"Your Money Or Life," "Your Announcement or Your national defense," are actually recognized in US Law to be illegal. The caveat is that, "Your announcement or your National Defense," is never put on the actual tapes--until recently. The President's foul language is usually a Tweet, for example. Do Republicans even think that attempted murder rises to the level of an impeachable offense?
Conditional Assault Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.
So is it attempted murder, a veiled threat even? There is the widely public case, now, of the girlfriend promoting the suicide. "Stop seeing so and so, or I'll kill him!" is probably laughed off like the same President at NATO. Cutting off the lawful military assistance, then suggesting--weak language--a possible favor--even weaker language--has the problem of the evidence. The suicide victim is dead, the threats public evidence. The aid was "On Hold," easily public record in both Ukraine, Congress, and whatever the White House considers to be national origins of Mafia Don(?)!
So where Republicans are shouting and screaming veiled threats at witnesses--Committee members and the President himself--then what is anyone seeing? The famous "Mary Poppins" witness at the Schiff hearings felt threatened. There is testimony. It mirrors what happened leading up to the ambassadorial termination.
The broadly stated answer is, "Articles of Impeachment!" The specific evidence now fills reams, books--and whatever anyone put in the Reagan Library, even--the planes(?).
Treason would be difficult to show, but easy to infer, even.
____________________________
"With assault defined in terms of attempted battery, one may point a loaded gun at another, or flourish a knife in his face, with a threat, which he intends to carry out, to injure the other unless the latter does something he is not legally obliged to do or refrains from doing something he is legally entitled to do -- as where A, with loaded gun pointed, tells B, 'I'll shoot you if you say that again' or 'I'll fire if you don't raise your hands.' It is no defense to assault of the attempted-battery sort that the victim can and does avoid injury by acceding to the other's unlawful condition; or, putting it another way, the required intent to injure is not negatived by such a condition which accompanies the defendant's act and threat." [People v. Johnson, 407 Mich. 196, 245 (Mich. 1979)].
______________________
"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(So Great Pharaoh sent the Prince--Big Nosed, Moustache, and Glasses(?)--into the desert, disguised as an "Exile"--or having changed his name(?). Acts 7 reports that the Prince was skilled in the Great Pharaoh's subjugating arts. (The clarity is shown in Old Testament.) Agents would be created, and given even an edict, a non-negotiable demand: Deut. 23: 19-20. The Subjugation of People's--and in a lot of history--became the outcome, (Matt 25:14-30). Homeless denizens, even now: Are clearly public evidence.)
Conditional Assault Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.
So is it attempted murder, a veiled threat even? There is the widely public case, now, of the girlfriend promoting the suicide. "Stop seeing so and so, or I'll kill him!" is probably laughed off like the same President at NATO. Cutting off the lawful military assistance, then suggesting--weak language--a possible favor--even weaker language--has the problem of the evidence. The suicide victim is dead, the threats public evidence. The aid was "On Hold," easily public record in both Ukraine, Congress, and whatever the White House considers to be national origins of Mafia Don(?)!
So where Republicans are shouting and screaming veiled threats at witnesses--Committee members and the President himself--then what is anyone seeing? The famous "Mary Poppins" witness at the Schiff hearings felt threatened. There is testimony. It mirrors what happened leading up to the ambassadorial termination.
The broadly stated answer is, "Articles of Impeachment!" The specific evidence now fills reams, books--and whatever anyone put in the Reagan Library, even--the planes(?).
Treason would be difficult to show, but easy to infer, even.
____________________________
"With assault defined in terms of attempted battery, one may point a loaded gun at another, or flourish a knife in his face, with a threat, which he intends to carry out, to injure the other unless the latter does something he is not legally obliged to do or refrains from doing something he is legally entitled to do -- as where A, with loaded gun pointed, tells B, 'I'll shoot you if you say that again' or 'I'll fire if you don't raise your hands.' It is no defense to assault of the attempted-battery sort that the victim can and does avoid injury by acceding to the other's unlawful condition; or, putting it another way, the required intent to injure is not negatived by such a condition which accompanies the defendant's act and threat." [People v. Johnson, 407 Mich. 196, 245 (Mich. 1979)].
______________________
"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(So Great Pharaoh sent the Prince--Big Nosed, Moustache, and Glasses(?)--into the desert, disguised as an "Exile"--or having changed his name(?). Acts 7 reports that the Prince was skilled in the Great Pharaoh's subjugating arts. (The clarity is shown in Old Testament.) Agents would be created, and given even an edict, a non-negotiable demand: Deut. 23: 19-20. The Subjugation of People's--and in a lot of history--became the outcome, (Matt 25:14-30). Homeless denizens, even now: Are clearly public evidence.)
Last edited:
