Official Impeachment Thread 2.0: House Judiciary Committee Hearings

Nostra

Diamond Member
Oct 7, 2019
63,647
54,757
3,615
Put a fork in impeachment, it's done.




I would like to start, perhaps incongruously, with a statement of three irrelevantfacts. First, I am not a supporter of President Trump. I voted against him in 2016 and Ihave previously voted for Presidents Clinton and Obama. Second, I have been highlycritical of President Trump, his policies, and his rhetoric, in dozens of columns. Third, Ihave repeatedly criticized his raising of the investigation of the Hunter Biden matter withthe Ukrainian president. These points are not meant to curry favor or approval. Ratherthey are meant to drive home a simple point: one can oppose President Trump’s policiesor actions but still conclude that the current legal case for impeachment is not justwoefully inadequate, but in some respects, dangerous, as the basis for the impeachmentof an American president. To put it simply, I hold no brief for President Trump. My personal and political views of President Trump, however, are irrelevant to myimpeachment testimony, as they should be to your impeachment vote. Today, my onlyconcern is the integrity and coherence of the constitutional standard and process ofimpeachment. President Trump will not be our last president and what we leave in thewake of this scandal will shape our democracy for generations to come. I am concernedabout lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance ofanger. If the House proceeds solely on the Ukrainian allegations, this impeachment wouldstand out among modern impeachments as the shortest proceeding, with the thinnestevidentiary record, and the narrowest grounds ever used to impeach a president.
7
Thatdoes not bode well for future presidents who are working in a country often sharply and,at times, bitterly divided

Read: Jonathan Turley impeachment inquiry testimony
 
The ranking member is yelling as much as an ex-wife. He seems to be just as reasonable too.
 
IMPEACH Trump today you gutless panty wad cowards, lets go to war in the Senate trial. There half the Dem's in the House just shit themselves. :auiqs.jpg:
 
So far the Repubs have accused the Dem's mothers of wearing army boots.
 
Reminiscent of Schiff's House Intel Committee Hearings and their parade of highly--opinionated NON-witnesses (who witnessed nothing) who could name 1 crime or any 'High Crimes and Misdemeanors' committed by the President, Nadler's House Judiciary Hearings will start out with testimony from a 'Constitutional Scholar' who witnessed NOTHING but who will give the OPINION that President Trump 'committed impeachable offenses such as obstruction of justice, obstruction of Congress and bribery' - again, NONE of which was proven in the House Intel Committee's failed Inquisition.

* FOOTNOTES:
1. The House Judiciary Committee is led by D-Nadler, the career Democrat politician and obviously inept lawyer / legal expert not qualified for the position of House Judiciary Committee Chairman, based on the fact that not long ago Nadler demanded the US AG - the leading Law Enforcer in the U.S.- BREAK THE LAW and then led the successful Democrat effort to CENSURE the US AG for REFUSING TIO BREAK THE LAW ... a law Nadler helped pass as a Senator.
-- Nadler sabotaged his own Impeachment hearings years ago, as now being reported, by declaring Impeaching a President so close to an election was an attempt to strip the Constitutional choice / right to vote from the American people.

2. 'Constitutional Scholar': Barak Obama was a self-claimed 'Constitutional Scholar; yet, during his Presidency he set a new record for criminal non-compliance with the FOIA & Federal Records Act, was held in Contempt of Court for intentionally ignoring Judges' court orders, and lost more USSC Constitutional Challenges than any modern-day President - he was found to have violated the US Constitution as President several times, such as when he was ruled to have made Un-Constitutional Recess appointments. Obama even declared publicly that he did not have the Constitutional and legal authority to affect change in existing US Immigration Law...right before he did so any way by by-passing Congress to impose his own personal 'DACA' EDICT.

So when Democrats and their surrogate propaganda / Fake News-pushing MSM tell you how 'Constitutional Scholars' have declared (their own biased opinion) President Trump broke laws (something Schiff and his Senate circus could not provide evidence of) just remember Obama was a self-proclaimed 'Constitutional Scholar', too, and lost more Constitutional arguments before the USSC than any other modern President and violated the Constitution - admittedly- just as much.

When a DEMOCRAT calls someone a 'Constitutional Scholar' it means NOTHING!


It is only fitting THIS is how Nadler and the triggered Trump-hating Democrats on Nadler's committee, committed to Impeaching the President, starts off their hearings in this way.


Democratic witness: Trump's obstruction 'worse than the misconduct of any prior president'

.
 
Republican tantrum? After we saw democrats smash windows and torch cars on inauguration day, beat up old men wearing MAGA hats, try to murder members of a republican baseball team, support an attempted coup and engage in an impeachment that nobody wants and nobody cares about the crazy left thinks republicans are throwing a tantrum? You almost gotta laugh.
 
Three professors who have all worked with the Democrats and donated to them. This first guy is already humming the Democrat line.

Only Turley will carry any credibility.
 
The ranking member is yelling as much as an ex-wife. He seems to be just as reasonable too.


I'm a little upset at Nadlers Kangaroo Court myself.


Lots of Trump supporters are upset. You think Trump is above the law.


Upset? I think it's hysterically funny watching the Democrats dig faster.

Their harpie professor is right now screaming the Democrat line, in that shrill voice of which they are so fond.

"Karlan told Politico in 2009, "It's no secret at all that I'm counted among the LGBT crowd". She has described herself as an example of "snarky, bisexual, Jewish women". Her partner is writer Viola Canales."
- Wikipedia
 
Last edited:
The ranking member is yelling as much as an ex-wife. He seems to be just as reasonable too.


I'm a little upset at Nadlers Kangaroo Court myself.


Lots of Trump supporters are upset. You think Trump is above the law.


Not a Trump supporter.

But if you think Nadler, or the group to his left, is being fair, you're more partisan than I considered possible.

01-kanga-court-li-600.jpg
 
Listen to this liberal Trump hater Pam Karlan....you can hear her hatred with every word that comes out of her pie hole.....
 

Forum List

Back
Top