Inquiries and Impeachment of Trump

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

Once again you post an opinion piece that’s 35 days old ignoring the fact that more information has been exposed about the shakedown of Ukraine. The fact that Parnas has implicated Pence, Rudy, Mulvaney, Bolton, Perry and Sekelow of knowingly participating in the shakedown. So "implications" are enough for you? Sorry but our judicial system doesn't work that way and neither will impeachment. Didn't Cohen and Avanatti "implicate" Trump? How'd that work out?Then there’s that pesky fact the GAO has determined there was indeed a violation of the law withholding funds for Ukraine.

Pesky facts that weren’t available 35 days ago. But it does fit the Cult narrative. And your "assumptions" fit the "idiot" narrative.

First, as I explained and apparently you didn't understand, the GAO is not a court of law where "facts" are decided. The GAO gave an opinion and the OMB gave a different opinion. What makes one more "factual" than the other since neither has anything to do with the Judicial branch of government? We won't know who was stating a "fact" until a court renders a judgement after hearing the evidence from both sides and since no court finding on this matter will be forth coming, Senators will use their own judgement over whose "fact" is correct.


What has Parnas "implicating" Pence, Rudy, Mulvaney, Bolton, Perry and Skelow have to do with Trump making. a decision? What is the worst case scenario of all of those people saying yeah, we all knew what the President was going to do? The only thing that matters is "was what he did illegal and we do not have a legal decision from a legal body on that and until we do Senators will draw their own conclusion on that matter". Second would be "if the Senator believes it to be a legal decision, does that decision rise to the level of a High crime or misdemeanor as spelled out in the Constitution and most Republican Senators if not all have said, "no it doesn't".


As I've said many times, assume that everything the Democrats are saying is true, that the President withheld aid to Ukraine because he wanted to ensure corruption had ended and the only way to get that assurance was through an investigation of the Biden's which BTW didn't happen and the aid was released in the time frame set up by Congress. Does that rise to the level of High crimes and misdemeanors? You don't even need a trial. Just assume what Democrats are saying is true and cast your vote. All we could possibly learn from testimony is yes, Trump did exactly that. I think he did exactly that and I do not believe it was illegal and I do not believe it rises to the level of a High crime or misdemeanor and therefore is not an impeachable offense and I'll bet any amount of money , that is the conclusion that at the very least, 34 Senators will agree with. It takes 67 to disagree for conviction.

[oeb11]

The Impeachment charade is just that - an Impachment without a Constitutional "Crime".

And - 9500- what chaps the Fascist DPST's is that Alan Dershowitz is a Democrat!!!
Regarded as turncoat - and the Fascist DPST storm troopers are already harassing his family, friends, and relatives. And anyone named Dershowitz - just out of anti-Semitic Racism.

[Jaxson66]

Nunes aide communicated with Parnas about Ukraine campaign, messages show

House Democrats released new documents Friday evening showing extensive contact between an associate of President Trump’s personal attorney and an aide to the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee regarding the effort to obtain material from Ukrainian prosecutors that would be damaging to former vice president Joe Biden.

The text messages between Lev Parnas, who functioned as Rudolph W. Giuliani’s emissary to Ukrainian officials, and Derek Harvey, an aide to Rep. Devin Nunes, the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, indicate Nunes’s office was aware of the operation at the heart of impeachment proceedings against the president — and sought to use the information Parnas was gathering.

The newly released texts show that Parnas was working last spring to set up calls for Harvey with the Ukrainian prosecutors who were feeding Giuliani information about Biden.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...85d_story.html


Rudy’s accomplice is spilling his guts. Dowd made a big mistake asking him to go down for the fat lying bastard. The next 72 hours will be filled with document dumps by Parnas and his lawyer.

And the trumptards defense...well yeah, he did it, but it’s not impeachable!

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

Nunes aide communicated with Parnas about Ukraine campaign, messages show


And the trumptards defense...well yeah, he did it, but it’s not impeachable!

Now you are catching on! It's not impeachable because he broke no law. But let's say for a minute that Trump broke the Impound Control Act of 1974 ( holding funds appropriated by Congress for reasons not covered by the law )for a few weeks. For the same reason Muller didn't charge Don Jr. and Comey didn't charge Hillary and Barr didn't charge Comey, "intent" probably couldn't be proven. Trump could claim he was unaware of the 1974 law and therefore had no intent to break it and as soon as his advisers brought it to his attention he released the funds. That's not counting the possibility that releasing the funds before the Congressional timeline was up might also mitigate whether the law was broken or not.


Don't you just hate it when the guy you want so bad is protected by the laws you say he broke.

[eccieuser9500]

What happened to his lawsuit?

[Jaxson66]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Now you are catching on! It's not impeachable because he broke no law. But let's say for a minute that Trump broke the Impound Control Act of 1974 ( holding funds appropriated by Congress for reasons not covered by the law )for a few weeks. For the same reason Muller didn't charge Don Jr. and Comey didn't charge Hillary and Barr didn't charge Comey, "intent" probably couldn't be proven. Trump could claim he was unaware of the 1974 law and therefore had no intent to break it and as soon as his advisers brought it to his attention he released the funds. That's not counting the possibility that releasing the funds before the Congressional timeline was up might also mitigate whether the law was broken or not.


Don't you just hate it when the guy you want so bad is protected by the laws you say he broke.

You’re beginning to sound like a jailhouse defense attorney representing his DUI client in court for the fifth time. Monotonous!

So, the laws can’t protect him from the court of public opinion. There’s still an election coming.

[eccieuser9500]

Patrick Leahy: Congress must defend the separation of powers


https://vtdigger.org/2020/01/17/patr...ion-of-powers/





Trump associates who have been sent to prison or faced criminal charges


https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trum...ry?id=68358219





And Now We Know EXACTLY Why Rex Tillerson Called Trump A 'F*cking Moron'


https://www.wonkette.com/and-now-we-...-f-cking-moron

[Jaxson66]

. President Trump reveals himself as woefully uninformed about the basics of geography, incorrectly telling Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, “It’s not like you’ve got China on your border.” He toys with awarding himself the Medal of Freedom.

And, according to a new book by Washington Post reporters Philip Rucker and Carol D. Leonnig, Trump does not seem to grasp the fundamental history surrounding the attack on Pearl Harbor.

“Hey, John, what’s this all about? What’s this a tour of?” Trump asks his then-Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, as the men prepare to take a private tour of the USS Arizona Memorial, which commemorates the December 1941 Japanese surprise attack in the Pacific that pulled the United States into World War II.

“Trump had heard the phrase ‘Pearl Harbor’ and appeared to understand that he was visiting the scene of a historic battle, but he did not seem to know much else,” write the authors, later quoting a former senior White House adviser who concludes: “He was at times dangerously uninformed.”


The fat lying bastard had no idea what the Arizona memorial was. A 73 yo man with a self proclaimed great education and knows more than the generals doesn’t know what the Arizona memorial represents now leads a Cult.
That’s a little spooky

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Jaxson66

You’re beginning to sound like a jailhouse defense attorney .....

What is a "jailhouse defense attorney"? And then ....

..... what do the "sound like"?

And after you wade through those bullshit responses ....!!!!

For what crime where in you jail to provide you the opportunity to have a long enough chat with one so you would know their "sound"?

I keep trying to tell you that you are either a World Class Liar or the dumbest piece of flesh to walk the Earth.

Well.... second to PussLousy! In the meantime ... have another BEER!

[oeb11]

Counting on cnn and msnbc for the "Truth" aka Fascist DPST narrative.

Bottom line - despite all the Fascist DPST tv hi-jinks -Trump will not be convicted, and the faux impeachment will be a wapon against the Fascist DPST nominee in Nov.
People are disgusted by the way the Fascist DPST's led by nazi pelosi have abandoned governance for Showboating.



Robespierre irrelevant memes to follow - along with Eric Swalwell inviting the iranian to come play at nukes with he and 9500!

[HoeHummer]

Are yous waponizing the Lying members of your Senate, Oebsy?

When are yous going to post something positive? Your demeanors has gotten darker and darker since you emerged from the slime.

And what have you don’t with Rexsy? He completes yous!

LOLLINGGGGGGG!

[Jaxson66]

Shove it,’ Rep. Ted Lieu tells GOP colleague Devin Nunes in response to lawsuit threat

The politicians’ dueling played out, as it almost always does these days, largely on Twitter and cable TV.

Rep. Ted Lieu (D) alleged in December that fellow California Rep. Devin Nunes (R) conspired with Lev Parnas, a former associate of President Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani, to undermine the United States. Parnas has pleaded not guilty to violating campaign finance laws.

Then a lawyer for Nunes, who is the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, sent a multi-page missive threatening to sue for damage to Nunes’s reputation, Lieu tweeted. The Democratic congressman replied with a letter of his own and posted a photo of the document online.

“I welcome any lawsuit from your client and look forward to taking discovery of Congressman Nunes,” he wrote. “Or, you can take your letter and shove it.”

When the disaster of the fat lying bastards term is over Lieu should lead the Trump Crimes Commission and drain the sewer.

[oeb11]

I hope Nunes does due the fascist DPST - it will be an interesting court case.

Fascist DPST's restrict fre speech to only themselves
just as the LSM lies about anyone not Marxist - Progressive!
And how is the latest "bombshell" - of the line of failures over the Years - working for j666 now???

[HoeHummer]

Yous write like you’ve been busy with your mum’s hairspray, oebsy

[Jaxson66]

House Democrats say Senate must ‘eliminate the threat that the President poses to America’s national security’

The House Democratic managers argue the Senate must “eliminate the threat that the President poses to America’s national security” in the 111-page legal brief they filed Saturday. The brief lays out their impeachment case against President Trump.

With opening arguments in the Senate trial to begin Wednesday afternoon, the seven House managers had until 5 p.m. Saturday to file their brief describing why Trump should be convicted and removed from office. The White House defense team has until noon Monday to file its argument why he should be acquitted.

The House legal filing reiterates the findings of the House Intelligence and Judiciary panels, which, after hearing from witnesses and experts, settled on charging Trump last month with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

“The evidence overwhelmingly establishes that he is guilty of both,” the managers wrote in the brief. “The only remaining question is whether the members of the Senate will accept and carry out the responsibility placed on them by the Framers of our Constitution and their constitutional Oaths.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...f6d_story.html