Offical Impeachment Thread

[bripat9643]

From the section you elided:

View attachment 289166

The treaty obligates each party to help the other. It doesn't limit requests in any way. It only specifies the conditions under which one party is obligated to assist the other.

What this proves, of course, is that you're a lying douchebag.

LOL

Lying fucking moron.... obligated if the required protocols are met.

Are you ever not a lying fucking moron?

Ever???

Yes, they are obligated if the USA follows the proper procedures. That doesn't mean failing to follow the correct procedures is a crime, you fucking moron. It just means that the USA won't be entitled to receive the services detailed by the treaty.

How don't know how many times I have to pound this into your fucking skull before it dawns on you.

Lying fucking moron, I never said not following the required protocols of that treaty was a crime. I said not following those protocols means trump was not acting under the jurisdiction of that treaty. Doing so is not a crime and I even said that already.

Are you ever not a lying fucking moron?

Ever???

If it's not a crime, then why even bring up the fact that he wasn't "authorized?" You've been trying to claim that it was only legal for AG Barr to make a request. Which therefor means Trump's request on the phone call was illegal.

Who are you trying to fool?

hey dumbass - Barr doesnt have the juice to hold back $$ to foreign countries.

how f'n stupid are you ............

Who said he did?

 

[edward37]

SHOW US your taxes
Judge tosses Trump suit over New York tax returns, rejects conspiracy claim
Maybe now we can find out all about the crook

 

[Hutch Starskey]

There's been no trial yet, lying fucking moron. What part of that escapes your lying fucking moronicship?

You already admitted it's not the same thing. The fact that Trump isn't getting due process couldn't be more obvious.

That's why I said, "essentially," ya lying fucking moron.

The only difference is one is regarding legal matters while the other is political matters.

But since you want to harp on that difference, show where the Constitution grants due process to non-legal matters....

In other words, not the same thing. On the one hand, you want us to believe that Schiff's kangaroo court is some kind of legal process observing due process, and on the other you want to take all the rules of due process and throw them out the window. You can't have it both ways, turd.

You failed to address my question.... where does the Constitution afford due process on non-legal matters?

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

LOL....That's exactly what it means, dope.

 

[bripat9643]

You already admitted it's not the same thing. The fact that Trump isn't getting due process couldn't be more obvious.

That's why I said, "essentially," ya lying fucking moron.

The only difference is one is regarding legal matters while the other is political matters.

But since you want to harp on that difference, show where the Constitution grants due process to non-legal matters....

In other words, not the same thing. On the one hand, you want us to believe that Schiff's kangaroo court is some kind of legal process observing due process, and on the other you want to take all the rules of due process and throw them out the window. You can't have it both ways, turd.

You failed to address my question.... where does the Constitution afford due process on non-legal matters?

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

LOL....That's exactly what it means, dope.

Wrong, dumbass.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

LOLOL

Lying fucking moron, Fruitcake posted it...

View attachment 289170


And YOU marked it a 'winner'.

You literally hit 'winner' on a post you just doubted exists. That's how big of a lying fucking moron you are.

I can't even follow this argument any more. What "lie" am I posting?

LOLOL

Are you ever not a lying fucking moron?

Ever??

I asked a question. How can that be a lie?

You are such a fucking moron.

Lying fucking moron, you literally hit 'winner' on a post you doubted existed.

I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.

I'm done participating in this thread.

I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.

That's apparent.
Even after it's spoon fed to you.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

That's why I said, "essentially," ya lying fucking moron.

The only difference is one is regarding legal matters while the other is political matters.

But since you want to harp on that difference, show where the Constitution grants due process to non-legal matters....

In other words, not the same thing. On the one hand, you want us to believe that Schiff's kangaroo court is some kind of legal process observing due process, and on the other you want to take all the rules of due process and throw them out the window. You can't have it both ways, turd.

You failed to address my question.... where does the Constitution afford due process on non-legal matters?

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

LOL....That's exactly what it means, dope.

Wrong, dumbass.

It can't be both a constitutional process and a "kangaroo court", dope.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No...it doesn't matter and I'm sure the Senate will be much more interested in testimony from all the witnesses with firsthand knowledge of the President's actions.

If it doesn't matter, then why are Schiff ass kissing turds like you trying so hard to get everyone to ignore him?

The Senate is going to rake the so-called "whistleblower" over the coals. For a least a week we will be regaled with all the evidence that he hates Trump and that he has been conspiring for three years stage a coup against him.

Schiff will also have his time in the hot seat. He won't be coming back to the House next year.

So what?
He could pledge his undying murderous hatred every day at the hearings...but the cat's out of the bag...Schiff has much better testimony to use.

Yes, I'm sure he does. The "whistleblower" will be called by the Republicans, not Schiff, moron. The "whistleblower" will expose the fact that this whole thing was a scheme and a sham.

Of course, that assumes there will even be a trial in the Senate, because after we learn all their is to know about how this whole sleazy mess got started, I'll be Nazi Pelosi drops the whole thing.

Reading comprehension really isn't your forte, is it?

What part of "it's not under Komrade Schiff for Brains' control" didn't you understand?

The chairman decides who testifies, dope.
It would take a majority vote in the committee to override the chairman.

 

[Faun]

LOL

Lying fucking moron.... obligated if the required protocols are met.

Are you ever not a lying fucking moron?

Ever???

You mean like if they meet with the Attorney General?

Stupid fuck.

I get it, the house of cards is collapsing and you depended on it to interfere with the election....

{Mark Zaid, one of the attorneys representing the intelligence community whistleblower at the center of the Democrats' ongoing impeachment inquiry, tweeted conspicuously in January 2017 that a "coup has started" and that "impeachment will follow ultimately."}

'Coup has started,' whistleblower's attorney said in 2017 posts calling for impeachment

Have someone explain the treaty to you, Fruitcake. It's above your reading comprehension level of See Spot Run.

I've been explaining it to you for a week, and you still don't get it.

Spits the forum's lying fucking moron who admits he doesn't understand the meaning of, "in accordance with the provisions of this treaty."

What don't I understand, shit for brains?

Already stated. There really is no need for the forum's lying fucking moron to reiterate that.

 

[Faun]

In other words, not the same thing. On the one hand, you want us to believe that Schiff's kangaroo court is some kind of legal process observing due process, and on the other you want to take all the rules of due process and throw them out the window. You can't have it both ways, turd.

You failed to address my question.... where does the Constitution afford due process on non-legal matters?

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

LOL....That's exactly what it means, dope.

Wrong, dumbass.

It can't be both a constitutional process and a "kangaroo court", dope.

Rationale and common sense eludes the USMB's lying fucking moron.

 

[bripat9643]

In other words, not the same thing. On the one hand, you want us to believe that Schiff's kangaroo court is some kind of legal process observing due process, and on the other you want to take all the rules of due process and throw them out the window. You can't have it both ways, turd.

You failed to address my question.... where does the Constitution afford due process on non-legal matters?

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

LOL....That's exactly what it means, dope.

Wrong, dumbass.

It can't be both a constitutional process and a "kangaroo court", dope.

Yes it can.

 

[bripat9643]

You mean like if they meet with the Attorney General?

Stupid fuck.

I get it, the house of cards is collapsing and you depended on it to interfere with the election....

{Mark Zaid, one of the attorneys representing the intelligence community whistleblower at the center of the Democrats' ongoing impeachment inquiry, tweeted conspicuously in January 2017 that a "coup has started" and that "impeachment will follow ultimately."}

'Coup has started,' whistleblower's attorney said in 2017 posts calling for impeachment

Have someone explain the treaty to you, Fruitcake. It's above your reading comprehension level of See Spot Run.

I've been explaining it to you for a week, and you still don't get it.

Spits the forum's lying fucking moron who admits he doesn't understand the meaning of, "in accordance with the provisions of this treaty."

What don't I understand, shit for brains?

Already stated. There really is no need for the forum's lying fucking moron to reiterate that.

In other words, you are afraid to say because then everyone will know what a moron you are.

 

[bripat9643]

If it doesn't matter, then why are Schiff ass kissing turds like you trying so hard to get everyone to ignore him?

The Senate is going to rake the so-called "whistleblower" over the coals. For a least a week we will be regaled with all the evidence that he hates Trump and that he has been conspiring for three years stage a coup against him.

Schiff will also have his time in the hot seat. He won't be coming back to the House next year.

So what?
He could pledge his undying murderous hatred every day at the hearings...but the cat's out of the bag...Schiff has much better testimony to use.

Yes, I'm sure he does. The "whistleblower" will be called by the Republicans, not Schiff, moron. The "whistleblower" will expose the fact that this whole thing was a scheme and a sham.

Of course, that assumes there will even be a trial in the Senate, because after we learn all their is to know about how this whole sleazy mess got started, I'll be Nazi Pelosi drops the whole thing.

Reading comprehension really isn't your forte, is it?

What part of "it's not under Komrade Schiff for Brains' control" didn't you understand?

The chairman decides who testifies, dope.
It would take a majority vote in the committee to override the chairman.

Only until it gets referred to the Senate. Do you actually believe the Repubs there won't make him testify?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

You failed to address my question.... where does the Constitution afford due process on non-legal matters?

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

LOL....That's exactly what it means, dope.

Wrong, dumbass.

It can't be both a constitutional process and a "kangaroo court", dope.

Yes it can.

Sure, dope.
Anything is possible when you have a poor understanding of your native language.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

I'm done riding on this wheel of circular logic. The Constitution doesn't prevent Piece of Schiff from conducting his kangaroo court. That doesn't mean it's not a kangaroo court.

LOL....That's exactly what it means, dope.

Wrong, dumbass.

It can't be both a constitutional process and a "kangaroo court", dope.

Yes it can.

Sure, dope.
Anything is possible when you have a poor understanding of your native language.

I understand it perfectly As all you leftwing douchebags have pointed out numerous times, the 6th Amendment doesn't apply to impeachments.

 

[easyt65]

At some point either a Republican or the US AG has to declare that 4 years of this non-stop undermining, lying, false accusations, attacks, foreign collusion, etc...is Conspiracy, Sedition, and Treason.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

So what?
He could pledge his undying murderous hatred every day at the hearings...but the cat's out of the bag...Schiff has much better testimony to use.

Yes, I'm sure he does. The "whistleblower" will be called by the Republicans, not Schiff, moron. The "whistleblower" will expose the fact that this whole thing was a scheme and a sham.

Of course, that assumes there will even be a trial in the Senate, because after we learn all their is to know about how this whole sleazy mess got started, I'll be Nazi Pelosi drops the whole thing.

Reading comprehension really isn't your forte, is it?

What part of "it's not under Komrade Schiff for Brains' control" didn't you understand?

The chairman decides who testifies, dope.
It would take a majority vote in the committee to override the chairman.

Only until it gets referred to the Senate. Do you actually believe the Repubs there won't make him testify?

To what end?
He/she only made the 911call. The existence of the house fire has since been confirmed by multiple witnesses and the firefighters are already on the scene.

 

[Faun]

Have someone explain the treaty to you, Fruitcake. It's above your reading comprehension level of See Spot Run.

I've been explaining it to you for a week, and you still don't get it.

Spits the forum's lying fucking moron who admits he doesn't understand the meaning of, "in accordance with the provisions of this treaty."

What don't I understand, shit for brains?

Already stated. There really is no need for the forum's lying fucking moron to reiterate that.

In other words, you are afraid to say because then everyone will know what a moron you are.

Stop lying, ya lying fucking moron.

I already stated what you don't understand in post 140

Stating again what you failed to understand before is futile.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

LOL....That's exactly what it means, dope.

Wrong, dumbass.

It can't be both a constitutional process and a "kangaroo court", dope.

Yes it can.

Sure, dope.
Anything is possible when you have a poor understanding of your native language.

I understand it perfectly As all you leftwing douchebags have pointed out numerous times, the 6th Amendment doesn't apply to impeachments.

You obviously don't. You only think you do.

By definition, a kangaroo court is not official or sanctioned and does not follow established standards.

 

[Faun]

At some point either a Republican or the US AG has to declare that 4 years of this non-stop undermining, lying, false accusations, attacks, foreign collusion, etc...is Conspiracy, Sedition, and Treason.

Cry to Republicans who started the two year Mueller investigation.

 

[LeftofLeft]

The Law Enforcement Assistance and Cooperation Treaty with Ukraine specifies that the designated officials of the two nations are the US Attorney General and the Ukraine Minister of Justice, (3.1.d.). The treaty binds those two offices--and so the usual rules in both nations, regarding those offices: In the Treaty. So from the New York Times, about the phone--Barbarous Anti-American sentiment is apparently what the White House has documented.

"A Justice Department official said that Mr. Barr had no knowledge of the call until the director of national intelligence and the intelligence community’s inspector general sent the department the whistle-blower’s criminal referral late last month, and that Mr. Trump has not spoken with the attorney general “about having Ukraine investigate anything relating to former Vice President Biden or his son.”

Political interference is not considered cause, stated in the Treaty provisions.

https://www.congress.gov/106/cdoc/tdoc16/CDOC-106tdoc16.pdf

Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!
(Red-Hatter waving takes on a new appearance. "Banzai! Surprise!" Attack on the USA apparently is supported--or on Ukraine, or Crimea!)

While Democrats encourage illegals to violate US Law by the masses, they choose to go after Trump under the guise of violating US Law. Pathetic.