Inquiries and Impeachment of Trump

[Jaxson66]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

House Democrats unveil two articles of impeachment against Trump

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Trump on Tuesday, saying he had abused the power of his office and obstructed Congress in its investigation of his conduct regarding Ukraine.

The argument, ‘why don’t you just wait?’ comes down to this: Why don’t you just let him cheat in just one more election?” Schiff said, calling impeachment “a question of duty.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...d9e_story.html

...

[oeb11]

j666 - got anything else
Anything cogent and constructive other than name-calling and outrage??
Get some help ! for your own sake!

[eccielover]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

Originally Posted by Jaxson66 View Post
House Democrats unveil two articles of impeachment against Trump

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Trump on Tuesday, saying he had abused the power of his office and obstructed Congress in its investigation of his conduct regarding Ukraine.

The argument, ‘why don’t you just wait?’ comes down to this: Why don’t you just let him cheat in just one more election?” Schiff said, calling impeachment “a question of duty.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...d9e_story.html

Is posting it a second time supposed to scare us more.

I'm still not worried that the Senate convicts.

[Jaxson66]

Originally Posted by eccielover

Is posting it a second time supposed to scare us more.

I'm still not worried that the Senate convicts.

Wasn’t my intentions, I was beginning a new page with facts of the day to cover the bullshit posted by cult members.

And I’m not worried about it being over just because the conspiracy caucus acquitted the fat lying bastard squatting in the Oval Office.

[Jaxson66]

Originally Posted by oeb11

j666 - got anything else
Anything cogent and constructive other than name-calling and outrage??
Get some help ! for your own sake!

I don’t wish to converse with a goddamn liar. Go post a cartoon.

[eccielover]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

Wasn’t my intentions, I was beginning a new page with facts of the day to cover the bullshit posted by cult members.

And I’m not worried about it being over just because the conspiracy caucus acquitted the fat lying bastard squatting in the Oval Office.

Figures, you won't accept the "Constitutional" verdict in the end.

[Jaxson66]

Originally Posted by eccielover

Figures, you won't accept the "Constitutional" verdict in the end.

Wrong, I’ll live with the lying bastards acquittal without grabbing my gun and threatening some half assed Rebellion.

If the fat lying bastard is convicted “ will you” ?

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

Wrong, I’ll live with the lying bastards acquittal without grabbing my gun and threatening some half assed Rebellion.

If the fat lying bastard is convicted “ will you” ?

[oeb11]

Quote:
Originally Posted by oeb11
j666 - got anything else
Anything cogent and constructive other than name-calling and outrage??
Get some help ! for your own sake!

I don’t wish to converse with a goddamn liar. Go post a cartoon.



And yet - like a Thornbird - you continue to engage, and push the thorn of reason and fact into One's own DPST breast!
Get some help.

[Jaxson66]

Originally Posted by oeb11

Quote:
Originally Posted by oeb11
j666 - got anything else
Anything cogent and constructive other than name-calling and outrage??
Get some help ! for your own sake!

I don’t wish to converse with a goddamn liar. Go post a cartoon. L



And yet - like a Thornbird - you continue to engage, and push the thorn of reason and fact into One's own DPST breast!
Get some help.

You’re a goddamn liar, you don’t know me.

[oeb11]

J666 - if you do not wish to engage - you do not have to.

Freedom Freedom Freedom.

Richie Havens - Woodstock.

[oeb11]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

Wrong, I’ll live with the lying bastards acquittal without grabbing my gun and threatening some half assed Rebellion.

If the fat lying bastard is convicted “ will you” ?

DPST's like j666 have denied the validity of the Trump Presidency since the day of the election.

That will not change with the expected "No Guilty" verdict from a Senate trial in response to fabricated political charges from the DPST's.


Conversely - conservatives - myself and others on this forum, respect the Constitution and Rule of law - If the Senate convicts Trump - he will be removed from Office.

Pence will be the POTUS



NOT H.......


FYI DPST's. Be careful what you ask for - It might just bite you in the posterior.

[HedonistForever]

Excuse me? Comey didn't "act" on his bias against Trump?


Monday’s review by Inspector General Michael Horowitz knocked down multiple lines of attack against the Russia investigation, finding that it was properly opened and that law enforcement leaders were not motivated by political bias.


https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciar...e-of-fbi-power


“I probably wouldn’t have … gotten away with it.” Those words this week from former FBI Director James Comey could well be chiseled in marble as his epitaph. He was explaining another violation of bureau policy during his tenure days after meeting behind closed doors with House members.
What was shocking was not that Comey violated protocols or policies again but the reaction of the audience to his admission. In describing how he set up a critical meeting with Michael Flynn, former national security adviser to President Trump, the audience was audibly thrilled by his cleverness in keeping Flynn unrepresented by legal counsel and unaware of the true nature of the meeting.

In his interview in New York City, Nicole Wallace asked him, “It’s hard to imagine two FBI agents ending up in the State Room. How did that happen?” The audience erupted when Comey said dryly, “I sent them. Something we’ve, I probably wouldn’t have done or maybe gotten away with in a more organized investigation, a more organized administration. In the George W. Bush administration … or the Obama administration, two men that all of us, perhaps, have increased appreciation for over the last two years. In both of those administrations there was process.” He revealed, “So if the FBI wanted to send agents into the White House itself to interview a senior official, you would work through the White House counsel and there would be discussions and approvals and it would be there. I thought, ‘It’s early enough, let’s just send a couple of guys over.’”


Holy crap! If Horowitz can't see that as "acting on a bias" that Comey readily admits he wouldn't have done to a President he respected, then Horowitz is incapable of understanding the nature of bias.


Another "bad actor" was Brennan who it now can be confirmed, lied to Congress about the Steele dossier.


https://thefederalist.com/2019/12/09/brennan-lied-about-not-including-steele-dossier-in-intelligence-community-assessment-on-2016-russian-election-interference/


Brennan Lied About Not Including Steele Dossier In Intelligence Community Assessment On 2016 Russian Election Interference

[Jaxson66]

Originally Posted by oeb11

DPST's like j666 have denied the validity of the Trump Presidency since the day of the election.

That will not change with the expected "No Guilty" verdict from a Senate trial in response to fabricated political charges from the DPST's..

You’re a goddamn liar, you don’t know me.

[Jaxson66]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Excuse me? Comey didn't "act" on his bias against Trump?


Monday’s review by Inspector General Michael Horowitz knocked down multiple lines of attack against the Russia investigation, finding that it was properly opened and that law enforcement leaders were not motivated by political bias.


https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciar...e-of-fbi-power


“I probably wouldn’t have … gotten away with it.” Those words this week from former FBI Director James Comey could well be chiseled in marble as his epitaph. He was explaining another violation of bureau policy during his tenure days after meeting behind closed doors with House members.
What was shocking was not that Comey violated protocols or policies again but the reaction of the audience to his admission. In describing how he set up a critical meeting with Michael Flynn, former national security adviser to President Trump, the audience was audibly thrilled by his cleverness in keeping Flynn unrepresented by legal counsel and unaware of the true nature of the meeting.

In his interview in New York City, Nicole Wallace asked him, “It’s hard to imagine two FBI agents ending up in the State Room. How did that happen?” The audience erupted when Comey said dryly, “I sent them. Something we’ve, I probably wouldn’t have done or maybe gotten away with in a more organized investigation, a more organized administration. In the George W. Bush administration … or the Obama administration, two men that all of us, perhaps, have increased appreciation for over the last two years. In both of those administrations there was process.” He revealed, “So if the FBI wanted to send agents into the White House itself to interview a senior official, you would work through the White House counsel and there would be discussions and approvals and it would be there. I thought, ‘It’s early enough, let’s just send a couple of guys over.’”


Holy crap! If Horowitz can't see that as "acting on a bias" that Comey readily admits he wouldn't have done to a President he respected, then Horowitz is incapable of understanding the nature of bias.


[FONT=&quot]Another "bad actor" was Brennan who it now can be confirmed, lied to Congress about the Steele dossier.[/FO]

Why do you insist on posting deep state conspiracy lies? They have all been debunked.

I doubt you have read one page of the Mueller report but you and the cult you represent still scream fake news.

If you truly believe that shit start yourself a thread so the other believers can have a safe place.