What Exactly are the High Crimes and Misdemeanors Trump Is Being Charged With?

[theHawk]

For some strange reason no one has been able/willing to articulate anything beyond THE RUSSIANS!

Well, we are not at war with Russia, we can talk to Russians anytime, and the President determines what is and is not secret at his will.

Now if you want to go down the path of Russia helped Trump, how about the billions China gave Bill Clinton for his election?

Oh you know, the Democrat statute of "collusion":

DNC Code § 3621:

If two or more persons collude to normalize relations with the United States, or to help the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the collusion, each shall be outed publically under this title.

If that is what Trump was doing....why won't he just show us?
Who would hold meetings with a foreign power and not document the meeting and who was there?

Where are all Obama admin transcripts for every conversation with foreigners? If they don't provide them, it means they are guilty of collusion and treason, right?

 

[rightwinger]

For some strange reason no one has been able/willing to articulate anything beyond THE RUSSIANS!

Well, we are not at war with Russia, we can talk to Russians anytime, and the President determines what is and is not secret at his will.

Now if you want to go down the path of Russia helped Trump, how about the billions China gave Bill Clinton for his election?

Oh you know, the Democrat statute of "collusion":

DNC Code § 3621:

If two or more persons collude to normalize relations with the United States, or to help the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the collusion, each shall be outed publically under this title.

If that is what Trump was doing....why won't he just show us?
Who would hold meetings with a foreign power and not document the meeting and who was there?

Where are all Obama admin transcripts for every conversation with foreigners? If they don't provide them, it means they are guilty of collusion and treason, right?

If there was a criminal investigation, they would be provided
Otherwise, you could file a freedom of information act inquiry

It is Trump who is claiming his representatives meetings with Russia were routine. It should be no problem to show us and put this thing to rest

 

[Thinker101]

For some strange reason no one has been able/willing to articulate anything beyond THE RUSSIANS!

Well, we are not at war with Russia, we can talk to Russians anytime, and the President determines what is and is not secret at his will.

Now if you want to go down the path of Russia helped Trump, how about the billions China gave Bill Clinton for his election?

Oh you know, the Democrat statute of "collusion":

DNC Code § 3621:

If two or more persons collude to normalize relations with the United States, or to help the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the collusion, each shall be outed publically under this title.

If that is what Trump was doing....why won't he just show us?
Who would hold meetings with a foreign power and not document the meeting and who was there?

Where are all Obama admin transcripts for every conversation with foreigners? If they don't provide them, it means they are guilty of collusion and treason, right?

If there was a criminal investigation, they would be provided
Otherwise, you could file a freedom of information act inquiry

It is Trump who is claiming his representatives meetings with Russia were routine. It should be no problem to show us and put this thing to rest

If there was a crime there would be a criminal investigation.

 

[Boss]

Trump had a private meeting with Comey, that Comey said was inappropriate. During the meeting Trump asked for Comey's loyalty, and pressured Comey to drop the investigation of Flynn., And when Comey didn't drop the investigation, Trump dropped Comey.

This is FALSE. He did NOT ask Comey to drop the investigation of Flynn according to Comey's OWN testimony AND the testimony of Deputy Director McCabe. Did they purger themselves? Trump merely said to Comey that he hoped they could wrap up the investigation on Flynn... that's not asking him or pressuring him to do anything.

And again, Trump's firing Comey doesn't end the investigation. So the claims that he fired Comey to end the investigation is simply not valid. He fired Comey because Comey was incompetent and up until the very week he was fired, a long list of prominent Democrats are on record DEMANDING that Comey be fired!

You people are so rabidly deranged that basic logic is escaping you. We're being inundated day after day with one fake news story after another that turns out to be completely false. Your fake news stories have become so wild and outrageous they are actually contradicting their own narratives and you don't seem to be bothered by that. First, there is this grand collusion conspiracy where Trump was actively working with the Russians to rig the election... that would certainly have to involve covert back channel communications but then we get the story that Kuchner requested back channel communications in December, a month AFTER the elections! So much for the whole pre-election collusion narrative! Then we discover Kuchner never requested back channel communications, the Russians did and the Trump administration turned them down.

Numerous and countless violations of federal law regarding the handling of classified intelligence information being leaked by anonymous sources left and right all over the place.... not a peep from any of you about that.... it's like you don't ******* care, as long as it might damage Trump! Private American citizens being spied on and their private conversations and names being leaked to the media.... you don't give two shits as long as it might damage Trump! No information on who ordered FISA warrants and on what grounds... you don't care, as long as it might damage Trump!

He fired Comey so he could hand pick his replacement

Do you believe he fired Comey for being mean to Hillary like he originally reported?

Okay, so now the story is changing... Trump didn't fire Comey to end the investigation as was claimed. Now, it's so he could hand pick his replacement. Well, that's who gets to pick the replacement but that's not a reason to fire someone. Let's take this real slow and try to remain calm and rational... Trump fired Comey because Comey was incompetent and needed to be replaced as Director of the FBI. It's really no more complicated than that.

If you're a deranged hack who is looking for anything to criticize Trump about, then you can draw all kinds of other rationales for why he fired Comey. That doesn't make you right.

 

[Boss]

Obama was president while Trump aides were secretly meeting with the Russians

George W. Bush was president when Obama aides were secretly meeting with the Iranians.

Do you have some point here?

 

[regent]

So it now sounds like a "high crime" has no meaning in US law and a misdemeanor can be about anything. That was about the same conclusion Gerald R. Ford came to in 1970 when he suggested to the House that Douglas be impeached. Ford said: an impeachable offense is whatever the House and Senate consider it to be.

 

[rightwinger]

For some strange reason no one has been able/willing to articulate anything beyond THE RUSSIANS!

Well, we are not at war with Russia, we can talk to Russians anytime, and the President determines what is and is not secret at his will.

Now if you want to go down the path of Russia helped Trump, how about the billions China gave Bill Clinton for his election?

Oh you know, the Democrat statute of "collusion":

DNC Code § 3621:

If two or more persons collude to normalize relations with the United States, or to help the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the collusion, each shall be outed publically under this title.

If that is what Trump was doing....why won't he just show us?
Who would hold meetings with a foreign power and not document the meeting and who was there?

Where are all Obama admin transcripts for every conversation with foreigners? If they don't provide them, it means they are guilty of collusion and treason, right?

If there was a criminal investigation, they would be provided
Otherwise, you could file a freedom of information act inquiry

It is Trump who is claiming his representatives meetings with Russia were routine. It should be no problem to show us and put this thing to rest

If there was a crime there would be a criminal investigation.

There is

 

[Thinker101]

Oh you know, the Democrat statute of "collusion":

DNC Code § 3621:

If two or more persons collude to normalize relations with the United States, or to help the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the collusion, each shall be outed publically under this title.

If that is what Trump was doing....why won't he just show us?
Who would hold meetings with a foreign power and not document the meeting and who was there?

Where are all Obama admin transcripts for every conversation with foreigners? If they don't provide them, it means they are guilty of collusion and treason, right?

If there was a criminal investigation, they would be provided
Otherwise, you could file a freedom of information act inquiry

It is Trump who is claiming his representatives meetings with Russia were routine. It should be no problem to show us and put this thing to rest

If there was a crime there would be a criminal investigation.

There is

There is? There is what...a crime? Ok, what is the crime?

 

[AntonToo]

For some strange reason no one has been able/willing to articulate anything beyond THE RUSSIANS!

Well, we are not at war with Russia, we can talk to Russians anytime, and the President determines what is and is not secret at his will.

Now if you want to go down the path of Russia helped Trump, how about the billions China gave Bill Clinton for his election?

High crimes and misdemeanors is an expression of the times, the bar is actually much lower than those words may imply today.

It actually just means misdemeanors or more.

 

[rightwinger]

If that is what Trump was doing....why won't he just show us?
Who would hold meetings with a foreign power and not document the meeting and who was there?

Where are all Obama admin transcripts for every conversation with foreigners? If they don't provide them, it means they are guilty of collusion and treason, right?

If there was a criminal investigation, they would be provided
Otherwise, you could file a freedom of information act inquiry

It is Trump who is claiming his representatives meetings with Russia were routine. It should be no problem to show us and put this thing to rest

If there was a crime there would be a criminal investigation.

There is

There is? There is what...a crime? Ok, what is the crime?

Please try to keep up with the thread

The crime was the hacking of the DNC server to attempt to influence an election

In this case, the party who benefitted from the crime was involved in secret discussions with the party who committed the crime

So it is a natural process to investigate what those discussions were related to

 

[Thinker101]

Where are all Obama admin transcripts for every conversation with foreigners? If they don't provide them, it means they are guilty of collusion and treason, right?

If there was a criminal investigation, they would be provided
Otherwise, you could file a freedom of information act inquiry

It is Trump who is claiming his representatives meetings with Russia were routine. It should be no problem to show us and put this thing to rest

If there was a crime there would be a criminal investigation.

There is

There is? There is what...a crime? Ok, what is the crime?

Please try to keep up with the thread

The crime was the hacking of the DNC server to attempt to influence an election

In this case, the party who benefitted from the crime was involved in secret discussions with the party who committed the crime

So it is a natural process to investigate what those discussions were related to

Apparently not all of us are quite as sharp as some of you lefties. Although, when someone gives you their password (as Podesta did), it's not really hacking.

 

[Reasonable]

For some strange reason no one has been able/willing to articulate anything beyond THE RUSSIANS!

Well, we are not at war with Russia, we can talk to Russians anytime, and the President determines what is and is not secret at his will.

Now if you want to go down the path of Russia helped Trump, how about the billions China gave Bill Clinton for his election?

Get off the Fox train and you'd get the answers to your questions.
Duh

 

[Boss]

Please try to keep up with the thread

The crime was the hacking of the DNC server to attempt to influence an election

In this case, the party who benefitted from the crime was involved in secret discussions with the party who committed the crime

So it is a natural process to investigate what those discussions were related to

So... Unless you have evidence that Donald J. Trump personally hacked a server, then you can't show that he committed any crime. It's not illegal to have conversations, secret or otherwise, with people who commit crimes. Unless you have evidence that Donald J. Trump conspired with people to commit criminal acts, you have a nothing burger.

First of all, you haven't identified the hackers. You can say it was "Russians" but you don't know that it was and you certainly don't know which Russians. There is no evidence that Donald J. Trump has spoken to ANY Russian, much less conspired with specific ones who may have hacked a server.

In short, you have a really long way to go in order to build a credible case for impeachment of a sitting president. You have ZERO evidence that Donald J. Trump was involved with ANY illegality and all you continue to do is run your stupid little ignorant mouth.

America is going to grow tired of this before the midterms.
You've been warned.

 

[rightwinger]

Please try to keep up with the thread

The crime was the hacking of the DNC server to attempt to influence an election

In this case, the party who benefitted from the crime was involved in secret discussions with the party who committed the crime

So it is a natural process to investigate what those discussions were related to

So... Unless you have evidence that Donald J. Trump personally hacked a server, then you can't show that he committed any crime. It's not illegal to have conversations, secret or otherwise, with people who commit crimes. Unless you have evidence that Donald J. Trump conspired with people to commit criminal acts, you have a nothing burger.

First of all, you haven't identified the hackers. You can say it was "Russians" but you don't know that it was and you certainly don't know which Russians. There is no evidence that Donald J. Trump has spoken to ANY Russian, much less conspired with specific ones who may have hacked a server.

In short, you have a really long way to go in order to build a credible case for impeachment of a sitting president. You have ZERO evidence that Donald J. Trump was involved with ANY illegality and all you continue to do is run your stupid little ignorant mouth.

America is going to grow tired of this before the midterms.
You've been warned.

Well, that is where the progression of crimes begin

Trump is best off if he had no interaction related to the hacks. Just routine interface with the Russians on unrelated matters

Now, if his people were discussing the emails and when and how they were released we have him participating in a crime

If he offered ANYTHING in return.....it is treason

 

[candycorn]

Please try to keep up with the thread

The crime was the hacking of the DNC server to attempt to influence an election

In this case, the party who benefitted from the crime was involved in secret discussions with the party who committed the crime

So it is a natural process to investigate what those discussions were related to

So... Unless you have evidence that Donald J. Trump personally hacked a server, then you can't show that he committed any crime. It's not illegal to have conversations, secret or otherwise, with people who commit crimes. Unless you have evidence that Donald J. Trump conspired with people to commit criminal acts, you have a nothing burger.

First of all, you haven't identified the hackers. You can say it was "Russians" but you don't know that it was and you certainly don't know which Russians. There is no evidence that Donald J. Trump has spoken to ANY Russian, much less conspired with specific ones who may have hacked a server.

In short, you have a really long way to go in order to build a credible case for impeachment of a sitting president. You have ZERO evidence that Donald J. Trump was involved with ANY illegality and all you continue to do is run your stupid little ignorant mouth.

America is going to grow tired of this before the midterms.
You've been warned.

It was Guccifer 2.0 according to US Intel.
Roger Stone (Trump advisor) had contact with him that he admits to.
Roger Stone (Trump advisor) also tweeted 6 weeks prior to Podesta being hacked.
Your standard for what is prosecutable may or may not be correct. I doubt it. Seems like conspiring to commit a crime is prosecutable. Unless you think Stone just happened to be acting alone.
There is also the court of public opinion and the ability to censure that are at play here.

 

[sartre play]

Have no way of knowing if Trump or any one connected to him did anything illegal, do think Russia tried /did influence the election. If Trump is hiding any thing its about money.

 

[dblack]

I can't even really care much about specific "crimes". The most dangerous military the world has ever seen is under the control of an immature idiot. Impeach him, ignore him, whatever it takes.

 

[Indeependent]

Except Comey testified under oath this didn't happen.
Are you having trouble assimilating this fact into your fantasy world?

Under oath? When? Where?

It's all over YouTube and someone posted it here 2 weeks ago.
I know, I know, you only read threads that have Trump hating titles.

Either link it or - STFU.

I could say the same about all the bullshit you post from the HussyPost and the WashingtonCompost.
I'm sure you would search heaven and earth for anything anti-Trump.
But I'm enjoying watching all you Lefties being bounced around like ping pong balls.

Meanwhile back in reality, there are what, 12 Trump knob polishers here trying to convince themselves and others that there is nothing to find.

And all 12 are waiting for even a hint of something to find with all of that state of the art equipment investigators possess.

 

[Boss]

Please try to keep up with the thread

The crime was the hacking of the DNC server to attempt to influence an election

In this case, the party who benefitted from the crime was involved in secret discussions with the party who committed the crime

So it is a natural process to investigate what those discussions were related to

So... Unless you have evidence that Donald J. Trump personally hacked a server, then you can't show that he committed any crime. It's not illegal to have conversations, secret or otherwise, with people who commit crimes. Unless you have evidence that Donald J. Trump conspired with people to commit criminal acts, you have a nothing burger.

First of all, you haven't identified the hackers. You can say it was "Russians" but you don't know that it was and you certainly don't know which Russians. There is no evidence that Donald J. Trump has spoken to ANY Russian, much less conspired with specific ones who may have hacked a server.

In short, you have a really long way to go in order to build a credible case for impeachment of a sitting president. You have ZERO evidence that Donald J. Trump was involved with ANY illegality and all you continue to do is run your stupid little ignorant mouth.

America is going to grow tired of this before the midterms.
You've been warned.

Well, that is where the progression of crimes begin

Trump is best off if he had no interaction related to the hacks. Just routine interface with the Russians on unrelated matters

Now, if his people were discussing the emails and when and how they were released we have him participating in a crime

If he offered ANYTHING in return.....it is treason

You have absolutely nothing so far. There is no crime or progression of crime that you have any evidence for or can prove on Trump or anyone else. And I'll tell you again, dipshit... you are NOT going to impeach a sitting president of the United States on the basis of speculation. Not gonna happen. Try to get that through your neanderthal cranium. You have to first convict Trump of some sort of crime, then the House then can impeach and the Senate can remove him from office. Before you can convict Trump, you need evidence Trump committed a crime. As of this moment, you have diddly squat.

 

[Boss]

Please try to keep up with the thread

The crime was the hacking of the DNC server to attempt to influence an election

In this case, the party who benefitted from the crime was involved in secret discussions with the party who committed the crime

So it is a natural process to investigate what those discussions were related to

So... Unless you have evidence that Donald J. Trump personally hacked a server, then you can't show that he committed any crime. It's not illegal to have conversations, secret or otherwise, with people who commit crimes. Unless you have evidence that Donald J. Trump conspired with people to commit criminal acts, you have a nothing burger.

First of all, you haven't identified the hackers. You can say it was "Russians" but you don't know that it was and you certainly don't know which Russians. There is no evidence that Donald J. Trump has spoken to ANY Russian, much less conspired with specific ones who may have hacked a server.

In short, you have a really long way to go in order to build a credible case for impeachment of a sitting president. You have ZERO evidence that Donald J. Trump was involved with ANY illegality and all you continue to do is run your stupid little ignorant mouth.

America is going to grow tired of this before the midterms.
You've been warned.

It was Guccifer 2.0 according to US Intel.
Roger Stone (Trump advisor) had contact with him that he admits to.
Roger Stone (Trump advisor) also tweeted 6 weeks prior to Podesta being hacked.
Your standard for what is prosecutable may or may not be correct. I doubt it. Seems like conspiring to commit a crime is prosecutable. Unless you think Stone just happened to be acting alone.
There is also the court of public opinion and the ability to censure that are at play here.

The court of public opinion is going to crucify YOU.

I don't know who Roger Stone talked to but talking to people is not a crime. Tweeting about things is not a crime. I don't know who "Guccifer 2.0" is and neither do you. Virtually everything that you and the left are throwing out there are not crimes and can't be prosecuted because they're not crimes.

It's pretty stunning to me... We've just gone through about 2 years of Hillary Clinton pulling one Houdini act after another to avoid prosecution on things that are very clearly crimes according to the Espionage Act. Illegal servers hidden in her closet, destroying emails that had been subpoena by the courts, mishandling classified information, on and on.... totally given a pass on all of it.... but you're going to try and impeach Trump with absolutely NO evidence whatsoever? I don't think so.

And again... you are all going to find out soon enough, this isn't helping your cause.