To impeach or not to impeach, that is the question

[TheProgressivePatriot]

It is rather humorous really. When this whole thing first popped up, Left-wingers were bouncing off the walls about how this is it... this is the impeachment. This is the where Trump will fall. It's all over. The game is up.
.... now months later.... "to impeach or not to impeach. That is the question".
Right.

Trump did not create the hatred and insanity of the left, he exposed it.

He created the hatred and insanity on the right though

 

[hadit]

There are some who argue that, if the circumstances and evidence warrants it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House to impeach the President.

That is true. If the situation calls for it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House of Representatives to impeach the President. However, according to our Constitution, Congress has many Constitutional duties and sometimes they conflict with one another.

That is the case here. The ultimate purpose of impeaching the President is his removal from office. Impeachment is merely an indictment against the President. The trial to determine his removal from office takes place in the Senate with the chief justice presiding.

Therein lies the problem. As matters stand now, the 67 votes needed to remove Trump from office simply won't happen.

Indeed, the very opposite is likely to happen. When the Senate exonerates Trump, the sympathy vote could easily propel Trump toward another four years in office.

In terms of the purpose of impeachment, the very opposite result could happen, and it is extremely likely, as matters stand now, that Trump would not be removed from office.

Congress has another Constitutional duty. Through its oversight responsibilities, Congress has the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed of the very bad judgments and the false statements of a very bad President to enable Americans to remove the very bad President from office in the next election.

In the opinion of many, including the leadership in the House, the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed has a higher calling than the Constitutional duty to impeach. Why? Because the former will achieve the desired result while the latter is likely to cause unwelcome, unintended consequences.

With all the evidence that has been presented imleaimpeac is now an inevitably.

Good luck. Russia collusion? Where did that go. Shitt took a shit. Only dim morons would believe anything that he represents.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WE don't need Russian collusion anymore . We have Ukraine and it is in the bag

What, giving up on it so soon? You spent years on it, it's only fair that you have to talk about it for at least that long.

 

[Butch_Coolidge]

There are some who argue that, if the circumstances and evidence warrants it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House to impeach the President.

That is true. If the situation calls for it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House of Representatives to impeach the President. However, according to our Constitution, Congress has many Constitutional duties and sometimes they conflict with one another.

That is the case here. The ultimate purpose of impeaching the President is his removal from office. Impeachment is merely an indictment against the President. The trial to determine his removal from office takes place in the Senate with the chief justice presiding.

Therein lies the problem. As matters stand now, the 67 votes needed to remove Trump from office simply won't happen.

Indeed, the very opposite is likely to happen. When the Senate exonerates Trump, the sympathy vote could easily propel Trump toward another four years in office.

In terms of the purpose of impeachment, the very opposite result could happen, and it is extremely likely, as matters stand now, that Trump would not be removed from office.

Congress has another Constitutional duty. Through its oversight responsibilities, Congress has the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed of the very bad judgments and the false statements of a very bad President to enable Americans to remove the very bad President from office in the next election.

In the opinion of many, including the leadership in the House, the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed has a higher calling than the Constitutional duty to impeach. Why? Because the former will achieve the desired result while the latter is likely to cause unwelcome, unintended consequences.

With all the evidence that has been presented imleaimpeac is now an inevitably.

Good luck. Russia collusion? Where did that go. Shitt took a shit. Only dim morons would believe anything that he represents.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WE don't need Russian collusion anymore . We have Ukraine and it is in the bag

Hilly also had the presidency [emoji1787]. You really are dolts.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[M14 Shooter]

In his new testimony, Mr. Sondland said he believed that withholding the aid was “ill-advised,” although he did not know “when, why or by whom the aid was suspended.”

“I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anticorruption statement,” Mr. Sondland said.
Sondland Updates Impeachment Testimony, Describing Ukraine Quid Pro Quo

Give me a fucking break!

I'm sorry you do not like the the fact the testimony you cited is yet another nothingburger, but the fact remains.

You can believe whatever delusional crap you want. It won't change anything.

^^^^
Never has there been, and never will there be, a better example of irony

Irony? Do you even understand what that means? Where is the irony?

-You- can believe whatever delusional crap you want. It won't change anything.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Holyfuckingshit!

Have you cult freaks ever even heard of the U.S. Constitution??

Yes!
Where in the constitution does it say that a president removed from office cannot be reelected!

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

Well this post of yours was rather ill-timed.

You may want to note that not all that are removed from office are disqualified from holding future office. And additional vote of the senate has to take place for disqualification. So it is possible that Trump can be removed from office and win reelection.

That would truly signal the absolute death of our democracy and sanity

Only for the snowflakes.
Rational, reasoned people? Less so.

 

[M14 Shooter]

WE don't need Russian collusion anymore . We have Ukraine and it is in the bag

You can believe whatever delusional crap you want. It won't change anything.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It is rather humorous really. When this whole thing first popped up, Left-wingers were bouncing off the walls about how this is it... this is the impeachment. This is the where Trump will fall. It's all over. The game is up.
.... now months later.... "to impeach or not to impeach. That is the question".
Right.

Trump did not create the hatred and insanity of the left, he exposed it.

He created the hatred and insanity on the right though

You can believe whatever delusional crap you want. It won't change anything.

 

[Andylusion]

It is rather humorous really. When this whole thing first popped up, Left-wingers were bouncing off the walls about how this is it... this is the impeachment. This is the where Trump will fall. It's all over. The game is up.
.... now months later.... "to impeach or not to impeach. That is the question".
Right.

Trump did not create the hatred and insanity of the left, he exposed it.

Agreed. The insane hatred was already there, and growing, before I ever heard of Trump running for office.

Personally, I hope Trump is impeached, then removed, then wins in 2020.

That would be hilarious....

 

[M14 Shooter]

Senator Lindsey Graham, one of Trump's staunchest supporters, appears to be confused.

You can believe whatever delusional crap you want - It won't change anything.
Trump will remain your President until at least January of 2021.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

The Times reports, "John R. Bolton, President Trump’s former national security adviser, knows about “many relevant meetings and conversations” connected to the Ukraine pressure campaign that House impeachment investigators have not yet been informed about, his lawyer told lawmakers on Friday.

"The lawyer, Charles J. Cooper, made that tantalizing point in a letter to the chief House lawyer in response to House committee chairmen who have sought Mr. Bolton’s testimony in their impeachment proceedings, arguing that his client would be willing to talk but only if a court rules that he should ignore White House objections."

Bolton did not show up for a deposition scheduled on Thursday because, his lawyer said, he wants a judge to determine whether he should testify in defiance of the White House.

What is Bolton trying to say here? Bolton strongly opposed Trump's attempt to use extortion in a request for foreign interference in our Presidential election to benefit the President politically, and he referred to Trump's personal lawyer, Giuliani, as a “hand grenade who’s going to blow everybody up,”, describing exactly what is happening now. The whole mess is blowing up in Trump's face.

Bolton was fired on September 10, about the time the hand grenade was going off in the Oval Office. Schiff was informed of the whistleblower's complaint on September 11.

Despite not showing up this week, does Bolton want to testify? Testifying would certainly help his book sales.

Or, despite their differences, does the outspoken conservative want to come to Trump's aid? Is he trying to drag this out with court fight?

One thing is true. If it is the latter, the Democrats are not biting although they would to have Bolton testify. They have had their fill of Trump's delaying tactics. They will welcome Bolton if he comes in voluntarily, but they are through with the subpoena business. In the meantime they will trot out their own witnesses.

They will be unimpeded by Trump. Stupidly, Trump will not allow his witnesses to appear in the impeachment inquiry which will go public next week.

The Democrats are delighted with Trump's incriminating recalcitrance.

 

[Zorro!]

There are some who argue that, if the circumstances and evidence warrants it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House to impeach the President.

That is true. If the situation calls for it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House of Representatives to impeach the President. However, according to our Constitution, Congress has many Constitutional duties and sometimes they conflict with one another.

That is the case here. The ultimate purpose of impeaching the President is his removal from office. Impeachment is merely an indictment against the President. The trial to determine his removal from office takes place in the Senate with the chief justice presiding.

Therein lies the problem. As matters stand now, the 67 votes needed to remove Trump from office simply won't happen.

Indeed, the very opposite is likely to happen. When the Senate exonerates Trump, the sympathy vote could easily propel Trump toward another four years in office.

In terms of the purpose of impeachment, the very opposite result could happen, and it is extremely likely, as matters stand now, that Trump would not be removed from office.

Congress has another Constitutional duty. Through its oversight responsibilities, Congress has the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed of the very bad judgments and the false statements of a very bad President to enable Americans to remove the very bad President from office in the next election.

In the opinion of many, including the leadership in the House, the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed has a higher calling than the Constitutional duty to impeach. Why? Because the former will achieve the desired result while the latter is likely to cause unwelcome, unintended consequences.

Nonsense. They are so focused on removing Trump that they are not serving The American People. The Democrat House has no legislative accomplishments.

Within the malicious duplicity behind the Democrats’ current impeachment initiative we have found something unexpected: Testimony: How Trump helped Ukraine.

One notable and little-reported conclusion emerging from the House Democratic impeachment proceedings is a consensus among foreign policy professionals that President Trump’s Ukraine policy has been an improvement over President Barack Obama’s.

When Trump became president his administration enacted a new policy that not only continued a broad range of assistance to Ukraine but also expanded that aid to include the provision of Javelin anti-tank missiles — the “lethal aid” that the Obama administration had refused to provide.

The Trump aid program has significantly helped Ukraine defend itself against Russia, according to three career foreign policy officials whose impeachment investigation testimony has been released in recent days: William Taylor, the highest-ranking American diplomat in Ukraine; Kurt Volker, the former U.S. special envoy for Ukraine; and Marie Yovanovitch, the former ambassador to Ukraine.
​

See the whole thing along with links and quotations here.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Republicans have to be gnashing their teeth over the abject stupidity of the Republican President.

Trump's order to retreat in Syria betrayed a key ally who suffered 11,000 casualties in quelling the ISIS terrorist threat. Trump's retreat order facilitated the Turkish invasion of Syria and the attempt by the Turkish dictator, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, to annihilate the Kurds who he regards as terrorists.

Trump enabled Edogan to kill hundreds of Kurds and causing thousands more to abandon their homes, becoming refugees.

On a day when live, public House impeachment hearings began featuring two key witnesses against Trump, William B. Taylor Jr., acting ambassador to Ukraine, and his boss, George Kent, deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, provided devastating evidence of abuse of power, on a day when desperate Republicans are trying vainly to defend Trump from his own incriminating statements, guess who Trump invites to the White House.

You got it, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

It is an in your face gesture to Republicans from a Republican President.

How smart is that?

Republicans are in the midst of drafting a bipartisan sanctions bill targeting Turkey for its aggressive action against the Kurds, aggressive action caused by Trump's retreat. Some of the strongest Congressional critics have included some of Trump's closest congressional allies, including Senator Lindsey Graham, who has repeatedly warned Erdoğan about the repercussions of his actions and has drafted his own sweeping sanctions bill targeting the country.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle called for Trump to rescind the White House invitation to Erdoğan entirely. The White House declined to do so.

How smart is that?

Pretty smart if Trump is acting like a Russian puppet whose sole purpose is to create havoc in the capital.

GOP senators air concerns during unusual White House meeting with Erdoğan - CNNPolitics helped with this report.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Republicans have to be gnashing their teeth over the abject stupidity of the Republican President.

Trump will remain your President until at least January 2021, and there's nothing you can do about it.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Which side is Trump on?

Republicans have to be gnashing their teeth over the abject stupidity of the Republican President.

Trump's order to retreat in Syria betrayed a key ally who suffered 11,000 casualties in quelling the ISIS terrorist threat. Trump's retreat order facilitated the Turkish invasion of Syria and the attempt by the Turkish dictator, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, to annihilate the Kurds who he regards as terrorists.

Trump enabled Edogan to kill hundreds of Kurds and causing thousands more to abandon their homes, becoming refugees.

On a day when live, public House impeachment hearings began featuring two key witnesses against Trump, William B. Taylor Jr., acting ambassador to Ukraine, and his boss, George Kent, deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, provided devastating evidence of abuse of power, on a day when desperate Republicans are trying vainly to defend Trump from his own incriminating statements, guess who Trump invites to the White House.

You got it, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

It is an in your face gesture to Republicans from a Republican President.

How smart is that?

Republicans are in the midst of drafting a bipartisan sanctions bill targeting Turkey for its aggressive action against the Kurds, aggressive action caused by Trump's retreat. Some of the strongest Congressional critics have included some of Trump's closest congressional allies, including Senator Lindsey Graham, who has repeatedly warned Erdoğan about the repercussions of his actions and has drafted his own sweeping sanctions bill targeting the country.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle called for Trump to rescind the White House invitation to Erdoğan entirely. The White House declined to do so.

How smart is that?

Pretty smart if Trump is acting like a Russian puppet whose sole purpose is to create havoc in the capital.

GOP senators air concerns during unusual White House meeting with Erdoğan - CNNPolitics helped with this report.

"Trump’s mistake in Syria is the unexpected ‘lottery win’ that further strengthened Moscow’s position in the Middle East and undermined America’s prestige as a rational political player and a reliable partner,” raved Mikhail Rostovsky in his article for the Russian newspaper Moskovsky Komsomolets.

The Post reports, "Kremlin-funded Russian state television has openly sided with Trump throughout the Ukraine scandal and even during the events that led up to it. For months on end, Dmitry , the host of a Sunday news show called “Vesti Nedeli” (or “The Weekly News”) on state-controlled television station Rossiya-24, encouraged Trump’s push for a Ukrainian investigation of former vice president Joe Biden and his son, as well as the groundless theory that Ukraine — not Russia — interfered in U.S. presidential elections in 2016."

Which side Trump is on is very difficult to determine in view of the support he is getting from hostile dictatorships.

 

[M14 Shooter]

"Trump’s mistake in Syria....

Trump will remain your President until at least January 2021 - and there's nothing you can do about it.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Just how dumb is our President?

Trump's order to retreat in Syria betrayed a key ally who suffered 11,000 casualties in quelling the ISIS terrorist threat. Trump's retreat order facilitated the Turkish invasion of Syria and the attempt by the Turkish dictator, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, to annihilate the Kurds who he regards as terrorists.

Trump enabled Erdogan to kill hundreds of Kurds and causing thousands more to abandon their homes, becoming refugees.

While desperate Republicans are trying vainly to defend Trump from his own incriminating statements, guess who Trump invites to the White House.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

"Trump’s mistake in Syria is the unexpected ‘lottery win’ that further strengthened Moscow’s position in the Middle East and undermined America’s prestige as a rational political player and a reliable partner,” raved Mikhail Rostovsky in his article for the Russian newspaper Moskovsky Komsomolets.

Kremlin-funded Russian state television has openly sided with Trump in the impeachment inquiry.

The President of the United States committed witness intimation in real time by assailing the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, while she was being questioned by members of the House of Representatives. "Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad," Trump wrote.

Another close associate of Trump's is convicted of a felony. Roger Stone, 67, was convicted in federal court of seven felonies for obstructing the congressional inquiry, lying to investigators under oath and trying to block the testimony of a witness whose account would have exposed his lies. Jurors deliberated for a little over seven hours before convicting him on all counts. Together, the charges carry a maximum prison term of 50 years.

Stone joins Trump's campaign manager, Trump's deputy campaign manager, Trump's former NSA, Trump's former personal lawyer, Trump's campaign foreign policy advisor on the list felons who have worked for Trump.

How in the world did this man become our President?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Just how dumb is our President?

Trump will remain your President until at least January 2021 - and there's nothing you can do about it.

How in the world did this man become our President?

The DNC decided to run the only person on the planet that could not beat him.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

This is from the transcript provided by the White House. This is what Trump told the Ukrainian president.

"I would like you to do us a favor though. The other thing, there's a lot of.talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me."

No hearsay, no second or third hand testimony, the quote above is straight from the horse's mouth.

So, is this.

At a recent briefing, White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney blithely described quid pro quo. “What you’re describing is a quid pro quo,” asserted a reporter. “We do that all the time,” replied Mulvaney. “Did he also mention to me the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely. No question about it. But that’s it. That’s why we held up the money … I have news for everybody: Get over it. There’s going to be political influence in [Trump's] foreign policy.”

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Impeachment Hearings Live Updates: Republicans Question Vindman’s Loyalty

Republicans, as usual, cannot challenge the evidence against Trump so they attack the integrity of the witness.

The top Ukraine expert at the National Security Council, Colonel Alexander S. Vindman, testified that Trump’s call with Ukraine’s president in which Trump asked for investigations of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. was “inappropriate” and “a partisan play.”

Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio cited critical comments about Colonel Vindman’s judgment from two other impeachment witnesses, Timothy Morrison and Fiona Hill, Vindman’s former boss at the National Security Council.

“Any idea why they have those impressions?” Mr. Jordan inquired.

“Alex is a top one percent military officer and the best army officer I have worked with in my 15 years of government service,” Vindman said, quoting Hill. “He is brilliant, unflappable, and exercises excellent judgment.”

Republicans also pressed Colonel Vindman, an American citizen and Army officer who was born in Ukraine, about how Oleksandr Danylyuk, the director of Ukraine’s national security council, had approached him three times to offer him the job of defense minister in Kiev.

This as if, because the Ukrainians offered Vindman a job three times, has something to do with Vindman's loyalty. In defending their guilty President, Republicans are reaching. Vindman confirmed the offers and testified that he repeatedly declined, dismissing the idea out of hand and reporting the approaches to his superiors and to counterintelligence officials.

“Every single time, I dismissed it,” he said, adding that “I’m an American. I came here when I was a toddler. And I immediately dismissed these offers, did not entertain them.”

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Republicans spent most of the day avoiding the testimony of the witnesses, providing their own testimony, attacking the media, and attacking the integrity of the Democrat's witnesses, Jennifer Williams and Colonel Alex Vindman.

In the afternoon the Intelligence Committee dealt with the Republican witnesses, Kurt Volker and Tim Morrison. They basically substantiated the reasons for the impeachment inquiry.

Volker offered very different testimony on Tuesday than he did when he spoke behind closed doors with House impeachment investigators.

"Since these events, and since I gave my testimony on October 3, a great deal of additional information and perspectives have come to light," Volker told the House Intelligence Committee.

Volker said in his October testimony that any conversations with the Ukrainians about making an announcement on the opening of an investigation into the Bidens had ended in August. But on Tuesday, Volker acknowledged that US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland had told a top Ukrainian official on September 1 that he believed the military aid was tied to the announcement of an investigation.

In an eyebrow-raising text he sent to a Ukrainian official Volker wrote “assuming President Z convinces trump he will investigate / ‘get to the bottom of what happened’ in 2016, we will nail down date for visit to Washington.”

Timothy Morrison, who recently quit as the senior director for Europe and Ukraine at the National Security Council, said he did not think the President’s July 25 call with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine was inherently wrong or illegal, but feared it would ignite a political storm if it became public.

“I feared at the time of the call on July 25 how its disclosure would play in Washington’s climate,” he said. “My fears have been realized. I understand the gravity of these proceedings, but I beg you not to lose sight of the military conflict underway in Ukraine today.”

These are Republican witnesses. The Democratic leadership can only thank Nunes, Jordon, and the rest of Trump's defense team.