Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
That is not listed in The Articles or Mueller Report. Try again.Dumbfuck....Obstruction of Congress does not appear in US Code.
Also can you explain how The Executive Branch Obstructed Congress when it's not a crime?
18 U.S. Code § 1505 - Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees
That crime was not alleged. Try Again
All Roads Lead To Ukraine
Of course it was, article II: Obstruction of Congress.
Obstruction of Congress is not a crime and is not found in US Code.
Can you define exactly what The Executive Branch did to Obstruct Congress?
Did he Veto a Bill or something?
Please tell us exactly what he did.
I gave you the link to it. It's not my problem you're too stupid to understand it.
That is not listed in The Articles or Mueller Report. Try again.
That crime was not alleged. Try Again
All Roads Lead To Ukraine
Of course it was, article II: Obstruction of Congress.
Obstruction of Congress is not a crime and is not found in US Code.
Can you define exactly what The Executive Branch did to Obstruct Congress?
Did he Veto a Bill or something?
Please tell us exactly what he did.
I gave you the link to it. It's not my problem you're too stupid to understand it.
Trump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
That is not listed in The Articles or Mueller Report. Try again.
That crime was not alleged. Try Again
All Roads Lead To Ukraine
Of course it was, article II: Obstruction of Congress.
Obstruction of Congress is not a crime and is not found in US Code.
Can you define exactly what The Executive Branch did to Obstruct Congress?
Did he Veto a Bill or something?
Please tell us exactly what he did.
I gave you the link to it. It's not my problem you're too stupid to understand it.
Trump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
LOL
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
Why do you keep bringing this up and out of context?
That statement was debunked and you know this so this makes you a dishonorable and disreputable liar.
LOLI gave you the link to it. It's not my problem you're too stupid to understand it.Obstruction of Congress is not a crime and is not found in US Code.Of course it was, article II: Obstruction of Congress.
Can you define exactly what The Executive Branch did to Obstruct Congress?
Did he Veto a Bill or something?
Please tell us exactly what he did.
Trump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
Why do you keep bringing this up and out of context?
That statement was debunked and you know this so this makes you a dishonorable and disreputable liar.
LOLI gave you the link to it. It's not my problem you're too stupid to understand it.Obstruction of Congress is not a crime and is not found in US Code.
Can you define exactly what The Executive Branch did to Obstruct Congress?
Did he Veto a Bill or something?
Please tell us exactly what he did.
Trump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
Out of context, Stumpy? Exactly how nuts are you?? I responded to a post claiming impeached Trump wasn't charged with a crime by quoting Impeached Trump's own attorney saying a crime is not necessary to be impeached. Of course, that was his position before being Impeached Trump's attorney.
The quote you posted son of Ashteroth was 20 years old and debunked by Dershowitz himself.
You knew that if you watched Dershowitz Expert Testimony yet you intentionally posted a Lie.
Why do you keep bringing this up and out of context?
That statement was debunked and you know this so this makes you a dishonorable and disreputable liar.
LOLI gave you the link to it. It's not my problem you're too stupid to understand it.
Trump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
Out of context, Stumpy? Exactly how nuts are you?? I responded to a post claiming impeached Trump wasn't charged with a crime by quoting Impeached Trump's own attorney saying a crime is not necessary to be impeached. Of course, that was his position before being Impeached Trump's attorney.
Biden has yet to secure the nomination, so he is not a political rival.No, they impeached Impeached Trump for abusing the power of his office by soliciting a foreign national to investigate a political rival.
Biden doesn't have to secure the nomination to run for president. They're both campaigning for the same office, so yes they're rivals.Biden has yet to secure the nomination, so he is not a political rival.No, they impeached Impeached Trump for abusing the power of his office by soliciting a foreign national to investigate a political rival.
But, even if he were, Repubs can go after corrupt democrats. There is no such thing as political-rival immunity.
This is all ass hurt because our government is overrun by corrupt politicians. Uncle Joe is no exception.
.
That is not listed in The Articles or Mueller Report. Try again.
That crime was not alleged. Try Again
All Roads Lead To Ukraine
Of course it was, article II: Obstruction of Congress.
Obstruction of Congress is not a crime and is not found in US Code.
Can you define exactly what The Executive Branch did to Obstruct Congress?
Did he Veto a Bill or something?
Please tell us exactly what he did.
I gave you the link to it. It's not my problem you're too stupid to understand it.
Trump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
LOL
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
Of course he corrupted the office of president-- by soliciting a foreign national to look for dirt into a political rival.LOLI gave you the link to it. It's not my problem you're too stupid to understand it.Obstruction of Congress is not a crime and is not found in US Code.Of course it was, article II: Obstruction of Congress.
Can you define exactly what The Executive Branch did to Obstruct Congress?
Did he Veto a Bill or something?
Please tell us exactly what he did.
Trump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
OK, I agree with that definition of an impeachable "non-crime". But that means a lot of very bad behavior by a president, dictatorial behavior.
1. Trump did not "completely corrupt the office of president"
2. Nor did Trump " pose a great danger to our liberty"
The two Articles as written against Trump are not impeachable, so say 53 GOP and 3 dem senators (Mansion, Sinema, and Doug Jones)
Starr and Dershowitz dismantled both articles as not impeachable and unconstitutional. The articles are just partisan talking points.
Agreed, but this whole thing is laughable when you consider that nearly all presidents since at least FDR, have done much worse.Of course he corrupted the office of president-- by soliciting a foreign national to look for dirt into a political rival.LOLI gave you the link to it. It's not my problem you're too stupid to understand it.Obstruction of Congress is not a crime and is not found in US Code.
Can you define exactly what The Executive Branch did to Obstruct Congress?
Did he Veto a Bill or something?
Please tell us exactly what he did.
Trump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
OK, I agree with that definition of an impeachable "non-crime". But that means a lot of very bad behavior by a president, dictatorial behavior.
1. Trump did not "completely corrupt the office of president"
2. Nor did Trump " pose a great danger to our liberty"
The two Articles as written against Trump are not impeachable, so say 53 GOP and 3 dem senators (Mansion, Sinema, and Doug Jones)
Starr and Dershowitz dismantled both articles as not impeachable and unconstitutional. The articles are just partisan talking points.
That's like complaining to a cop, who's writing you a ticket for going 80, that others are going 90.Agreed, but this whole thing is laughable when you consider that nearly all presidents since at least FDR, have done much worse.Of course he corrupted the office of president-- by soliciting a foreign national to look for dirt into a political rival.LOLI gave you the link to it. It's not my problem you're too stupid to understand it.
Trump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
OK, I agree with that definition of an impeachable "non-crime". But that means a lot of very bad behavior by a president, dictatorial behavior.
1. Trump did not "completely corrupt the office of president"
2. Nor did Trump " pose a great danger to our liberty"
The two Articles as written against Trump are not impeachable, so say 53 GOP and 3 dem senators (Mansion, Sinema, and Doug Jones)
Starr and Dershowitz dismantled both articles as not impeachable and unconstitutional. The articles are just partisan talking points.
Impeaching Donnie for this phone call, is absurd. He’s done so many other things that really warrant impeachment.
Maybe so. However it does indicate the rampant corruption in our central government Unfairness certainly applies.That's like complaining to a cop, who's writing you a ticket for going 80, that others are going 90.Agreed, but this whole thing is laughable when you consider that nearly all presidents since at least FDR, have done much worse.Of course he corrupted the office of president-- by soliciting a foreign national to look for dirt into a political rival.LOLTrump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
OK, I agree with that definition of an impeachable "non-crime". But that means a lot of very bad behavior by a president, dictatorial behavior.
1. Trump did not "completely corrupt the office of president"
2. Nor did Trump " pose a great danger to our liberty"
The two Articles as written against Trump are not impeachable, so say 53 GOP and 3 dem senators (Mansion, Sinema, and Doug Jones)
Starr and Dershowitz dismantled both articles as not impeachable and unconstitutional. The articles are just partisan talking points.
Impeaching Donnie for this phone call, is absurd. He’s done so many other things that really warrant impeachment.
Break the law -- you might be held accountable.
That's like complaining to a cop, who's writing you a ticket for going 80, that others are going 90.Agreed, but this whole thing is laughable when you consider that nearly all presidents since at least FDR, have done much worse.Of course he corrupted the office of president-- by soliciting a foreign national to look for dirt into a political rival.LOLTrump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
OK, I agree with that definition of an impeachable "non-crime". But that means a lot of very bad behavior by a president, dictatorial behavior.
1. Trump did not "completely corrupt the office of president"
2. Nor did Trump " pose a great danger to our liberty"
The two Articles as written against Trump are not impeachable, so say 53 GOP and 3 dem senators (Mansion, Sinema, and Doug Jones)
Starr and Dershowitz dismantled both articles as not impeachable and unconstitutional. The articles are just partisan talking points.
Impeaching Donnie for this phone call, is absurd. He’s done so many other things that really warrant impeachment.
Break the law -- you might be held accountable.
LOLThat's like complaining to a cop, who's writing you a ticket for going 80, that others are going 90.Agreed, but this whole thing is laughable when you consider that nearly all presidents since at least FDR, have done much worse.Of course he corrupted the office of president-- by soliciting a foreign national to look for dirt into a political rival.LOL
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
OK, I agree with that definition of an impeachable "non-crime". But that means a lot of very bad behavior by a president, dictatorial behavior.
1. Trump did not "completely corrupt the office of president"
2. Nor did Trump " pose a great danger to our liberty"
The two Articles as written against Trump are not impeachable, so say 53 GOP and 3 dem senators (Mansion, Sinema, and Doug Jones)
Starr and Dershowitz dismantled both articles as not impeachable and unconstitutional. The articles are just partisan talking points.
Impeaching Donnie for this phone call, is absurd. He’s done so many other things that really warrant impeachment.
Break the law -- you might be held accountable.
Sure, but I supposed if the cop was only pulling over black people that were going 80, you may be singing a different tune. That is what Democrats have done by targeting Republicans and Trump.
I am glad you acknowledge that any indiscretion in this case is akin to a traffic ticket, hardly worth of impeachment.
Of course he corrupted the office of president-- by soliciting a foreign national to look for dirt into a political rival.LOLI gave you the link to it. It's not my problem you're too stupid to understand it.Obstruction of Congress is not a crime and is not found in US Code.
Can you define exactly what The Executive Branch did to Obstruct Congress?
Did he Veto a Bill or something?
Please tell us exactly what he did.
Trump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
OK, I agree with that definition of an impeachable "non-crime". But that means a lot of very bad behavior by a president, dictatorial behavior.
1. Trump did not "completely corrupt the office of president"
2. Nor did Trump " pose a great danger to our liberty"
The two Articles as written against Trump are not impeachable, so say 53 GOP and 3 dem senators (Mansion, Sinema, and Doug Jones)
Starr and Dershowitz dismantled both articles as not impeachable and unconstitutional. The articles are just partisan talking points.
Actually, Impeached Trump asked Zelensky to look into why Biden stopped the prosecution into his son's company; which is bullshit since Biden didn't stop any prosecution into his son's company.Of course he corrupted the office of president-- by soliciting a foreign national to look for dirt into a political rival.LOLI gave you the link to it. It's not my problem you're too stupid to understand it.
Trump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
OK, I agree with that definition of an impeachable "non-crime". But that means a lot of very bad behavior by a president, dictatorial behavior.
1. Trump did not "completely corrupt the office of president"
2. Nor did Trump " pose a great danger to our liberty"
The two Articles as written against Trump are not impeachable, so say 53 GOP and 3 dem senators (Mansion, Sinema, and Doug Jones)
Starr and Dershowitz dismantled both articles as not impeachable and unconstitutional. The articles are just partisan talking points.
We disagree. He did not solicit a foreign national to look "for dirt". He asked for Z to work with Barr and Giuliani to investigate why Joe Biden fired the prosecutor (Shokin) and bragged about the $1b extortion. A legitimate investigation by Barr is not a bad thing. Who says that the Bidens get a pass for their potentially criminal acts? Is Hunter Biden worth $83,000 a month? Why was he paid so much? Trump did nothing wrong.
What is corrupt about investigating probable crimes?
Trump's Ukraine call transcript: Read the document
In case you forgot what corrupt is, corrupt is paying Russians for the fictitious "Steele Dossier" on Trump, and then via Operation Crossfire Hurricane use falsified FISA warrants and the Federal intel agencies to setup and spy on the Trump campaign.
Actually, Impeached Trump asked Zelensky to look into why Biden stopped the prosecution into his son's company; which is bullshit since Biden didn't stop any prosecution into his son's company.Of course he corrupted the office of president-- by soliciting a foreign national to look for dirt into a political rival.LOLTrump does have due process rights, so says the USSC:
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment
Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win, Makes Impeachment Article 2 Null & Void - DC Dirty Laundry
Article-2 is dead.
Article-1 is dead too because there is no "high crime" charged, just whiny democrats too lazy to tee it up in court.
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
OK, I agree with that definition of an impeachable "non-crime". But that means a lot of very bad behavior by a president, dictatorial behavior.
1. Trump did not "completely corrupt the office of president"
2. Nor did Trump " pose a great danger to our liberty"
The two Articles as written against Trump are not impeachable, so say 53 GOP and 3 dem senators (Mansion, Sinema, and Doug Jones)
Starr and Dershowitz dismantled both articles as not impeachable and unconstitutional. The articles are just partisan talking points.
We disagree. He did not solicit a foreign national to look "for dirt". He asked for Z to work with Barr and Giuliani to investigate why Joe Biden fired the prosecutor (Shokin) and bragged about the $1b extortion. A legitimate investigation by Barr is not a bad thing. Who says that the Bidens get a pass for their potentially criminal acts? Is Hunter Biden worth $83,000 a month? Why was he paid so much? Trump did nothing wrong.
What is corrupt about investigating probable crimes?
Trump's Ukraine call transcript: Read the document
In case you forgot what corrupt is, corrupt is paying Russians for the fictitious "Steele Dossier" on Trump, and then via Operation Crossfire Hurricane use falsified FISA warrants and the Federal intel agencies to setup and spy on the Trump campaign.
And yes, he asked Zelensky to investigate a political rival, which serves to help his own campaign for re-election.
Impeached Trump also lied to Zelensky about working with Barr. Impeached Trump didn't mention any of this to Barr and Barr was never part of the discussions with Zelensky.Actually, Impeached Trump asked Zelensky to look into why Biden stopped the prosecution into his son's company; which is bullshit since Biden didn't stop any prosecution into his son's company.Of course he corrupted the office of president-- by soliciting a foreign national to look for dirt into a political rival.LOL
"It certainly doesn't have to be a crime. If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don't need a technical crime." ~ Alan Dershowitz
OK, I agree with that definition of an impeachable "non-crime". But that means a lot of very bad behavior by a president, dictatorial behavior.
1. Trump did not "completely corrupt the office of president"
2. Nor did Trump " pose a great danger to our liberty"
The two Articles as written against Trump are not impeachable, so say 53 GOP and 3 dem senators (Mansion, Sinema, and Doug Jones)
Starr and Dershowitz dismantled both articles as not impeachable and unconstitutional. The articles are just partisan talking points.
We disagree. He did not solicit a foreign national to look "for dirt". He asked for Z to work with Barr and Giuliani to investigate why Joe Biden fired the prosecutor (Shokin) and bragged about the $1b extortion. A legitimate investigation by Barr is not a bad thing. Who says that the Bidens get a pass for their potentially criminal acts? Is Hunter Biden worth $83,000 a month? Why was he paid so much? Trump did nothing wrong.
What is corrupt about investigating probable crimes?
Trump's Ukraine call transcript: Read the document
In case you forgot what corrupt is, corrupt is paying Russians for the fictitious "Steele Dossier" on Trump, and then via Operation Crossfire Hurricane use falsified FISA warrants and the Federal intel agencies to setup and spy on the Trump campaign.
And yes, he asked Zelensky to investigate a political rival, which serves to help his own campaign for re-election.
Agreed, Trump should have said investigation instead of prosecution. See clip below.
We disagree, Trump asked for Z to work with Barr to investigate WTF the Bidens were up to. Just because Joe is a potential political rival does not give him immunity from investigation. After three years of the Mueller Investigation into Trump's "Russian Collusion Hoax" I'm not very sympathetic to democrats whining about an investigation into very suspicious activity.
View attachment 303183
