

Prove it in such a way that the Clinton's or Al Gore or Obama weren't guilty of doing the same thing.

fer fucks sake. . . really?

Well first you would have to show where they solicited help for their campaigns from foreign nationals ...

Chinagate and the Clintons | The American Spectator | Politics Is Too Important To Be Taken Seriously.

Umm, your article points out the DNC gave all the money back. It also points out that Clinton was paid $500K for a speech in Russia. But that's in line with other speeches he was giving around the world. And he wasn't running for office so it couldn't be construed as a campaign donation.

OMG. . . you are by far, the most equivocating, morally bankrupt, lying individual on this site.

So if the DNC hadn't been caught. . . well, it would have been just fine for them to keep those contributions from a foreign government?

I guess if Trump gets caught, all he needs to do it give any illegally gotten gains back then, and you guys will be just fine with it, eh?


. . . and as for the other charge? Well. . . I suppose Trump should just have all cash go through Melania's name, then, if he wants to use it for any campaign purposes? meh. . . it's all good. . . right?


You are really, really, the most disingenuous poster on this site. Do you think folks are as stupid as the dumb shit you post?

 

[MisterBeale]

From your own link;

". . . Madison objected to “maladministration.” He thought this term was so vague that it would threaten the separation of powers. Congress could remove any president it disagreed with on grounds of “maladministration.” This would give Congress complete power over the executive.. . . "

I think, at worst, the POTUS could only, at this point, be guilty of this. This is what you don't like, and refuse to admit, because these proceedings, are, in the end, just political in nature and a violation of the separation of powers.

Nope, at this point, he could be guilty of violating...

§30121 Contributions and donations by foreign nationals​

O.K.

Sure. . .

Prove it in such a way that the Clinton's or Al Gore or Obama weren't guilty of doing the same thing.

fer fucks sake. . . really?

I can't find any record of Clinton, Gore or Obama soliciting a foreign government to dig up dirt on his political opponent.

Of course not.

FACT CHECK: Did Republicans Pay For The Trump Dossier?

Flashback: That Time The WSJ Said The Trump Dossier Could Be A Hillary-Funded Effort

Meet the espionage firm which ordered Trump 'dirty dossier' | Daily Mail Online

https://nypost.com/2017/06/24/inside-the-shadowy-intelligence-firm-behind-the-trump-dossier/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/campfin/stories/fifth060998.htm

Hillary hired Fusion GPS, an American based firm. There are no laws against that.

If there are laws against, "soliciting a foreign government to dig up dirt," than hiring a company to do it for you, is analogous to saying. . . I didn't kill anyone, I only hired someone to do it for me. . . . Which, as most folks know the history of the Clintons, is pretty spot on.

Again, you are being a disingenuous piece of shit. Everyone sees right through you.