███████████ Impeachment Proceedings On Donald Trump ███████████

[bestone4ever]

This probably doesn't belong here but it's funny as fuck.

@realDonaldTrump: Wow! Crazy Bernie Sanders is surging in the polls, looking very good against his opponents in the Do Nothing Party. So what does this all mean? Stay tuned!

@BernieSanders: It means you’re going to lose.

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1216435180220620807

 

[butters]

This probably doesn't belong here but it's funny as fuck.

@realDonaldTrump: Wow! Crazy Bernie Sanders is surging in the polls, looking very good against his opponents in the Do Nothing Party. So what does this all mean? Stay tuned!

@BernieSanders: It means you’re going to lose.

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1216435180220620807

and then there was this classic reply from a trump-supporter

ICASTAR123!
‏

@icastar123
20m20 minutes ago
More
Replying to @realDonaldTrump
Great Job President Trump! Thankful your President!

this is why education's so important, folks

 

[bestone4ever]

Trump said he loves the uneducated.

 

[Rightguide]

Thanks Democrats:



So far, all impeachment has done is make Donald Trump more popular
Thomas Meaney

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-trump-popular-nancy-pelosi-november-election

 

[RoryN]

Trump 'knew exactly what was going on' with Ukraine pressure campaign, says Lev Parnas

Washington (CNN) - Indicted Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas, a central figure in the White House's alleged Ukraine pressure campaign, said President Donald Trump "knew exactly what was going on" despite his repeated denials of wrongdoing.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/15/politics/lev-parnas-trump-ukraine/index.html

 

[RocketLauncher]

When does the trial start?

 

[RoryN]

Boom. Breaking, on all networks:

Trump Broke The Law with Ukraine Aid Withholding: Watchdog

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/tr...law-government-accountability-office-n1117031

 

[Pookie]

Boom. Breaking, on all networks:

Trump Broke The Law with Ukraine Aid Withholding: Watchdog

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/tr...law-government-accountability-office-n1117031

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

 

[butters]

yeah, been reading it and it's on the news... of course, the trumpsters will deny it broke any laws because he says so.

the government watchdogs doing their jobs:

The GAO, a nonpartisan congressional watchdog, said in a decision issued Thursday that the White House budget office violated the Impoundment Control Act, a 1974 law that limits the White House from withholding funds that Congress has appropriated.

The Office of Management and Budget told the GAO it "withheld the funds to ensure that they were not spent 'in a manner that could conflict with the President's foreign policy,'" said Thomas Armstrong, the GAO's general counsel.

"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 GAO wrote. "OMB withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act. The withholding was not a programmatic delay. Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the ICA."

The White House budget office told the GAO that the money was withheld because they were reviewing the programs, meaning the delay wasn't subject to the Impoundment Control Act. But the GAO rejected that argument.

"OMB asserts that its actions are not subject to the ICA because they constitute a programmatic delay," GAO wrote. "OMB further argues that because reviews for compliance with statutory conditions and congressional mandates are considered programmatic, so too should be reviews undertaken to ensure compliance with presidential policy prerogatives. OMB's assertions have no basis in law."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/16/poli...g-aid/index.html?cid=web-alerts&nsid=65587177

 

[Rightguide]

Bullshit charge. The Parnas notes are bullshit, even Sen. Collins questions their authenticity. Remember Parnas owns a company named, Fraud Inc., that ought to tell you something.

 

[BotanyBoy]

yeah, been reading it and it's on the news... of course, the trumpsters will deny it broke any laws because he says so.

Or because the (D)'s haven't been able to produce evidence that he did.


Unfortunately "orange man bad!!" and extra foot stamping about the popular vote just isn't enough.

 

[jaF0]

Lock him up!!!!

GAO says Trump administration broke law by withholding Ukraine aid
Fox News|7 minutes ago
The Government Accountability Office issued a legal opinion on Thursday saying that President Trump's administration broke the law by withholding defense aid to Ukraine -- the issue at the heart of the president's impeachment trial. That money — $214 million which had been allocated to the Department of Defense for security assistance .


I'd volunteer to click the handcuffs, but I don't want the orange to rub off.

 

[butters]

Or because the (D)'s haven't been able to produce evidence that he did.


Unfortunately "orange man bad!!" and extra foot stamping about the popular vote just isn't enough.

you get one reply from me today, so don't waste it:

the democrats can't produce documentation blocked to them or receive testimony from witnesses trump obstructed from testifying.

they didn't produce this document or make this announcement, the GOVERNMENT's OWN NON-PARTISAN WATCHDOG did.


now, bark away, do your thing, i won't see it or reply. *pats you on head*

 

[BotanyBoy]

the democrats can't produce documentation

And that's all that matters.

they didn't produce this document or make this announcement, the GOVERNMENT's OWN NON-PARTISAN WATCHDOG did.

The hyper-partisan "watchdog" doesn't count.

now, bark away, do your thing, i won't see it or reply. *pats you on head*

Yea...gotta run from reality

 

[icanhelp1]

Bullshit charge. The Parnas notes are bullshit, even Sen. Collins questions their authenticity. Remember Parnas owns a company named, Fraud Inc., that ought to tell you something.

Rep Bob Barr phrased it perfectly. If Nancy Pelosi is so concerned that Trump broke the law then why wasn't the statutory reference of said broken law included in the articles of impeachment? Make sense to me!

 

[Rightguide]

Lock him up!!!!

GAO says Trump administration broke law by withholding Ukraine aid
Fox News|7 minutes ago
The Government Accountability Office issued a legal opinion on Thursday saying that President Trump's administration broke the law by withholding defense aid to Ukraine -- the issue at the heart of the president's impeachment trial. That money — $214 million which had been allocated to the Department of Defense for security assistance .


I'd volunteer to click the handcuffs, but I don't want the orange to rub off.

~Yawn~

This from left wing Vox:

The report may change the tenor of the Senate’s impeachment trial

The White House has already refuted the report’s conclusions, accusing the GAO of “overreach.” And OMB spokesperson Rachel Semmel said her agency “uses its apportionment authority to ensure taxpayer dollars are properly spent consistent with the President’s priorities and with the law.”

The anger in these statements makes sense, especially since both the White House and OMB are being accused of something serious. But they also have the space to be indignant because they can be confident the report isn’t likely to change anything.

Importantly, nothing major will likely happen on the legal front. Some ethics group will probably sue the administration over this, and the GAO might even do so as it has before, but it’s unlikely to lead to much. It’s possible, though, that the White House will fire staff at OMB or even acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, who also heads that office.

The White House may still not change its procedures. Last November, an OMB lawyer said the executive branch didn’t have to abide by GAO rulings. “When an agency of the legislative branch interprets a law differently than the executive branch, the executive branch is not bound by its views,” Mark Paoletta, the OMB’s general counsel, wrote in a memo last November.

The most probable outcome, then, is that this report will serve as fodder for the president’s opponents who want to see him impeached. It bolsters the case against him that he did something illegal — for his own political gain — and therefore must be booted from office. But the Senate is controlled by Republicans, which means even this new information is unlikely to lead to the president’s conviction.

https://www.vox.com/2020/1/16/21068705/gao-report-ukraine-aid-impeachment-trum

 

[jaF0]

Dude's been crooked most of his life, like most corporate toads are. You can't get ahead legally.

Dude transferred his corrupt practices into Government, breaking many laws along the way. They've been cited and quoted repeatedly, but the Orangies will never take their blinders off.

 

[freakyguy41]

Or because the (D)'s haven't been able to produce evidence that he did.


Unfortunately "orange man bad!!" and extra foot stamping about the popular vote just isn't enough.

Easy enough to remedy... everyone who is subpoenaed, including trump himself, comes forward... swears to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth... allowing all witnesses to testify and all evidence to be presented... then let the chips fall where they may.

Anything short of that is a cover up by a criminal enterprise.

Just think... if trump is exonerated by the evidence, then i'm sure he'll boast about it everyday... whereas if the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he's guilty of one or both charges, then the Senate would be obligated to convict and remove him from office. Hmm... i wonder what the chief justice will have to say at the end.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Easy enough to remedy... everyone who is subpoenaed, including trump himself, comes forward... swears to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth... allowing all witnesses to testify and all evidence to be presented... then let the chips fall where they may.

Well there is so much partisanship on both sides that's NEVER going to happen.

Anything short of that is a cover up by a criminal enterprise.

That's what you want it to be.

But really it's just partisan hackery playing out.

Just think... if trump is exonerated by the evidence, then i'm sure he'll boast about it everyday... whereas if the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he's guilty of one or both charges, then the Senate would be obligated to convict and remove him from office. Hmm... i wonder what the chief justice will have to say at the end.

Trump doesn't need to be exonerated, (D)eez need to prove he did what they say he did.

 

[bestone4ever]

It's in the Senate now.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Oh look, Lardo's getting impeached.

 

[Rightguide]

Oh look, Lardo's getting impeached.

That's already happened, clown.

 

[icanhelp1]

~Yawn~

This from left wing Vox:

The report may change the tenor of the Senate’s impeachment trial

The White House has already refuted the report’s conclusions, accusing the GAO of “overreach.” And OMB spokesperson Rachel Semmel said her agency “uses its apportionment authority to ensure taxpayer dollars are properly spent consistent with the President’s priorities and with the law.”

The anger in these statements makes sense, especially since both the White House and OMB are being accused of something serious. But they also have the space to be indignant because they can be confident the report isn’t likely to change anything.

Importantly, nothing major will likely happen on the legal front. Some ethics group will probably sue the administration over this, and the GAO might even do so as it has before, but it’s unlikely to lead to much. It’s possible, though, that the White House will fire staff at OMB or even acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, who also heads that office.

The White House may still not change its procedures. Last November, an OMB lawyer said the executive branch didn’t have to abide by GAO rulings. “When an agency of the legislative branch interprets a law differently than the executive branch, the executive branch is not bound by its views,” Mark Paoletta, the OMB’s general counsel, wrote in a memo last November.

The most probable outcome, then, is that this report will serve as fodder for the president’s opponents who want to see him impeached. It bolsters the case against him that he did something illegal — for his own political gain — and therefore must be booted from office. But the Senate is controlled by Republicans, which means even this new information is unlikely to lead to the president’s conviction.

https://www.vox.com/2020/1/16/21068705/gao-report-ukraine-aid-impeachment-trum

Isn't the GAO in the same office building as the ACLU?

 

[Rightguide]

'100% false': DOJ rejects Lev Parnas claim that Barr was part of Ukraine scheme
by Daniel Chaitin & Jerry Dunleavy
| January 15, 2020 11:00 PM
| Updated Jan 16, 2020, 12:15 AM

The Justice Department flatly rejected allegations by Lev Parnas, an indicted associate of Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, that Attorney General William Barr was "absolutely" involved in a Ukraine scheme now at the center of impeachment.

"100% false," DOJ spokeswoman Kerri Kupec told the Washington Examiner in the same two-word statement which MSNBC host Rachel Maddow, who conducted an interview with Parnas on Wednesday, read live on air.

Parnas, 47, along with another Giuliani associate, Igor Fruman, was charged over an alleged scheme to funnel foreign money to Republican politicians. House Democrats began releasing a trove of texts and documents Tuesday evening related to efforts to remove then-Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch from her post in Kyiv. Parnas asserted that his dealings in Ukraine, now the subject of impeachment scrutiny, were done with Trump's and Giuliani's knowledge.

"Today, we interviewed Lev Parnas," Maddow's show told the Justice Department in its request for comment, which was shared by Kupec. "He told us Attorney General Barr was basically on the same team and best of friends with Rudy Giuliani, Victoria Toensing, and Joe DiGenova. He said AG Barr knew, through contact with Rudy Giuliani, about the effort to get the Ukrainians to announce an investigation of Vice President Joe Biden. We welcome any comment you have for us about this."

Kupec told the Washington Examiner that there was no truth to Parnas's claims. She added that the Justice Department's position "has not changed" since September, when the Ukraine controversy first broke through a whistleblower complaint and when the agency emphatically distanced itself from Giuliani's foray into Ukraine in a lengthy statement.

More here:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...as-claim-that-barr-was-part-of-ukraine-scheme

 

[Rightguide]

Isn't the GAO in the same office building as the ACLU?

Here's another little tidbit:


"Abe Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, JFK, LBJ, Bill Clinton, the Bushes, John McCain, John Kerry, Al Gore, Pat Buchanan, Jeb Hensarling, Russ Feingold, Joe Lieberman, Judd Gregg, and not least both Paul Ryan… and Barack Obama” have all supported the power of the presidency to balance the spending power of Congress.

The Akron Law Review reported on President John F. Kennedy’s support for the same kind of hold President Trump is alleged to ordered on Ukraine aid:

President Kennedy’s major impoundment controversy centered about the RS-70, a long-range bomber. Congress appropriated nearly two times the amount that the President had requested, and Secretary of Defense McNamara refused to release the excess funds and emphasized that America’s missile deterrence capability combined with existing bomber strength was more than adequate."
https://warroom.org/jfk-clinton-and-obama-wanted-impoundment-control/