Offical Impeachment Thread

[OKTexas]

At this point, yep, with some defections from the Ds. Right now I don't even see this crap making it to the senate. Like I said before, this is nothing but a commie campaign trick, pulling anything they can to try to effect public opinion.

.

.

it will go to trial. being removed is a whole other animal - but he'll get a trial.

Don't bet the farm on it child. LMAO

.

McConnell Shuts Down Early Dismissal Option for Impeachment Articles, Says Senate Will ‘Have to Have a Trial’
By Mairead McArdle
November 13, 2019 4:10 PM
Trump Impeachment -- Mitch McConnell Shuts Down Early Dismissal Option for Impeachment Articles | National Review

is devon nunes' cow on that there farm?

At this point I don't see the house even voting on articles. They don't want to commit political suicide.

.

then you need to take them blinders off ***** cat.

Perhaps you should learn what "blinders" are before trying to use it in a sentence. Your ignorance is showing. LMAO

.

 

[NotYourBody]

Apparently winning the election as a Republican President is an impeachable offense. Good luck losers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That ignores Reagan, Bush 41, and Bush the Lesser. None of them were impeached.

Getting an intern blow job is also an impeachable offense, don't forget that. I don't imagine that will be an issue for Trump because he has to pay for sex and interns don't get paid enough for that horror.

The blowjob was not an impeachable offense. Are you so much of a dumbass that you cannot read the Articles of Impeachment for Bubba Clinton?

He lied under oath.

About an intern blow job.

Did you read the articles of impeachment? Obviously not, you incredible dumbass!

High crimes and misdemeanors involving a BLOW JOB!

 

[NotYourBody]

She wasn't dismissed, she was reassigned. And the president doesn't need a reason.

.

uh - ya. i know & have said that in other posts. the question is ---- by the abassador herself was that ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the prez - but why was she 'smeared'?

Because he is covering up his real reason for getting her out of office. Next week, it comes very clear. It's not going to be a good month for Rump.

He doesn't have to have a reason, dumbass!

For someone who claims to be so smart, you really are a dumb MF!

Not once have I claimed to be that bright. Meanwhile, you are calling everyone around you a dumbass. Does that mean you are claiming to be Gods gift to bright boys? But it's pretty clear Rump had to get rid of her to get his lapdog into that position to get his bribery or blackmail to begin. The Ambassador was asked point blank if she would have supported any of this and she answered point blank, "No". And if you haven't noticed, the diplomatic community did NOT fire her. They sent her to train new Diplomats. Her support was so powerful that she received a standing ovation and loud applause as she left the chambers. Rump is in for a rough week starting next Wednesday when they start looking into what they have already opened up with the Professional Diplomats. If the Political Appointees try what Rump demands of them now, they go to prison. So look for them to come clean for a change. And Rump to go deeper and deeper.

.

OK, dumbass! You have prove yourself to be stupid more times than we can count.

She received applause because she gave them nothing? That is what you are claiming because she shot down every attempt by the Shiff-Show to find anything on Trump.

 

[OldLady]

Oh sorry, I thought you watched the testimony yesterday.

I did. I watched Schiff and Yovanovitch claim that Trump smeared her.

actually she said that rotten rudy smeared her & trump agreeing that she was 'bad news' is enough. btw, there NEVER was a reason given for her dismissal, even if idonny just didn't like her. no reason at all.

She wasn't dismissed, she was reassigned. And the president doesn't need a reason.

.

uh - ya. i know & have said that in other posts. the question is ---- by the abassador herself - was that ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the prez - but why was she 'smeared'?

Perhaps because she didn't support the incoming Ukraine admin or our president.

.

This is obstruction. Nothing has failed.

This is executive privilege, your article is FOS.

He cannot whine about not being allowed to present his "side," and then refuse to provide information to the committee that would supposedly "clear" him. He is telling his cronies not to testify, refusing the committee's subpoenas. That would be telling his side, wouldn't it? Why is he telling them not to testify?
Trump can't have it both ways. He needs to quit complaining about how unfair it is when he won't even come forward with his supposed defense, which I highly doubt he has--because it's obvious he's been caught red handed and the best he can do is hope enough people swallow his bullshit to keep him out of trouble.

I cant wait to hear your answer!!!

Haven't you followed me long enough to know I'm not a Democrat? My observations and judgments about Trump are not about his party, dude.

I have watched your insane LOVE of all things anti-Trump....So then tell us babe, what SPECIFICALLY don't you lik . Is it all your FEELINGS that he isn't a wussy like the Surrender Monkey?.What policies don't you like...his UNEMPLOYMENT NUMBERS, his STOCK MARKET. succes . Perhaps his trying to make us SAFE and save America BILLIONS OF $ from illegal invaders....maybe making NATO PAY UP for 6vdecades of us FOOTING THE BILL, or Collapsing China financially when they are screaming to roll back the tariffs, maybe the couple of % you got back in a TAX DEGREASE?....please let us all know.....oh, all you other ABNORMALS can jump in specifically why you are so butt hurt?

You'd love to turn this into a "Dems being butt hurt" issue, but it isn't. It is about what the President and Co. have done that it is a blatant misuse of his power and his not so good attempts to hide it. This is what this is about. Go take your "Dems are butt hurt" excuse and try dangling a $20 under some other poor schmuck's nose. I'm not buying.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

No I do not believe anything that I read. That would be you Trumpanzees

Why then, with what you posted, do you believe it means anything?

Why would you NOT believe that it means anything?

Didnt Trump allow you ALTERNATE LIFESTYLES to get gender neutral bathrooms and school locker rooms....The little Surrender Monkey never did so much for you folks...BTW, one of the few things I disagree with him about, but OUTWEIGHED by his GREAT POLICIES!

I won't dignify your troll post with a response

Not a troll post, but I understand you refuse to answer...put you in a bad light if you were honest!

Not a troll post. ??What the **** is a post on a thread about impeachment that brings up bathrooms and gender called? Are you really that stupid?

 

[OldLady]

This is obstruction. Nothing has failed.

This is executive privilege, your article is FOS.

He cannot whine about not being allowed to present his "side," and then refuse to provide information to the committee that would supposedly "clear" him. He is telling his cronies not to testify, refusing the committee's subpoenas. That would be telling his side, wouldn't it? Why is he telling them not to testify?
Trump can't have it both ways. He needs to quit complaining about how unfair it is when he won't even come forward with his supposed defense, which I highly doubt he has--because it's obvious he's been caught red handed and the best he can do is hope enough people swallow his bullshit to keep him out of trouble.

Look OL, up to this point this has all been 100% the democrat's show. It is the democrats who want it both ways. They don't want TRump's people to clear him, they want to use them to finagle more bullcrap to try to twist around to hit him over the head with! And just why should TRump go along with that?

THE DEMOCRAT'S HAVE ALREADY ACCUSED AND CHARGED TRUMP WITH THE CONCLUSIONS OF CRIMES. You don't do that if you haven't even finished your investigation, much less heard from and allowed the defendant to present his side. Either they have the proof to back that up or they should be charged with liable and defamation.



And sadly, Nancy, calling an investigation into YOU fake, that you know nothing about because it hurts and would expose your party, is both divisive, dishonest and LYING. SO YOU ARE IMMEDIATELY DISCOUNTED FROM ALL FUTURE CONSIDERATION AS A FACTUAL WITNESS ON ANYTHING.

And the very fact that the reporter doesn't ASK HER why the investigation by Trump into the democrats is "fake" or what is fake about it proves they are about as worthless and fraudulent as she is.

They don't want TRump's people to clear him, they want to use them to finagle more bullcrap to try to twist around to hit him over the head with! And just why should TRump go along with that?
But Toob, how else can he give his side without providing testimony? I heard is press briefing from... Friday, was it? ... where he complained bitterly about not having fair representation, violating his rights, etc. etc., but then he won't let his side testify.

It's all coming when the actual impeachment hearing comes and the GOP, Barr and Trump are allowed to present anything THEY want!!!

Exactly.

 

[OKTexas]

Ukraine Knew of Aid Freeze by Early August, Undermining Trump Defense

Top officials were told in early August about the delay of $391 million in security assistance, undercutting a chief argument President Trump has used to deny any quid pro quo.

To Democrats who say that President Trump’s decision to freeze $391 million in military aid was intended to bully Ukraine’s leader into carrying out investigations for Mr. Trump’s political benefit, the president and his allies have had a simple response: There was no quid pro quo because the Ukrainians did not know assistance had been blocked. the freeze was directly linked to Mr. Trump’s demand. That did not deter the president, who on Wednesday approvingly tweeted a quote by a congressional Republican saying neither Mr. Taylor nor any other witness had “provided testimony that the Ukrainians were aware that military aid was being withheld.”

In fact, word of the aid freeze had gotten to high-level Ukrainian officials by the first week in August, according to interviews and documents obtained by The New York Times.

weeks earlier than acknowledged.

Ukraine Knew of Aid Freeze by Early August, Undermining Trump Defense

Ukraine Knew Trump Was Freezing Aid Over Biden

Ukrainian officials knew for months that President Donald Trump was withholding key military aid to their country over demands that Ukraine investigate Trump’s political rival and 2020 candidate Joe Biden, The New York Times reported on Wednesday.

The report, based on interviews and documents the Times obtained, directly contradicts Trump’s claim that there could not have been an improper quid pro quo arrangement because Ukrainian officials did not know the United States was withholding $391 million in military aid.

Instead, top Ukrainian officials reportedly knew of the aid freeze as early as the first week of August ― just days after Trump requested Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Biden during a July 25 phone call.

Ukraine Knew Trump Was Freezing Aid Over Biden, New York Times Reports | HuffPost

So he didn't know when the call was made, got it. Great unbiased sources I might add. LMAO

.

 

[OldLady]

uh - ya. i know & have said that in other posts. the question is ---- by the abassador herself was that ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the prez - but why was she 'smeared'?

Because he is covering up his real reason for getting her out of office. Next week, it comes very clear. It's not going to be a good month for Rump.

He doesn't have to have a reason, dumbass!

For someone who claims to be so smart, you really are a dumb MF!

Not once have I claimed to be that bright. Meanwhile, you are calling everyone around you a dumbass. Does that mean you are claiming to be Gods gift to bright boys? But it's pretty clear Rump had to get rid of her to get his lapdog into that position to get his bribery or blackmail to begin. The Ambassador was asked point blank if she would have supported any of this and she answered point blank, "No". And if you haven't noticed, the diplomatic community did NOT fire her. They sent her to train new Diplomats. Her support was so powerful that she received a standing ovation and loud applause as she left the chambers. Rump is in for a rough week starting next Wednesday when they start looking into what they have already opened up with the Professional Diplomats. If the Political Appointees try what Rump demands of them now, they go to prison. So look for them to come clean for a change. And Rump to go deeper and deeper.

.

OK, dumbass! You have prove yourself to be stupid more times than we can count.

She received applause because she gave them nothing? That is what you are claiming because she shot down every attempt by the Shiff-Show to find anything on Trump.

Someone on PBS said they were applauding Schiff. I dunno, that was confusing, except that the Republicans were trying to wash away the butt hurt President's tweets about her.

 

[BULLDOG]

Perhaps not. The right doesn't care how unethical he is, or if if he breaks our laws but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be called out for his unethical, unlawful behavior.

Which law did he break? Why is it you TDS libtards cannot find any support for any crime?

Three people have already testified that Trump did nothing illegal. Who else does Shiff-for-brains have up his sleeve?

Who were those people and what qualifies them to make that determination?

Why don't you ask Shiff? He claimed they were the star witnesses that would provide the smoking gun to nail Trump. Could it possibly be that he was lying yet again?

Because you are the one who made the claim here. Either back it up or admit you can't. Your call.

I didn't make a claim. You asked a nonsensical question. I asked you a question, but apparently you are too stupid to recognize what the "?" at the end means!

Perhaps not. The right doesn't care how unethical he is, or if if he breaks our laws but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be called out for his unethical, unlawful behavior.

Which law did he break? Why is it you TDS libtards cannot find any support for any crime?

Three people have already testified that Trump did nothing illegal. Who else does Shiff-for-brains have up his sleeve?

Who were those people and what qualifies them to make that determination?

Why don't you ask Shiff? He claimed they were the star witnesses that would provide the smoking gun to nail Trump. Could it possibly be that he was lying yet again?

Because you are the one who made the claim here. Either back it up or admit you can't. Your call.

I didn't make a claim. You asked a nonsensical question. I asked you a question, but apparently you are too stupid to recognize what the "?" at the end means!

Yes, you made a claim. in #3331
"Three people have already testified that Trump did nothing illegal"

I'll repeat my question.
Who were those three people and what qualifies them to make that determination?

 

[lennypartiv]

Trump WILL be Impeached. Want to bet?

And McConnell will have his back in the Senate. In the end Ukraine got their aid. You Dems got no case for impeachment.

 

[OKTexas]

Poor little short buy, I highlighted exactly what you said, being eligible to run for office is not an exemption from investigation. You commies are proving that on a daily basis. You're doing exactly what you're accusing Trump of doing. Don't think your short bus status excuses your hypocrisy.

.

You're ******* demented, dumbfuck cuck -- I never said Biden couldn't be investigated. I never said he shouldn't be investigated. You only think I said that because you're totally fucked in the head (i.e., typical conservative). I said Trump can't ask a foreign national to investigate Biden.

Wrong again short bus, he can ask for cooperation on anyone, remember, "NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW". Isn't that what you commies have been chanting for the last 3 years?

.

No, he cannot ask a foreign country to investigate his political opponents.

Are you saying running for office makes one immune form investigation? If not, we have a treaty with Ukraine on criminal investigations, I haven't seen where politicians are exempted form that treaty.

.

Investigate them all. But only picking one & wanting an announcement more than the actual investigation should be a hint.

Did any of the others have a son raking in millions from Burisma while they were running point for the country? Even officials from the maobama admin expressed concern, but when Trump express the same concern it's suddenly impeachable. Give me a freaking break.

.

 

[jameny5]

Could you say that numbo jumbo again? What about all that illegal money and tax breaks that Trump and his family has made and gotten! You were saying?

 

[OldLady]

Ukraine Knew of Aid Freeze by Early August, Undermining Trump Defense

Top officials were told in early August about the delay of $391 million in security assistance, undercutting a chief argument President Trump has used to deny any quid pro quo.

To Democrats who say that President Trump’s decision to freeze $391 million in military aid was intended to bully Ukraine’s leader into carrying out investigations for Mr. Trump’s political benefit, the president and his allies have had a simple response: There was no quid pro quo because the Ukrainians did not know assistance had been blocked. the freeze was directly linked to Mr. Trump’s demand. That did not deter the president, who on Wednesday approvingly tweeted a quote by a congressional Republican saying neither Mr. Taylor nor any other witness had “provided testimony that the Ukrainians were aware that military aid was being withheld.”

In fact, word of the aid freeze had gotten to high-level Ukrainian officials by the first week in August, according to interviews and documents obtained by The New York Times.

weeks earlier than acknowledged.

Ukraine Knew of Aid Freeze by Early August, Undermining Trump Defense

Ukraine Knew Trump Was Freezing Aid Over Biden

Ukrainian officials knew for months that President Donald Trump was withholding key military aid to their country over demands that Ukraine investigate Trump’s political rival and 2020 candidate Joe Biden, The New York Times reported on Wednesday.

The report, based on interviews and documents the Times obtained, directly contradicts Trump’s claim that there could not have been an improper quid pro quo arrangement because Ukrainian officials did not know the United States was withholding $391 million in military aid.

Instead, top Ukrainian officials reportedly knew of the aid freeze as early as the first week of August ― just days after Trump requested Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Biden during a July 25 phone call.

Ukraine Knew Trump Was Freezing Aid Over Biden, New York Times Reports | HuffPost

So he didn't know when the call was made, got it. Great unbiased sources I might add. LMAO

.

NYT doesn't publish without confirmation of facts. Their opinions may not please you but they wouldn't be publishing something like this, which is news, not op ed, if it hadn't been corroborated. Now, I know that you folks will just continue to find a Ukranian official who says they didn't know. You go for it. The truth continues to come out; you can't drown it out forever.

 

[bripat9643]

I did. I watched Schiff and Yovanovitch claim that Trump smeared her.

actually she said that rotten rudy smeared her & trump agreeing that she was 'bad news' is enough. btw, there NEVER was a reason given for her dismissal, even if idonny just didn't like her. no reason at all.

She wasn't dismissed, she was reassigned. And the president doesn't need a reason.

.

uh - ya. i know & have said that in other posts. the question is ---- by the abassador herself - was that ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the prez - but why was she 'smeared'?

Perhaps because she didn't support the incoming Ukraine admin or our president.

.

This is executive privilege, your article is FOS.

He cannot whine about not being allowed to present his "side," and then refuse to provide information to the committee that would supposedly "clear" him. He is telling his cronies not to testify, refusing the committee's subpoenas. That would be telling his side, wouldn't it? Why is he telling them not to testify?
Trump can't have it both ways. He needs to quit complaining about how unfair it is when he won't even come forward with his supposed defense, which I highly doubt he has--because it's obvious he's been caught red handed and the best he can do is hope enough people swallow his bullshit to keep him out of trouble.

I cant wait to hear your answer!!!

Haven't you followed me long enough to know I'm not a Democrat? My observations and judgments about Trump are not about his party, dude.

I have watched your insane LOVE of all things anti-Trump....So then tell us babe, what SPECIFICALLY don't you lik . Is it all your FEELINGS that he isn't a wussy like the Surrender Monkey?.What policies don't you like...his UNEMPLOYMENT NUMBERS, his STOCK MARKET. succes . Perhaps his trying to make us SAFE and save America BILLIONS OF $ from illegal invaders....maybe making NATO PAY UP for 6vdecades of us FOOTING THE BILL, or Collapsing China financially when they are screaming to roll back the tariffs, maybe the couple of % you got back in a TAX DEGREASE?....please let us all know.....oh, all you other ABNORMALS can jump in specifically why you are so butt hurt?

You'd love to turn this into a "Dems being butt hurt" issue, but it isn't. It is about what the President and Co. have done that it is a blatant misuse of his power and his not so good attempts to hide it. This is what this is about. Go take your "Dems are butt hurt" excuse and try dangling a $20 under some other poor schmuck's nose. I'm not buying.

It's about Dims being butthurt. That's all it's been about since the 2016 election.

 

[Lesh]

Trump WILL be Impeached. Want to bet?

And McConnell will have his back in the Senate. In the end Ukraine got their aid. You Dems got no case for impeachment.

Moscow Mitch more than likely doesn't care what Trump has done...neither do you

Ukraine ONLY got that aid because the whistle blower blew up Trump's scheme

There WILL be Impeachment

 

[OKTexas]

"Are you saying running for office makes one immune form investigation? If not, we have a treaty with Ukraine on criminal investigations, I haven't seen where politicians are exempted form that treaty."

It is against the law to ask a foreign government to investigate your political rival. Get that through your think skulls Trumpers. Stop being disingenuous.

Poor thing, the career people at the DOJ said you're wrong. Even folks in your dear leaders admin expressed concern about baby Biden, but when Trump does it's a crime? Give me a break. Riddle me this, if Biden wasn't running, would it still be a crime?

.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

NYT doesn't publish without confirmation of facts.

 

[lennypartiv]

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Ukraine eventually got the aid. There are no grounds for impeachment.

 

[OKTexas]

"Are you saying running for office makes one immune form investigation? If not, we have a treaty with Ukraine on criminal investigations, I haven't seen where politicians are exempted form that treaty."

It is against the law to ask a foreign government to investigate your political rival. Get that through your think skulls Trumpers. Stop being disingenuous.

Your side lost the election, IM2, move on and vote him out in a year.
No laws have been broken and Schiff and Pelosi know it, they are just trying to muddy the waters for
the inept and confused. Your stable of mules couldn't win an election for dog catcher....and they know it.

(R) nutters need to move on from that tired old excuse. if that happened, then y'all could finally stop bring up hillary everytime you hafta defend donny.

Consider this plan.

If the Democrats were actually clever.......they'd hold the hearings......and then vote not to impeach.

Why?
a. they know the Republican Senate is a dead end for the ploy
b. independent voters have made clear that they are sick of the charade
c. the only hope is to damage Trump for the election....and they can see that it isn't working
d. they realize that if it gets to the Senate.....the Republicans can recall not just the same 'witnesses'...and ask what they want
and when they want....
e. but they can call Schiff to testify!!!!

Yep, it's all about effecting the election, they know impeachment will go no where.

.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Because he is covering up his real reason for getting her out of office. Next week, it comes very clear. It's not going to be a good month for Rump.

He doesn't have to have a reason, dumbass!

For someone who claims to be so smart, you really are a dumb MF!

Not once have I claimed to be that bright. Meanwhile, you are calling everyone around you a dumbass. Does that mean you are claiming to be Gods gift to bright boys? But it's pretty clear Rump had to get rid of her to get his lapdog into that position to get his bribery or blackmail to begin. The Ambassador was asked point blank if she would have supported any of this and she answered point blank, "No". And if you haven't noticed, the diplomatic community did NOT fire her. They sent her to train new Diplomats. Her support was so powerful that she received a standing ovation and loud applause as she left the chambers. Rump is in for a rough week starting next Wednesday when they start looking into what they have already opened up with the Professional Diplomats. If the Political Appointees try what Rump demands of them now, they go to prison. So look for them to come clean for a change. And Rump to go deeper and deeper.

.

OK, dumbass! You have prove yourself to be stupid more times than we can count.

She received applause because she gave them nothing? That is what you are claiming because she shot down every attempt by the Shiff-Show to find anything on Trump.

Someone on PBS said they were applauding Schiff. I dunno, that was confusing, except that the Republicans were trying to wash away the butt hurt President's tweets about her.

Why would we do that or care?

Yovanovich was supposed to hit the grand slam that was set up by Taylor. Damning information about Trump. Swing and a miss. So then the shift was about how Trump had no right firing her, that was until we brought proof that DumBama fired every single ambassador a week before he even entered the White House. So the shift went again, this time to how bad her feelings were hurt.

This was supposed to be an impeachment inquiry; a inquiry about illegal and impeachable acts, not if somebody was offended or not.

The room was full of Democrats, so it's really not too much of a surprise that bug eyes got applause.