Opinion: Adam Schiff’s Impeachment Report Exonerates President Trump

[ThisIsMe]

Yeah sure, Trumpybear didn't specifically tell anyone that has testified so far that he planned to use the phony headlines he was creating against Joe and the Democrat so I guess his coercion, bribery, blackmail or extortion plot was just for fun and he should continue to lead the Country.

Or not.

Do you believe that if the house says " I think this is the reason he did this, or I have a feeling this is the reason he did this, we should impeach him" is a viable reason to impeach? If so, oh my, I hate to see the future, because we can just start impeachments on every president for perceived wrongdoing.

After his phone call he wanted them to open an investigation into the Bidens. He said it himself. That's was political corruption clear as day.

So, if Biden was involved with some foul play, and trump had gained intelligence of that, you think he would be wrong to have it looked into?

Perhaps you are correct, maybe trump shouldnt have been the one to make this request, due to it looking bad, but anyone else in his cabinet who would have made such a request would eventually just lead right back to trump, as it's his administration.

Ok, to me, if it is proven that trump made these requests for the purpose of helping him win the election, then you are 100% right, he should be removed.

If he really had information that would lead him to believe biden had his hand in some corrupt business, then I'd say you would have a hard time arguing he did anything wrong. This is why I'm saying intent here is important.

 

[basquebromance]

If there was one ill the Founding Founders feared as much as that of an unfit president, it may have been that of excessive factionalism. Although the Framers viewed parties as necessary, they also endeavored to structure the new government in such a way as to minimize the “violence of faction.” As George Washington warned in his farewell address, “the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.”

Today, we may be witnessing a collision between the power of a remedy meant to curb presidential misconduct and the power of faction determined to defend against the use of that remedy on a president of the same party. But perhaps even more corrosive to our democratic system of governance, Trump and his allies are making a comprehensive attack on the very idea of fact and truth. How can a democracy survive without acceptance of a common set of experiences?

 

[ThisIsMe]

The "personal gain" angle was started by left wing media based on their theories of why he did it. There was never any actual indication he was looking for help with the election.

I think the changing of the specific words they dictated to the Ukraine President that he must include are documented in an e-mail chain. He was going to give a broad speech about fighting corruption but Trump insisted on including the specific mentioning of Biden and the DNC server/Crowdstrike as targets of the investigation.

Yeah, I can see where one would think that is the smoking gun. One could say that he was simply wanting zelensky to announce an investigation in order to rattle biden. Sure, I can see that. I can also see that one way to see all of the moving parts is to give them a little boost. Make the announcement, and then watch what happens and see what shakes out.

You could be right, but, what in saying is, the road were going down, to me, requires more than a "could be".

 

[bripat9643]

The "personal gain" angle was started by left wing media based on their theories of why he did it. There was never any actual indication he was looking for help with the election.

I think the changing of the specific words they dictated to the Ukraine President that he must include are documented in an e-mail chain. He was going to give a broad speech about fighting corruption but Trump insisted on including the specific mentioning of Biden and the DNC server/Crowdstrike as targets of the investigation.

He did? Where's the evidence for that?

 

[lantern2814]

Thus you are triggered as you have to jump in and whine anytime Trump is mentioned. By the way that sound you hear is us laughing at your pathetic attempt at spin.

Why would I care if someone that worships another human being is laughing at me?

All you Trump worshipers think people care what you think. It must be part of the mindset of being a worshiper.

Well asshole, I don't worship any human being (except my wife)/ Highlighting your triggered snowflake TDS does not amount to worship/ See, NOBODY cares what a lying leftist like you thinks. You don't care, yet you jump in at every opportunity. The very definition of a triggered snowflake.

 

[lantern2814]

Thus you are triggered as you have to jump in and whine anytime Trump is mentioned. By the way that sound you hear is us laughing at your pathetic attempt at spin.

Why would I care if someone that worships another human being is laughing at me?

All you Trump worshipers think people care what you think. It must be part of the mindset of being a worshiper.

Well asshole, I don't worship any human being (except my wife)/ Highlighting your triggered snowflake TDS does not amount to worship/ See, NOBODY cares what a lying leftist like you thinks. You don't care, yet you jump in at every opportunity. The very definition of a triggered snowflake.

And Gator instantly proves my point. Congratulations numbskull, you just got punked again.

 

[iceberg]

Adam Schiff’s Impeachment Report Exonerates President Trump.

this paragraph stuck out:
Every fact in the Democrats’ case has been contested—starting with whether or not Trump demanded a quid pro quo from Ukraine. But the most obvious example of Democrats presuming, not proving, the necessary facts is their complete failure to demonstrate Trump had “corrupt” intent. Democrats assert—without evidence—that President Trump’s motivation in seeking investigations of Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election and Burisma was his own personal political interests.
----
and it's 100% true. the left dove on this like a duck on a junebug and *assumed* it was because it was for trumps own political gain. yet none of that has been proven.

just "assumed".

if he is truly looking into corruption and the activities of the left 2 things would happen:
1. he would make that phone call
2. the left, if corrupt, would go apeshit to discredit anything he was doing.

looks like both happened.

as the left loves to tell trump, if you've nothing to hide, let it all out for us to see. yet, where are they when it comes to looking into what THEY have done over the last decade? throwing up FAKE NEWS, just ignoring you, accusing the right of what they are being looked into doing and so forth.

if the left has done nothing wrong, what's wrong with trump having the complaints from the ukraine looked into? i mean, they didn't do it so nothing would be found, right? a lot like the mueller reports...

yet, here we are. no laws have been broken and there is zero proof trump did it for political gain vs. following up and doing his job.

it's also funny to me that somehow during all this IMPEACH 45 activity for the phone call, obstruction in 2016 is coming up as a top reason for said impeachment. like a streaker at halftime this came out of nowhere to take center stage.

Schiff exonerated President trump? In your dreams! I am pretty sure he chairman of the committee that investigated heard testimony and sent the impeachment issues to Judiciary committee for narrowing down the actual charges to those he thought most easily proved.

And exactly what are those and how will they prove his intent?

Put emotions dow.

Not an emotional response. Just evaluating the validity of the premise that Schiff exonerated the President. My unemotional opinion is that Schiff would not have sent it to Judicial for consideration if he thought the president was exonerated by the testimony before committee.

Yet when asked you can't name laws broken or real prove "issues".

I rest my case.

Your giving it a rest is a good thing. I doubt we will see any opinions pro or con from the USMB in future hearings. This is all going to work out. I may or may not be satisfied, but I can live with.

And still nothing specific about what he did wrong.

 

[busybee01]

Schiff and Biden should be happy to testify in the Senate

it's also funny to me that somehow during all this IMPEACH 45 activity for the phone call, obstruction in 2016 is coming up as a top reason for said impeachment. like a streaker at halftime this came out of nowhere to take center stage.

That is almost as funny as spending 3 years looking for criminal financial dealings and all you can find is lying about a blow job.

would be hilarious if i said i supported clinton being impeached, huh?

i think all we do anymore is investigate whether a reason is needed or not. yes i believe crimes have occurred but no i don't think anyone will ever pay for them. the scariest part of that scenario is where do we go from here? punish one side the other is going to cry FOUL and return the favor, as we've been doing more or less SINCE clinton.

i think all this trump bullshit is in fact, bullshit. i don't base this on past behaviors or actions but on it's own "merit" (using the term loosely to be sure).

so - if we just look at trump and this article, does it have merit? did the dems prove intent? does intent even matter in something like this?

my real question comes to - as i said - where do we go from here? is it really what anyone wants OVERALL or just immediate gratification and an emotional rescue. i'm going to stop as i got 2 70s classic song titles snuck into that sentence and i'm going to call it a day.

Is intent necessary?

Going buy the answer from Lindsey Graham above, it seems that all that is necessary is getting enough votes. Is intent necessary for something to be "clearly out of bounds in your role"?

Not sure what happens next...irregardless of if they impeach him or not. Obviously the Senate will not convict him. I said at the beginning of this that if Trump were impeached it would change the country forever and no president would ever finish a term unscathed.

But Trump is such an outlier, that I am not sure what happens next.

I think much of that will depend on Nov. If they impeach him and he loses in Nov or he squeaks out a win and the Dems take back the Senate while holding the House then this might become the norm.

But if the Dems are blown out come Nov, lose the House and Trump wins by a larger margin (which would be very hard not to) then perhaps future parties will go "well, that was a bad idea, lets not do that again".

What sane person would vote for a democrat at this point?’maybe tulsi? But all these new democrat candidates for Congress should have to answer tough questions! On environment, (crazy green new deal) Open borders, men in the little girls locker room, infanticide... IF REPUBLICANS DONT RUN ON THESE ISSUES.. you deserve to lose republicans!

What sane voter would vote for a Republican. Republicans will need to explain why they want to allow companies to pollute the air and water and destroy wildlife habitats. Voters agree with Democrats on immigration and trying to tell women what to do with their bodies. IF REPUBLICANS RUN ON THESE ISSUES they will lose.

 

[francoHFW]

Adam Schiff’s Impeachment Report Exonerates President Trump.

this paragraph stuck out:
Every fact in the Democrats’ case has been contested—starting with whether or not Trump demanded a quid pro quo from Ukraine. But the most obvious example of Democrats presuming, not proving, the necessary facts is their complete failure to demonstrate Trump had “corrupt” intent. Democrats assert—without evidence—that President Trump’s motivation in seeking investigations of Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election and Burisma was his own personal political interests.
----
and it's 100% true. the left dove on this like a duck on a junebug and *assumed* it was because it was for trumps own political gain. yet none of that has been proven.

just "assumed".

if he is truly looking into corruption and the activities of the left 2 things would happen:
1. he would make that phone call
2. the left, if corrupt, would go apeshit to discredit anything he was doing.

looks like both happened.

as the left loves to tell trump, if you've nothing to hide, let it all out for us to see. yet, where are they when it comes to looking into what THEY have done over the last decade? throwing up FAKE NEWS, just ignoring you, accusing the right of what they are being looked into doing and so forth.

if the left has done nothing wrong, what's wrong with trump having the complaints from the ukraine looked into? i mean, they didn't do it so nothing would be found, right? a lot like the mueller reports...

yet, here we are. no laws have been broken and there is zero proof trump did it for political gain vs. following up and doing his job.

it's also funny to me that somehow during all this IMPEACH 45 activity for the phone call, obstruction in 2016 is coming up as a top reason for said impeachment. like a streaker at halftime this came out of nowhere to take center stage.

Too bad you don't get real news, super duper. All your talk about looking into it is total garbage propaganda. They know there's nothing there...

 

[busybee01]

Adam Schiff’s Impeachment Report Exonerates President Trump.

this paragraph stuck out:
Every fact in the Democrats’ case has been contested—starting with whether or not Trump demanded a quid pro quo from Ukraine. But the most obvious example of Democrats presuming, not proving, the necessary facts is their complete failure to demonstrate Trump had “corrupt” intent. Democrats assert—without evidence—that President Trump’s motivation in seeking investigations of Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election and Burisma was his own personal political interests.
----
and it's 100% true. the left dove on this like a duck on a junebug and *assumed* it was because it was for trumps own political gain. yet none of that has been proven.

just "assumed".

if he is truly looking into corruption and the activities of the left 2 things would happen:
1. he would make that phone call
2. the left, if corrupt, would go apeshit to discredit anything he was doing.

looks like both happened.

as the left loves to tell trump, if you've nothing to hide, let it all out for us to see. yet, where are they when it comes to looking into what THEY have done over the last decade? throwing up FAKE NEWS, just ignoring you, accusing the right of what they are being looked into doing and so forth.

if the left has done nothing wrong, what's wrong with trump having the complaints from the ukraine looked into? i mean, they didn't do it so nothing would be found, right? a lot like the mueller reports...

yet, here we are. no laws have been broken and there is zero proof trump did it for political gain vs. following up and doing his job.

it's also funny to me that somehow during all this IMPEACH 45 activity for the phone call, obstruction in 2016 is coming up as a top reason for said impeachment. like a streaker at halftime this came out of nowhere to take center stage.

Human Events is another right wing organization that has been corrupted by Trump. Trump has no right to demand investigations of a American with no valid reason. The DOJ has found no reason to open a investigation because there is no evidence of anything illegal. Conservatives I know do not believe Americans should be investigated when there is no cause.

There is all kinds of evidence moron. There's a video, and there's Hunter Biden's bank records.

There is no evidence. That is why the DOJ has not opened any investigation. There is nothing in Hunter Biden's records except that he sat on the board of directors at Burisma.

 

[Jitss617]

Schiff and Biden should be happy to testify in the Senate

it's also funny to me that somehow during all this IMPEACH 45 activity for the phone call, obstruction in 2016 is coming up as a top reason for said impeachment. like a streaker at halftime this came out of nowhere to take center stage.

That is almost as funny as spending 3 years looking for criminal financial dealings and all you can find is lying about a blow job.

would be hilarious if i said i supported clinton being impeached, huh?

i think all we do anymore is investigate whether a reason is needed or not. yes i believe crimes have occurred but no i don't think anyone will ever pay for them. the scariest part of that scenario is where do we go from here? punish one side the other is going to cry FOUL and return the favor, as we've been doing more or less SINCE clinton.

i think all this trump bullshit is in fact, bullshit. i don't base this on past behaviors or actions but on it's own "merit" (using the term loosely to be sure).

so - if we just look at trump and this article, does it have merit? did the dems prove intent? does intent even matter in something like this?

my real question comes to - as i said - where do we go from here? is it really what anyone wants OVERALL or just immediate gratification and an emotional rescue. i'm going to stop as i got 2 70s classic song titles snuck into that sentence and i'm going to call it a day.

Is intent necessary?

Going buy the answer from Lindsey Graham above, it seems that all that is necessary is getting enough votes. Is intent necessary for something to be "clearly out of bounds in your role"?

Not sure what happens next...irregardless of if they impeach him or not. Obviously the Senate will not convict him. I said at the beginning of this that if Trump were impeached it would change the country forever and no president would ever finish a term unscathed.

But Trump is such an outlier, that I am not sure what happens next.

I think much of that will depend on Nov. If they impeach him and he loses in Nov or he squeaks out a win and the Dems take back the Senate while holding the House then this might become the norm.

But if the Dems are blown out come Nov, lose the House and Trump wins by a larger margin (which would be very hard not to) then perhaps future parties will go "well, that was a bad idea, lets not do that again".

What sane person would vote for a democrat at this point?’maybe tulsi? But all these new democrat candidates for Congress should have to answer tough questions! On environment, (crazy green new deal) Open borders, men in the little girls locker room, infanticide... IF REPUBLICANS DONT RUN ON THESE ISSUES.. you deserve to lose republicans!

What sane voter would vote for a Republican. Republicans will need to explain why they want to allow companies to pollute the air and water and destroy wildlife habitats. Voters agree with Democrats on immigration and trying to tell women what to do with their bodies. IF REPUBLICANS RUN ON THESE ISSUES they will lose.

All production pollutes the air are you fucking retard.. you will never control us

 

[OKTexas]

Next you'll be saying Trump never even made the call. Repubs are not factually contesting any of the evidence of Trump's guilt. They are simply claiming the sky is not blue.

196 republicans and 2 dems contested the impeachment. There is no evidence to contest, the only fact witness said Trump told him that he wanted nothing from Ukraine. Assumptions, suppositions and conjecture aren't evidence.

Now we find the phone number shitt claimed to be to OMB, wasn't. You'd think the MSM would have called the number, but the WSJ is the only one that did and it didn't connect to the OMB. This is nothing but a pile of steaming dog shit.

Rep Chris Collins said it best, Nadler is going to have to make chicken salad from chicken schiff.

.

 

[bripat9643]

Adam Schiff’s Impeachment Report Exonerates President Trump.

this paragraph stuck out:
Every fact in the Democrats’ case has been contested—starting with whether or not Trump demanded a quid pro quo from Ukraine. But the most obvious example of Democrats presuming, not proving, the necessary facts is their complete failure to demonstrate Trump had “corrupt” intent. Democrats assert—without evidence—that President Trump’s motivation in seeking investigations of Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election and Burisma was his own personal political interests.
----
and it's 100% true. the left dove on this like a duck on a junebug and *assumed* it was because it was for trumps own political gain. yet none of that has been proven.

just "assumed".

if he is truly looking into corruption and the activities of the left 2 things would happen:
1. he would make that phone call
2. the left, if corrupt, would go apeshit to discredit anything he was doing.

looks like both happened.

as the left loves to tell trump, if you've nothing to hide, let it all out for us to see. yet, where are they when it comes to looking into what THEY have done over the last decade? throwing up FAKE NEWS, just ignoring you, accusing the right of what they are being looked into doing and so forth.

if the left has done nothing wrong, what's wrong with trump having the complaints from the ukraine looked into? i mean, they didn't do it so nothing would be found, right? a lot like the mueller reports...

yet, here we are. no laws have been broken and there is zero proof trump did it for political gain vs. following up and doing his job.

it's also funny to me that somehow during all this IMPEACH 45 activity for the phone call, obstruction in 2016 is coming up as a top reason for said impeachment. like a streaker at halftime this came out of nowhere to take center stage.

Human Events is another right wing organization that has been corrupted by Trump. Trump has no right to demand investigations of a American with no valid reason. The DOJ has found no reason to open a investigation because there is no evidence of anything illegal. Conservatives I know do not believe Americans should be investigated when there is no cause.

There is all kinds of evidence moron. There's a video, and there's Hunter Biden's bank records.

There is no evidence. That is why the DOJ has not opened any investigation. There is nothing in Hunter Biden's records except that he sat on the board of directors at Burisma.

I just listed two pieces of evidence, you fucking moron.