Because they were dumb enough to be maneuvered into doing something wrong themselves by Trump. My, that must be embarrassing.
Pleading the 5th is not a good look while testifying during an impeachment hearing.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Because they were dumb enough to be maneuvered into doing something wrong themselves by Trump. My, that must be embarrassing.
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.
History backs this up. If you pull up the articles of impeachment that were approved in the Johnson and Clinton impeachments and drafted but not yet approved for Nixon, many of them are very broadly worded and do not refer to specific criminal statutes. It's not even clear in Johnson's case that any real crime was committed, but he came within a vote of conviction anyway.
If the evidence ultimately shows that Trump did withhold aid to pressure Ukraine into investigating a political rival, and if the evidence ultimately shows that he did so for personal political reasons rather than out of a legitimate concern for the national interest, I don't know how one can deny that's an impeachable abuse of power, regardless of whether a specific criminal statute is violated (although I think one could make various criminal claims under specific statutes for that conduct, such as criminal extortion or bribery).
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?
In the Clinton case the Starr Report identified 11 federal felonies committed by Clinton.
In the Clinton case the Starr Report identified 11 federal felonies committed by Clinton.
Because it doesn't matter, the Dems will just jump to something else. For example
1. Trump didn't fire Mueller> next
2. Trump allowed Mueller access to everyone in his admin> next
2. Trump released the Mueller report to the public> next
4. Trump released both transcripts of both phone calls
Collusion**Obstruction of justice, congress, Extortion, Bribery and now witness tampering. What else can Schithead come up with. Maybe blame Trump for the triple 7 plane crashes or maybe for the Astros stealing signals in the World Series.
Trump would have fired mueller.... that's what he wanted.
He DID NOT allow access to everyone in his admin for Mueller.
He released a portion of the report, with the parts that needed to be seen were redacted. That is not over.
He did NOT release a transcript but an essay based on it.. just like barrs essay on the Mueller report.
You're a liar.![]()
That's true, but the articles themselves were more broadly worded, such as the article concerning "abuse of power."
I believe what that means is that { identifiable statutes were violated } and presented to the house.
Trump would have fired mueller.... that's what he wanted.
BUT HE DIDN'T
He DID NOT allow access to everyone in his admin for Mueller.
WHO?
He released a portion of the report, with the parts that needed to be seen were redacted. That is not over.
GRAND JURY TESTIMONY IS PROTECTED BY 6(E), THE CHAIRS HAD ACCESS!
He did NOT release a transcript but an essay based on it.. just like barrs essay on the Mueller report.
WHAT WAS RELEASED WAS A MEMORANDUM, PHONE CALLS ARE NOT RECORDED, WHAT WAS PROVIDED WAS AN NSC TRANSCRIPT MEMORANDUM.
You're a liar.![]()
You might be right. Most legal commentators I've read appear to believe that the impeachment clause is not limited to specific statutory violations.
Yes, a statutory violation is not required even though { high crimes and misdemeanors } is often touted. Impeachment is a political process. Clinton and Nixon were both charged with felonies so there is some precedent for basing impeachment on criminal violations. Removal of a president is still theory and unprecedented, it's never happened before.
It's unclear because the language is unclear. Johnson was accused of violating the Tenure in Office act, which wasn't a criminal statute, so there's historical precedent for not relying on statutes. In Nixon's case, too, I don't think the articles were limited to specific statutory violations (but it's been a while since I've looked at them).
There were crimes committed, the Watergate cover up being the most serious.
My own view is that it's got to be very serious, at least quasi-criminal conduct to justify impeachment. They shouldn't impeach a president just for vague impropriety.
So, who's going to handle the outcome better?
Us if they don't toss the bum out?
-or-
Them if they do?
Collusion**Obstruction of justice, congress, Extortion, Bribery and now witness tampering. What else can Schithead come up with.
Because it doesn't matter, the Dems will just jump to something else. For example
1. Trump didn't fire Mueller> next
2. Trump allowed Mueller access to everyone in his admin> next
2. Trump released the Mueller report to the public> next
4. Trump released both transcripts of both phone calls
Collusion**Obstruction of justice, congress, Extortion, Bribery and now witness tampering. What else can Schithead come up with. Maybe blame Trump for the triple 7 plane crashes or maybe for the Astros stealing signals in the World Series.
Because it doesn't matter, the Dems will just jump to something else. For example
1. Trump didn't fire Mueller> next
2. Trump allowed Mueller access to everyone in his admin> next
2. Trump released the Mueller report to the public> next
4. Trump released both transcripts of both phone calls
Collusion**Obstruction of justice, congress, Extortion, Bribery and now witness tampering. What else can Schithead come up with. Maybe blame Trump for the triple 7 plane crashes or maybe for the Astros stealing signals in the World Series.
There was absolutely zero point to her appearance before Schiff's committee. Total fail.
so she had "less" reason to cry in front of america like a little bitch.