House Impeachment Hearings

[heathergives]

Stewart: "I would now feel compelled to ask you, Madam Ambassador, as you sit here before us, very simply and directly, do you have any information regarding the president of the United States accepting any bribes?"


Yovanovitch: "No."

Stewart: "Do you have any information regarding any criminal activity that the president of the United States has been involved with at all?"

Yovanovitch: "No."

'just sayin'....

 

[HisArpy]

'just sayin'....

"But, but, he FIRED ME and that made me feel bad..." *sniff* *boo hoo* *sniff*

 

[RobDownSouth]

Can't defend Trump on his actions.

Like they taught Timmeh his first week at Trump University School of Law...
https://i.imgur.com/flXU8rn.jpg

 

[RobDownSouth]

Sure it is. This isn't a Court of law. Congress is not limited to violations of statutes. They may also impeach a president for actions that are lawful, yet still constitute abuses of power. For example, Trump’s efforts to push witnesses to defy subpoenas is also impeachable.

It is, if the (D)'s want to get him reelected.

Petulant Little Glibertarian Welfare Queen.
*nods*

 

[HisArpy]

Like they taught Timmeh his first week at Trump University School of Law...
https://i.imgur.com/flXU8rn.jpg

Dam, doxxed and exposed by rubbery. Who knew he could hack my university records so

S..........L..........O..........W..........L..........Y




Poor rubbery, outing people well after the facts are already established...

 

[Emerson40]

You STARTED OUT by being critical and you nit pick everything with a jaundiced eye.

That doesn't lend your analysis any credibility, instead it makes you a fool because you refuse to assess information from a neutral position.

For instance, you dismiss the list of Trump's accomplishments because they come from his PR people. You don't dismiss them because you can refute the actual accomplishments, you dismiss them because Trump is tooting his own horn.

Yet, the media, who is the party responsible for reporting FACTS, refuses to acknowledge the actual accomplishments. Thereby leaving it up to Trump to laud himself. Which is what you use to deride someone who is actually doing what he promised.

The contortions you go through in order to validate this circular logic also illustrate the depth you will go to in order to justify your lack of neutrality and fair assessment of the facts. This further highlights how unreliable your opinion is because it isn't based on facts but animus.

Which animus is further demonstrated by your hostility towards the people who continually disprove your beliefs as total bunk by using ACTUAL FACTS rather than the drek you so causally spew everywhere.

Jesus, you’re all over the place, Timmeh. It was Adre who raised the question about the source of Trump’s accomplishments, not me.

I was the one who pointed out all his broken election promises. You know, the ones he was never going to keep, but you’re cool with.


Please try to keep up with the rest of the class.

 

[heathergives]

"But, but, he FIRED ME and that made me feel bad..." *sniff* *boo hoo* *sniff*

 

[Rightguide]

Let’s say you’re right. It merely shows your President is undisciplined, unhinged, and plain stupid, yet you continue to support and defend him. Which makes you pretty dumb too.

Did you wet your pants when Obama actually bribed the Iranians or when he helped the Russians invade the Ukraine by sitting on his hands when they did and then refused to give the Ukraine lethal weapons?

 

[KeithD]

Sure it is. This isn't a Court of law. Congress is not limited to violations of statutes. They may also impeach a president for actions that are lawful, yet still constitute abuses of power. For example, Trump’s efforts to push witnesses to defy subpoenas is also impeachable.

This. Anything the House of Representatives votes is impeachable, is impeachable.

With Trump, they have a whole smorgasbord of options, and he provides additional ones daily.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

I wonder why none of the administration officials that keep saying Trump did nothing wrong will testify under oath?

 

[Dribble]

Did you wet your pants when Obama actually bribed the Iranians or when he helped the Russians invade the Ukraine by sitting on his hands when they did and then refused to give the Ukraine lethal weapons?

And it took just this long to google the truth and read it

https://www.politifact.com/florida/...aetz-says-obama-permanently-stopped-military/

 

[KeithD]

I wonder why none of the administration officials that keep saying Trump did nothing wrong will testify under oath?

Because they were dumb enough to be maneuvered into doing something wrong themselves by Trump. My, that must be embarrassing.

 

[zipman]

I wonder why none of the administration officials that keep saying Trump did nothing wrong will testify under oath?

And why the people actually testifying under oath are liars?

And if he did nothing wrong, why are they stonewalling the investigation by directing people to not answer the subpoenas and testify?

 

[Emerson40]

Did you wet your pants when Obama actually bribed the Iranians or when he helped the Russians invade the Ukraine by sitting on his hands when they did and then refused to give the Ukraine lethal weapons?

OOOBAAAAAHMAAAAA!


There’s a new administration in town, vette.

This thread is about current events, not vetteman’s unresolved and imagined, deep-state whataboutisms.

 

[Rightguide]

Let’s say you’re right. It merely shows your President is undisciplined, unhinged, and plain stupid, yet you continue to support and defend him. Which makes you pretty dumb too.

Actually I erred, the House can assert "anything" and call it an impeachable offense with a simple majority partisan vote saying so. The trouble begins when their managers show up at the doors of the Senate for presentation and trial. Only a completely dysfunctional Senate would dare remove a duly elected President on a partisan vote of the House.

 

[Dribble]

Actually I erred, the House can assert "anything" and call it an impeachable offense with a simple majority partisan vote saying so. The trouble begins when their managers show up at the doors of the Senate for presentation and trial. Only a completely dysfunctional Senate would dare remove a duly elected President on a partisan vote of the House.

Are you saying the Democratically controlled Senate was correct in not removing Bill Clinton after the Republican controlled House impeached him for lying about a blowjob?

 

[Rightguide]

I wonder why none of the administration officials that keep saying Trump did nothing wrong will testify under oath?

Understand due process and read the Constitution. Study Charles Montesquieu's "The Spirit of Laws," to understand why the Founders incorporated his principles of "separation of powers" into the Constitution. Maybe you'll find a clue.

 

[bodysong]

*Yawn*

Building the wall, the new wall is being built

Surprise! Zero Miles Of Trump's 'Wall' Has Been Built

11/16/19

On Thursday, Acting (of course) Customs and Border Protection commissioner
Mark Morgan admitted to reporters that 70 miles of 'new' wall on the US-Mexico
border are actually replacing old barriers.

The amount of "new" wall built so far?

ZERO.

Take it away, Vincente Fox. (Not work safe)

Former Mexican President @VicenteFoxQue has some helpful Spanish phrases
if you want to visit Mexico before Trump "builds that fucken wall"

— Esquire (@esquire) August 10, 2018

Border Protection Commissioner Admits No New Border Wall Miles Built
Despite Trump's Claim of 'Great Progress'

https://www.newsweek.com/cbp-no-new-border-wall-1472077


Trump inherited barriers covering 654 miles (1,046 kilometers), or about
one-third of the border. Much of it was built during George W. Bush's
presidency.

 

[Dribble]

Surprise! Zero Miles Of Trump's 'Wall' Has Been Built

11/16/19

On Thursday, Acting (of course) Customs and Border Protection commissioner
Mark Morgan admitted to reporters that 70 miles of 'new' wall on the US-Mexico
border are actually replacing old barriers.

The amount of "new" wall built so far?

ZERO.

Take it away, Vincente Fox. (Not work safe)

Former Mexican President @VicenteFoxQue has some helpful Spanish phrases
if you want to visit Mexico before Trump "builds that fucken wall"

— Esquire (@esquire) August 10, 2018

Border Protection Commissioner Admits No New Border Wall Miles Built
Despite Trump's Claim of 'Great Progress'

https://www.newsweek.com/cbp-no-new-border-wall-1472077


Trump inherited barriers covering 654 miles (1,046 kilometers), or about
one-third of the border. Much of it was built during George W. Bush's
presidency.

There has been walls built on private land by a private company using a go fund me site. Their goal...to sell the land to the Federal Govt...

Their most recent project is 3 mile project in Texas...you know....things are always bigger in Texas

 

[bodysong]

Aglaopheme, I apologize for taking the bait, and participating
in the hijacking of this thread on House Impeachment hearings.

(Perhaps a new thread should be started, concerning Trump's promises and boasts.)

 

[RobDownSouth]

I wonder why none of the administration officials that keep saying Trump did nothing wrong will testify under oath?

Because there are penalties for lying under oath (perjury). Ask Timmeh!

There are, however, zero penalties for lying on Twitter or on Fox News shows.

 

[bodysong]

via @mkraju, testimony of David Holmes, who heard Trump’s voice
on Sondland’s Jul 26 cellphone call.

Sondland: “Zelensky loves your ass.”

Trump: “So, he’s going to do the investigations?”

Sondland: “Zelensky’s going to do anything you ask him.”

Holy hell.

—@dcpoll

 

[schism666]

 

[Rightguide]

via @mkraju, testimony of David Holmes, who heard Trump’s voice
on Sondland’s Jul 26 cellphone call.

Sondland: “Zelensky loves your ass.”

Trump: “So, he’s going to do the investigations?”

Sondland: “Zelensky’s going to do anything you ask him.”

Holy hell.

—@dcpoll

Nothing burger.

 

[Rightguide]

There was absolutely zero point to her appearance before Schiff's committee. Total fail.