Offical Impeachment Thread

[OKTexas]

Super. Then let's stretch the limits of the Constitution and the definition of 'hearsay' so that the minority Party will always just Impeach every sitting President from now on.

Hearsay evidence is admissible in impeachment hearing, grand juries, probate hearing, parole hearings, etc where there is no cross examination. The reason hearsay evidence is not admissible is that it is generally less reliable and it becomes impossible to cross examine a witness who gives hearsay evidence because the witness can not answer questions about evidence.

Congress is not a court. It’s a legislative body, and it’s not bound by the centuries of common law that built up around the admissibility of hearsay evidence. It will be interesting to see what hearsay evidence will be allowed in the a senate trial since rules of evidence and procedures are government by senate rules that are mostly based on precedent.

However, all this makes little difference since the Senate will vote along party lines as will the House which makes evidence irrelevant.

And if you support that, don't be crying when what comes around goes around. If the commies are able to get away with this, don't expect the Republicans for forgive and forget. Like the filibuster rule with judicial nominations, it will come back to haunt the Democrats, trust me.

Spoken like a true partisan. Of course republicans will seek retaliation against the next republican president just as democrats will seek retaliation. That's American politics today. The unstated goal of every political party is a one party state which just happens to be the goal of the communist party.

Well......the communist and Democrat party. That's why the Democrats became the anti-white party.

It's one thing for people in parties to try and change leadership. That's understandable. But this idiocy would make our founders turn over in their graves. They want to impeach a President over what "they think" he had in mind when he took certain actions, and brought witnesses who also "thought" what Trump had in mind.

The entire impeachment is about suppositions, interpretations, and assumptions, but no real facts. Nixon was a fact; hard core evidence. Clinton was a fact; DNA evidence and court testimony. There are no facts here, and certainly no impeachable offenses.

I think your GOP filter is obscuring the truth. What "he (Trump) had in mind" is critical to whether he was violating both the constitution and campaign election laws when he pressured the Ukraine to open an investigation of the Bidens or just sought to eliminate corruption in the Ukraine. If his intent was to discredit Joe Biden, he is violating the law and the constitution but if his intent is simply to cleanup corruption in the Ukraine, then the Senate should dismiss the applicable charges.

As explained in the Federalist Papers (I think the number is 65), high crimes and misdemeanors is essentially bad conduct, not necessarily a violation of the law. If you look back at previous impeachments you will see articles charging violation of oath of office, improper use of executive powers, behavior unbecoming the office, immoral behavior, drunkenness, etc.

It has become customary that in impeachments today, there be at least one charge of violation of the law but that has not always been the case. You see, our forefathers believed that public officials must be held to much higher standards than the public. Just being a law abiding citizens was not enough. They expected public officials to be of high character. For example in Articles of Impeachment of Andrew Johnson it was claimed that he spoke with a loud voice, certain intemperate, inflammatory and scandalous harangues before congress.

Our forefathers would roll over in their graves if they saw who we were electing today.

Bullshit, the founders specifically rejected maladministration as a reason for impeachment as too broad.

.

 

[beautress]

No quid pro quo.

All bullshit.

Win at the polls, lefty losers.

Such pathetic losers.

Trump openly admitted to doing precisely that.
Multiple witnesses said he did precisely that, as well.

But Ukraine president said he didn't....You fucks just can't handle the truth!

it means nothing that Zelenskyy claimed publicly that there was no quid pro quo on the part of Trump. It only means that it would be unwise for the Ukrainian president to criticize the U.S. president.

There was no quid pro quo. Your hatred for the President is noted.

 

[beautress]

Hearsay evidence is admissible in impeachment hearing, grand juries, probate hearing, parole hearings, etc where there is no cross examination. The reason hearsay evidence is not admissible is that it is generally less reliable and it becomes impossible to cross examine a witness who gives hearsay evidence because the witness can not answer questions about evidence.

Congress is not a court. It’s a legislative body, and it’s not bound by the centuries of common law that built up around the admissibility of hearsay evidence. It will be interesting to see what hearsay evidence will be allowed in the a senate trial since rules of evidence and procedures are government by senate rules that are mostly based on precedent.

However, all this makes little difference since the Senate will vote along party lines as will the House which makes evidence irrelevant.

And if you support that, don't be crying when what comes around goes around. If the commies are able to get away with this, don't expect the Republicans for forgive and forget. Like the filibuster rule with judicial nominations, it will come back to haunt the Democrats, trust me.

Spoken like a true partisan. Of course republicans will seek retaliation against the next republican president just as democrats will seek retaliation. That's American politics today. The unstated goal of every political party is a one party state which just happens to be the goal of the communist party.

Well......the communist and Democrat party. That's why the Democrats became the anti-white party.

It's one thing for people in parties to try and change leadership. That's understandable. But this idiocy would make our founders turn over in their graves. They want to impeach a President over what "they think" he had in mind when he took certain actions, and brought witnesses who also "thought" what Trump had in mind.

The entire impeachment is about suppositions, interpretations, and assumptions, but no real facts. Nixon was a fact; hard core evidence. Clinton was a fact; DNA evidence and court testimony. There are no facts here, and certainly no impeachable offenses.

I think your GOP filter is obscuring the truth. What "he (Trump) had in mind" is critical to whether he was violating both the constitution and campaign election laws when he pressured the Ukraine to open an investigation of the Bidens or just sought to eliminate corruption in the Ukraine. If his intent was to discredit Joe Biden, he is violating the law and the constitution but if his intent is simply to cleanup corruption in the Ukraine, then the Senate should dismiss the applicable charges.

As explained in the Federalist Papers (I think the number is 65), high crimes and misdemeanors is essentially bad conduct, not necessarily a violation of the law. If you look back at previous impeachments you will see articles charging violation of oath of office, improper use of executive powers, behavior unbecoming the office, immoral behavior, drunkenness, etc.

It has become customary that in impeachments today, there be at least one charge of violation of the law but that has not always been the case. You see, our forefathers believed that public officials must be held to much higher standards than the public. Just being a law abiding citizens was not enough. They expected public officials to be of high character. For example in Articles of Impeachment of Andrew Johnson it was claimed that he spoke with a loud voice, certain intemperate, inflammatory and scandalous harangues before congress.

Our forefathers would roll over in their graves if they saw who we were electing today.

Bullshit, the founders specifically rejected maladministration as a reason for impeachment as too broad.

.

"the founders specifically rejected maladministration as a reason for impeachment as too broad."​

Yes they did. The Obama/Biden/Clinton/PartisanMedia brainwash is driving the Dimmies nuts.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

No quid pro quo.

All bullshit.

Win at the polls, lefty losers.

Such pathetic losers.

Trump openly admitted to doing precisely that.
Multiple witnesses said he did precisely that, as well.

But Ukraine president said he didn't....You fucks just can't handle the truth!

it means nothing that Zelenskyy claimed publicly that there was no quid pro quo on the part of Trump. It only means that it would be unwise for the Ukrainian president to criticize the U.S. president.

There was no quid pro quo. Your hatred for the President is noted.

Let's see. Another legal loophole has been created.

4 bank robbers all agree to rob a bank. They go into the bank with guns drawn. They announce that they are doing an anauthorized withdrawal a gun point. The money is stacked on the counter and all they have to do is just scoop it up into their waiting backpacks. But someone triggered a silent alarm but announced it to the bank robbers. So the Bank Robbers drop their bags, kick their weapons under the counter and wait from the police. They claim that they never intended to rob the bank and have never announced that they were robbing the bank. You see, unauthorized withdrawals are not bank robbing. We need to rewrite the legal laws for everyone since Rump and his Criminals seem to think that this is legal for them. It may revolutionize how bank robbers that get caught while robbing a bank can get away with it because they never went all the way through with it and never said they were robbing the bank. They were just making an unsuccessful armed unauthorized withdrawal.

Rump used code words when communicating his wishes. In this case, his demands. By a certain date, everyone from the dog walker up knew what he meant. He was playing loose with over 400 million bucks that was supposed to go directly to Ukraine for lethal weapons for their beleaguered military. He was playing with money that Congress had bi-partisan agreed to send to Ukraine to combat illegal Russian Intrusion into Ukraine by both military and terrorist support. And what did he require to release those funds and to have a face to face with the Ukrainian President? The new President had to publicly announce that he was authorizing an investigation into the Bidens. A clear breach of Election Laws on Rumps and his Criminally insane followers. Then the cat got out of the bag. After the cat got out of the bag, the funds were released. But guess what, still no face to face meeting between Presidents. Rump is pissed. Then after the cat was out of the bag, his criminally insane underlings tried to cover it up. And are still trying.

So we have Bribery, possible theft, definitely obstruction of justice and a pretty good case of Corruption on the Rumpsters. And the one person that should be prosecuting those criminals is Barr who is in on the Corruption. These facts are pretty well known and you can't use silly math to unexplain it or cracked logic. What we have is a broken Executive Branch that is corrupt as all hell and a Senate that is tied up because a bunch of pansies are afraid to go against the Criminal Rump on anything.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

HIs so-called political rival got his drug addicted son a job paying 80K a month in an industry he had no experience in, in a country he had no business in; didn't even know a word of their language. And you want to label who is corrupt?

None of what you and the other commies claim can be proven. Unless you can testify and show how Democrats are able to read minds, then you have no legitimate case.

We went these over before.
Hunter got the high paying job with no experience. So?

Trump asking a favor to a foreign leader to investigate his political rival. Is not acceptable no matter how much you twist it. Trump is a piece of shit.

How is Kushner running around with out diplomatic experience? Don’t tell me he is doing it for free.

How is Guilliani a private citizen running around like a diplomat? Spreading corrupted propaganda. Don’t tell me he is doing it for free.

WTF does that have to do with it? Trump can hire anybody he wants.

View attachment 291181

This is not about Joe hiring somebody. It's about getting favors from a foreign corrupt company. Favors are not granted out of kindness. People expect something in return. An email was discovered through the FOIA that showed one from Burisma, dropping Hunters name to curry favor from the State Department.

Impeachment is not for what you or others find acceptable or not. Impeachment is for high crimes and misdemeanors, none of which Donald is part of.

Talking about hypocrite.
You mentioned Hunter unqualified and highly paid. I gave you an exact example of the same situations. You are full of cow dung.

I deal with hundreds of suppliers and vendors. So when I ask one of them to hire one of my nephews. That is a favor. Is that bad?

Biden ask Burisma to hire his son. Where did Biden violate any rules?

We don't know because it''s never been investigated. That's why Trump asked Zelensky to "look into it" as a favor. And if there is something that shows corruption, then Trump could have the IG look at that.

No, it's not bad if you ask a vendor to hire your nephew. But then again, you have no power to return the favor.

Or to gain favor by the vender who hired his nephew, uhhh ummmm ohhh wait one second here .. Can we say kick back in such situations maybe ? Conflict of interest maybe ???

If Biden's Son has done what you claim he has and Biden did what you claim he did, it was the job (and still is) of the Justice Department to investigate and bring charges to the both of them. It's not up to the President to try and blackmail another world leader to do his bidding for him. The problem here is, it WAS looked into by the Justice Department and no crime was found.

But if Barr will restart the investigation on the Bidens, he has my blessings. But, at the same time, he needs to to after the Rumpster Criminals that refuse the Congressional Subpoenas and have the US Marshals arrest and escort their sorry buts to the Congressional floor.

 

[eagle1462010]

We went these over before.
Hunter got the high paying job with no experience. So?

Trump asking a favor to a foreign leader to investigate his political rival. Is not acceptable no matter how much you twist it. Trump is a piece of shit.

How is Kushner running around with out diplomatic experience? Don’t tell me he is doing it for free.

How is Guilliani a private citizen running around like a diplomat? Spreading corrupted propaganda. Don’t tell me he is doing it for free.

WTF does that have to do with it? Trump can hire anybody he wants.

View attachment 291181

This is not about Joe hiring somebody. It's about getting favors from a foreign corrupt company. Favors are not granted out of kindness. People expect something in return. An email was discovered through the FOIA that showed one from Burisma, dropping Hunters name to curry favor from the State Department.

Impeachment is not for what you or others find acceptable or not. Impeachment is for high crimes and misdemeanors, none of which Donald is part of.

Talking about hypocrite.
You mentioned Hunter unqualified and highly paid. I gave you an exact example of the same situations. You are full of cow dung.

I deal with hundreds of suppliers and vendors. So when I ask one of them to hire one of my nephews. That is a favor. Is that bad?

Biden ask Burisma to hire his son. Where did Biden violate any rules?

We don't know because it''s never been investigated. That's why Trump asked Zelensky to "look into it" as a favor. And if there is something that shows corruption, then Trump could have the IG look at that.

No, it's not bad if you ask a vendor to hire your nephew. But then again, you have no power to return the favor.

Or to gain favor by the vender who hired his nephew, uhhh ummmm ohhh wait one second here .. Can we say kick back in such situations maybe ? Conflict of interest maybe ???

If Biden's Son has done what you claim he has and Biden did what you claim he did, it was the job (and still is) of the Justice Department to investigate and bring charges to the both of them. It's not up to the President to try and blackmail another world leader to do his bidding for him. The problem here is, it WAS looked into by the Justice Department and no crime was found.

But if Barr will restart the investigation on the Bidens, he has my blessings. But, at the same time, he needs to to after the Rumpster Criminals that refuse the Congressional Subpoenas and have the US Marshals arrest and escort their sorry buts to the Congressional floor.

Sucks for the Dems that they cannot override the Executive Powers..............Equal Branches of the Gov't.............They DO NOT HAVE THAT AUTHORITY..............

If they say THEY DO...........then they must go to the Judicial Branch and Challenge it............You can cry .......scream...........and demand all you want...............it doesn't change a thing...........

In regards to election tampering and corruption in Ukraine.........Trump has every right to ask for cooperation with our DOJ for ongoing investigations.............It's NOT A CRIME to do so...............In regards to his lawyer..........it's his JOB to defend Trump......and finding information to defend him from this Endless attack by the Dems is a part of that Job......

 

[Daryl Hunt]

WTF does that have to do with it? Trump can hire anybody he wants.

View attachment 291181

This is not about Joe hiring somebody. It's about getting favors from a foreign corrupt company. Favors are not granted out of kindness. People expect something in return. An email was discovered through the FOIA that showed one from Burisma, dropping Hunters name to curry favor from the State Department.

Impeachment is not for what you or others find acceptable or not. Impeachment is for high crimes and misdemeanors, none of which Donald is part of.

Talking about hypocrite.
You mentioned Hunter unqualified and highly paid. I gave you an exact example of the same situations. You are full of cow dung.

I deal with hundreds of suppliers and vendors. So when I ask one of them to hire one of my nephews. That is a favor. Is that bad?

Biden ask Burisma to hire his son. Where did Biden violate any rules?

We don't know because it''s never been investigated. That's why Trump asked Zelensky to "look into it" as a favor. And if there is something that shows corruption, then Trump could have the IG look at that.

No, it's not bad if you ask a vendor to hire your nephew. But then again, you have no power to return the favor.

Or to gain favor by the vender who hired his nephew, uhhh ummmm ohhh wait one second here .. Can we say kick back in such situations maybe ? Conflict of interest maybe ???

If Biden's Son has done what you claim he has and Biden did what you claim he did, it was the job (and still is) of the Justice Department to investigate and bring charges to the both of them. It's not up to the President to try and blackmail another world leader to do his bidding for him. The problem here is, it WAS looked into by the Justice Department and no crime was found.

But if Barr will restart the investigation on the Bidens, he has my blessings. But, at the same time, he needs to to after the Rumpster Criminals that refuse the Congressional Subpoenas and have the US Marshals arrest and escort their sorry buts to the Congressional floor.

Sucks for the Dems that they cannot override the Executive Powers..............Equal Branches of the Gov't.............They DO NOT HAVE THAT AUTHORITY..............

If they say THEY DO...........then they must go to the Judicial Branch and Challenge it............You can cry .......scream...........and demand all you want...............it doesn't change a thing...........

In regards to election tampering and corruption in Ukraine.........Trump has every right to ask for cooperation with our DOJ for ongoing investigations.............It's NOT A CRIME to do so...............In regards to his lawyer..........it's his JOB to defend Trump......and finding information to defend him from this Endless attack by the Dems is a part of that Job......

One huge problem. Barr blindly supports anything Rump does and says. Barr isn't representing the United States of America. He's Rumps personal lawyer. So with that in mind, exactly who in the Judicial Branch should Congress take their grievance to? The Top Cop is corrupt as hell. Rump has seized control over about 3/5ths of the government. It should be 1/3rd but he's bot a lock on more like 2/3rds with his criminal Moscow Mitch at his Back. This looks very similar to Italy in 1933 that propelled Mussolini into absolute power. Obviously, Rump read the playbook leading up to the power grab in Italy by 1933. If I thought you had the capability to actually read history I would suggest some good reading for you. But you only listen to Rush and Hannity and the Extreme Right wing part of Fox along with some conspiracy sites.

One huge problem, the DOJ did not have an open case looking into the Bidens. If they had, it would have been unwise but not illegal. And even Barr wouldn't touch that hot potato. But would it have been found to be illegal? Probably not. Just damaging but not any worse than Rump on any given Tuesday. But Rump doing it back channel trying to blackmail another head of state to announce they are starting an investigation into the Bidens when Biden was beating him in the polls by refusing funds that were already authorized to go to Ukraine and dangling a face to face meeting to help Ukraine with it's face problem with Russia is downright criminal. And don't give me that crap that he didn't do any of it. Everyone from the dog catcher to the lead Diplomat was aware of it after certain date. But even a Professional Diplomat can only take so much corruption before they say enough. And that is pretty well what has happened.

 

[eagle1462010]

Talking about hypocrite.
You mentioned Hunter unqualified and highly paid. I gave you an exact example of the same situations. You are full of cow dung.

I deal with hundreds of suppliers and vendors. So when I ask one of them to hire one of my nephews. That is a favor. Is that bad?

Biden ask Burisma to hire his son. Where did Biden violate any rules?

We don't know because it''s never been investigated. That's why Trump asked Zelensky to "look into it" as a favor. And if there is something that shows corruption, then Trump could have the IG look at that.

No, it's not bad if you ask a vendor to hire your nephew. But then again, you have no power to return the favor.

Or to gain favor by the vender who hired his nephew, uhhh ummmm ohhh wait one second here .. Can we say kick back in such situations maybe ? Conflict of interest maybe ???

If Biden's Son has done what you claim he has and Biden did what you claim he did, it was the job (and still is) of the Justice Department to investigate and bring charges to the both of them. It's not up to the President to try and blackmail another world leader to do his bidding for him. The problem here is, it WAS looked into by the Justice Department and no crime was found.

But if Barr will restart the investigation on the Bidens, he has my blessings. But, at the same time, he needs to to after the Rumpster Criminals that refuse the Congressional Subpoenas and have the US Marshals arrest and escort their sorry buts to the Congressional floor.

Sucks for the Dems that they cannot override the Executive Powers..............Equal Branches of the Gov't.............They DO NOT HAVE THAT AUTHORITY..............

If they say THEY DO...........then they must go to the Judicial Branch and Challenge it............You can cry .......scream...........and demand all you want...............it doesn't change a thing...........

In regards to election tampering and corruption in Ukraine.........Trump has every right to ask for cooperation with our DOJ for ongoing investigations.............It's NOT A CRIME to do so...............In regards to his lawyer..........it's his JOB to defend Trump......and finding information to defend him from this Endless attack by the Dems is a part of that Job......

One huge problem. Barr blindly supports anything Rump does and says. Barr isn't representing the United States of America. He's Rumps personal lawyer. So with that in mind, exactly who in the Judicial Branch should Congress take their grievance to? The Top Cop is corrupt as hell. Rump has seized control over about 3/5ths of the government. It should be 1/3rd but he's bot a lock on more like 2/3rds with his criminal Moscow Mitch at his Back. This looks very similar to Italy in 1933 that propelled Mussolini into absolute power. Obviously, Rump read the playbook leading up to the power grab in Italy by 1933. If I thought you had the capability to actually read history I would suggest some good reading for you. But you only listen to Rush and Hannity and the Extreme Right wing part of Fox along with some conspiracy sites.

One huge problem, the DOJ did not have an open case looking into the Bidens. If they had, it would have been unwise but not illegal. And even Barr wouldn't touch that hot potato. But would it have been found to be illegal? Probably not. Just damaging but not any worse than Rump on any given Tuesday. But Rump doing it back channel trying to blackmail another head of state to announce they are starting an investigation into the Bidens when Biden was beating him in the polls by refusing funds that were already authorized to go to Ukraine and dangling a face to face meeting to help Ukraine with it's face problem with Russia is downright criminal. And don't give me that crap that he didn't do any of it. Everyone from the dog catcher to the lead Diplomat was aware of it after certain date. But even a Professional Diplomat can only take so much corruption before they say enough. And that is pretty well what has happened.

Long winded Lie bro.....

Biden didn't go to Ukraine to save it from Russia...........Apple Pie...........and the American way.........He did it to take advantage of the Chaos.......He takes his son on Air Force 2 to the Ukraine while thousands are dying from the Ruskies..........And a week later his son is WOW on the Board of the Largest Gas Producer in the Ukraine.............

If your concern is for the Ukraine with Russia on their door step back then.........Then Biden should have been there to meet with Ukraine military officials to discuss WHAT THEY NEED to PROTECT THEMSELVES...........

Like Lethal aid.............the ability to kill Russian armor.......aka tanks...........Did Joe and Obama do that........they gave a bunch of NON MILITARY AID.............but didn't give Ukraine weapons to stop the Russians on the battlefield...........

Biden CASHED in on his position during a time of Crisis and Chaos..............for his son.......Ray Charles can see that.

Trump on the other hand gave Ukraine Lethal weapons to help them KILL RUSSIANS if need be.........Why didn't that happen when Obama was in power..........hmmmm..........As thousands of Ukrainians were dying......

The DOJ has been looking at 2016 election meddling for years now, but have ignored the DNC's role in this and the courts of Ukraine in this.............Because it has been a Partisan Investigation that ignores the other sides dealings from the Deep State............who are attempting a COUP on Trump.

I'll use what the Dems have been using for years..............IF BIDEN is innocent...........then he should want this investigated to CLEAR HIS NAME.............If he did no crime .............Then he should WELCOME BEING INVESTIGATED.............

The Biden's will not be taken down..............Graham calling for an investigation will in the end do NOTHING.........It's a Show.............Biden and Graham are friends......and behind closed doors laugh about it and rehearse the next SHOW to cover their butts from all the corruption they have done as career politicains.

Career politicians from both parties...........keep the people at each other so they don't come after them for their corruption..............It's a designed strategy

 

[Olde Europe]

It needs evidence but not the kind evidence admissible in federal court because there is no federal law against bribing an offical of a foreign country.

You may wish to look up the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

 

[Lesh]

Sondland testified that there WAS a Quid Pro Quo.

He testified that Trump demanded it

He testified that not only Trump, but Pompeo, and Mulvaney , among others were intimately involved

Cooper testified that the Ukrainians knew the aid was held up prior to that phone call

She also testified that the DOD had certified that corruption in Ukraine was not an issue of any significance and that the aid should be released...months prior

Fiona Hill testified that part of what Trump was demanding from Ukraine...and has been spewing since...along with the GOP sycophants...was RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA

Virtually every defense of Trump has been shot down

 

[eagle1462010]

Sondland testified that there WAS a Quid Pro Quo.

He testified that Trump demanded it

He testified that not only Trump, but Pompeo, and Mulvaney , among others were intimately involved

Cooper testified that the Ukrainians knew the aid was held up prior to that phone call

She also testified that the DOD had certified that corruption in Ukraine was not an issue of any significance and that the aid should be released...months prior

Fiona Hill testified that part of what Trump was demanding from Ukraine...and has been spewing since...along with the GOP sycophants...was RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA

Virtually every defense of Trump has been shot down

 

[eagle1462010]

Presuming testimony



Go to minute 2.......and let that sink in

 

[MarathonMike]

Super. Then let's stretch the limits of the Constitution and the definition of 'hearsay' so that the minority Party will always just Impeach every sitting President from now on.

Hearsay evidence is admissible in impeachment hearing, grand juries, probate hearing, parole hearings, etc where there is no cross examination. The reason hearsay evidence is not admissible is that it is generally less reliable and it becomes impossible to cross examine a witness who gives hearsay evidence because the witness can not answer questions about evidence.

Congress is not a court. It’s a legislative body, and it’s not bound by the centuries of common law that built up around the admissibility of hearsay evidence. It will be interesting to see what hearsay evidence will be allowed in the a senate trial since rules of evidence and procedures are government by senate rules that are mostly based on precedent.

However, all this makes little difference since the Senate will vote along party lines as will the House which makes evidence irrelevant.

And if you support that, don't be crying when what comes around goes around. If the commies are able to get away with this, don't expect the Republicans for forgive and forget. Like the filibuster rule with judicial nominations, it will come back to haunt the Democrats, trust me.

Spoken like a true partisan. Of course republicans will seek retaliation against the next republican president just as democrats will seek retaliation. That's American politics today. The unstated goal of every political party is a one party state which just happens to be the goal of the communist party.

Well......the communist and Democrat party. That's why the Democrats became the anti-white party.

It's one thing for people in parties to try and change leadership. That's understandable. But this idiocy would make our founders turn over in their graves. They want to impeach a President over what "they think" he had in mind when he took certain actions, and brought witnesses who also "thought" what Trump had in mind.

The entire impeachment is about suppositions, interpretations, and assumptions, but no real facts. Nixon was a fact; hard core evidence. Clinton was a fact; DNA evidence and court testimony. There are no facts here, and certainly no impeachable offenses.

I think your GOP filter is obscuring the truth. What "he (Trump) had in mind" is critical to whether he was violating both the constitution and campaign election laws when he pressured the Ukraine to open an investigation of the Bidens or just sought to eliminate corruption in the Ukraine. If his intent was to discredit Joe Biden, he is violating the law and the constitution but if his intent is simply to cleanup corruption in the Ukraine, then the Senate should dismiss the applicable charges.

As explained in the Federalist Papers (I think the number is 65), high crimes and misdemeanors is essentially bad conduct, not necessarily a violation of the law. If you look back at previous impeachments you will see articles charging violation of oath of office, improper use of executive powers, behavior unbecoming the office, immoral behavior, drunkenness, etc.

It has become customary that in impeachments today, there be at least one charge of violation of the law but that has not always been the case. You see, our forefathers believed that public officials must be held to much higher standards than the public. Just being a law abiding citizens was not enough. They expected public officials to be of high character. For example in Articles of Impeachment of Andrew Johnson it was claimed that he spoke with a loud voice, certain intemperate, inflammatory and scandalous harangues before congress.

Our forefathers would roll over in their graves if they saw who we were electing today.

Really? So 'High Crimes and Misdemeanors' means essentially bad personal conduct? I see, so since the "Trump going after a political opponent' spin is blowing up in their faces, they can still Impeach him for saying "grab her by the pussy" in a private conversation. Is that it? Or maybe they will call Stormy Daniels as a surprise witness. Nothing the Democrats do at this point would surprise me.

 

[RealDave]

No quid pro quo.

All bullshit.

Win at the polls, lefty losers.

Such pathetic losers.

Trump openly admitted to doing precisely that.
Multiple witnesses said he did precisely that, as well.

But Ukraine president said he didn't....You fucks just can't handle the truth!

it means nothing that Zelenskyy claimed publicly that there was no quid pro quo on the part of Trump. It only means that it would be unwise for the Ukrainian president to criticize the U.S. president.

There was no quid pro quo. Your hatred for the President is noted.

Quid Pro Quo has been admitted . Your hatred for our Constitution is noted.

 

[The Purge]

No quid pro quo.

All bullshit.

Win at the polls, lefty losers.

Such pathetic losers.

Trump openly admitted to doing precisely that.
Multiple witnesses said he did precisely that, as well.

But Ukraine president said he didn't....You fucks just can't handle the truth!

it means nothing that Zelenskyy claimed publicly that there was no quid pro quo on the part of Trump. It only means that it would be unwise for the Ukrainian president to criticize the U.S. president.

There was no quid pro quo. Your hatred for the President is noted.

Quid Pro Quo has been admitted . Your hatred for our Constitution is noted.

Yes Biden admitted it and on video tape!....Did you knoe... silly question as you know nothing...
Next to go?

Adam Schiff-Ukraine connection comes under scrutiny

 

[RealDave]

Trump openly admitted to doing precisely that.
Multiple witnesses said he did precisely that, as well.

But Ukraine president said he didn't....You fucks just can't handle the truth!

it means nothing that Zelenskyy claimed publicly that there was no quid pro quo on the part of Trump. It only means that it would be unwise for the Ukrainian president to criticize the U.S. president.

There was no quid pro quo. Your hatred for the President is noted.

Quid Pro Quo has been admitted . Your hatred for our Constitution is noted.

Yes Biden admitted it and on video tape!....Did you knoe... silly question as you know nothing...
Next to go?

Adam Schiff-Ukraine connection comes under scrutiny

Woody, are you really this fucking stupid?

Biden was a acting for our country.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No quid pro quo.

All bullshit.

Win at the polls, lefty losers.

Such pathetic losers.

Trump openly admitted to doing precisely that.
Multiple witnesses said he did precisely that, as well.

But Ukraine president said he didn't....You fucks just can't handle the truth!

it means nothing that Zelenskyy claimed publicly that there was no quid pro quo on the part of Trump. It only means that it would be unwise for the Ukrainian president to criticize the U.S. president.

There was no quid pro quo. Your hatred for the President is noted.

Quid Pro Quo has been admitted . Your hatred for our Constitution is noted.

Admitted by who?

 

[beagle9]

Trump openly admitted to doing precisely that.
Multiple witnesses said he did precisely that, as well.

But Ukraine president said he didn't....You fucks just can't handle the truth!

it means nothing that Zelenskyy claimed publicly that there was no quid pro quo on the part of Trump. It only means that it would be unwise for the Ukrainian president to criticize the U.S. president.

There was no quid pro quo. Your hatred for the President is noted.

Quid Pro Quo has been admitted . Your hatred for our Constitution is noted.

Admitted by who?

Joe Biden, with the actions committed that sealed the definition in real time.

 

[RealDave]

We don't know because it''s never been investigated. That's why Trump asked Zelensky to "look into it" as a favor. And if there is something that shows corruption, then Trump could have the IG look at that.

No, it's not bad if you ask a vendor to hire your nephew. But then again, you have no power to return the favor.

Or to gain favor by the vender who hired his nephew, uhhh ummmm ohhh wait one second here .. Can we say kick back in such situations maybe ? Conflict of interest maybe ???

If Biden's Son has done what you claim he has and Biden did what you claim he did, it was the job (and still is) of the Justice Department to investigate and bring charges to the both of them. It's not up to the President to try and blackmail another world leader to do his bidding for him. The problem here is, it WAS looked into by the Justice Department and no crime was found.

But if Barr will restart the investigation on the Bidens, he has my blessings. But, at the same time, he needs to to after the Rumpster Criminals that refuse the Congressional Subpoenas and have the US Marshals arrest and escort their sorry buts to the Congressional floor.

Sucks for the Dems that they cannot override the Executive Powers..............Equal Branches of the Gov't.............They DO NOT HAVE THAT AUTHORITY..............

If they say THEY DO...........then they must go to the Judicial Branch and Challenge it............You can cry .......scream...........and demand all you want...............it doesn't change a thing...........

In regards to election tampering and corruption in Ukraine.........Trump has every right to ask for cooperation with our DOJ for ongoing investigations.............It's NOT A CRIME to do so...............In regards to his lawyer..........it's his JOB to defend Trump......and finding information to defend him from this Endless attack by the Dems is a part of that Job......

One huge problem. Barr blindly supports anything Rump does and says. Barr isn't representing the United States of America. He's Rumps personal lawyer. So with that in mind, exactly who in the Judicial Branch should Congress take their grievance to? The Top Cop is corrupt as hell. Rump has seized control over about 3/5ths of the government. It should be 1/3rd but he's bot a lock on more like 2/3rds with his criminal Moscow Mitch at his Back. This looks very similar to Italy in 1933 that propelled Mussolini into absolute power. Obviously, Rump read the playbook leading up to the power grab in Italy by 1933. If I thought you had the capability to actually read history I would suggest some good reading for you. But you only listen to Rush and Hannity and the Extreme Right wing part of Fox along with some conspiracy sites.

One huge problem, the DOJ did not have an open case looking into the Bidens. If they had, it would have been unwise but not illegal. And even Barr wouldn't touch that hot potato. But would it have been found to be illegal? Probably not. Just damaging but not any worse than Rump on any given Tuesday. But Rump doing it back channel trying to blackmail another head of state to announce they are starting an investigation into the Bidens when Biden was beating him in the polls by refusing funds that were already authorized to go to Ukraine and dangling a face to face meeting to help Ukraine with it's face problem with Russia is downright criminal. And don't give me that crap that he didn't do any of it. Everyone from the dog catcher to the lead Diplomat was aware of it after certain date. But even a Professional Diplomat can only take so much corruption before they say enough. And that is pretty well what has happened.

Long winded Lie bro.....

Biden didn't go to Ukraine to save it from Russia...........Apple Pie...........and the American way.........He did it to take advantage of the Chaos.......He takes his son on Air Force 2 to the Ukraine while thousands are dying from the Ruskies..........And a week later his son is WOW on the Board of the Largest Gas Producer in the Ukraine.............

If your concern is for the Ukraine with Russia on their door step back then.........Then Biden should have been there to meet with Ukraine military officials to discuss WHAT THEY NEED to PROTECT THEMSELVES...........

Like Lethal aid.............the ability to kill Russian armor.......aka tanks...........Did Joe and Obama do that........they gave a bunch of NON MILITARY AID.............but didn't give Ukraine weapons to stop the Russians on the battlefield...........

Biden CASHED in on his position during a time of Crisis and Chaos..............for his son.......Ray Charles can see that.

Trump on the other hand gave Ukraine Lethal weapons to help them KILL RUSSIANS if need be.........Why didn't that happen when Obama was in power..........hmmmm..........As thousands of Ukrainians were dying......

The DOJ has been looking at 2016 election meddling for years now, but have ignored the DNC's role in this and the courts of Ukraine in this.............Because it has been a Partisan Investigation that ignores the other sides dealings from the Deep State............who are attempting a COUP on Trump.

I'll use what the Dems have been using for years..............IF BIDEN is innocent...........then he should want this investigated to CLEAR HIS NAME.............If he did no crime .............Then he should WELCOME BEING INVESTIGATED.............

The Biden's will not be taken down..............Graham calling for an investigation will in the end do NOTHING.........It's a Show.............Biden and Graham are friends......and behind closed doors laugh about it and rehearse the next SHOW to cover their butts from all the corruption they have done as career politicains.

Career politicians from both parties...........keep the people at each other so they don't come after them for their corruption..............It's a designed strategy

Jesus fuck you people are dumnber than shit.

How often has Ivanka or Jared ride on AF1? When Trump was dealing with China, both Donnie & Ivanka were getting copyrights for their businesses.

That is corruption.

Joe Biden acted along with other countries to remove a prosecutor. (there was no active barisma investigation at that time)

Hunter Biden was never being investigated.

You God damn stupid fucks need to start caring more about Amerca than that Conman you elected President.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Hearsay evidence is admissible in impeachment hearing, grand juries, probate hearing, parole hearings, etc where there is no cross examination. The reason hearsay evidence is not admissible is that it is generally less reliable and it becomes impossible to cross examine a witness who gives hearsay evidence because the witness can not answer questions about evidence.

Congress is not a court. It’s a legislative body, and it’s not bound by the centuries of common law that built up around the admissibility of hearsay evidence. It will be interesting to see what hearsay evidence will be allowed in the a senate trial since rules of evidence and procedures are government by senate rules that are mostly based on precedent.

However, all this makes little difference since the Senate will vote along party lines as will the House which makes evidence irrelevant.

And if you support that, don't be crying when what comes around goes around. If the commies are able to get away with this, don't expect the Republicans for forgive and forget. Like the filibuster rule with judicial nominations, it will come back to haunt the Democrats, trust me.

Spoken like a true partisan. Of course republicans will seek retaliation against the next republican president just as democrats will seek retaliation. That's American politics today. The unstated goal of every political party is a one party state which just happens to be the goal of the communist party.

Well......the communist and Democrat party. That's why the Democrats became the anti-white party.

It's one thing for people in parties to try and change leadership. That's understandable. But this idiocy would make our founders turn over in their graves. They want to impeach a President over what "they think" he had in mind when he took certain actions, and brought witnesses who also "thought" what Trump had in mind.

The entire impeachment is about suppositions, interpretations, and assumptions, but no real facts. Nixon was a fact; hard core evidence. Clinton was a fact; DNA evidence and court testimony. There are no facts here, and certainly no impeachable offenses.

I think your GOP filter is obscuring the truth. What "he (Trump) had in mind" is critical to whether he was violating both the constitution and campaign election laws when he pressured the Ukraine to open an investigation of the Bidens or just sought to eliminate corruption in the Ukraine. If his intent was to discredit Joe Biden, he is violating the law and the constitution but if his intent is simply to cleanup corruption in the Ukraine, then the Senate should dismiss the applicable charges.

As explained in the Federalist Papers (I think the number is 65), high crimes and misdemeanors is essentially bad conduct, not necessarily a violation of the law. If you look back at previous impeachments you will see articles charging violation of oath of office, improper use of executive powers, behavior unbecoming the office, immoral behavior, drunkenness, etc.

It has become customary that in impeachments today, there be at least one charge of violation of the law but that has not always been the case. You see, our forefathers believed that public officials must be held to much higher standards than the public. Just being a law abiding citizens was not enough. They expected public officials to be of high character. For example in Articles of Impeachment of Andrew Johnson it was claimed that he spoke with a loud voice, certain intemperate, inflammatory and scandalous harangues before congress.

Our forefathers would roll over in their graves if they saw who we were electing today.

Really? So 'High Crimes and Misdemeanors' means essentially bad personal conduct? I see, so since the "Trump going after a political opponent' spin is blowing up in their faces, they can still Impeach him for saying "grab her by the pussy" in a private conversation. Is that it? Or maybe they will call Stormy Daniels as a surprise witness. Nothing the Democrats do at this point would surprise me.

If Democrats want to set that precedent, then as I said, I don't want to hear the left complaining when our people are in charge and using the same standards. If they want to cut off their nose to spite their face, it only goes to show us how desperate they are for power.