Official Impeachment Thread 2.0: House Judiciary Committee Hearings

[Crixus]

Watching a recorded version of the hearing and Bucks line of questioning. He asked Turley if the other three panelists would consider a list of other acts that other presidents did as an abuse of power under the same standards they are holding on Trump. The other three panelists were siting right there but instead of questioning them he just went off on his own rant pushing his narrative and using Turley as a nodding bobble head .... that was the most pathetic line of questioning I’ve seen yet.

the questions were actually good but he was too scared to actually question the people sitting right in front of him. #Weak

Pathetic, wasn't it? Turley was visibly uncomfortable. Sadly, he didn't find it in himself to retort, "With all due respect, Congressman, my esteemed colleagues are sitting right here, right next to me. So, if you want to hear their opinion on the matters you inquired, why not ask them? I'd also be interested in hearing them out."

Well, just as pathetic was the Democrats' determined effort to ignore Turley. Apparently there was just one with the guts to take him on, at least so far. In my view, they are doing this hearing a great disservice. Personally, I find Turley thoroughly disingenuous in his arguments, and would have loved to see them picked apart. So, they chose to let stand, basically unopposed, the charge there's a thin basis for impeachment, which would be further marred by lack of evidence. Disconcerting, that.

i agree... I don’t like the 3 on 1 and I don’t like how each side is using the witnesses to push their agenda instead of challenging them with questions and good debate.

I would love to see Turley and the guy on the left end have a sit down debate/discussion about it. Get these soapbox politicians out of the way.

You mean the guy on the left who said trump should be impeached for a naughty tweet? You missed Turlys point all along and not just for today. His point is t that trump is awesome. Matter of fact, Turly ain't even a trump guy. He was correct in saying that this is nothing but people who are mad being mad, and that impeaching a presidant because he is a poopy face is not a good idea, even though it's doable. This should worry the hell out of you, and it would if you could see past the TDS. Look, one day a democrat will be presidant. That's a fact. One day the republicans will have a house full of crazy fuckers equivelant to AOC and her squad. What will you say when they impeach that presidant?

 

[WEATHER53]

The liberal prove you are not a witch monkey dung fling is wrapping up. Next is an entity that can punch back-the senate.
. I doubt these queer fears want it to go there as they might get a boo boo on their emotion driven smear efforts.

 

[Persistence Of Memory]

Thread intermission

Hillary Clinton has coughing fit during Howard Stern interview

 

[WEATHER53]

Oops....the credibility of all of the Democrats' self-professed Constitutional Scholar witnesses was just burnt to the ground:

White House, GOP cite evidence of Democrat law prof witnesses’ past anti-Trump bias



Another Frustrating 'Scream At The Sky' Moment for Democrats / Snowflakes.....

...poor snowflakes.

.

The only thing they showed as "witnesses" is how much they hate Trump.

There has been only one witness out of the dozen emoters that were brought forth.

 

[hadit]

Turly pretty much said it. One day a democrat will be presidant. That and all this is is a butthurt because trump won.

Guaranteed that the democrat will face this kind of attack. If they are successful in getting rid of Trump, it'll be open session.

And like I said if no impeachment trump can do even more harm to America without fear You'd call him KING

I don't recall seeing you at the last mind reader's convention. I think your foil helmet is on too tight, because your read is way off.

 

[BULLDOG]

The ranking member is yelling as much as an ex-wife. He seems to be just as reasonable too.

I'm a little upset at Nadlers Kangaroo Court myself.

Lots of Trump supporters are upset. You think Trump is above the law.

Not a Trump supporter.

But if you think Nadler, or the group to his left, is being fair, you're more partisan than I considered possible.

Since when are you not a Trump supporter? You argue in support of that orange fool and against his opponents every day.

 

[Slade3200]

you are ahead of the curve... that is the argument that all the Trumpsters will eventually get to. Validating the Biden investigation is what it’s all going to boil down to..

Why shouldn't Biden be investigated? He did after all, violate his oath of office and probably several laws as well.

I disagree. There is no evidence of any crime and the accusations that Trump is now leveling years later are obviously political in nature.

Biden violated the UN charter by meddling in the internal political affairs of another country, there is a reason to investigate that.

.

you're stretching... nice try though

No stretch, a fact. Oh and the old, just following orders defense won't cut it.

.

Did you know the IMF made the same threat?

 

[Slade3200]

I’m answering all your questions. The witnesses are not being accused of anything. They are there to give legal analysis

They were accused, and convicted of, being leftist political hacks.............by using their own words against them.

So? What does their political bias have to do with their legal opinions?

The woman says she has to walk to the other side of the street when going past Trump Tower. Does this sound like someone who is all there?

again with the character assassination crap... who cares?! she obviously hates Trump. Are you saying that the analysis of people with bias should not be considered?

Hers? Yes.

Next?

Why, because she’s bias?

 

[Slade3200]

I disagree with all that. This isn’t a court of law, it’s a political process to fire the president. They need to convince enough congressmen to vote for it and hope that public opinion is what pushed them to do so. It pretty obvious what Trump was doing in my eyes.

that said o think impeachment t is a horrible idea and I do think it wins trump reelection. If the stop it now then Biden still wins

Biden was never going to win.

.

I disagree

He's already cutting staff and running out of money, the writing is on the wall.

.

Nice try. He is the front runner, who do you think you’re fooling?

You might want to check his numbers in the early States, he's down in some, slipping in others. National polls are irrelevant at this point.

.

I’m not worried about the early stats. It’s all about Super Tuesday

 

[Slade3200]

I disagree. There is no evidence of any crime and the accusations that Trump is now leveling years later are obviously political in nature.

Joe Biden admitted on video that he committed quid pro quo, where were you when that happened? He got a Ukrainian prosecutor fired because he wouldn't back off of an investigation that was entangling Biden's son. Hunter Biden is now in deep shit, as some in Ukraine are saying he stole millions of dollars of their money, and they want it back.

We also have an Obama-era treaty with Ukraine, to root out corruption there, so it's not looking very good for the Bidens right now.

ThereS nothing illegal about what Biden did. Quid pro quo isn’t illegal when used in national diplomacy. Did you not know that?

It is when you go rogue and use it to stop an investigation into your son.

Oops!

Yes that would be illegal. But that’s not what happened. It wasn’t a rogue act, it was national policy. You’re just making the rogue thing up

Biden went rogue. Why hasn't Obama come forward to say he was acting on his behalf?

Hmmmm.....

Because it’s common knowledge and neither Obama or Biden are making public comments on it because that’s the trap republicans are trying to set. They want engagement on this but it’s a non issue and Biden/Obama don’t want to put any fuel on that distraction

 

[MarathonMike]

The Impeachment Provision is vague enough that you can get Constitutional "Scholars" to argue either side. What should be clear is the intent of the provision. If you want to believe a phone call about investigating corruption warrants Impeachment and removal, then go ahead and believe that.

Simple minded answer by this guy that distorts the facts.
The majority of Constitutional scholars agree the actions deserve impeachment on multiple grounds.
The best the Republicans could come up for a Constitutional scholar who felt the process is moving to fast. The potential for impeachment is there. According to his recommendations you must hear from Mulvaney, Pompeo and others.
To meet the Republican objections bring in Pompeo, Mulvaney and others. Put them under oath and get the final details that the Republican legal scholar admits could result in impeachment

Just like the Russian Collusion fiasco, the Impeachment fiasco has been a manufactured crisis and a colossal waste of time, money and bandwidth. The Democrats don't even know the damage they've caused by their blind lust for power. They are pathetic.

 

[Slade3200]

ThereS nothing illegal about what Biden did. Quid pro quo isn’t illegal when used in national diplomacy. Did you not know that?

What Joe Biden did is called "bribery" and yes, that is a crime. And unlike Trump, there is evidence of it.

No it’s not a crime when used in diplomacy. Nobody in congress or the executive objected to how Biden handled affairs with Ukraine because it was in line with our national policy. Trump on the other hand made move against what the set policy was

Bullshit. Nothing in our national policy said Ukraine needed to fire Shokin

It absolutely was. Not only our national policy but that of many country’s in the EU. You need to education yourself. Ron Johnson even signed a letter calling for reforms to Shokins office.

Ron Johnson and the EU sets our "National policy"?

Link?

Ron Johnson’s letter shows the will of those members of our congress. Do you think they were trying to cover for Hunter Biden with that letter? Why do you think they wrote it?

 

[Slade3200]

ThereS nothing illegal about what Biden did. Quid pro quo isn’t illegal when used in national diplomacy. Did you not know that?

What Joe Biden did is called "bribery" and yes, that is a crime. And unlike Trump, there is evidence of it.

No it’s not a crime when used in diplomacy. Nobody in congress or the executive objected to how Biden handled affairs with Ukraine because it was in line with our national policy. Trump on the other hand made move against what the set policy was

Bullshit. Nothing in our national policy said Ukraine needed to fire Shokin

It absolutely was. Not only our national policy but that of many country’s in the EU. You need to education yourself. Ron Johnson even signed a letter calling for reforms to Shokins office.

Ron Johnson and the EU sets our "National policy"?

Link?

Yovanovitch Says Biden's Push to Oust Ukraine Prosecutor Was U.S. Policy

 

[edward37]

The ranking member is yelling as much as an ex-wife. He seems to be just as reasonable too.

I'm a little upset at Nadlers Kangaroo Court myself.

Lots of Trump supporters are upset. You think Trump is above the law.

Not a Trump supporter.

But if you think Nadler, or the group to his left, is being fair, you're more partisan than I considered possible.

Since when are you not a Trump supporter? You argue in support of that orange fool and against his opponents every day.

oh he's a trump supporter,,,,,,,,,say's he didn't vote for him,,,,maybe true but bet he never voted dem in his lifetime ,,,,a true repub

 

[Slade3200]

No it’s not a crime when used in diplomacy. Nobody in congress or the executive objected to how Biden handled affairs with Ukraine because it was in line with our national policy. Trump on the other hand made move against what the set policy was

Bullshit. Nothing in our national policy said Ukraine needed to fire Shokin

It absolutely was. Not only our national policy but that of many country’s in the EU. You need to education yourself. Ron Johnson even signed a letter calling for reforms to Shokins office.

Post some evidence. I've never seen a single one of you douchebags do that.

Here’s a piece... now you do the rest and see how the rest of the world wanted the same thing...
3 GOP senators called for Ukrainian government reform in 2016 letter

Nowhere is Shokin's name mentioned.

What was mentioned in the letter? What was the purpose? Do I really need to walk you through 2+2?! You can’t be that dumb

 

[Slade3200]

agreed... that’s not what Biden did but it is what Trump is being accused of. Glad you recognize that as a crime

That is exactly what Biden did.

No that’s not at all what Biden did.

had Biden leveraged the loan in order to drop the Burisma case then it would be on par with what Trump did and I’d agree that would be a criminal act

But that's exactly what he did: Fire the prosecutor investigating the Burisma case, or you're not getting the one billion dollars.

And son of a bitch, they fired the prosecutor.

You are making that up. Biden didn’t get sokin fired because he was investigating Burisma. That investigation wasn’t even active. He got him fired because it was a source of corruption in Ukraine and it was our countries policy and that of our allies to seek reforms in his office.

Link to this "USA policy"?

Yovanovitch Says Biden's Push to Oust Ukraine Prosecutor Was U.S. Policy

 

[JGalt]

What Joe Biden did is called "bribery" and yes, that is a crime. And unlike Trump, there is evidence of it.

No it’s not a crime when used in diplomacy. Nobody in congress or the executive objected to how Biden handled affairs with Ukraine because it was in line with our national policy. Trump on the other hand made move against what the set policy was

Bullshit. Nothing in our national policy said Ukraine needed to fire Shokin

It absolutely was. Not only our national policy but that of many country’s in the EU. You need to education yourself. Ron Johnson even signed a letter calling for reforms to Shokins office.

Ron Johnson and the EU sets our "National policy"?

Link?

Yovanovitch Says Biden's Push to Oust Ukraine Prosecutor Was U.S. Policy

Great!! Since it's the President who sets US policy, that drags Obama kicking and screaming into the mess. Dis gunna be good.

 

[Slade3200]

agreed... that’s not what Biden did but it is what Trump is being accused of. Glad you recognize that as a crime

That is exactly what Biden did.

No that’s not at all what Biden did.

had Biden leveraged the loan in order to drop the Burisma case then it would be on par with what Trump did and I’d agree that would be a criminal act

But that's exactly what he did: Fire the prosecutor investigating the Burisma case, or you're not getting the one billion dollars.

And son of a bitch, they fired the prosecutor.

You are making that up. Biden didn’t get sokin fired because he was investigating Burisma. That investigation wasn’t even active. He got him fired because it was a source of corruption in Ukraine and it was our countries policy and that of our allies to seek reforms in his office.

We've heard this cover story a thousands times. Where is the proof that the US or our allies wanted him fired? No one has ever posted it.

Here you go you dunce. WSJ article from 2016 before all this Trump drama started.... It was a known position of our country and our allies
——-
The United States and other Western nations had for months called for the ousting of Mr. Shokin, who was widely criticized for turning a blind eye to corrupt practices and for defending the interests of a venal and entrenched elite. He was one of several political figures in Kiev whom reformers and Western diplomats saw as a worrying indicator of a return to past corrupt practices, two years after a revolution that was supposed to put a stop to self-dealing by those in power.

Ukraine Ousts Viktor Shokin, Top Prosecutor, and Political Stability Hangs in the Balance

 

[Nostra]

Joe Biden admitted on video that he committed quid pro quo, where were you when that happened? He got a Ukrainian prosecutor fired because he wouldn't back off of an investigation that was entangling Biden's son. Hunter Biden is now in deep shit, as some in Ukraine are saying he stole millions of dollars of their money, and they want it back.

We also have an Obama-era treaty with Ukraine, to root out corruption there, so it's not looking very good for the Bidens right now.

ThereS nothing illegal about what Biden did. Quid pro quo isn’t illegal when used in national diplomacy. Did you not know that?

It is when you go rogue and use it to stop an investigation into your son.

Oops!

Yes that would be illegal. But that’s not what happened. It wasn’t a rogue act, it was national policy. You’re just making the rogue thing up

Biden went rogue. Why hasn't Obama come forward to say he was acting on his behalf?

Hmmmm.....

Because it’s common knowledge and neither Obama or Biden are making public comments on it because that’s the trap republicans are trying to set. They want engagement on this but it’s a non issue and Biden/Obama don’t want to put any fuel on that distraction

Quid Pro Joe is making all kinds of public comments. He claims Obama told him to do it.

Where is Obama?

Hmmmmmm....

 

[Slade3200]

Watching a recorded version of the hearing and Bucks line of questioning. He asked Turley if the other three panelists would consider a list of other acts that other presidents did as an abuse of power under the same standards they are holding on Trump. The other three panelists were siting right there but instead of questioning them he just went off on his own rant pushing his narrative and using Turley as a nodding bobble head .... that was the most pathetic line of questioning I’ve seen yet.

the questions were actually good but he was too scared to actually question the people sitting right in front of him. #Weak

Pathetic, wasn't it? Turley was visibly uncomfortable. Sadly, he didn't find it in himself to retort, "With all due respect, Congressman, my esteemed colleagues are sitting right here, right next to me. So, if you want to hear their opinion on the matters you inquired, why not ask them? I'd also be interested in hearing them out."

Well, just as pathetic was the Democrats' determined effort to ignore Turley. Apparently there was just one with the guts to take him on, at least so far. In my view, they are doing this hearing a great disservice. Personally, I find Turley thoroughly disingenuous in his arguments, and would have loved to see them picked apart. So, they chose to let stand, basically unopposed, the charge there's a thin basis for impeachment, which would be further marred by lack of evidence. Disconcerting, that.

i agree... I don’t like the 3 on 1 and I don’t like how each side is using the witnesses to push their agenda instead of challenging them with questions and good debate.

I would love to see Turley and the guy on the left end have a sit down debate/discussion about it. Get these soapbox politicians out of the way.

You mean the guy on the left who said trump should be impeached for a naughty tweet? You missed Turlys point all along and not just for today. His point is t that trump is awesome. Matter of fact, Turly ain't even a trump guy. He was correct in saying that this is nothing but people who are mad being mad, and that impeaching a presidant because he is a poopy face is not a good idea, even though it's doable. This should worry the hell out of you, and it would if you could see past the TDS. Look, one day a democrat will be presidant. That's a fact. One day the republicans will have a house full of crazy fuckers equivelant to AOC and her squad. What will you say when they impeach that presidant?

I agree with Turley and think impeachment is a horrible idea... his points were not missed by this guy. I thought he was a good witness.