Remember: it's no longer "President Trump" - it's "Impeached President Trump"

[cowslinger64]

See, Biden threatened to literally take away the funds. That is against the Impoundment Act. Trump didn't threaten anything, he just held it back a spell, never voiced an intention to not give it to them like Biden did. Why can't you own up to the fact that Obama and Biden were not as pure as the driven snow. Obama set precedence and Trump tried a version of Obama's ploy and now it impeachment time.

That is breaking the law. Jeezus keerist.


Where does it say Obama held it back so the ukraine would investigate a future political rival?

 

[nowisthetime]

Lol, he so wanted badly for O to be impeached, didn't he? Egg's on his orange fat face.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Lol, he so wanted badly for O to be impeached, didn't he? Egg's on his orange fat face.

It basically all started when Bam roasted Cheeto's suntanned ass at that Correspondent's Dinner and threw his birther shit back at his puss...we've essentially been paying the price for his fragile male ego's humiliation ever since.

Lucky for us he's been super sloppy at undoing Bam's legacy while being proficient at shitting on his own.

 

[cowslinger64]

It basically all started when Bam roasted Cheeto's suntanned ass at that Correspondent's Dinner and threw his birther shit back at his puss...we've essentially been paying the price for his fragile male ego's humiliation ever since.

Lucky for us he's been super sloppy at undoing Bam's legacy while being proficient at shitting on his own.

Sure helps explain why the trumptards love him so. He represents them perfectly.

 

[zipman]

That is breaking the law. Jeezus keerist.


Where does it say Obama held it back so the ukraine would investigate a future political rival?

LOL, it's like trying to teach a pig to sing.

 

[Rightguide]

With these left wingers it's not about equal application of the law, the constitution or federalist papers, it's all about a scorched earth resistance and total hatred of Trump. They are consumed by it. Pelosi's veins pop out of her head when talking about Trump..... Green, Schiff, Nadler, Waters, Swalwell, never seen anything like it!

We should as a nation lead them to the gallows as traitors.

 

[Rightguide]

LOL, it's like trying to teach a pig to sing.

^^^

More booty tunes.

 

[cowslinger64]

We should as a nation lead them to the gallows as traitors.

So we should go back and hang Starr first, right?

 

[BotanyBoy]

LOL

What a fraud.

I want a specific example of a POTUS breaking the Impound Act. Waiting

Then you should have asked for that instead of running with the goalpost after the fact.

Not that it really matters as the new goalpost you set isn't relevant to anything being discussed here.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

^^^

More booty tunes.

"booty tunes"

https://media3.giphy.com/media/4HbbmeuR0g4r6/source.gif

one of these days you're gonna drop a he-man's ballzack and finally write the Great American Anal/Scat Erotica Novel the bitch inside of you is screaming to get out.

 

[Heathergave]

Trump is a petty troll that cant take the heat. He is not a nice person or a good person. This was all well established long before he was president.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

You quoted an article. That is what the article quoted discussed, the Impound Law. You said "everybody does it." WHen challenged, YOU changed the goalposts to some generic Whataboutism that did not address the article you quoted. WHen challenged on that, you accuse me of changing the goalpost, when all I did was ignore your WHataboutism and went back to the original issue.

You can't name another POTUS who broke the law in the way Trump has been shown to have broken the law. Noted.

Then you should have asked for that instead of running with the goalpost after the fact.

Not that it really matters as the new goalpost you set isn't relevant to anything being discussed here.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You quoted an article. That is what the article quoted discussed, the Impound Law. You said "everybody does it." WHen challenged, YOU changed the goalposts to some generic Whataboutism that did not address the article you quoted. WHen challenged on that, you accuse me of changing the goalpost, when all I did was ignore your WHataboutism and went back to the original issue.

You can't name another POTUS who broke the law in the way Trump has been shown to have broken the law. Noted.

None of this worming makes up for the lack of precision in your communication.

No, but I don't think POTUS broke the law in the way partisan hacks claim Trump did.

 

[icanhelp1]

That is breaking the law. Jeezus keerist.


Where does it say Obama held it back so the ukraine would investigate a future political rival?

You must get fucked up in rotaries.

So let's break down what you wrote:

Broke the law by holding up approved aid to a foreign country: Cite what article of impeachment describes what law he broke. Now, you could possibly cite the Impoundment Control act of 1974, but it doesn't exist in the articles of impeachment, so that can't be it.

What you quoted as "breaking the law" is a talking point without substance, chronology is important, if expressed implied influence or pressure is unrealized by the inherent recipient of the aid then how can you infer bribery, extortion or Quid Pro Quo, let me simplify, it would be like playing patty cake with one hand or playing hide and go seek by yourself, doesn't make sense.

The control act is very explicit in its definition: established procedures to prevent the president and other government officials from unilaterally substituting their own funding decisions for those of the congress. In other words, stop the president from refusing to release appropriated funds for policy he opposes. Trump held it up but also released it in a timely manner, before the end of the fiscal spending cycle.

"Do us a favor" has a different meaning than "do me a favor" What will clear this up is testimony by the whistleblower and compare his/her statement to the actual transcript memorandum. When reading the 9 page WB comments it becomes evident that it was a cleverly contrived and well prepared legal document that goes way beyond the phone conversation between Zelensky and Trump. Also violates handling of classified material and WB PROTOCOL, deviating from the chain of command and chain of custody, failure to report first to the designated authority ( ICIG )

Again, one more time, what statute is cited in either article of impeachment. If you accuse someone of breaking the law then you have to cite the relevant statute in order to apply the appropriate punishment ( removal ). Abuse of power and obstruction of congress are the principles in the articles of impeachment.

Abuse of power; what statute was provided for abuse of power? You say, coercing a foreign government to investigate an opposing potential presidential candidate so as to benefit Trump in the 2020 elections. The word {coercing } is the operative word here. Using the threat of refusing aid. Coercion takes two, both parties have to be cognizant of the threat in order to apply coercion. Zelensky was not aware of any implied threat to hold back aid and admitted so himself on many occasions.

"Do us a favor", {US} being the operative word, seems to suggest plural over individual.

A presidential candidate is not immune from an investigation into corruption. Two items are present with Bidens.

VP Biden threatened to eliminate 1 billion dollars in aid to Ukraine if prosecutor General Shokin, who was about to investigate Burisma, (the very company Hunter Biden who was a non-qualified board member of) WAS NOT FIRED. That's two violation, 1. Implied violation of the Impoundment Control Act of 1974... 2. Quid Pro Quo and coercion of a foreign government by using the threat to refuse aid
( ABUSE OF POWER ). Biden achieved the desired effect and Shokin was fired. There's a crime there and the Dems know it. It's the very crime you're accusing Trump of having committed. There is an interesting parallel that the crimes Trump is being accused of are the very same crimes that have been committed in the previous administration. Deflection at its best. Impeach someone to take the onus off of oneself. It's a brilliant strategy but it isn't going to work. The Durham report will come due in the coming months. There is rumor out there of the Bidens involved with money laundering.

Hunter Biden was the recipient of a benefit, existing under the umbrella of influence provided by VP Biden, a job which provided up to $80,000.00 monthly for a job Hunter was not qualified to hold. Screams conflict of interest and warrants a thorough investigation as to the reason why was it absolutely necessary for Shokin to be fired.

Trump requested an investigation into the 2016 campaign and what was the connection with the Ukraine, Javanovic list of people off limits for investigation, Manafort's black ledger, the Clinton email server and Russian interference with the 2016 election campaign. All legitimate concerns and definitely deserves an impartial investigation, hopefully a little more impartial than the political hit job being given to Trump.

 

[cowslinger64]

You must get fucked up in rotaries.

So let's break down what you wrote:
.

You really waste your time trying to disprove the proven. Never tire of it?


You're a very tiresome troll. For the very last time:

The Trump administration’s decision to freeze the release of security assistance to Ukraine violated the law, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) said in a new report.

The independent watchdog said in an opinion issued Thursday that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) withheld the appropriated funds last summer not as a programmatic delay but in order to advance the president’s own agenda.

By doing so, the watchdog concluded, the White House violated what’s known as the Impoundment Control Act (ICA).

“Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law,” the report said. “OMB withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA)...Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the ICA.”

The GAO opinion touched on a matter at the center of impeachment proceedings against President Trump: The decision by the White House to withhold nearly $400 million in U.S. aid to Kyiv as it fights off pro-Russian separatists.


https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...inistration-broke-law-by-withholding-aid-from


There couldn't possibly be enough evidence for your moronic hacks.

 

[icanhelp1]

You really waste your time trying to disprove the proven. Never tire of it?


You're a very tiresome troll. For the very last time:

The Trump administration’s decision to freeze the release of security assistance to Ukraine violated the law, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) said in a new report.

The independent watchdog said in an opinion issued Thursday that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) withheld the appropriated funds last summer not as a programmatic delay but in order to advance the president’s own agenda.

By doing so, the watchdog concluded, the White House violated what’s known as the Impoundment Control Act (ICA).

“Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law,” the report said. “OMB withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA)...Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the ICA.”

The GAO opinion touched on a matter at the center of impeachment proceedings against President Trump: The decision by the White House to withhold nearly $400 million in U.S. aid to Kyiv as it fights off pro-Russian separatists.


https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...inistration-broke-law-by-withholding-aid-from


There couldn't possibly be enough evidence for your moronic hacks.

No helping you. When you cite a statute that Trump is being impeached for you let me know. The GAO opinion is nothing more than that! an opinion. Looks like the house Dems are going to have to come up with another batch of articles.

 

[cowslinger64]

No helping you. When you cite a statute that Trump is being impeached for you let me know. The GAO opinion is nothing more than that! an opinion. Looks like the house Dems are going to have to come up with another batch of articles.

Trump is impeached.


You lose.


Actually, we all lost.


BTW.. it's the GAOs job to monitor this sort of thing.


If trump actually did shoot someone, as he claimed he could do and not lose a voter.. could you image the horror the cop that arrested him would go through?


Fuck you.

 

[Conager]

Is Trump, as The Impeached President of The United States of America still in charge today?

 

[jaF0]

Was he ever in charge? Or was it Vlad?

 

[cowslinger64]

Is Trump, as The Impeached President of The United States of America still in charge today?

That question will be answered when trumps tax returns are released.

 

[jomar]

Then you should politely inform rorbags, mr.stolenvalor, Jumanji, and the racoon to STFU already.

Haha, saw the last jumanji over Christmas and the nieces said the new one was awesome.

 

[jomar]

I didn't misspeak. The Clinton "impeachment" at this point is groundless, meaning it's purpose was defeated by the United States Senate. The difference between Clinton and Trump's impeachment situation is that Trump has not been charged with a specific crime and when he is acquitted his impeachment will be just as groundless. It wasn't too long ago your side was trying to tell us the House proceeding was like a "Grand Jury" proceeding, but I might remind you that if an indicted person is subsequently found not guilty, he/she isn't considered "Indicted for life."

Say what?

Except he’s still impeached. Just because the senate doesn’t find the offense rises to the level of removal from office doesn’t negate the fact of impeachment.

Trump and Clinton are impeached for life. The difference is that Clinton got a blowjob and Trump tried to fuck Biden.


Eh, the last sentence was funnier in the read through.

 

[Conager]

Is Trump, as The Impeached President of The United States of America still in charge today?

That question will be answered when trumps tax returns are released.

I didn't know that was happening today.

What about now? Is Impeached President of The United States of America Donald John Trump still in charge of this fine country? Are you snowflakes still whining about it?

 

[Conager]

Say what?

Except he’s still impeached. Just because the senate doesn’t find the offense rises to the level of removal from office doesn’t negate the fact of impeachment.

Trump and Clinton are impeached for life. The difference is that Clinton actually obstructed justice and Trump stands accused of "obstructing Congress" which isn't actually a thing


Eh, the last sentence was funnier in the read through.

FYP, YWIA

 

[BotanyBoy]

Say what?

Except he’s still impeached. Just because the senate doesn’t find the offense rises to the level of removal from office doesn’t negate the fact of impeachment.

Trump and Clinton are impeached for life. The difference is that Clinton got a blowjob and Trump tried to fuck Biden.


Eh, the last sentence was funnier in the read through.

Biden, the rich old white nepotistic male is fucked.....the Bernie bro's ain't voting for him, he's the enemy in their eyes.

Enjoy that "progress" comrade.