Offical Impeachment Thread

[AzogtheDefiler]

Jordan: You didn’t listen in on President Trump and Zelensky’s call?

Taylor: I did not.

Jordan: You’ve never talked with Chief of Staff Mulvaney?

Taylor: I never did.

Jordan: You’ve never met the president?

Taylor: That’s correct.

Jordan: You had three meetings again with Zelenksy and it didn’t come up … and President Zelensky never made an announcement. … and you’re their star witness.

every note that was written in real time regarding & confirming all the info testified to yesterday is in pompeo's little sausage fingers that is being refused to be released to congress.

This was the actual dialogue between Jordan and Taylor.

 

[bripat9643]

USA-despising Brit9643--desecrating soldier's graves and memorials, (The Trump Agenda overall)--even on Veteran's Day weekend--fails at US decency, law, and foreign policy and international policy: In just the few words of the "What difference does it make(?)!" post.

The treaty is a peaceful pact, and approved in the Senate with all the niceties contained therein. It specifies requests for legal proceedings--what, when, where, how, and so on--that legally happen between two nations. Requests with basis in political interference are specifically not included, and so would be said illegal per treaty and international convention.

Then there is the goon squad on the phone call, not to up on matters USA!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!
(With A Red-Hat(s) Waving: The Banzai scenario begins to unfold!)

The treaty does not outlaw any American from making a request of the government of Ukraine, moron.

 

[jc456]

If you call that extortion, then what Biden did was worse, since what he did is what the commies are accusing Trump of doing.

What Biden said was fully approved by Obama and both House and Congress. It was not to get them to spew BS so Clinton could win. Just so we know more facts here.
Discussion of mod actions edited

Really? When did Obama approve it? When did both houses of Congress approve it?

it was a joint effort between the US & other nations. biden, along with other american officials were our point men & did not go rogue on this.

What really happened when Biden forced out Ukraine's top prosecutor

play the video and tell me at what minute mark he says he did that for other countries.

don't have to. prove he did it all by himself. & bloviating doesn't count. GO!

I know you don't, it isn't there. you prove me correct.

 

[playtime]

I would like you to do us a favor though

A direct response to a request to buy Javelin missiles. When talking about the favors, it was clear they were personal in nature.

Favor regarding 2016 or 2020? 2016 is OK but 2020 is not. Therein lies the intent. How do you prove it was for 2020? I ll wait patiently.

because biden is the top candidate that polls are showing who could beat donny. that video that every dumbfuck here is trying to peddle as the smoking gun that 'proves' biden was committing a crime.... back in 2018... when donny was a year into his term... but nothingg came of it until after biden got into the race & the polls are favorable.

You have to prove intent and that intent is to impact 2020 not to see what happened in 2016. Even during yesterday's hearings, they mentioned 2016 numerous times. Intent is very difficult to prove. As far as "dumbfuck", you're the dumbest person on this board and that is saying a lot with people like JoeB running around.

uh-huh. please hang onto that if it makes feel better.

It is a fact. Sorry to burst your Leftist bubble. You keep losing debates to me. Aren't you tired of losing or are you used to it? Loser.

only in yer mind, zog. only in yer mind.

 

[bripat9643]

About the Treaty: Signed at Kiev in 1999, referred to the Senate, approved October, 2000.

What matters is that by-passing the law--The Attorney General is authorized in the proceedings, and in writing it must be: By-Passing the law Is beyond High Crimes and just possibly an Act of War. If other means are used, than those in writing, then Attorney General has to put the details in writing within 10 days!

Text - Treaty Document 106-16 - Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Red-Hatters Not the Law, but a group of goons in all the advertising, even!

Dead wrong, moron. You obviously didn't read it.

 

[Faun]

A shakedown with no quid, no pro, and no quo?

How does that work?

It wouldn't matter if there was. As Professor Dershowitz pointed out, there is no law against quid pro quo's in the statute. He looked up, down and sideways. Couldn't find one.

ray ray ray.... articles of impeachment do not hafta follow traditional criminal law. doucherwitz is grabbing at straws.

What's wrong with you? Impeachment is a process against the President for committing high CRIMES and misdemeanors. Or are you telling me that Democrats don't need any reason to impeach a President? When did we become the former Soviet Union?

raymond, we all know you are one of them thar poorly educated fans of trump; but can't you for once try to show some dignity & research before you blurt?

there are several interpretations what 'high crimes & misdemeanors' consists of. i omitted the one that you claim is the only one because of redundancy

Presidential Impeachment: The Legal Standard and Procedure


There are essentially four schools of thought concerning the meaning of these words, although there are innumerable subsets within those four categories.

Congressional Interpretation

The first general school of thought is that the standard enunciated by the Constitution is subject entirely to whatever interpretation Congress collectively wishes to make:

"What, then, is an impeachable offense? The only honest answer is that an impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history; conviction results from whatever offense or offenses two-thirds of the other body considers to be sufficiently serious to require removal of the accused from office..." Congressman Gerald Ford, 116 Cong. Rec. H.3113-3114 (April 15, 1970).

Misdemeanor

The third approach is that an indictable crime is not required to impeach and remove a President. The proponents of this view focus on the word "misdemeanor" which did not have a specific criminal connotation to it at the time the Constitution was ratified. This interpretation is somewhat belied by details of the debate the Framers had in arriving at the specific language to be used for the impeachment standard.

Initially the standard was to be "malpractice or neglect of duty." This was removed and replaced with "treason, bribery, or corruption." The word "corruption" was then eliminated. On the floor during debate the suggestion was made to add the term "maladministration." This was rejected as being too vague and the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" was adopted in its place. There are many legal scholars who believe this lesser standard is the correct one, however.

Relating to the President's Official Duties

The fourth view is that an indictable crime is not required, but that the impeachable act or acts done by the President must in some way relate to his official duties. The bad act may or may not be a crime but it would be more serious than simply "maladministration." This view is buttressed in part by an analysis of the entire phrase "high crimes or misdemeanors" which seems to be a term of art speaking to a political connection for the bad act or acts. In order to impeach it would not be necessary for the act to be a crime, but not all crimes would be impeachable offenses.

https://litigation.findlaw.com/legal-sy ... edure.html

name the high crime?

Abuse of power.

 

[jc456]

Jordan: You didn’t listen in on President Trump and Zelensky’s call?

Taylor: I did not.

Jordan: You’ve never talked with Chief of Staff Mulvaney?

Taylor: I never did.

Jordan: You’ve never met the president?

Taylor: That’s correct.

Jordan: You had three meetings again with Zelenksy and it didn’t come up … and President Zelensky never made an announcement. … and you’re their star witness.

every note that was written in real time regarding & confirming all the info testified to yesterday is in pompeo's little sausage fingers that is being refused to be released to congress.

This was the actual dialogue between Jordan and Taylor.

dude, he isn't interested in facts.

Like the Illinios rep Quigly stated, hearsay is better than direct evidence.

 

[bripat9643]

The Law Enforcement Assistance and Cooperation Treaty with Ukraine specifies that the designated officials of the two nations are the US Attorney General and the Ukraine Minister of Justice, (3.1.d.). The treaty binds those two offices--and so the usual rules in both nations, regarding those offices: In the Treaty. So from the New York Times, about the phone--Barbarous Anti-American sentiment is apparently what the White House has documented.

"A Justice Department official said that Mr. Barr had no knowledge of the call until the director of national intelligence and the intelligence community’s inspector general sent the department the whistle-blower’s criminal referral late last month, and that Mr. Trump has not spoken with the attorney general “about having Ukraine investigate anything relating to former Vice President Biden or his son.”

Political interference is not considered cause, stated in the Treaty provisions.

https://www.congress.gov/106/cdoc/tdoc16/CDOC-106tdoc16.pdf

Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!
(Red-Hatter waving takes on a new appearance. "Banzai! Surprise!" Attack on the USA apparently is supported--or on Ukraine, or Crimea!)

1. So-called whistleblowers don't hand down indictments.
2. "Cause" for what?
3. What difference does it make if Barr knew about the call?

It makes no difference if Barr knew about the call. What matters is that Barr was not investigating Biden.

That doesn't matter either.

 

[IM2]

So extortion is legal. Who knew?

If you call that extortion, then what Biden did was worse, since what he did is what the commies are accusing Trump of doing.

What Biden said was fully approved by Obama and both House and Congress. It was not to get them to spew BS so Clinton could win. Just so we know more facts here.
Discussion of mod actions edited

Really? When did Obama approve it? When did both houses of Congress approve it?

it was a joint effort between the US & other nations. biden, along with other american officials were our point men & did not go rogue on this.

What really happened when Biden forced out Ukraine's top prosecutor

There isn't a shred of evidence to support that claim.

All kinds of evidence supports it.

 

[Baz Ares]

The problem is what Trump was asking for in exchange for releasing the aid - whether weapon or wampum doesn't matter. You fellas have a knack for irrelevance.

He asked for NOTHING as the transcript proves....but low IQ liberals will follow lying talkingvpoints to their deaths!

He asked for a favor. As the transcript proves. You may want to try a different line of bullshit.

A favor...like this favor?

Was this not a USA Potus and Congress approved?

Yes, the Surrender Monkey was dragged into it by Biden...DONT BELIEVE ME CALL OBUMA!

I see your DOPer team member made some real news in the BS section of the hearing.

 

[playtime]

that's because the transcript hasn't been released. only the edited memorandum that is being peddled as THE transcript. oh & sundland said there was a quid pro quo after he was caught perjuring himself.

you know that how?

i research, that's how. it's written in clear language on PAGE ONE of the MEMORANDUM that donny is pushing. google it you poorly educated lazy ass.

you don't do it well obviously, you haven't posted anything. see. your evidence is something you present, not me going to look for it for you.

^^^ right on cue ^^^

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

PAGE ONE.

put quotes around the language that is evidence that he stated anything about aid for a favor.

changing the goal posts? can't put quotes around an edited version of something that has portions edited out & then substituted with ellipses. you want hard copy proof - then tell donny to release the unedited transcript that is hiding.

GO!

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Favor regarding 2016 or 2020? 2016 is OK but 2020 is not. Therein lies the intent. How do you prove it was for 2020? I ll wait patiently.

because biden is the top candidate that polls are showing who could beat donny. that video that every dumbfuck here is trying to peddle as the smoking gun that 'proves' biden was committing a crime.... back in 2018... when donny was a year into his term... but nothingg came of it until after biden got into the race & the polls are favorable.

You have to prove intent and that intent is to impact 2020 not to see what happened in 2016. Even during yesterday's hearings, they mentioned 2016 numerous times. Intent is very difficult to prove. As far as "dumbfuck", you're the dumbest person on this board and that is saying a lot with people like JoeB running around.

uh-huh. please hang onto that if it makes feel better.

It is a fact. Sorry to burst your Leftist bubble. You keep losing debates to me. Aren't you tired of losing or are you used to it? Loser.

only in yer mind, zog. only in yer mind.

Really? Should I bring up our pro choice debate? You ran with your tail tucked between your legs. I was polite too and you came off like the usual moonbat.

 

[Claudette]

The whole thing is a big nothing burger and the Dems are still batting 0.

What a waste of time and tax dollars brought to you by a pack of imbeciles led by that egotistical little shit, Shiffforbrains. What a moron.

 

[playtime]

What Biden said was fully approved by Obama and both House and Congress. It was not to get them to spew BS so Clinton could win. Just so we know more facts here.
Discussion of mod actions edited

Really? When did Obama approve it? When did both houses of Congress approve it?

it was a joint effort between the US & other nations. biden, along with other american officials were our point men & did not go rogue on this.

What really happened when Biden forced out Ukraine's top prosecutor

play the video and tell me at what minute mark he says he did that for other countries.

don't have to. prove he did it all by himself. & bloviating doesn't count. GO!

I know you don't, it isn't there. you prove me correct.

you & zog share the same brain?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

He asked for NOTHING as the transcript proves....but low IQ liberals will follow lying talkingvpoints to their deaths!

He asked for a favor. As the transcript proves. You may want to try a different line of bullshit.

A favor...like this favor?

Was this not a USA Potus and Congress approved?

Yes, the Surrender Monkey was dragged into it by Biden...DONT BELIEVE ME CALL OBUMA!

I see your DOPer team member made some real news in the BS section of the hearing.

View attachment 289752

That hat is awesome.

 

[Faun]

The Law Enforcement Assistance and Cooperation Treaty with Ukraine specifies that the designated officials of the two nations are the US Attorney General and the Ukraine Minister of Justice, (3.1.d.). The treaty binds those two offices--and so the usual rules in both nations, regarding those offices: In the Treaty. So from the New York Times, about the phone--Barbarous Anti-American sentiment is apparently what the White House has documented.

"A Justice Department official said that Mr. Barr had no knowledge of the call until the director of national intelligence and the intelligence community’s inspector general sent the department the whistle-blower’s criminal referral late last month, and that Mr. Trump has not spoken with the attorney general “about having Ukraine investigate anything relating to former Vice President Biden or his son.”

Political interference is not considered cause, stated in the Treaty provisions.

https://www.congress.gov/106/cdoc/tdoc16/CDOC-106tdoc16.pdf

Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!
(Red-Hatter waving takes on a new appearance. "Banzai! Surprise!" Attack on the USA apparently is supported--or on Ukraine, or Crimea!)

1. So-called whistleblowers don't hand down indictments.
2. "Cause" for what?
3. What difference does it make if Barr knew about the call?

It makes no difference if Barr knew about the call. What matters is that Barr was not investigating Biden.

That doesn't matter either.

Of course that matters in terms of the treaty since a requirement to request support includes the requestor name the authority on the investigation.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Really? When did Obama approve it? When did both houses of Congress approve it?

it was a joint effort between the US & other nations. biden, along with other american officials were our point men & did not go rogue on this.

What really happened when Biden forced out Ukraine's top prosecutor

play the video and tell me at what minute mark he says he did that for other countries.

don't have to. prove he did it all by himself. & bloviating doesn't count. GO!

I know you don't, it isn't there. you prove me correct.

you & zog share the same brain?

You're just jealous because I am 10 years younger than you and way smarter.

 

[playtime]

because biden is the top candidate that polls are showing who could beat donny. that video that every dumbfuck here is trying to peddle as the smoking gun that 'proves' biden was committing a crime.... back in 2018... when donny was a year into his term... but nothingg came of it until after biden got into the race & the polls are favorable.

You have to prove intent and that intent is to impact 2020 not to see what happened in 2016. Even during yesterday's hearings, they mentioned 2016 numerous times. Intent is very difficult to prove. As far as "dumbfuck", you're the dumbest person on this board and that is saying a lot with people like JoeB running around.

uh-huh. please hang onto that if it makes feel better.

It is a fact. Sorry to burst your Leftist bubble. You keep losing debates to me. Aren't you tired of losing or are you used to it? Loser.

only in yer mind, zog. only in yer mind.

Really? Should I bring up our pro choice debate? You ran with your tail tucked between your legs. I was polite too and you came off like the usual moonbat.

haaaaaaaaaaaaaa................... what? wow- what's it like to stroke yer own ego like donny? will you also claim you are a stable genius too? i most likely bailed because you were getting more ridiculous & wasting my time.

 

[jc456]

Really? When did Obama approve it? When did both houses of Congress approve it?

it was a joint effort between the US & other nations. biden, along with other american officials were our point men & did not go rogue on this.

What really happened when Biden forced out Ukraine's top prosecutor

play the video and tell me at what minute mark he says he did that for other countries.

don't have to. prove he did it all by himself. & bloviating doesn't count. GO!

I know you don't, it isn't there. you prove me correct.

you & zog share the same brain?

At least I have one. What's your excuse?

 

[playtime]

it was a joint effort between the US & other nations. biden, along with other american officials were our point men & did not go rogue on this.

What really happened when Biden forced out Ukraine's top prosecutor

play the video and tell me at what minute mark he says he did that for other countries.

don't have to. prove he did it all by himself. & bloviating doesn't count. GO!

I know you don't, it isn't there. you prove me correct.

you & zog share the same brain?

You're just jealous because I am 10 years younger than you and way smarter.

oh good god - you really going with that, 'eh?