Why can’t Dems treat Trump as fairly as Republicans did Bill Clinton?

[dilbert firestorm]

https://nypost.com/2019/10/08/why-ca...-bill-clinton/


Why can’t Dems treat Trump as fairly as Republicans did Bill Clinton?

By Post Editorial Board
October 8, 2019 | 7:43pm

Speaker Nancy Pelosi has a clear duty to call an immediate House vote to authorize an official impeachment inquiry — if she dares.

The White House informed her today that the Executive Branch won’t play along with the lawless “inquiry” that House Democrats have been engaged in — which President Trump has quite fairly termed “a totally compromised kangaroo court.”

White House counsel Pat Cipollone’s letter to Pelosi spells out the problems. While the Constitution clearly gives the House the power to begin impeachment proceedings, it does not give the speaker the privilege of declaring them all by herself.

Precedent is on the White House’s side here. Most recently, the full House voted to open impeachment inquiries against Presidents Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon — and in so doing set clear rules that gave presidential defenders full rights to participate, including the right to subpoena witnesses.

The letter even quotes Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler’s past remarks that “the power of impeachment … demands a rigorous level of due process” that includes such provisions.

As Cipollone notes, the investigating committees “must provide for the disclosure of all evidence favorable to the President and all evidence bearing on the credibility of witnesses called to testify in the inquiry. The Committees’ current procedures proved none of these basic constitutional rights.”

Pelosi’s Democrats are rushing to a final impeachment vote before Thanksgiving. They’re deposing witnesses behind closed doors and denying Republicans fair time to ask questions and the right to call their own witnesses — and won’t even release full interview transcripts.

Instead, they’re leaking negative info and withholding favorable facts — feeding fanatically anti-Trump media to repeat slanted interpretations as fact.

This is no constitutional effort to get at the full facts: It’s a rush to sell the public on a narrative of presidential wrongdoing.

The White House is entirely right to call out Pelosi’s game. And her only proper response is to treat her drive to impeach Trump the same way her Republican predecessors did their drive to impeach Clinton.

Is she simply afraid to be fair?

[rexdutchman]

Oh dear god your kidding right Liberal and fair ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

https://nypost.com/2019/10/08/why-ca...-bill-clinton/



Pelosi’s Democrats are rushing to a final impeachment vote before Thanksgiving. They’re deposing witnesses behind closed doors and denying Republicans fair time to ask questions and the right to call their own witnesses — and won’t even release full interview transcripts.

The Dim TV coverage of the impeachment basically has high profile Dims shouting insults. No specifics. They've also changed the goalposts of "high crimes and misdemeanors" to "whatever."

The Senate Republicans just need to hold together. Voting for impeachment would be disastrous for the party and most individually. Trump isn't going to quit.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

https://nypost.com/2019/10/08/why-ca...-bill-clinton/


Why can’t Dems treat Trump as fairly as Republicans did Bill Clinton?

?

Your ignorance is showing yet again.

How about you give the Dems a special prosecutor that can have witnesses ailed for not testifying like Ken Starr....Hmmmmmmmm.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by WTF

Your ignorance is showing yet again.

How about you give the Dems a special prosecutor that can have witnesses ailed for not testifying like Ken Starr....Hmmmmmmmm.

they had one. Mueller.

BAHHAHHAHAAAAAAAAAAAA

[dilbert firestorm]

and this guy committed perjury... tsk, tsk...

[LexusLover]

Why can’t Dems treat Trump as fairly as Republicans did Bill Clinton?

Class and Intelligence.

But IMO they should not have impeached him.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

they had one. Mueller.

BAHHAHHAHAAAAAAAAAAAA

Your ignorance on the difference on the power of Muller and Starr is showing...

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

Speaker Nancy Pelosi has a clear duty to call an immediate House vote to authorize an official impeachment inquiry — if she dares.


This is no constitutional effort to get at the full facts: It’s a rush to sell the public on a narrative of presidential wrongdoing.

this is two-faced, though.. you guys demand that Pelosi take an Impeachment inquiry vote, because you DON'T WANT more facts coming out.. every day there is more shit leaked or uncovered. why should Pelosi hurry a vote? there will be a vote (or not) later, to impeach, if the facts warrant. if your side is "clean", don't worry about it. I think the Ukraine transcript is not so damaging, thus Trump's willingness to release it, but.. the shenanigans in the months preceding the call, by Gulliani, Barr, and the arrested Ukrainians, among others, alarms me.. there is a lot more to learn.. be patient, and stop worrying that your guy is under investigation.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

this is two-faced, though.. you guys demand that Pelosi take an Impeachment inquiry vote, because you DON'T WANT more facts coming out.. every day there is more shit leaked or uncovered. ....

... Excellent choice of words .....

.... more shit leaked or uncovered.....

Tran, you've obviously never been the target of a campaign to destroy your reputation, livelihood, and/or family with shit reported and published about you on the front pages of national rags with the retractions and denials stuck in the back buried in the classifieds and/or "notices" .... that usually end up in the bottom of a bird cage or shredded in a litter box for the family cat. About 90% (if not more) of the shit has been debunked either by the "alleged" leaker or someone who was there reporting that the alleged leaker wasn't present.

The alleged "investigation" is nothing more than a forum to spread more shit about Trump, his cabinet and appointees, and/or his friends and family (now his lawyer) ... and the reason why they won't put it to a vote is because they've been reading the "tea leaves" back home and they won't be returning to Congress once they vote for the impeachment (they actually believe the polls .... like they did when HillariousNoMore was calling us "deplorables") .....

... they've had 1/2 dozen "investigations" now FOR MORE THAN THREE YEARS and they have not one shred of credible evidence that Trump has committed any "high crime or MISDEMEANOR" that's why they won't put it to a vote ............all they need to do is to ask Adumbo Shit to testify about all he knows, because he's been blabbing for three fucking years they have the "facts" but it's a "secret" and he can't repeat them ..... "the facts" .... aka more shit.

I used to think Obaminable was the greatest embarrassment to worm his way into the media attention .... until Adumbo Shit appeared on the scene....and he even has a genetically infected look when he lies. He makes Obaminable look like Mother Theresa.

[Chung Tran]

well I agree that there has been a lot of fake shit leveled at Trump, that started from the beginning of his term. the Kavanaugh stuff is particularly egregious.. and it may be the Ukraine call was, if not "beautiful", at least is not wicked.

but if there is nothing to the Biden/Ukraine rumblings, like much of the other shit previously, let's find out.. there is new info daily, I want to see it all added up, spun, dissected, and see if this time it warrants anything.

if it does not, I will call out the Democrats and rail right along with you. if Trump is innocent, he should not fear getting railroaded. he has escaped basically unscathed, up to now.. why should this bring him down?

my current thinking is Trump MAY be basically innocent, but his "people" are the trouble spots.. Barr, Gulliani, etc.. the Right wants to absolve every player in this sphere, I'm not even close to that at this time.

[eccielover]

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

this is two-faced, though.. you guys demand that Pelosi take an Impeachment inquiry vote, because you DON'T WANT more facts coming out..

No we want her to take a vote largely to make the inquiry official and lawful.

Right now they are claiming they are doing a lawful impeachment inquiry, yet it isn't any such thing.

They should not be referring to it as an impeachment inquiry, but rater what it is then. A one sided dig up dirt on Trump effort.

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by eccielover

No we want her to take a vote largely to make the inquiry official and lawful.

Right now they are claiming they are doing a lawful impeachment inquiry, yet it isn't any such thing.

They should not be referring to it as an impeachment inquiry, but rater what it is then. A one sided dig up dirt on Trump effort.

why does the nomenclature bother you so much? it is lawful and official, even if you think it is unfair.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

this is two-faced, though.. you guys demand that Pelosi take an Impeachment inquiry vote, because you DON'T WANT more facts coming out.. every day there is more shit leaked or uncovered. why should Pelosi hurry a vote? there will be a vote (or not) later, to impeach, if the facts warrant. if your side is "clean", don't worry about it. I think the Ukraine transcript is not so damaging, thus Trump's willingness to release it, but.. the shenanigans in the months preceding the call, by Gulliani, Barr, and the arrested Ukrainians, among others, alarms me.. there is a lot more to learn.. be patient, and stop worrying that your guy is under investigation.

It's the dim-retards who are afraid of the facts coming out. Their present game plan denies the introduction of factual evidence that would upset their little apple cart of lies -- a violation of the 6th Amendment.

[dilbert firestorm]

https://townhall.com/columnists/paul...-vote-n2554507


zugzwang!!!


She cannot hold the vote because it would endanger her more moderate members by having them voice their support for overturning an election on partisan grounds. She cannot hold the vote because she would then be compelled to give both parties, not just her own, subpoena power and access to witnesses. She cannot hold the vote because she cannot afford to allow the American people to see, in open hearings, the spurious claims upon which the impeachment fantasy is based. She cannot make a move without damaging her and her party’s position. Zugzwang would be the term in chess.