All You Need to Know About Lt Col Vindman

[OKTexas]

You have no victim.........You have no crime..........Period.

One. A crime is not required for impeachment.

Two. Is attempted murder a crime?

LOL..............your one statement is SPOT ON.


There is no need for a crime..........we gonna IMPEACH HIM BECAUSE WE DON'T LIKE HIM.

From the mouth of Lindsey Graham:

“You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if this body determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role, Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”

So you are already giving up on a crime.............and back to we don't like Trump so they are going to do it anyway.

Thanks for clearing that up ............Some court of law here.......oops.....it's not.......it is the 3 ring circus congress. Gonna try and impeach a sitting president for NO CRIME.........

Imagine that.

No. He’s committed crimes. But he cannot be indicted or charged with them while he’s the president. That’s why he has survived the fact that he committed felony campaign finance violations, has violated the emoluments clause and has obstructed justice.

Impeachment is the means by which we can hold the president accountable for actual statutory crimes and “high crimes and misdemeanors”.

You ought to study what that last phrase means. It’s important. Dumb shit.

The Criminal Division of the DOJ says you're full of shit. But hey, facts don't matter to you commies, it's all about your propaganda and talking points.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.

Agreed.

It is also a political process. With political agendas and motivations where the final outcome may bear no resemblance to justice.

Impeaching a sitting president isn’t necessarily difficult to do. It only requires a majority vote by the house.

Conviction is a different matter. Conviction requires a 2/3rds vote by the senate.

Yep, and dismissal only requires a majority vote in the senate. That's likely to happen if it gets that far.

.

 

[ding]

Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.

Agreed.

It is also a political process. With political agendas and motivations where the final outcome may bear no resemblance to justice.

Impeaching a sitting president isn’t necessarily difficult to do. It only requires a majority vote by the house.

Conviction is a different matter. Conviction requires a 2/3rds vote by the senate.

Yep, and dismissal only requires a majority vote in the senate. That's likely to happen if it gets that far.

.

I don’t think so.

An impeached president must be convicted in the senate of at least one article of impeachment. If he is convicted of one article of impeachment, he is automatically removed.

To convict on an article of impeachment requires a 2/3rds vote of the senate.

 

[OKTexas]

Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.

Agreed.

It is also a political process. With political agendas and motivations where the final outcome may bear no resemblance to justice.

Impeaching a sitting president isn’t necessarily difficult to do. It only requires a majority vote by the house.

Conviction is a different matter. Conviction requires a 2/3rds vote by the senate.

Yep, and dismissal only requires a majority vote in the senate. That's likely to happen if it gets that far.

.

I don’t think so.

An impeached president must be convicted in the senate of at least one article of impeachment. If he is convicted of one article of impeachment, he is automatically removed.

To convict on an article of impeachment requires a 2/3rds vote of the senate.

You're wrong on both points. Carry on. Damn, you've been wrong a lot today. I notice you skipped right over my reply to your post.

.

.

 

[ding]

Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.

Agreed.

It is also a political process. With political agendas and motivations where the final outcome may bear no resemblance to justice.

Impeaching a sitting president isn’t necessarily difficult to do. It only requires a majority vote by the house.

Conviction is a different matter. Conviction requires a 2/3rds vote by the senate.

Yep, and dismissal only requires a majority vote in the senate. That's likely to happen if it gets that far.

.

I don’t think so.

An impeached president must be convicted in the senate of at least one article of impeachment. If he is convicted of one article of impeachment, he is automatically removed.

To convict on an article of impeachment requires a 2/3rds vote of the senate.

You're wrong on both points. Carry on. Damn, you've been wrong a lot today. I notice you skipped right over my reply to your post.

.

.

I didn’t skip over it. You said conviction required a majority. It doesn’t. It requires 2/3rds of the senate convicting in at least one article of impeachment.

As to the likelihood of a conviction, it’s pretty low because you’d have to get 67 votes out of 100 to convict. Not 51 like you believe.

You can look it up for yourself though.

Civics for Citizens: Everything You Need to Know about Impeachment - Andrew Goodman Foundation

What does the impeachment process look like?
In very simple terms, the impeachment process is as follows:

• First, Congress investigates and decides whether or not they want to pursue impeachment. If after a majority vote the House decides to approve any of the charges, a.k.a. the “Articles of Impeachment,” then the official in question is formally “impeached.”
• Next, the impeached official faces trial in the Senate, which has the final say on the matter.
• Lastly, the Senate must vote on each article separately. Each charge requires two-thirds voting “yes” for conviction. If there are multiple articles of impeachment, it only takes one conviction vote for removal to be automatic.

 

[OKTexas]

The accusations were that he withheld funding from Ukraine for dirt on Joe..............They say it didn't happen...............

Until you have that............YOU HAVE NOTHING.

We have that. We have what is needed for the inquiry.

Made up shit without a victim...........We already know what this is and so do you.....

You basically slipped and admitted it on this thread.......so did golfing.......gator......No crime needed to impeach........

And you went REVENGE........with the Benghazi statement.........because you knew I was calling you out

The fact is that no crime is needed to impeach. Why does that give you wood?

Because you hacks are not trying to impeach for a crime. You are trying to impeach because you don't like him.

Says volumes about your party. Just as the Ford Case..........IRS abuses an etc.

Did Donald Trump obstruct justice in regards to the investigation into Russian influence in the 2016 election?

NO!!!!!!

.

 

[OKTexas]

UPDATE: Publication of Manafort payments violated law, interfered in US election, Kyiv court rules | KyivPost - Ukraine's Global Voice

In reviewing an administrative case filed by lawmaker Boryslav Rozenblat, the court concluded that Artem Sytnyk, director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, and parliamentarian Serhiy Leshchenko acted illegally when they revealed that Manafort’s surname and signature were found in the so-called “black ledger” of ousted President Viktor Yanukovych’s Party of Regions.

The “black ledger” is alleged to be a secret accounting book showing suspicious payments by the party to a range of individuals and officials. It became a key document implicating Manafort in corruption in Ukraine, and helped to end his tenure as Trump’s campaign chair.

In a statement on its website, the court also appeared to describe the two men’s actions as constituting interference in the 2016 United States presidential election.

The release of information about the “black ledger,” which was part of a pre-trial investigation, “led to interference in the electoral processes of the United States in 2016 and harmed the interests of Ukraine as a state,” the court’s press service wrote.

The court also declared that Leshchenko acted illegally and termed his actions “interference in the external politics of Ukraine by spreading the above-mentioned information about Paul Manafort.”



In January 2017, the news site Politico published an article suggesting that Ukrainian government officials attempted to use the “black ledger” to interfere in the U.S. presidential election in favor of Trump’s rival for the presidency, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.[UOTE]

You are citing bullshit. It’s ******* weird.

It's BS to a Lib............That was the ruling of the Ukraine courts...........and they admitted meddling in the U.S. election to which it would help Hillary.........Those 2 charged gave it to a Democrat looking for dirt........imagine that ............leaked it to give advantage to Hillary....Didn't work did it......

But of course you will never admit that now will you.................

.

The time is going to come when you're going to have to admit that you attacked war veterans, and gold star families to support Donald Trump

What the hell does being a war veteran have to do with anything, hell, I'm a war vet and you have no problem attacking me.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.

Agreed.

It is also a political process. With political agendas and motivations where the final outcome may bear no resemblance to justice.

Impeaching a sitting president isn’t necessarily difficult to do. It only requires a majority vote by the house.

Conviction is a different matter. Conviction requires a 2/3rds vote by the senate.

Yep, and dismissal only requires a majority vote in the senate. That's likely to happen if it gets that far.

.

I don’t think so.

An impeached president must be convicted in the senate of at least one article of impeachment. If he is convicted of one article of impeachment, he is automatically removed.

To convict on an article of impeachment requires a 2/3rds vote of the senate.

You're wrong on both points. Carry on. Damn, you've been wrong a lot today. I notice you skipped right over my reply to your post.

.

.

I didn’t skip over it. You said conviction required a majority. It doesn’t. It requires 2/3rds of the senate convicting in at least one article of impeachment.

As to the likelihood of a conviction, it’s pretty low because you’d have to get 67 votes out of 100 to convict. Not 51 like you believe.

You can look it up for yourself though.

Civics for Citizens: Everything You Need to Know about Impeachment - Andrew Goodman Foundation

What does the impeachment process look like?
In very simple terms, the impeachment process is as follows:

• First, Congress investigates and decides whether or not they want to pursue impeachment. If after a majority vote the House decides to approve any of the charges, a.k.a. the “Articles of Impeachment,” then the official in question is formally “impeached.”
• Next, the impeached official faces trial in the Senate, which has the final say on the matter.
• Lastly, the Senate must vote on each article separately. Each charge requires two-thirds voting “yes” for conviction. If there are multiple articles of impeachment, it only takes one conviction vote for removal to be automatic.

You are correct, you didn't skip over my reply, I mistook you for another poster.

However, the senate can dismiss the articles of impeachment, it was tried with Clinton, but failed. Also removal is NOT automatic on conviction, which will never happen in this case. The senate can vote for censure or reprimand, they don't have to remove him.

.

 

[Katniss]

I've read through several posted comments and I'm convinced that most of you have no idea what it means to be an American. You have no idea what our Constitution says and you clearly didn't serve the country because you don't know the very basic pledge that service to your country means your loyalty is to country not a man sitting in the WH.

God damn it! What the **** is wrong with you people. This is not how American's behave or talk. I mean......seriously!!!!!!!!!......someone actually suggested murdering Lt Col Vindman because he followed the law of the land and his oath to the country.

This is disturbing on so many levels.

I never suggested murdering him...............I have quoted the UCMJ for going public against higher ranking officers...............His concern..........lol.............Where is the smoking gun...........did the aid get withheld unless Ukraine went after Biden.............

I've shown that the TEMPORARY hold was over advanced engines going to China. Yet the aid was released.............

Did this officer have this knowledge..........was he in the meetings that decided the temp freeze.........

If he wasn't ..........his Concern is NOTHING OF VALUE............because he wasn't in on the decision making of what Trump is being accused of..............If he accused the CIC of wrongdoing..........he better damn well have his shit in order............Because going public against the CIC without due cause is a CRIME under the UCMJ.

You remember that........if he's righteous then he has nothing to worry about..........I haven't heard he's righteous yet............Have you.

I wasn't referring to you but I did read your comments and am not at all reassured that you understand what it means to serve one's country.

I have taken the oath to serve my country. It's incredibly important to me and it scares the hell out of me that people on this site can carelessly toss aside someone's service because it doesn't fall in line with their party politics.

I served 10 years......and I'm still quoting the UCMJ.............show me the crime or you have nothing.

I repeat............You have no Victim..........because the Ukrainian Gov't says it didn't happen........

How do you have a crime without a victim....................you don't......case dismissed.

Well I hope you're no longer serving because I don't want people in the military that are happy to do the wrong thing because it doesn't outline how to do the right thing in the service manual.

Go back and look at the oath you took. Read it carefully. Then I suggest you rent the movie "A few good men" and skip to the very end. There's an important message there.

Abuse of Power isn't based on whether there is a victim. Also, I imagine the President of Ukraine isn't stupid enough to openly admit he was extorted. He still has to work with this Administration and good politicians keep disagreements behind closed doors. He also doesn't want to appear weak to his own citizens. That can lead to dire situations in that region.

Excuses............You have no proof he extorted anyone. And Ukraine is the so called victim.......They say he didn't do it.........so this whole circus act is Mickey Mouse production.

Well welcome to Disneyland! Buckle up baby.......it's going to be a wild ride. (cheeky grin)

 

[bodecea]

Vindman Was ‘Deeply Troubled’ By Trump’s Effort To ‘Subvert’ US Foreign Policy.

Who sets foreign policy, the President or every individual in the military?

Time to arrest him and toss him in Leavenworth to rot.

Vindman Was ‘Deeply Troubled’ By Trump’s Effort To ‘Subvert’ US Foreign Policy. Brit Hume Points Out His ‘Huge Fallacy’

No, he does not deserve prison for stating his opinion on the matter... let the House do their impeachment inquiry, and hold their impeachment vote and let the Sentae do their trial to see if Trump is guilty but let stop wanting to silence the opinions of those we disagree with...

You do know opinions aren't evidence, right?

.

But actions of a Lt Col can be punishable by death.

Oh this is priceless! Keep showing how much CRCs hate our military. We vets notice.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Vindman Was ‘Deeply Troubled’ By Trump’s Effort To ‘Subvert’ US Foreign Policy.

Who sets foreign policy, the President or every individual in the military?

Time to arrest him and toss him in Leavenworth to rot.

Vindman Was ‘Deeply Troubled’ By Trump’s Effort To ‘Subvert’ US Foreign Policy. Brit Hume Points Out His ‘Huge Fallacy’

No, he does not deserve prison for stating his opinion on the matter... let the House do their impeachment inquiry, and hold their impeachment vote and let the Sentae do their trial to see if Trump is guilty but let stop wanting to silence the opinions of those we disagree with...

You do know opinions aren't evidence, right?

.

But actions of a Lt Col can be punishable by death.

Oh this is priceless! Keep showing how much CRCs hate our military. We vets notice.

Treasonous military you mean. Yes, they are hated.

 

[gipper]

It's BS to a Lib............That was the ruling of the Ukraine courts...........and they admitted meddling in the U.S. election to which it would help Hillary.........Those 2 charged gave it to a Democrat looking for dirt........imagine that ............leaked it to give advantage to Hillary....Didn't work did it......

But of course you will never admit that now will you.................

It is total BS. You have no shame.

LOL

Evidence points to your side..........NOT TRUMP...........Your side is the one with no shame.

IRS attacks..........
FISA abuse......proven by the courts......Admiral Rodgers.....Clapper hates that guy.
Lying under oath by top FBI guys and intel guys...........

We will see who's lying on this...........You do know the Grand Juries are now going for some of the left's hero's right now...........lol

Your side needs a crime to give to the Senate..........what is the crime you are investigating.....You can't prove quid pro quo.............so what is it.

A crime is not required for impeachment. How many times do you have to be reminded of that fact.

And, there was absolutely a quid pro quo. There was soliciting campaign assistance. There has been obstruction. There has been a cover up.

Trump will be impeached. The Senate will not convict.

The hearings will further erode Trump’s minority of support. He will lose the election. He will then be indicted for crimes that he has committed.

You will stick with him the whole way because you are a really stupid Trombie asslicker.

Stop whining.

I don’t whine. I also don’t believe bullshit conspiracy theories.

Yes of course. In your mind any corruption by Ds is conspiracy theory, but Rs are guilty every time.

partisans. Ugh!

 

[LoneLaugher]

It is total BS. You have no shame.

LOL

Evidence points to your side..........NOT TRUMP...........Your side is the one with no shame.

IRS attacks..........
FISA abuse......proven by the courts......Admiral Rodgers.....Clapper hates that guy.
Lying under oath by top FBI guys and intel guys...........

We will see who's lying on this...........You do know the Grand Juries are now going for some of the left's hero's right now...........lol

Your side needs a crime to give to the Senate..........what is the crime you are investigating.....You can't prove quid pro quo.............so what is it.

A crime is not required for impeachment. How many times do you have to be reminded of that fact.

And, there was absolutely a quid pro quo. There was soliciting campaign assistance. There has been obstruction. There has been a cover up.

Trump will be impeached. The Senate will not convict.

The hearings will further erode Trump’s minority of support. He will lose the election. He will then be indicted for crimes that he has committed.

You will stick with him the whole way because you are a really stupid Trombie asslicker.

Stop whining.

I don’t whine. I also don’t believe bullshit conspiracy theories.

Yes of course. In your mind any corruption by Ds is conspiracy theory, but Rs are guilty every time.

partisans. Ugh!

Provide me with an example of proven Dem corruption. See how I react. Key word, proven.

 

[Lesh]

Your sympathy is not required.......nor wanted..............You have come in here spouting the Dems mantra.......and expect me to believe you when you think it's a bad idea..........I highly doubt that.

Again................Where is the Quid Pro Quo........and did this officer have the knowledge of the problem with the engines........for a temp freeze of aid............

He was concerned but UKRAINE isn't..............the victim said ........HEY GUYS I DIDN'T GET RAPED BY TRUMP...........but the DEMS SAY STFU Ukraine ...............YOU WERE RAPED BECAUSE WE SAY SO.

Enjoy the show Gator gone golfing........because that is all this is.

Trumpers latch on to these phrases and then pretend that their version of reality is the only one.

You're pretending that the only issue is whether or not there was a QPQ. False narrative.

The mere ASK in the phone call was illegal and worthy of Impeachment.

Just ASKING a foreign leader to help Trump get re-elected is Impeachable.

Just ASKING that Ukraine help get Manafort off (yes that happened too) is Impeachable

The fact that there WAS a QPQ is just more fuel for the fire....

So when Obama asked Putin to give him till after the election to make a deal. That is also an impeachable offense? I mean he did ask a foreign leader help with his reelection.

Except that did NOT a happen and you are mischaracterizing what Did happen.

also. No personal gain involved

Then what did he ask Putin to do? He got busted because he was too stupid to realize he was on a live mic.

Your sympathy is not required.......nor wanted..............You have come in here spouting the Dems mantra.......and expect me to believe you when you think it's a bad idea..........I highly doubt that.

Again................Where is the Quid Pro Quo........and did this officer have the knowledge of the problem with the engines........for a temp freeze of aid............

He was concerned but UKRAINE isn't..............the victim said ........HEY GUYS I DIDN'T GET RAPED BY TRUMP...........but the DEMS SAY STFU Ukraine ...............YOU WERE RAPED BECAUSE WE SAY SO.

Enjoy the show Gator gone golfing........because that is all this is.

Trumpers latch on to these phrases and then pretend that their version of reality is the only one.

You're pretending that the only issue is whether or not there was a QPQ. False narrative.

The mere ASK in the phone call was illegal and worthy of Impeachment.

Just ASKING a foreign leader to help Trump get re-elected is Impeachable.

Just ASKING that Ukraine help get Manafort off (yes that happened too) is Impeachable

The fact that there WAS a QPQ is just more fuel for the fire....

So when Obama asked Putin to give him till after the election to make a deal. That is also an impeachable offense? I mean he did ask a foreign leader help with his reelection.

Except that did NOT a happen and you are mischaracterizing what Did happen.

also. No personal gain involved

Obama was Putin’s puppet. It’s clear.

I know, they loved him till Putin told Obama where to go.

He wasn't even talking to Putin dope

 

[jknowgood]

Your sympathy is not required.......nor wanted..............You have come in here spouting the Dems mantra.......and expect me to believe you when you think it's a bad idea..........I highly doubt that.

Again................Where is the Quid Pro Quo........and did this officer have the knowledge of the problem with the engines........for a temp freeze of aid............

He was concerned but UKRAINE isn't..............the victim said ........HEY GUYS I DIDN'T GET RAPED BY TRUMP...........but the DEMS SAY STFU Ukraine ...............YOU WERE RAPED BECAUSE WE SAY SO.

Enjoy the show Gator gone golfing........because that is all this is.

Trumpers latch on to these phrases and then pretend that their version of reality is the only one.

You're pretending that the only issue is whether or not there was a QPQ. False narrative.

The mere ASK in the phone call was illegal and worthy of Impeachment.

Just ASKING a foreign leader to help Trump get re-elected is Impeachable.

Just ASKING that Ukraine help get Manafort off (yes that happened too) is Impeachable

The fact that there WAS a QPQ is just more fuel for the fire....

So when Obama asked Putin to give him till after the election to make a deal. That is also an impeachable offense? I mean he did ask a foreign leader help with his reelection.

Except that did NOT a happen and you are mischaracterizing what Did happen.

also. No personal gain involved

Then what did he ask Putin to do? He got busted because he was too stupid to realize he was on a live mic.

Trumpers latch on to these phrases and then pretend that their version of reality is the only one.

You're pretending that the only issue is whether or not there was a QPQ. False narrative.

The mere ASK in the phone call was illegal and worthy of Impeachment.

Just ASKING a foreign leader to help Trump get re-elected is Impeachable.

Just ASKING that Ukraine help get Manafort off (yes that happened too) is Impeachable

The fact that there WAS a QPQ is just more fuel for the fire....

So when Obama asked Putin to give him till after the election to make a deal. That is also an impeachable offense? I mean he did ask a foreign leader help with his reelection.

Except that did NOT a happen and you are mischaracterizing what Did happen.

also. No personal gain involved

Obama was Putin’s puppet. It’s clear.

I know, they loved him till Putin told Obama where to go.

He wasn't even talking to Putin dope

Lol, ok. Who was Obama's message suppose to be for?

 

[gipper]

LOL

Evidence points to your side..........NOT TRUMP...........Your side is the one with no shame.

IRS attacks..........
FISA abuse......proven by the courts......Admiral Rodgers.....Clapper hates that guy.
Lying under oath by top FBI guys and intel guys...........

We will see who's lying on this...........You do know the Grand Juries are now going for some of the left's hero's right now...........lol

Your side needs a crime to give to the Senate..........what is the crime you are investigating.....You can't prove quid pro quo.............so what is it.

A crime is not required for impeachment. How many times do you have to be reminded of that fact.

And, there was absolutely a quid pro quo. There was soliciting campaign assistance. There has been obstruction. There has been a cover up.

Trump will be impeached. The Senate will not convict.

The hearings will further erode Trump’s minority of support. He will lose the election. He will then be indicted for crimes that he has committed.

You will stick with him the whole way because you are a really stupid Trombie asslicker.

Stop whining.

I don’t whine. I also don’t believe bullshit conspiracy theories.

Yes of course. In your mind any corruption by Ds is conspiracy theory, but Rs are guilty every time.

partisans. Ugh!

Provide me with an example of proven Dem corruption. See how I react. Key word, proven.

Yes we all know Dems aren’t ever corrupt. LMFAO.

 

[LoneLaugher]

A crime is not required for impeachment. How many times do you have to be reminded of that fact.

And, there was absolutely a quid pro quo. There was soliciting campaign assistance. There has been obstruction. There has been a cover up.

Trump will be impeached. The Senate will not convict.

The hearings will further erode Trump’s minority of support. He will lose the election. He will then be indicted for crimes that he has committed.

You will stick with him the whole way because you are a really stupid Trombie asslicker.

Stop whining.

I don’t whine. I also don’t believe bullshit conspiracy theories.

Yes of course. In your mind any corruption by Ds is conspiracy theory, but Rs are guilty every time.

partisans. Ugh!

Provide me with an example of proven Dem corruption. See how I react. Key word, proven.

Yes we all know Dems aren’t ever corrupt. LMFAO.

Have you got a proven example or not?

 

[ding]

Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.

Agreed.

It is also a political process. With political agendas and motivations where the final outcome may bear no resemblance to justice.

Impeaching a sitting president isn’t necessarily difficult to do. It only requires a majority vote by the house.

Conviction is a different matter. Conviction requires a 2/3rds vote by the senate.

Yep, and dismissal only requires a majority vote in the senate. That's likely to happen if it gets that far.

.

I don’t think so.

An impeached president must be convicted in the senate of at least one article of impeachment. If he is convicted of one article of impeachment, he is automatically removed.

To convict on an article of impeachment requires a 2/3rds vote of the senate.

You're wrong on both points. Carry on. Damn, you've been wrong a lot today. I notice you skipped right over my reply to your post.

.

.

I didn’t skip over it. You said conviction required a majority. It doesn’t. It requires 2/3rds of the senate convicting in at least one article of impeachment.

As to the likelihood of a conviction, it’s pretty low because you’d have to get 67 votes out of 100 to convict. Not 51 like you believe.

You can look it up for yourself though.

Civics for Citizens: Everything You Need to Know about Impeachment - Andrew Goodman Foundation

What does the impeachment process look like?
In very simple terms, the impeachment process is as follows:

• First, Congress investigates and decides whether or not they want to pursue impeachment. If after a majority vote the House decides to approve any of the charges, a.k.a. the “Articles of Impeachment,” then the official in question is formally “impeached.”
• Next, the impeached official faces trial in the Senate, which has the final say on the matter.
• Lastly, the Senate must vote on each article separately. Each charge requires two-thirds voting “yes” for conviction. If there are multiple articles of impeachment, it only takes one conviction vote for removal to be automatic.

You are correct, you didn't skip over my reply, I mistook you for another poster.

However, the senate can dismiss the articles of impeachment, it was tried with Clinton, but failed. Also removal is NOT automatic on conviction, which will never happen in this case. The senate can vote for censure or reprimand, they don't have to remove him.

.

Once impeached by house the senate holds a trial. If the president is convicted on any article of impeachment he is automatically removed. Dismissal only occurs if no article receives 2/3rds of the votes in the senate.

 

[gipper]

Stop whining.

I don’t whine. I also don’t believe bullshit conspiracy theories.

Yes of course. In your mind any corruption by Ds is conspiracy theory, but Rs are guilty every time.

partisans. Ugh!

Provide me with an example of proven Dem corruption. See how I react. Key word, proven.

Yes we all know Dems aren’t ever corrupt. LMFAO.

Have you got a proven example or not?

If you need ONE, you have clearly admitted to being a dunce.

Do you work for the D Party? Be honest. Because I don’t think you can really be this foolish otherwise. Please stop with the propaganda. It’s not working. Go back to watching porn all day. You’re better at that.

 

[IM2]

Vindman Was ‘Deeply Troubled’ By Trump’s Effort To ‘Subvert’ US Foreign Policy.

Who sets foreign policy, the President or every individual in the military?

Time to arrest him and toss him in Leavenworth to rot.

Vindman Was ‘Deeply Troubled’ By Trump’s Effort To ‘Subvert’ US Foreign Policy. Brit Hume Points Out His ‘Huge Fallacy’

No, he does not deserve prison for stating his opinion on the matter... let the House do their impeachment inquiry, and hold their impeachment vote and let the Sentae do their trial to see if Trump is guilty but let stop wanting to silence the opinions of those we disagree with...

It’s my understanding he was talking to Ukraine officials trying to subvert the President.

Your understanding is incorrect and derived from fake news.