Here is my question to Senate Repubs

[berg80]

"Obstruction of Congress" is neither a High Crime nor a Misdemeanor.

Yet, it was one of the articles of impeachment as a result of the Nixon impeachment inquiry.

Nixon was never impeached.

Do you think you just scored some points with that disingenuous comment?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Executive privilege doesn't apply to hiding crimes.

Nobody is hiding anything. Show me where anybody in the Trump administration demonstrated criminal activity.

All you have to do is to read the Trump's "transcript" of the call. The "ask" is the crime. The other crimes were committed by staffers like Sondland, Morrison and Volker who tried to implement the extortion at the President's behest.

So please show me the law against a President asking a leader of another country to look into possible wrongdoings of our representatives.

The Democrats seem to believe that mere political candidacy protects them from criminal investigation.

Joe Biden has not been nominated, therefore he is not a political opponent

True, but the Democrats still attempt to apply the cloak.

 

[Thinker101]

"Obstruction of Congress" is neither a High Crime nor a Misdemeanor.

Yet, it was one of the articles of impeachment as a result of the Nixon impeachment inquiry.

Nixon was never impeached.

Do you think you just scored some points with that disingenuous comment?

We can get points? Sign me up.

 

[Anathema]

As difficult as it may be, we have to stop looking thru the lens of partisan politics. What Trump did represents an abuse of presidential power and is an illegal act. Dem, Repub, or Independent........when we go down the road of allowing such behavior to go on without accountability there is no putting that genie back in the bottle.

If we are to be honest, EVERY Federal politician since 1860 has committed Treason, among a long list of High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

 

[edward37]

It should also be noted that when Mike Pompeo was heading up one of the Benghazi Inquiries, he demanded tens of thousands of documents from the State Department, and then castigated Hillary Clinton's State Department for not producing the documents fast enough, and threatened to charge the Obama Administration with Obstruction of Congress, because they took too long.

Pompeo's State Department has refused to turn over a single document and has tried to block staff from testifying.

Pompeo is in deep doo doo now colluding with scum Guiliant to smear the women ambassador No wonder the pos didn't back her when she was removed

 

[blackhawk]

I have a simple litmus test for how seriously one really feels about this impeachment inquiry and how much you are just being a blind partisan. If everything was the same except the President being investigated was a Democrat and it was a Republican controlled House doing the impeachment inquiry would you still support it and if you are on the right would you still oppose it? For the record I feel this impeachment attempt is a total sham and is being doen simply because the Democrats did not get what they wanted with the Mueller investigation and if this was a Democrat President and Republican controlled House doing this I would feel the same way. Impeachment is a drastic and serious matter and should not used in a light hearted and trivial manner the way it is being used here I will remind the left this will not end when Trump leaves office one day the precedent that has been set by the Democrats with this attempted impeachment will be used against a Democrat President.

But............Trump broke the law when he solicited Ukraine's help in influencing a US election.

Section 201 - Bribery of public officials and witnesses, 18 U.S.C. § 201 | Casetext

So we can take your response to mean if this was a Democrat President and a Republican controlled House doing this you would still support impeachment.

As difficult as it may be, we have to stop looking thru the lens of partisan politics. What Trump did represents an abuse of presidential power and is an illegal act. Dem, Repub, or Independent........when we go down the road of allowing such behavior to go on without accountability there is no putting that genie back in the bottle.

Except he didn't we have just had two weeeks of Congressional testimoney where none of the witnesses provided any first hand knowledge of any crime by Trump. If you are going to try and impeach a President any President it must be done with facts and evidence second and third hand accounts of something along with opinions and presumption are neither. What we just saw would not get you a conviction in a court of law I know Congressional hearings are different from criminal trails but it does tell you how weak the arguement for impeaching Trump is.

 

[Defiant1]

What personal gain did Trump get? Please show me this personal gain of yours.

The solicitation of an investigation in to the Biden's is in itself a crime even if it was not delivered, just as attempted robbery is a crime even if it is not successful.

Wrong. A President has every right to ask a leader of another country if any of our representatives or agencies have committed crimes in their country. There is no law against that.

Not when the request is in regards to someone the prez may face in an election.

Nonsense. A candidate is not protected from criminal investigation by virtue of his candidacy.

The issue is that the investigation was being solicited by way of extorting Ukraine for the political benefit of Trump. That is a black letter violation of the law.

So you are saying Trump can't do anything that may tangentially benefit him?

 

[berg80]

As difficult as it may be, we have to stop looking thru the lens of partisan politics. What Trump did represents an abuse of presidential power and is an illegal act. Dem, Repub, or Independent........when we go down the road of allowing such behavior to go on without accountability there is no putting that genie back in the bottle.

If we are to be honest, EVERY Federal politician since 1860 has committed Treason, among a long list of High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Yikes!! That is the penultimate whataboutism. IOW, everyone is guilty of everything so let's do nothing about the crimes committed right in front of our eyes. Perfect.

 

[berg80]

The solicitation of an investigation in to the Biden's is in itself a crime even if it was not delivered, just as attempted robbery is a crime even if it is not successful.

Wrong. A President has every right to ask a leader of another country if any of our representatives or agencies have committed crimes in their country. There is no law against that.

Not when the request is in regards to someone the prez may face in an election.

Nonsense. A candidate is not protected from criminal investigation by virtue of his candidacy.

The issue is that the investigation was being solicited by way of extorting Ukraine for the political benefit of Trump. That is a black letter violation of the law.

So you are saying Trump can't do anything that may tangentially benefit him?

You're trying to parse this. He can not solicit, by way of extortion or by any means, the initiation of an investigation by..........wait for it............A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT............in to a political rival. Why is this concept so difficult for Trumpette's to understand?

FEC Chair Forced to Remind Trump (Again) That It Is 'Illegal' to Solicit Election Help From Foreign Governments
'Is This Thing On?': FEC Chair Forced to Remind Trump (Again) That It Is 'Illegal' to Solicit Election Help From Foreign Governments

 

[Anathema]

Yikes!! That is the penultimate whataboutism. IOW, everyone is guilty of everything so let's do nothing about the crimes committed right in front of our eyes. Perfect.

This entire country has existed in an unConstitutional paradigm since 1861. That state of existence was maintained, then greatly exacerbated by FDR and every POTUS since then. By working with those Presidents, and stealing additional powers and responsibilities for themselves as well, Congress is equally guilty.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Wrong. A President has every right to ask a leader of another country if any of our representatives or agencies have committed crimes in their country. There is no law against that.

Not when the request is in regards to someone the prez may face in an election.

Nonsense. A candidate is not protected from criminal investigation by virtue of his candidacy.

The issue is that the investigation was being solicited by way of extorting Ukraine for the political benefit of Trump. That is a black letter violation of the law.

So you are saying Trump can't do anything that may tangentially benefit him?

You're trying to parse this. He can not solicit, by way of extortion or by any means, the initiation of an investigation by..........wait for it............A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT............in to a political rival. Why is this concept so difficult for Trumpette's to understand?

FEC Chair Forced to Remind Trump (Again) That It Is 'Illegal' to Solicit Election Help From Foreign Governments
'Is This Thing On?': FEC Chair Forced to Remind Trump (Again) That It Is 'Illegal' to Solicit Election Help From Foreign Governments

You are a brick wall.

 

[Defiant1]

Wrong. A President has every right to ask a leader of another country if any of our representatives or agencies have committed crimes in their country. There is no law against that.

Not when the request is in regards to someone the prez may face in an election.

Nonsense. A candidate is not protected from criminal investigation by virtue of his candidacy.

The issue is that the investigation was being solicited by way of extorting Ukraine for the political benefit of Trump. That is a black letter violation of the law.

So you are saying Trump can't do anything that may tangentially benefit him?

You're trying to parse this. He can not solicit, by way of extortion or by any means, the initiation of an investigation by..........wait for it............A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT............in to a political rival. Why is this concept so difficult for Trumpette's to understand?

FEC Chair Forced to Remind Trump (Again) That It Is 'Illegal' to Solicit Election Help From Foreign Governments
'Is This Thing On?': FEC Chair Forced to Remind Trump (Again) That It Is 'Illegal' to Solicit Election Help From Foreign Governments

He isn't. That's just in your TDS mind.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wrong. A President has every right to ask a leader of another country if any of our representatives or agencies have committed crimes in their country. There is no law against that.

Not when the request is in regards to someone the prez may face in an election.

Nonsense. A candidate is not protected from criminal investigation by virtue of his candidacy.

The issue is that the investigation was being solicited by way of extorting Ukraine for the political benefit of Trump. That is a black letter violation of the law.

So you are saying Trump can't do anything that may tangentially benefit him?

You're trying to parse this. He can not solicit, by way of extortion or by any means, the initiation of an investigation by..........wait for it............A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT............in to a political rival. Why is this concept so difficult for Trumpette's to understand?

FEC Chair Forced to Remind Trump (Again) That It Is 'Illegal' to Solicit Election Help From Foreign Governments
'Is This Thing On?': FEC Chair Forced to Remind Trump (Again) That It Is 'Illegal' to Solicit Election Help From Foreign Governments

It's in reference to somebody soliciting for political purposes, which cannot be proven in this case. Again, Trump asked to have Zelensky look into suspicious activities by Biden, not because he was a political opponent, but because he was a representative of our country during the time. Biden was not, and is not, Trump's political opponent for the presidency of the United States.

 

[Maxdeath]

It should also be noted that when Mike Pompeo was heading up one of the Benghazi Inquiries, he demanded tens of thousands of documents from the State Department, and then castigated Hillary Clinton's State Department for not producing the documents fast enough, and threatened to charge the Obama Administration with Obstruction of Congress, because they took too long.

Pompeo's State Department has refused to turn over a single document and has tried to block staff from testifying.

No doubt the hypocrisy of Repubs is just stunning. There are no shortage of examples from Pompeo, Graham, Gowdy, Jordan, etc.
There's going to be a ruling on the McGahn case on Monday. I don't see how the court can rule he will not be compelled to testify unless the decision is left to Trump appointees. Once the ruling is made it gives the obstruction charge even more substantive legal backing. It is not disputable that Trump has obstructed a fully authorized impeachment inquiry...........just as Nixon did. It only takes one count of the articles of impeachment to pass to remove the prez. I don't see how the Repubs can vote against the charge of obstruction without twisting themselves in knots.

The Democrats will never see 67 Senate votes on this matter.

Not only that but a lot of Dems will be ruined as information on the money laundering in Ukraine comes out.
The senate will be allowed to actually call witnesses and ask questions of all witnesses. It will not be the narrow Schiff circus that it was in the house.

The information on money laundering in the Ukraine has already come out. It was called the "Black Ledger". Paul Manafort's name appear next to millions of dollars of payments. That was the damaging information that came out during the campaign that caused Trump to fire Manafort.

Trump is part of what Trump calls the "Ukrainian effort to undermine his candidacy". Trump is only in favour of people finding corruption that doesn't involve his friends.

Lol. I think you are forgetting Pelosi, Kerry, Podesta, Chalupa and the rest.
Hell Ukraine has been a money laundering setup for years. All the big players were giving so called aide so that it could be funneled into American pockets.

 

[berg80]

Not when the request is in regards to someone the prez may face in an election.

Nonsense. A candidate is not protected from criminal investigation by virtue of his candidacy.

The issue is that the investigation was being solicited by way of extorting Ukraine for the political benefit of Trump. That is a black letter violation of the law.

So you are saying Trump can't do anything that may tangentially benefit him?

You're trying to parse this. He can not solicit, by way of extortion or by any means, the initiation of an investigation by..........wait for it............A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT............in to a political rival. Why is this concept so difficult for Trumpette's to understand?

FEC Chair Forced to Remind Trump (Again) That It Is 'Illegal' to Solicit Election Help From Foreign Governments
'Is This Thing On?': FEC Chair Forced to Remind Trump (Again) That It Is 'Illegal' to Solicit Election Help From Foreign Governments

It's in reference to somebody soliciting for political purposes, which cannot be proven in this case. Again, Trump asked to have Zelensky look into suspicious activities by Biden, not because he was a political opponent, but because he was a representative of our country during the time. Biden was not, and is not, Trump's political opponent for the presidency of the United States.

What greater political purpose is there than trying to create a pretext for accusing the guy who at the time was the presumptive Dem nominee of something nefarious? Trump was following the same playbook he used in 2016. Make unsubstantiated claims of impropriety against your opponent rather than debating the issues. You know full well Trump's M.O. is character assassination. He has to make his opponent out to be corrupt so the evidence of his own corruption doesn't dominate the narrative. His strategy is to always be on the attack so he doesn't have to defend himself. Cuz..........you know.........he's a ***** grabbing adulterer and a business cheat who had his charitable foundation shut down because he stole from it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Nonsense. A candidate is not protected from criminal investigation by virtue of his candidacy.

The issue is that the investigation was being solicited by way of extorting Ukraine for the political benefit of Trump. That is a black letter violation of the law.

So you are saying Trump can't do anything that may tangentially benefit him?

You're trying to parse this. He can not solicit, by way of extortion or by any means, the initiation of an investigation by..........wait for it............A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT............in to a political rival. Why is this concept so difficult for Trumpette's to understand?

FEC Chair Forced to Remind Trump (Again) That It Is 'Illegal' to Solicit Election Help From Foreign Governments
'Is This Thing On?': FEC Chair Forced to Remind Trump (Again) That It Is 'Illegal' to Solicit Election Help From Foreign Governments

It's in reference to somebody soliciting for political purposes, which cannot be proven in this case. Again, Trump asked to have Zelensky look into suspicious activities by Biden, not because he was a political opponent, but because he was a representative of our country during the time. Biden was not, and is not, Trump's political opponent for the presidency of the United States.

What greater political purpose is there than trying to create a pretext for accusing the guy who at the time was the presumptive Dem nominee of something nefarious? Trump was following the same playbook he used in 2016. Make unsubstantiated claims of impropriety against your opponent rather than debating the issues. You know full well Trump's M.O. is character assassination. He has to make his opponent out to be corrupt so the evidence of his own corruption doesn't dominate the narrative. His strategy is to always be on the attack so he doesn't have to defend himself. Cuz..........you know.........he's a ***** grabbing adulterer and a business cheat who had his charitable foundation shut down because he stole from it.

Politicians do that all the time. Look what they did to Romney. You can't get much of a cleaner cut guy than that. Never smoked, never drank, never used recreational narcotics, married to one woman.

And what did your side say about him? He's been involved in animal cruelty. He killed the husband of a worker at one of his companies by taking away his insurance. He attacked a gay kid in high school because he played a prank by giving him a haircut.

You can't legitimately impeach somebody because he cuts another politician on the other side down. What Trump was concerned about is what role Joe played in this whole Burisma thing; that is besides getting the prosecutor fired.

 

[Crepitus]

Members of the POT (party of Trump) and their right wing media cohorts are free to express their opinion that the impeachment inquiry is a sham. But those allegations don't change the constitutional authority given to the House committees to lawfully conduct it. So riddle me this.
We know for an absolute certainty Trump has obstructed the inquiry by refusing to release requested documents and by ordering that subpoenaed witnesses not testify. Therefore, we know one of the articles of impeachment will include a charge of obstruction.
Senate Repubs can disingenuously claim the extortion of Ukraine does not, in their minds, rise to the level of an impeachable offense. But how will they get around the fact Trump has obstructed the inquiry?

As an aside, it should be noted the Trump admin may open itself up to the commission of another impeachable offense. The hypocritical Trump lackey known as Lindsey Graham has requested from the State Dept. documents pertaining to Joe Biden's activities with respect to the US government's demands the corrupt prosecutor Shokin be removed from office because he refused to prosecute cases of corruption in Ukraine. If the admin acquiesces to this request while blocking the release of documents sought by the House Intel Committee in the course of its impeachment inquiry it runs the risk of being charged with selectively releasing documents for investigations it favors. Representing yet another abuse of power.

You can't charge a President with obstruction when he exercises his Executive Privilege outlined in the Constitution. The commies in the House do not run the entire government, and get what they want by demands.

Executive privilege doesn't apply to hiding crimes.

Nobody is hiding anything. Show me where anybody in the Trump administration demonstrated criminal activity.

We just had two weeks of public congressional testimony on that, did you sleep through it all?

No, I watched some of it before it got too boring. The testimonies all had to do with presumptions, not fact. The facts were that Trump instructed Sondland of no quid pro quo's. That's the only order he gave to Sondland in this matter. The rest he made assumptions on, and also testified that's what others did as well.

They all testified to what tRump admitted doing in his released "transcript".

 

[CWayne]

Members of the POT (party of Trump) and their right wing media cohorts are free to express their opinion that the impeachment inquiry is a sham. But those allegations don't change the constitutional authority given to the House committees to lawfully conduct it. So riddle me this.
We know for an absolute certainty Trump has obstructed the inquiry by refusing to release requested documents and by ordering that subpoenaed witnesses not testify. Therefore, we know one of the articles of impeachment will include a charge of obstruction.
Senate Repubs can disingenuously claim the extortion of Ukraine does not, in their minds, rise to the level of an impeachable offense. But how will they get around the fact Trump has obstructed the inquiry?

As an aside, it should be noted the Trump admin may open itself up to the commission of another impeachable offense. The hypocritical Trump lackey known as Lindsey Graham has requested from the State Dept. documents pertaining to Joe Biden's activities with respect to the US government's demands the corrupt prosecutor Shokin be removed from office because he refused to prosecute cases of corruption in Ukraine. If the admin acquiesces to this request while blocking the release of documents sought by the House Intel Committee in the course of its impeachment inquiry it runs the risk of being charged with selectively releasing documents for investigations it favors. Representing yet another abuse of power.

We know with certainty that Trump exercised Executive Privilege (not a crime) and that he was following precedent set by the prior Administration with regard to subpoenaed documents.

The Senate, having watched the impeachment by innuendo and opinion, will rightly conclude that there is no crime, will acquit, and then maybe we can get on with the rest of our lives.

 

[Nostra]

Members of the POT (party of Trump) and their right wing media cohorts are free to express their opinion that the impeachment inquiry is a sham. But those allegations don't change the constitutional authority given to the House committees to lawfully conduct it. So riddle me this.
We know for an absolute certainty Trump has obstructed the inquiry by refusing to release requested documents and by ordering that subpoenaed witnesses not testify. Therefore, we know one of the articles of impeachment will include a charge of obstruction.
Senate Repubs can disingenuously claim the extortion of Ukraine does not, in their minds, rise to the level of an impeachable offense. But how will they get around the fact Trump has obstructed the inquiry?

As an aside, it should be noted the Trump admin may open itself up to the commission of another impeachable offense. The hypocritical Trump lackey known as Lindsey Graham has requested from the State Dept. documents pertaining to Joe Biden's activities with respect to the US government's demands the corrupt prosecutor Shokin be removed from office because he refused to prosecute cases of corruption in Ukraine. If the admin acquiesces to this request while blocking the release of documents sought by the House Intel Committee in the course of its impeachment inquiry it runs the risk of being charged with selectively releasing documents for investigations it favors. Representing yet another abuse of power.

Why are you posting this here?

Do you think we have Senate Republicans posting on this site?

 

[Crepitus]

Members of the POT (party of Trump) and their right wing media cohorts are free to express their opinion that the impeachment inquiry is a sham. But those allegations don't change the constitutional authority given to the House committees to lawfully conduct it. So riddle me this.
We know for an absolute certainty Trump has obstructed the inquiry by refusing to release requested documents and by ordering that subpoenaed witnesses not testify. Therefore, we know one of the articles of impeachment will include a charge of obstruction.
Senate Repubs can disingenuously claim the extortion of Ukraine does not, in their minds, rise to the level of an impeachable offense. But how will they get around the fact Trump has obstructed the inquiry?

As an aside, it should be noted the Trump admin may open itself up to the commission of another impeachable offense. The hypocritical Trump lackey known as Lindsey Graham has requested from the State Dept. documents pertaining to Joe Biden's activities with respect to the US government's demands the corrupt prosecutor Shokin be removed from office because he refused to prosecute cases of corruption in Ukraine. If the admin acquiesces to this request while blocking the release of documents sought by the House Intel Committee in the course of its impeachment inquiry it runs the risk of being charged with selectively releasing documents for investigations it favors. Representing yet another abuse of power.

You can't charge a President with obstruction when he exercises his Executive Privilege outlined in the Constitution. The commies in the House do not run the entire government, and get what they want by demands.

Executive privilege doesn't apply to hiding crimes.

Nobody is hiding anything. Show me where anybody in the Trump administration demonstrated criminal activity.

All you have to do is to read the Trump's "transcript" of the call. The "ask" is the crime. The other crimes were committed by staffers like Sondland, Morrison and Volker who tried to implement the extortion at the President's behest.

So please show me the law against a President asking a leader of another country to look into possible wrongdoings of our representatives.

Lol, the republicans are WAAAY past that point kiddo. These last few days they've been admitting he did it, and even admitting it's wrong. Their new line is it's not an impeachable crime.