When was President Trump convicted to cause impeachment?

[Dragonlady]

Just because you don’t like the POTUS, doesn’t mean he should be impeached.

If you don’t think Brennan lied to the FBI and the FBI slurped it up, you probably also don’t think that the Clinton Foundation was operated as a pay for play organization.

So odd their donations fell so much once she lost the election. I guess all disease and famine on earth have been eradicated? Or is it because they can’t sell political favors.

You\re seriously misinformed.

Their donations fell after she lost the election because she had announced they were shutting down the Foundation if she won. Bill and Melinda Gates agreed to take over their projects. Bid money donors made committments to other charities. Donations picked up again after Trump won. Canada donated $75 million to the Clinton Foundation after Trump cancelled funding for Planned Parenthood in Third World Countries.

The Foundation has done a lot of hurricane recovery work, including after Harvey.

 

[Uncensored2008]

HE HASN'T BEEN CONVICTED BECAUSE IN ORDER TO CONVICT HIM HE WOULD FIRST HAVE TO BE IMPEACHED. HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU HAVE TO BE TOLD?

The Constitution is clear: "shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction for Treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors"

I'm simply asking WHAT
1) TREASON?? Zero
2) Bribery??? Zero
3) Other high crimes and misdemeanors" Zero

There has been NOTHING proving President Trump has done any of the above!

So again... WHAT are the reasons for impeachment? Nothing!

This isn't an impeachment, despite what the little Goebbels of the fascist media say. The Soviet Star Chamber of Adam Stalin-Schitt is 100% political. It is intended to alter and influence the 2020 election. Schitt and the Stalinists are running a taxpayer funded smear campaign. They have no intention of drafting articles of impeachment. This is just the democrats using the federal government to rig an election, once again.

The dims will be swept from the house over this. Regardless of proclamations from corrupt Obama judges.

That's correct, it is an impeachment inquiry, to gather evidence and facts on whether to impeach and the articles of impeachment if they choose. It could be just a Censure instead once the investigating part is complete and turned over to the judiciary committee.

Bullshit, it is a taxpayer funded smear campaign intended to influence and alter the 2020 election.

Nazi Piloshiti and Adam Stalin-Schitt should face criminal charges for racketeering and election tampering.

You are acting like the Nazi. You are also a idiot to boot.

Of course; condemning Soviet Star Chambers is exactly what the Nazis did..

Tell me dumbfuck, what specific charge did the Stalinist party have in mind when Wolf Blitzer said in 2016 that you would impeach Trump? What was Jew hating Nazi**** Tlaib referring to when she shrieked "Impeach the motherfucker" back in 2018?

Because it sounds a lot like you Stalinist pigs vowed to impeach Trump and THEN set out to fabricating charges against him.

 

[Crepitus]

The requirements to impeach a president are found in Article II, Section IV of the Constitution. It states that 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..

What treasonous act has President Trump been convicted?
What bribery act has President Trump been convicted?
What other high crimes and misdemeanors acts has President Trump been convicted?

Would someone please tell me when President Trump was convicted?

Wow, no more crack for you my friend.

--as usual, you people have no facts/proof/etc

I thought I told you to lay off the crack?

 

[Crepitus]

The requirements to impeach a president are found in Article II, Section IV of the Constitution. It states that 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..

What treasonous act has President Trump been convicted?
What bribery act has President Trump been convicted?
What other high crimes and misdemeanors acts has President Trump been convicted?

Would someone please tell me when President Trump was convicted?

Wow, no more crack for you my friend.

/-----/ "Wow, no more crack for you my friend."
TRANSLATION: Impeach now. Orange Man Bad. It was Hillary's turn. CNN said he'd lose. Electoral College no fair. Trump says mean things.
View attachment 286398

None for you either.

 

[Obejoekenobe]

Would someone please tell me when President Trump was convicted?

No.... but you can go here in starting to edify yourself.

52 U.S. Code § 30121 - Contributions and donations by foreign nationals

And you’re welcome.

 

[basquebromance]

Trump's day of reckoning shows the world that the rule of law applies to everyone in america!

 

[Obejoekenobe]

Yea the conviction they speak of is in the senate, not a court of law.

That's what makes impeachment a political move, not a legal one. However, once a REAL impeachment is voted on, that gives the minority party the right to subpoena witnesses which libtards do NOT want to happen.

If Pat Cipollone, WH council, is any indication of the type of defense lawyer the senate republicans present to defend Trump?

It won’t make a difference.

LOLOL

 

[Dragonlady]

Yea the conviction they speak of is in the senate, not a court of law.

That's what makes impeachment a political move, not a legal one. However, once a REAL impeachment is voted on, that gives the minority party the right to subpoena witnesses which libtards do NOT want to happen.

The witnesses are all burying your hero's lies. That's why he keeps changing the story, and attacking the process. Neither the law, the witnesses or the process are on your side.

I like how you confidently make statements about what's happening . . . in closed-door hearings the public, AND EVEN OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES, are excluded from.

Every witness has issued a public statement which is released to the press, which outlines generally what they will be telling the hearing. Not one Republican has come forward to say anything in defence of the President, or to question the veracity of the witness statements.

 

[Care4all]

Who can they call as witnesses to defend president Trump' s illegal actions in the Ukraine?

And why not simply ask for these witnesses to be brought in now, if they are relevant?

There is no one that's even in the realm of this mess that has spoken up to defend Trump' s actions...

Not a single Republican has spoken up with any valid excuse for him and what he did in the Ukraine...

They are only yelling about a Process, not TRUMPs actions ?

what actions about the Ukraine ?

alleged bribery and extortion.

Using a foreign gvt to help with your campaign.

Running a shadow gvt with his personal campaign lawyer.

WHO can Repubs subpoena to testify that could defend the president' s actions???

How is paying Hunter Biden 50,000 a month to sit on the board of a company he knew nothing about helping the president's campaign?

First, it was not illegal for Hunter to sit on their board, so there was NO Corruption for Giuliani and the President to look in to.

Second, the procedure of investigating an American citizen for corruption in a foreign country is done legally, through the DOJ And our Foreign Corruption agencies within the FBI or Treasury...along with the cooperation agreement with the foreign nation. NOT through the President and his personal campaign lawyer and a handful of criminal goons.

Third, if the President were truly concerned about corruption taking place in the Ukraine then why in the heck is he concerned with what might have happened 3 to 4 years ago with his rival verses the corruption that could be going on NOW, in the present?

Fourth, in June the Pentagon analyzed the Ukraine's corruption before handing over our aid and gave the Ukraine a clear Bill of health, to release the aid... but Trump held it back till the Ukraine investigated AGAIN, the Biden's and crowdstrike

And Fifth, Trump would not release the aid or put the Ukraine president on the schedule for a meeting in DC

UNTILL the Uke President made a PUBLIC announcement that he was investigating Hunter BIden/ Burisma in the media, preferably CNN....

NOW TELL ME, why was the public announcement of this newly opened Uke investigation needed before the meeting scheduled in DC or the military aid released?


WAKE UP PLEASE

so there was NO Russian Corruption for the Dems/left/etc to look in to.

Huh? What's your comment have to do with my post???

 

[Care4all]

"The only way we can defeat Trump in 2020 is to impeach him" - Elijah Cummings.

and after he said that they killed him....the plot deepens.

Someone saying that could be Epsteined indeed - the Clinton mob doesn't like loose lips....

Yeah, that's why Barr is covering it up... Barr is covering for the Clintons, eh?

 

[Care4all]

Yes but the simple question is:
What treasonous act has President Trump been convicted?
What bribery act has President Trump been convicted?
What other high crimes and misdemeanors acts has President Trump been convicted?

The Constitution is clear:
The requirements to impeach a president are found in Article II, Section IV of the Constitution.
"It states that 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."

A) There has been NO impeachment because
B) There has been NO conviction, because
there have been NO Treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors even made about President Trump!

HE HASN'T BEEN CONVICTED BECAUSE IN ORDER TO CONVICT HIM HE WOULD FIRST HAVE TO BE IMPEACHED. HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU HAVE TO BE TOLD?

The Constitution is clear: "shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction for Treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors"

I'm simply asking WHAT
1) TREASON?? Zero
2) Bribery??? Zero
3) Other high crimes and misdemeanors" Zero

There has been NOTHING proving President Trump has done any of the above!

So again... WHAT are the reasons for impeachment? Nothing!

This isn't an impeachment, despite what the little Goebbels of the fascist media say. The Soviet Star Chamber of Adam Stalin-Schitt is 100% political. It is intended to alter and influence the 2020 election. Schitt and the Stalinists are running a taxpayer funded smear campaign. They have no intention of drafting articles of impeachment. This is just the democrats using the federal government to rig an election, once again.

The dims will be swept from the house over this. Regardless of proclamations from corrupt Obama judges.

That's correct, it is an impeachment inquiry, to gather evidence and facts on whether to impeach and the articles of impeachment if they choose. It could be just a Censure instead once the investigating part is complete and turned over to the judiciary committee.

Bullshit, it is a taxpayer funded smear campaign intended to influence and alter the 2020 election.

Nazi Piloshiti and Adam Stalin-Schitt should face criminal charges for racketeering and election tampering.

The only one trying to bring this close to the election which is more than a year from now is Trump....

He has stonewalled every subpoena and witness... deliberately.

It's TRUMPs plan... not the Dems, blind one!!!

 

[Lesh]

If Republicans are worried that Trump's impending Impeachment might hurt his election chances...maybe they ought to go through an actual primary and find someone else

 

[harmonica]

what actions about the Ukraine ?

alleged bribery and extortion.

Using a foreign gvt to help with your campaign.

Running a shadow gvt with his personal campaign lawyer.

WHO can Repubs subpoena to testify that could defend the president' s actions???

How is paying Hunter Biden 50,000 a month to sit on the board of a company he knew nothing about helping the president's campaign?

First, it was not illegal for Hunter to sit on their board, so there was NO Corruption for Giuliani and the President to look in to.

Second, the procedure of investigating an American citizen for corruption in a foreign country is done legally, through the DOJ And our Foreign Corruption agencies within the FBI or Treasury...along with the cooperation agreement with the foreign nation. NOT through the President and his personal campaign lawyer and a handful of criminal goons.

Third, if the President were truly concerned about corruption taking place in the Ukraine then why in the heck is he concerned with what might have happened 3 to 4 years ago with his rival verses the corruption that could be going on NOW, in the present?

Fourth, in June the Pentagon analyzed the Ukraine's corruption before handing over our aid and gave the Ukraine a clear Bill of health, to release the aid... but Trump held it back till the Ukraine investigated AGAIN, the Biden's and crowdstrike

And Fifth, Trump would not release the aid or put the Ukraine president on the schedule for a meeting in DC

UNTILL the Uke President made a PUBLIC announcement that he was investigating Hunter BIden/ Burisma in the media, preferably CNN....

NOW TELL ME, why was the public announcement of this newly opened Uke investigation needed before the meeting scheduled in DC or the military aid released?


WAKE UP PLEASE

so there was NO Russian Corruption for the Dems/left/etc to look in to.

Huh? What's your comment have to do with my post???

...hahahhahahhaha
...look at your first sentence --- there was no collusion or Ukraine crime for any one to look into or an impeachment

 

[airplanemechanic]

If Republicans are worried that Trump's impending Impeachment might hurt his election chances...maybe they ought to go through an actual primary and find someone else

Son thats the last thing I'm worried about. And impeachment and exoneration in the senate would do nothing but HELP his chances of reelection.

Add to that that he just got the leader of ISIS, MORE WINNING! MAGA!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Yea the conviction they speak of is in the senate, not a court of law.

That's what makes impeachment a political move, not a legal one. However, once a REAL impeachment is voted on, that gives the minority party the right to subpoena witnesses which libtards do NOT want to happen.

The witnesses are all burying your hero's lies. That's why he keeps changing the story, and attacking the process. Neither the law, the witnesses or the process are on your side.

The only witness that matters is the President of the Ukraine. He has stated that there was no pressure and therefore no quid pro quo. Your investigation should have died right there.

Did you expect a man who is utterly dependent on President Trump's approval internationally to sit next to Trump in front of the American press and call the President a liar? But Zelensky made a point of saying that he still didn't have an invitation to the White House in that presser, which showed that he was, in truth, being pressured.

Can you post anything except bullshit?

He was not sitting next to the President during that phone call. You do know how telephones work, right? Or are you Canucks still using two cans and a string?

You can imagine shit all you want, but facts are facts.

You have lost and don;t even know it yet, not that it matters to you since you are a busybody with no real skin in our political processes. Right Canuck?

Zelensky was sittinig right next to the President at that press conference at the United Nations. I guess you didn't actually watch it. You just picked up the day's talking points.

Every person on earth has a stake in your politics because Trump is on the verge of starting WWIII with his insanity.

Hey, shit for brains! The call, remember that? He stated that there was no pressure in the days after that call came to light. Then he repeated it at the press conference in person. You must have missed that in YOUR talking points, since you cannot keep the timeline straight, dumbass!

My God, you people are so fucking stupid!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Yea the conviction they speak of is in the senate, not a court of law.

That's what makes impeachment a political move, not a legal one. However, once a REAL impeachment is voted on, that gives the minority party the right to subpoena witnesses which libtards do NOT want to happen.

The witnesses are all burying your hero's lies. That's why he keeps changing the story, and attacking the process. Neither the law, the witnesses or the process are on your side.

I like how you confidently make statements about what's happening . . . in closed-door hearings the public, AND EVEN OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES, are excluded from.

Every witness has issued a public statement which is released to the press, which outlines generally what they will be telling the hearing. Not one Republican has come forward to say anything in defence of the President, or to question the veracity of the witness statements.

Uh, yes they did. The Republicans stated they had destroyed Taylor's opening statement claims in a matter of seconds.

It is no wonder that you don't know that since the Lame Stream Media never reported it.

 

[WEATHER53]

Impeached???
Hell hes never been criminally investigated nor charged
The liberal “we feel it should be” is an emotional plague.

 

[airplanemechanic]

If liberals would want to really impeach him they would do it. They're doing nothing more than trying to harm him politically. Like saying they swam in the water when they did nothing more than putting their toe in.

If they really wanted an impeachment to stick they would follow the law to the letter making sure that no I is left undotted or T uncrossed. Not doing this behind the closed doors bullshit.

 

[Lesh]

The witnesses are all burying your hero's lies. That's why he keeps changing the story, and attacking the process. Neither the law, the witnesses or the process are on your side.

The only witness that matters is the President of the Ukraine. He has stated that there was no pressure and therefore no quid pro quo. Your investigation should have died right there.

Did you expect a man who is utterly dependent on President Trump's approval internationally to sit next to Trump in front of the American press and call the President a liar? But Zelensky made a point of saying that he still didn't have an invitation to the White House in that presser, which showed that he was, in truth, being pressured.

Can you post anything except bullshit?

He was not sitting next to the President during that phone call. You do know how telephones work, right? Or are you Canucks still using two cans and a string?

You can imagine shit all you want, but facts are facts.

You have lost and don;t even know it yet, not that it matters to you since you are a busybody with no real skin in our political processes. Right Canuck?

Zelensky was sittinig right next to the President at that press conference at the United Nations. I guess you didn't actually watch it. You just picked up the day's talking points.

Every person on earth has a stake in your politics because Trump is on the verge of starting WWIII with his insanity.

Hey, shit for brains! The call, remember that? He stated that there was no pressure in the days after that call came to light. Then he repeated it at the press conference in person. You must have missed that in YOUR talking points, since you cannot keep the timeline straight, dumbass!

My God, you people are so fucking stupid!

He who? Zelensky?

the guy that Trump was strong arming? The guy STILL dependent on Trump for aid to fight off the Russian invasion?

that guy?

 

[Lesh]

Yea the conviction they speak of is in the senate, not a court of law.

That's what makes impeachment a political move, not a legal one. However, once a REAL impeachment is voted on, that gives the minority party the right to subpoena witnesses which libtards do NOT want to happen.

The witnesses are all burying your hero's lies. That's why he keeps changing the story, and attacking the process. Neither the law, the witnesses or the process are on your side.

I like how you confidently make statements about what's happening . . . in closed-door hearings the public, AND EVEN OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES, are excluded from.

Every witness has issued a public statement which is released to the press, which outlines generally what they will be telling the hearing. Not one Republican has come forward to say anything in defence of the President, or to question the veracity of the witness statements.

Uh, yes they did. The Republicans stated they had destroyed Taylor's opening statement claims in a matter of seconds.

It is no wonder that you don't know that since the Lame Stream Media never reported it.

Quote and link please.

not that you’d lie but well... we’ve read your garbage before