The Impeachment Thread

[Mick]

Absolutely. And completely political. That wasn't about rooting out corruption. That was all about damaging a potential opponent (who he doesn't want to face).

Ukraine still has corrupt elements from the Soviet Union era which the Russians want to exploit. It appears the new President was reluctant to play ball with Trump. After all he won on the anti corruption campaign to root out Russian influence and invasion and witnessed the love between Trump and Putin.

 

[1972 Grad]

I agree and just like any other career politician, there are many inconsistencies and waffling that Trump could point to with Joe Biden. He was a strong proponent of the 1994 crime bill which has disproportionately hurt the African-American community. He has waffled on busing and abortion. He voted for the war in Iraq but then spoke out against it once it became unpopular with the American people. So, why dig for dirt here? He has valid ammunition in other places.

He is also probably one of the dumbest politicians ever to reach that high of a plateau. Before you say Dan Quayle, Quayle wasn't dumb, just young and inexperienced. Of course, Obama needed an experienced old white guy to make him more electable.

 

[luthervol]

I don't defend Trump but I do call into question the way the Democrats have gone about resolving their issues about the lost election. Neither of those are absurd, side by side, or not, and for you to try and summarize it as that, is in itself absurd.

What you and so many others continually fail to grasp is that none of this is about the lost election. Had any of the other 16 repubs. won the nomination and election, NONE of this would be happening. This is and always has been about Trump being such a horrendously despicable human that he is unfit to hold the office and should be removed by any legal means available as soon as possible.
Again, what blows my mind is how anyone could be surprised by the reaction. It was 100% predictable and 100% warranted.

 

[UT_VOLS13]

What you and so many others continually fail to grasp is that none of this is about the lost election. Had any of the other 16 repubs. won the nomination and election, NONE of this would be happening. This is and always has been about Trump being such a horrendously despicable human that he is unfit to hold the office and should be removed by any legal means available as soon as possible.
Again, what blows my mind is how anyone could be surprised by the reaction. It was 100% predictable and 100% warranted.

FANTASTIC!

 

[Hunerwadel]

"unconstitutional"

Nailed it. It's totally not within the House's powers.

Whaaaa? There's a press secretary now?

If she had something to say she could have maybe held what they used to call a press briefing.

 

[1972 Grad]

Whaaaa? There's a press secretary now?

If she had something to say she could have maybe held what they used to call a press briefing.

So, your side could use her as a punching bag?

 

[1972 Grad]

At least Tulsi got to vote with all the other crazy Dems for this scam impeachment.

 

[lawgator1]

Impeachment rights for Trump include loophole for Democrats to take them away

GOP rules provided the same for Clinton.

 

[0nelilreb]

What you and so many others continually fail to grasp is that none of this is about the lost election. Had any of the other 16 repubs. won the nomination and election, NONE of this would be happening. This is and always has been about Trump being such a horrendously despicable human that he is unfit to hold the office and should be removed by any legal means available as soon as possible.
Again, what blows my mind is how anyone could be surprised by the reaction. It was 100% predictable and 100% warranted.

I wonder how many people you’ve convinced with you diatribe to now vote for Trump just in the hopes he wins and Just to watch you blow a gasket . I’ll bet there will be at least one .

 

[luthervol]

I wonder how many people you’ve convinced with you diatribe to now vote for Trump just in the hopes he wins and Just to watch you blow a gasket . I’ll bet there will be at least one .

LOL.....Just a risk I have to take.

 

[Mick]

I wonder how many people you’ve convinced with you diatribe to now vote for Trump just in the hopes he wins and Just to watch you blow a gasket . I’ll bet there will be at least one .

The important issue. I believe you.

 

[Mick]

LOL.....Just a risk I have to take.

No prediction? lol

 

[BowlBrother85]

So, your side could use her as a punching bag?

It is pretty gutless to hide from the press when you are the press secretary. No president has ever had a more combative relationship with the press corps than Richard Nixon and yet, his press secretary, Ron Ziegler, still held press briefings once a month up until his resignation. Trump tries incredibly hard to only place himself and those who represent him in controlled environments such as campaign rallies. That is why it was such a surprise to see him at the World Series the other night. He actually placed himself in a crowd he couldn't control... and predictably, they booed the hell out of him.

 

[luthervol]

No prediction? lol

All of the likely candidates that I can think of are already committed to voting Trump. Maybe Hogg?

 

[Mick]

All of the likely candidates that I can think of are already committed to voting Trump. Maybe Hogg?

If he thinks they will place more regulations on water treatment and waste management, he will. I know of one that sees Trump for what he is and will not vote for him again.

 

[1972 Grad]

It is pretty gutless to hide from the press when you are the press secretary. No president has ever had a more combative relationship with the press corps than Richard Nixon and yet, his press secretary, Ron Ziegler, still held press briefings once a month up until his resignation. Trump tries incredibly hard to only place himself and those who represent him in controlled environments such as campaign rallies. That is why it was such a surprise to see him at the World Series the other night. He actually placed himself in a crowd he couldn't control... and predictably, they booed the hell out of him.

You know as well as anyone that the press treats Republicans far worse than they do Democrats. Google how the White House Press Corps votes. I think it is about 90% Democrat. The press has gotten more and more hostile since Watergate.

 

[DC_Vol]

If he thinks they will place more regulations on water treatment and waste management, he will. I know of one that sees Trump for what he is and will not vote for him again.

There will be a vote. The impeachment sham you get so excited about appears to be collapsing.

 

[luthervol]

You know as well as anyone that the press treats Republicans far worse than they do Democrats. Google how the White House Press Corps votes. I think it is about 90% Democrat. The press has gotten more and more hostile since Watergate.

They treat progress, inclusion, and unity better than they treat regression, exclusion, and divisiveness. That just makes it appear as if it's a Dem. and Rep. thing.

 

[luthervol]

There will be a vote. The impeachment sham you get so excited about appears to be collapsing.

Collapsing? It seems just the opposite is happening.

 

[BowlBrother85]

There will be a vote. The impeachment sham you get so excited about appears to be collapsing.

How so? If today's vote on the rules of impeachment showed anything, it's that it will be a straight party line vote. That means two things: Trump will be impeached by the House ... but acquitted by the Senate.

 

[newarkvol]

There will be a vote. The impeachment sham you get so excited about appears to be collapsing.

White House Aide Confirms He Saw Signs of a Quid Pro Quo on Ukraine

 

[BowlBrother85]

They treat progress, inclusion, and unity better than they treat regression, exclusion, and divisiveness. That just makes it appear as if it's a Dem. and Rep. thing.

And the reality is that Trump has never tried to co-exist with any member of the press who hasn't positioned themselves as strictly being a partisan ally.

 

[RockyTop85]

I said neither of those things and you know it. You're better than that. I don't defend Trump but I do call into question the way the Democrats have gone about resolving their issues about the lost election. Neither of those are absurd, side by side, or not, and for you to try and summarize it as that, is in itself absurd.

You can’t be serious.

Really? Where was I "cheering and defending Trump for breaking with all unwritten norms and customs and making totally frivolous assertions of privilege to try and string things out."?

=

“I don’t defend trump! How dare you?”

Another big problem that is hard to escape is that there apparently has been one attempt after another to undo this election since Trump took office. First it was Russian Collusion now it's Ukrainian Quid Pro Quo. One has nothing to do with the other, but Gees, Louise, it's difficult for most anyone wiithout strong partisan leanings to even take anything like this serious any longer. It's all stupid politics as usual and a lot of people just don't pay attention and won't care until something a lot more drastic than this grabs their attention. IMO, that's what is trying to be done with this impeachment inquiry, despite Nancy's proclamations regarding "Rule of Law", and yadda, yadda, yadda

=

“This is all just democrats ganging up on trump and trying to play politics and overturn the election.”

If you are going to quote me, quote me, don't make schit up.

My reaction to the Mueller Report was and is . . . AND?

There were some things in it that I did not like about Trump's conduct/behavior. There are a lot of things about Trump and his behavior I do not like that goes beyond the Mueller Report.

But my main take away, was, is that it? Nothing that would remove him from office, nothing that Schiff said that he had? Just a big nothing that changed nothing. My reaction was very similar to the Hillary Private Server/Emails investigation. A lot there that I didn't like about her conduct and behavior but in the end, a big fat nothing.

Politics as usual.

But now with all access information via internet and social/media, it just seems constantly to be getting nastier, with the stakes appearing to be higher and more desperate. The end result is we have candidates sinking lower into the pandering and mud slinging, with their respective sides egging them on.

It's disgusting and I don't see it changing anytime soon.

LMFAO, here this might help you:

What he needs is a Susan Rice to lie for him.

We don't deserve squat. Why, are we entitled?

If the Democrats keep this up, Trump should executive privilege the crap out of them. No documents, no witnesses, no testimony. They had their investigation.

They get nothing, so supoena away. Congress has no enforcement capability anyway. They need the DOJ to do that. Say "Screw 'em" watch their heads explode.

He pushes your buttons bigly.

So why is Mueller silent so far?

Is he waiting for the most opportune time to spring forward with a "Not so fast, you liars" moment?

Eh, probably not but don't let that stop you from your circle jerk reaction to a report that didn't say what you thought it should because of your "feeelszzzz".

Ain't going to happen. You've got to know this by now, deep down, you do.

But you go on and keep on hoping because that's all you got, Don't Stop Believing.

Some will win, some will lose,
Some were born to sing the blues
Oh, the movie never ends
It goes on and on and on and on

Who is that standing behind him LG? Isn't that your guy Rod Rosenstein? What, is he in the bag too? It's a conspiracy, a vast right wing conspiracy!!!!!!

Well, did he obstruct "justice"??
Facts are, that if he really wanted to obstruct the Mueller Investigation, he could have. When decisions were ultimately made, they were made to cooperate fully.

BS. Orders mean nothing unless they are obeyed. When they weren't, what did he do? Did he continue to insist that they be carried out? Did he relieve those who disobeyed and find someone that would carry them out? No? So that's all you got. Ultimately, they cooperated fully.

Instead you are losing yours. Orders not carried out have no effect on anything. He had the power to make them carry them out. Obviously after getting advice and thinking about it he decided not to do it in the end. That is all that matters. What occurred? Did it impede or comply? They ended up complying, so no obstruction occurred. The rest is just BS that you are trying mighty hard to hang your hat on, except you don't have a hat.

Good luck with that. Is he going to be prosecuted? No. You know it too. So all this is, is pissing and moaning. It's not fair, you cheated.

It's over.

No one cares except stupid stubborn people who just can't accept that Hillary lost. The Mueller Report isn't going to achieve the results you desire. Trump will not be impeached over it and everyone knows it. The best you can hope for is that this constant beating of a dead horse will win in 2020. But it will more likely than not have the opposite result.

Move on and beat him in the next election with a better candidate and a good platform. Going after him like this was will prove counterproductive. It already is.

Who is going to prosecute him if charged?

The DOJ.

Sure, Bwahahahaha!

Your delusion is fast approaching luther's on the TDS continuum.

Too bad the other ongoing investigations to which you pin your hopes on will not find anything that 2 years, an army of investigators and $30 million + did not find.

However the ongoing investigations to which AG Barr referred plus the OIG's will have discoveries that come out that will not be pleasing to you.

Wanna bet? Because it is. But wait, there's more the FISA Court Investigation and the OIG's will really mean it's over and just beginning for your guys.

The Senate would be doing their part by not bringing that silly action forward.

And looking at the candidates the Democrat Party is bringing to the fore, they have no room to make the speech you are attributing to them. What a collection of clowns and losers. Good luck beating a great economy. Looks like China is coming around too. If that deal gets done, the economy will be gangbusters in 2020 and you will lose bigly. Justifiably so because the Democrat Party brings nothing to the table but promises of free stuff no one can afford to pay for and Muh, Trump/Russia.

Your problem is with the word "legal."

Your only recourse is to win the next election, quit with all this other made up Russian collusion/obstruction BS. Your party needs to learn how to lose gracefully when they lose. But that would require class and good manners.

What was I thinking?

Isn't a crime only a crime if the crime is completed? If no obstruction took place because McGahn didn't follow through, then how is it obstruction?

My big brother tells me to steal a candy bar at the store and I don't, is my brother guilty of theft?

So my boss tells me to steal a candy bar at the store and I don't, is my boss guilty of theft?

My boss can only fire me, my big brother can hurt me bad.

It doesn't bother you that a sitting President knew of the Russian interference at the time it was happening and did nothing about it?

And,

there's this:

Russia Isn’t the Only One Meddling in Elections. We Do It, Too.

Umm, OK. If he is impeached and then the Senate trial removes him from office he is no longer President so they can indict him and he can go to prison.

Otherwise. . . . but then you don't have anything that rises to the level to make that all happen, now do you?

But he says mean things!

That's a letter from former prosecutors, BFD. If it was a textbook case why didn't Mueller make a recommendation? Instead he ducked and weaved and made excuses and then passed the buck. Doesn't sound so textbook to me based upon the person responsible for the investigation actions. And he doesn't want to discuss it, answer questions about it or appear before Congress about it. The only prosecutor that matters right now is the AG, who heads the DOJ. So that letter carries no water, except the political kind, and that kind of water will always leave you thirsty because it's a mirage. It has no legal effect on the matter of the President's impeachment/indictment whatsoever.

Get back to my original post: List the specific actions that rise to the level of impeachment and then an indictment. Leave the "But he says mean things!" BS out of it.

What about Mueller? He passed the buck to Barr, now didn't he?

Come on, man, if they had anything substantive they would have done more than they did but they didn't, now did they? Because they didn't have anything substantive that would lead to impeachment/indictment, you now hold out hope that further inquiry will find something "probably in the last place they look."

You are the one that is blind, luther, you know you got nothing and are trying desperately to find something, holding out for a faint glimmer of hope in your dark, dark night, that you have brought onto yourself.

So far you have listed:

1. He says mean things!
2. DeVos
3. He says mean things!, Part II.

That's all you got? After 3 tries at this? One would think that if you are so worked up about how awful he is as President that this would elicit many, many examples of what you've based your conclusion on.

What has he done, not said?

Has he had people killed? No?

Has he imprisoned political foes? No?

So what's so "horrendous and despicable" to the point you call it "a 300 year anomaly"?

This "exercise is senseless" because you have nothing to back up your description of Trump and you know it. You are so OTT with hyperbole and the evidence of this is smacking you right in your face with your own words proving you are just blathering nonsense.

That's not a gray area you're dwelling in, it's a shade of pink, to soothe your "feelz."

Then why were his conclusions so "fuzzy" and not clear?

There are also instances in this report where it is clear that things listed as evidence were cherry picked/taken out of context, with exculpatory evidence/statements left out.

People will see what they want to see but the conclusions reached by the head of the Russian Interference Investigation, Mr. Mueller himself, are clear enough to show that those who wanted Trump out of office based on this investigation are sorely disappointed to the point they are grasping at anything to change that reality.

Inference isn't your strong suit is it?

My question was an inferred answer to yours.

Why isn't Ms. Nancy moving forward with impeachment then? You know that the House can determine what an impeachable offense is, right?

I didn't think so.

So to be clear, I do not think Trump is guilty of a crime, if he were Ms. Nancy would go ahead with impeachment, IMHO, and she, so far, is not. Even you should now be able to grasp that inference.

However, neither of us are lawyers and it's just our opinion. Even lawyers disagree on this subject. So what? You think any of that is going to change after Mueller testifies? I don't.

The 1000 former prosecutors has been addressed on here just as many times. That didn't stop you from doing it again. Wonder how many former prosecutors would have had the same opinion regarding Comey's claim regarding Ms. Clinton. . .

Regarding your comments as to the standard for impeachment:

So the people don't feel he is guilty of a crime or of a crime that reaches the level of impeachment. Is that right?

Did the Muell think so? Would he even dare say? Mueller certainly chickened out on this whole deal and used a bunch of BS to cast doubt about the President but did not reach a conclusion that the President committed a crime, (even though he could have) but didn't because he didn't want to because it would be "wrong" for him to accuse someone of wrongdoing who couldn't then have a fair trial and get the chance to defend himself. And yet that seems to be exactly what he did with a footnote* explanation saying it's someone else's job. BS covering for CS. He punted on third down when the goal became "too political" for him.

Either way, I thought that the House can determine what is an impeachable offense or not? Am I wrong? So far they have not.

So what you are saying essentially is that it is not about right or wrong, crime or no crime, but "politics"? No wonder we are in such a mess.

His Boss said he could have said if he committed a crime, not charge him. But he didn't and his Boss said that he didn't have a problem with his reasons for not doing so but it then had to go to his Boss to decide. Both Barr and Rosenstein decided not.

It is what it is. No bobbing and weaving, that's your take. That's on you.

Nope but he could refer it to the House for impeachment.

But it obviously does. Since it's usually the job of the DOJ to charge or recommend charges and it's who Mueller reports to.

Otherwise why all the vituperation directed towards him by the libs if "what he believes doesn't really matter?"

If Mueller truly believed that, don't you think he just might have done things differently and taken the decision one way or the other out of Barr's hands?

Let's see if you are smarter than a 4th grader.

Comey's actions had more influence on the election then anything the Russians did. That's who influenced the election if anything or anyone did.

And it was Hillary's actions that put Comey in a position to do what he did.

She (and you) have no one to blame, really, but Hillary's stupidity.

I’d be understating things considerably to say this looks a bit more celebratory and insulting than “well he did some things wrong but just not enough to remove him.”

Looks like you’re taking almost every opportunity to argue against and belittle anybody who says this was a big deal.

And you continue to do so by saying it’s just an effort to undo the election.

That’s “defending.” Not very effective, but to be fair he hasn’t given you much to work with.

 

[DC_Vol]

It is pretty gutless to hide from the press when you are the press secretary. No president has ever had a more combative relationship with the press corps than Richard Nixon and yet, his press secretary, Ron Ziegler, still held press briefings once a month up until his resignation. Trump tries incredibly hard to only place himself and those who represent him in controlled environments such as campaign rallies. That is why it was such a surprise to see him at the World Series the other night. He actually placed himself in a crowd he couldn't control... and predictably, they booed the hell out of him.

I completely understand why Trump hates the press. They are full of ****. It’s gotten progressively worse (no pun intended) since 2015.

It’s cute how many people get excited that Trump got boo’d at the Nats game. He won 4% of the vote in Washington. Put your Jergins away.

 

[Stew Cook]

White House Aide Confirms He Saw Signs of a Quid Pro Quo on Ukraine

and.. now is when what he says suddenly doesn't matter.