Impeachment Thread

[Dumpington]

JackLuis writes: "She explained the political implications for Republicans not allowing a fair trial."

And WHAT fair trial is that, Jack?

The Democrats railroaded impeachment through the House of Representatives without even calling any of the witnesses that Chuck Schumer insists are essential! And now Nancy Pelosi says she wants to put Adam Schiff in charge of the U.S. Senate trial? Be serious!

Five Democratic Party U.S. Senators currently running for president AGAINST Trump are demanding to serve as jurors! How corrupt can you possibly get?

YDB95 cries out: "What is your basis for your belief that there's anything to be investigated? Because Dear Leader said so?"

No, YDB95 - it's because the U.S. Constitution says so!

As a Democrat, you OPPOSE the U.S. Constitution! You ALSO oppose American economic growth and secure borders! But you SUPPORT Planned Parenthood, transgendered guys competing as women in athletic events, socialist economics, and the respect that Democrats & their Hollywood supporters are heaping upon deceased Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.

Like many modern Democrats, a part of you wishes that Soleimani's name appeared on the ballot in some of the Democratic Party's upcoming primaries so that you could cast your vote for him (instead of for Joe Biden, who sickens you, despite the fact that he'll end up winning the nomination in the end!)

 

[jp55665566]

What is your basis for your belief that there's anything to be investigated? Because Dear Leader said so?

You have no problem with a Vice-President's son, sitting on the board of an oil/gas company run by a corrupt oligarch, in one of the world's most corrupt Nations (Ukraine)?

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

As we expected all along, Nancy Pelosi caved.

 

[JackLuis]

Lev Parnas attorney tells judge there are ‘essential’ documents Congress needs for impeachment

The attorney representing Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas is requesting permission from a federal judge to turn over more materials to Congress for the impeachment of President Donald Trump.

Attorney Joseph Bondy wrote to Judge J. Paul Oetken requesting a modification of a protective order governing the use of evidence collected as part of the criminal prosecution of Parnas.

Bondy requested that a digital copy of all the information on two iPhones and a Samsun phone be turned over to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

“Review of these materials is essential to the Committee’s ability to corroborate the strength of Mr. Parnas’s potential testimony,” the letter read.

Adam better call another hearing Monday! First Trumpski's act of war and then Lev and his Rudy collusion! Articles III and IV!

 

[YDB95]

You have no problem with a Vice-President's son, sitting on the board of an oil/gas company run by a corrupt oligarch, in one of the world's most corrupt Nations (Ukraine)?

I don't like nepotism any more than you do, but that in itself is not a crime. There is not, and never has been, any evidence that Hunter Biden or his father were guilty of anything beyond nepotism.

 

[JackLuis]

The Supreme Court can legally step in if McConnell tries to push through an unfair impeachment trial: attorney

In a column for the Washington Post, attorney James Robenalt laid out the legal basis for the Supreme Court to step in and review the impeachment trial of Donald Trump if there is evidence it was not conducted properly.

With Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) already admitting that he is working hand-in-hand with the White House to undercut the impeachment trial of the president — as well as signing as a co-sponsor a dismissal bill in the Senate that would allow throw all charges against Trump to be dismissed without a trial — Robenalt explains there is precedent for the Supreme Court to intervene.

John Roberts Presides over the Impeachment trial.

Definition of preside

intransitive verb
1 : to exercise guidance, direction, or control
2a : to occupy the place of authority : act as president, chairman, or moderator
b : to occupy a position similar to that of a president or chairman
3 : to occupy a position of featured instrumental performer —usually used with atpresided at the organ

How much does Roberts owe Trumpski?????

 

[YDB95]

How much does Roberts owe Trumpski?????

The question is probably whether Roberts values his legacy more than his partisanship. Rumor has it he does, but we'll see.

 

[phrodeau]

You have no problem with a Vice-President's son, sitting on the board of an oil/gas company run by a corrupt oligarch, in one of the world's most corrupt Nations (Ukraine)?

If one of the Trump scions were sitting on a board of a corrupt company, your argument would be that they were there to prevent corruption and drain the swamp.

 

[JackLuis]

Trump’s plan to bar Bolton from testifying by using executive privilege dismantled by ex-federal prosecutor

Appearing on MSNBC on Saturday morning, former federal prosecutor Cynthia Alksne brushed aside Donald Trump’s assertion that he could bar former national security adviser John Bolton from testifying before Congress by claiming executive privilege.

Speaking with host Geoff Bennett, Alksne pointed out that invoking executive privilege is not all-encompassing when it comes to criminal testimony.

We know Trumpski is a criminal, so....

 

[KeithD]

The question is probably whether Roberts values his legacy more than his partisanship. Rumor has it he does, but we'll see.

Yeah, I'm giving him 70-30 on being the judge he aspired to be and to value the Constitution more than the Dumbbell. I'm looking for him saying, "Witnesses? Of course we'll have witnesses." 70-30 are pretty depressing odds for a Supreme Court chief justice, though.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

As we expected all along, Nancy Pelosi caved.

Caved to what?

https://media.giphy.com/media/l0ErNdz1w5vt3YdZm/giphy.gif

 

[YDB95]

Caved to what?

https://media.giphy.com/media/l0ErNdz1w5vt3YdZm/giphy.gif

Now, now, I'm sure it made perfect sense when Fox News said it.

 

[jp55665566]

I don't like nepotism any more than you do, but that in itself is not a crime. There is not, and never has been, any evidence that Hunter Biden or his father were guilty of anything beyond nepotism.

There is plenty of indication that criminal activity may have occurred. That is why an investigation is wanted. What did Hunter Biden do to warrant his $80,000/month salary?

 

[Leather_Lesbian]

DAMNING NEW EMAILS SHOW TRUMP KNEW HE WAS BREAKING THE LAW ON UKRAINE


Of the two dozen different defenses and counting that Donald Trump’s allies have trotted out re: why he shouldn’t be impeached for attempting to extort Ukraine, the one most frequently cited is that the freeze on nearly $400 million in military aid in exchange for investigations is much ado about nothing because said aid was ultimately released—no harm, no foul, everyone can go home. That, of course, is a lot like arguing that a mafia don didn’t do anything wrong in ordering the murder of a snitch, if all he did was send his capos to break the guy’s kneecaps, tie to him to a chair, cut off his ring finger and utter the words “we’re gonna kill you and your whole family,” if the guy happened to make it out alive after the cops showed up at the abandoned warehouse. The ring finger is just ornamental! He’s still got both pinkies!

The other problem with this defense is that it appears quite-to-very likely that the only reason the aid was eventually released was because Adam Schiff sent a letter concerning the existence of the whistle-blower complaint, which preceded the unfreezing by just one day. Also, in November we learned that the Office of Management and Budget and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney scrambled to come up with an after-the-fact justification for the hold, which they insisted was legal, despite pushback from officials at the State Department and National Security Council who thought otherwise. Oh, and then there are the unredacted emails, the existence of which was reported by Just Security’s Kate Brannen on Thursday, which show that Trump knew the freeze was considered illegal but pressed for it anyway. And just to top things off, the transparent attempt by the Justice Department to cover up the concern from the Pentagon about the whole breaking-of-the-law thing.

As you can probably imagine, Democrats are quite reasonably steamed up about the revelation that (1) Trump pushed for the freeze despite knowing the DOD believed it to be illegal, and (2) the Justice Department tried extremely hard to obscure this and other pertinent facts. “The newly-revealed unredacted emails are a devastating blow to Sen. McConnell’s push to have a trial without the documents and witnesses we’ve requested,” Chuck Schumer said in a statement. “These emails further expose the serious concerns raised by Trump administration officials about the propriety and legality of the president’s decision to cut off aid to Ukraine to benefit himself…. The American people deserve a fair trial that gets to the truth, not a rigged process that enables a cover-up.”

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/01/donald-trump-ukraine-aid-emails

 

[jp55665566]

DAMNING NEW EMAILS SHOW TRUMP KNEW HE WAS BREAKING THE LAW ON UKRAINE
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/01/donald-trump-ukraine-aid-emails

You don't believe any investigation of the Hunter Biden's activities in Ukraine is warranted?

The notion that PRESIDENT Trump would need any help from Ukraine to dust Joe Biden in an election is laughable.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Caved to what?

https://media.giphy.com/media/l0ErNdz1w5vt3YdZm/giphy.gif

After rushing through impeachment, insisting it needed to be done ASAP to protect the integrity of the 2020 election, she sat on them for three weeks. She demanded assurances that there will be witnesses in the Senate trial, and said she would not send the articles of impeachment over to the Senate until she “saw the arena.”

McConnell explained to her that she has no voice in how the Senate conducts the trial and made no concessions. She announced on Friday that the House will begin proceeding with the handoff next week. She caved.

McConnell has already informed Senators to plan on being in DC at the trial next weekend.

 

[KeithD]

In other words, Pelosi did everything right in the face of the obviously guilty Trump administration in stonewalling key witnesses (the House found more than enough to convict anyway, especially as one of the articles concerns the obvious stonewalling) and the Republicans in the Senate are continuing the coverup, trying to reject having witness in a trial (yeah, like Americans can't understand why that's wrong), and arrogantly prejudging just to participate in a coverup despite that they'll have to declare an oath that they aren't prejudging.

So, great job, Nancy. That holding up the transferal while the damning evidence just keeps piling up gets board Trumpettes like this one tied up in knots is added gravy.

 

[SecretSapphic]

Trump claims, "When we start allowing national security advisers to just go up and say whatever they want to say, we can’t do that."

Actually, we can. Especially during impeachment hearings. Though Richard Nixon made an effort to hide the recordings made in the Oval Office after they were revealed during congressional hearings on Watergate, neither he nor Bill Clinton made any effort to stop witnesses from appearing at impeachment proceedings, and neither did either put any limits on what witnesses might say. On the other hand, Trump hasn’t just ordered White House staff not to cooperate and refused to hand over all documents, he has also taken an expansive view of privilege from the moment he moved into the White House, one that includes blocking access to individuals many steps removed from the White House and reaching back to protect members of his campaign and transition team.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled against the kind of expansive claim of privilege that Trump is making. There is no new law to be decided here. If Trump was taken to court over blocking Bolton’s testimony, he would lose. Trump’s statements that he had to block Bolton’s testimony to protect the office are clearly nonsense, because in previous instances such testimony from top officials wasn’t just allowed, but assumed. Trump isn’t preserving anything—except himself.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...stify-at-Senate-trial-because-it-would-be-bad

 

[Dumpington]

Secret Sapphic writes: "The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled against the kind of expansive claim of privilege that Trump is making."

Yes, for over three years now we've been told that Donald Trump has committed crimes that make him undeserving of the presidency!

But next week the U.S. Senate will begin an impeachment trial, presided over by U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts - and when it's all over we'll know whether or not any of those charges are VALID!

If they ARE valid & meaningful, then Trump will be convicted and forced out of office! But if the charges are complete BULLSH*T, then Nancy Pelosi & the House Democrats will have wasted our time (and millions of taxpayer dollars) pursuing their clown-car exhibit of LIES!

The president's jury (the U.S. Senate) will include at least FIVE Democrats who are running against Trump for the presidency, but despite this CLEAR conflict of interest (they should all recuse themselves), I'm going to predict the Dems don't come anywhere CLOSE to the 67-votes they'll need for a conviction! Heck, they won't even get anywhere close to fifty!

 

[JackLuis]

Ex-prosecutor laughs at idea Rudy Giuliani would be helpful to Trump in impeachment trial: He ‘can’t zip up his pants’

Former federal prosecutor Cynthia Alksne can’t stop laughing at Rudy Giuliani for thinking that he’s going to defend the president before the U.S. Senate or even the Supreme Court during the impeachment.

In an interview with Fox News Saturday, Giuliani proposed that President Donald Trump and his legal team go before the Supreme Court and declare the impeachment unconstitutional. Giuliani justified the idea by saying that in the past, there was nothing in the Constitution that said the High Court could declare a law passed by Congress to be unconstitutional.

When asked if Giuliani would be on the legal team that tries the case, Alksne laughed and said, “no.”

“The people at the White House Counsel’s Office know better than that,” she explained. “Rudy Giuliani just gave an interview to New York Magazine, and he forgot to zip up his pants. No one is going to put this guy in charge of anything.”

 

[YDB95]

One of the precious few bright spots in these four years has been watching Giuliani's reputation finally catch up with the jerk he always has been. It's about time!

 

[icanhelp1]

The question is probably whether Roberts values his legacy more than his partisanship. Rumor has it he does, but we'll see.

Typical Dem MO, start planning and stringing up alibis just in case Trump gets acquitted. You know, dems typical talking points, Roberts is bias, we need more witnesses, we need more articles, let try russian collusion again, lets try illegal assassination, Trump is trying to start WWIII, Trump didn't send flowers to Suleimani's funeral.

I'm sure the SWAMP QUEEN has another unethical ploy to use. Nancy will probably win and that would be unfortunate. San Fran used to be a great city and now, just like Baltimore, and because of progressive policies they're both shitholes.
Nancy, living off the government to the tune of 26 million is complicit in these cities turning to shitholes.


She acts prayerful ( LMAO ) and prays for Trump. Being a catholic myself, Nancy's hypocrisy is truly maddening. She professes to be a practicing Catholic while she promulgates abortion. In my opinion her God is power. I wonder how her and sleepy Joe sleep at night knowing all these babies are exterminated. It's one thing to be pro abortion and its another to profess your adherences to your faith which by doctrine, abortion at all levels is a sin against humanity ( Donum Vitae ) Its one thing to be secular in your beliefs and its another to hypocritically hide behind your faith while admonishing a reporter on a question of hate.

If she wins you can have her, I wouldn't want to be associated with someone who is absent the moral courage to stand by her faith. The Dems have become secular and are slowly eliminating the values our country was founded on. The progressive movement in this country will bring on the downfall of our great country. Her bashing Trump is laughable on its face, she's the one that needs prayers.

26 million, I want to see her tax returns. I wonder why all dems leave office millionaires?

 

[icanhelp1]

Secret Sapphic writes: "The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled against the kind of expansive claim of privilege that Trump is making."

Yes, for over three years now we've been told that Donald Trump has committed crimes that make him undeserving of the presidency!

But next week the U.S. Senate will begin an impeachment trial, presided over by U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts - and when it's all over we'll know whether or not any of those charges are VALID!

If they ARE valid & meaningful, then Trump will be convicted and forced out of office! But if the charges are complete BULLSH*T, then Nancy Pelosi & the House Democrats will have wasted our time (and millions of taxpayer dollars) pursuing their clown-car exhibit of LIES!

The president's jury (the U.S. Senate) will include at least FIVE Democrats who are running against Trump for the presidency, but despite this CLEAR conflict of interest (they should all recuse themselves), I'm going to predict the Dems don't come anywhere CLOSE to the 67-votes they'll need for a conviction! Heck, they won't even get anywhere close to fifty!

See Dump, this is a double edge sword, the Dems win either way. If he's removed they win and if he's acquitted he's guilty by association. This impeachment process is all about shaping the electorate for 2020. It's the same strategy they used with the Mueller report. there was no 'there' 'there' but the process changed enough minds to give them back the house. The Mueller report was the "Trojan Horse", get the house back and then push impeachment by committee ( Schiff and Nadler ). It's a brilliant strategy and the Senate needs to play hardball. They needs to stay focused on acquittal and not be tricked by the likes of Shumar calling for witnesses and dragging this out till election day. If witnesses have to be brought in due to public outrage then they need to pay a big price for being so belligerent. The Dems love to use "defending the constitution", well, we need to put put Schiff, the whistleblower, both bidens, comey and Hillary on the stand and expose this Ukraine mess for all to see.

 

[JackLuis]

Mitch McConnell hit with formal ethics complaint over Trump impeachment: Statements ‘directly contradict his oath of impartiality’

The advocacy group Public Citizen on Monday filed a formal ethics complaint against Senate Majority Mitch McConnell, accusing the powerful Republican of betraying his oath of office by signaling overt bias in favor of President Donald Trump even before his looming impeachment trial begins.

“The public declarations by Senator McConnell that his role in the impeachment process is to coordinate with the White House and thereby make a mockery of the trial directly contradict his oath of impartiality,” said Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen, in a statement. “This is not about whether McConnell has views on Trump’s guilt or whether he has reached a conclusion based on the available evidence. It’s about whether he will design a process that aims to render impartial justice. He has made clear he has no intention of doing so.”

Buh-Bye Mitch!

 

[KeithD]

Mitch McConnell hit with formal ethics complaint over Trump impeachment: Statements ‘directly contradict his oath of impartiality’



Buh-Bye Mitch!

That would be nice, but it's really enough, in the historical context, for it to be quite clear in history that this is a Senate coverup. For historical purposes, it's quite clear that Trump is corrupt/criminal/treasonous, is working on destroying the underpinnings of the American system, and should be removed. A Republican-controlled Senate whitewash will only emphasize this in the history books and McConnell will be highlighted as a corrupt villain in this.