The Impeachment Process Has Officially Begun (23 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 24 (members: 0, guests: 24)
    Andrus

    Andrus

    Admin
    Staff member
    Joined
    Oct 6, 2018
    Messages
    2,268
    Reaction score
    944
    Age
    65
    Location
    Sunset, Louisiana
    Offline
    By Laura Bassett

    After months of internal arguing among Democrats over whether to impeach President Donald Trump, the dam is finally breaking in favor of trying to remove him from office. The Washington Post reported that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would announce a formal impeachment inquiry on Tuesday, following a bombshell report that Trump illegally asked Ukraine’s government to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, one of his political opponents. (He essentially admitted to having done so over the weekend.)

    “Now that we have the facts, we’re ready,” Pelosi said Tuesday morning at a forum hosted by The Atlantic. At 5 p.m. the same day, she was back with more. "The actions taken to date by the president have seriously violated the constitution, especially when the president says Article Two says I can do whatever I want," referring to the segment of the Constitution that defines the power of the executive branch of the government. Pelosi's message was that checks and balances of those branches are just as central to the Constitution. And one more thing: "Today, I am announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry," she said at a conference broadcast on Twitter by the Huffington Post. ...

    Read the Full Story - InStyle
     
    Lazybones said:
    You can scroll back just like I can. No offense.
    Click to expand...

    I am asking you to link me to the post for a few reasons.

    1. I don't know where to find it. This thread is 24 pages long.
    2. If you link me to it, there is no chance of me digging until I find something, only to be told that it was the wrong post.

    The clearer we all are with our words, the more constructive the discussion.
     
    Lazybones said:
    I don’t know what to say. Russia interfered with the election. Let’s say that is 100%true.

    Please point to me where Donald trump and his campaign paid for or worked in conjunction with Russia to influence the election. If there was evidence, he would have been charged.
    Click to expand...
    Therein lies the problem, the fact that Russia interfered what our elections at the direction of Vladimir Putin is not in dispute. Those facts were proven by the Mueller Report. trump's efforts to manufacture evidence to say otherwise is what got him into this trouble in the first place. He is chasing down these stupid conspiracy theories to further validate himself because he knows that he wouldn't be president without the Russians.

    These are just two of the laws he has broken with the Ukraine call:

    18 U.S.C. § 607 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 607. Place of solicitation

    a) Prohibition.--
    (1) In general.     --It shall be unlawful for any person to solicit or receive a donation of money or other thing of value in connection with a Federal, State, or local election from a person who is located in a room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties by an officer or employee of the United States.  It shall be unlawful for an individual who is an officer or employee of the Federal Government, including the President, Vice President, and Members of Congress, to solicit or receive a donation of money or other thing of value in connection with a Federal, State, or local election, while in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties by an officer or employee of the United States, from any person.
    (2) Penalty. --A person who violates this section shall be fined not more than $5,000, imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both.
    (b)  The prohibition in subsection (a) shall not apply to the receipt of contributions by persons on the staff of a Senator or Representative in, or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress or Executive Office of the President, provided, that such contributions have not been solicited in any manner which directs the contributor to mail or deliver a contribution to any room, building, or other facility referred to in subsection (a), and provided that such contributions are transferred within seven days of receipt to a political committee within the meaning of section 302(e) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971.

    18 U.S.C. § 872 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 872. Extortion by officers or employees of the United States

    Whoever, being an officer, or employee of the United States or any department or agency thereof, or representing himself to be or assuming to act as such, under color or pretense of office or employment commits or attempts an act of extortion, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both;  but if the amount so extorted or demanded does not exceed $1,000, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
     
    Last edited:
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    Therein lies the problem, the fact that Russia interfered what our elections at the direction of Vladimir Putin is not in dispute. Those facts were proven by the Mueller Report. trump's efforts to manufacture evidence to say otherwise is what got him into this trouble in the first place. He is chasing down these stupid conspiracy theories to further validate himself because he knows that he wouldn't be president without the Russians.
    Click to expand...
    The point I am making is if all you say is true, so what? That is the point of the mueller report. So what.

    I’m not saying Russia didn’t interfere. Obama knew they were and did nothing about it.
     
    Lazybones said:
    1. The DNC paid a company run by a British National to dig up dirt (much of it lies) on a political candidate.
    Click to expand...
    Nope again.

    It’s a US Company run by US residents.

    9923050D-D302-49CC-9810-8D7356FEC8DA.jpeg

    I know you’re trying hard to force a gotcha, but it doesn’t fly. A contractor for the US company is a British National. There is nothing fishy or underhanded or questionable about that. Additionally, the Steele dossier is not central or even very important to the Mueller report; if you remove all mention of the Steele dossier and it’s findings from the Mueller report, the report is hardly changed at all. There is nothing remotely similar between the Steele Dossier and the Ukrainian phone call.
     
    Last edited:
    Slackermod said:
    This is a thread to talk about the current impeachment inquiry.

    Take talk about the Mueller investigation to its own thread.
    Click to expand...

    Aren’t the two very much tied together? It’s a position worth discussing that the impeachment is just a continuation of the mueller investigation. Weird that we can’t discuss both at the same time.
     
    Slackermod said:
    No, they are not really tied together at all. Two separate topics.
    Click to expand...
    I won’t argue with you and will abide. But there are numerous articles out there from both sides of the isle that would disagree with you. I will leave a left wing source so you know I’m not being disingenuous.

    Daily Kos

    Daily Kos is a progressive news site that fights for democracy by giving our audience information and resources to win elections and impact government. Our coverage is assiduously factual, ethical, and unapologetically liberal. We amplify what we think is important, with the proper context—not...
    m.dailykos.com m.dailykos.com
     
    Lazybones said:
    I won’t argue with you and will abide. But there are numerous articles out there from both sides of the isle that would disagree with you. I will leave a left wing source so you know I’m not being disingenuous.

    Daily Kos

    Daily Kos is a progressive news site that fights for democracy by giving our audience information and resources to win elections and impact government. Our coverage is assiduously factual, ethical, and unapologetically liberal. We amplify what we think is important, with the proper context—not...
    m.dailykos.com m.dailykos.com
    Click to expand...

    To be fair, the daily kos is a garbage liberal source that doesn't stick to the facts and is heavily biased.

    At best, their connection to the Mueller Report is that, well, there is already a case for obstruction of Justice, so if you actually build a strong case on the Ukraine situation, you might as well throw those in as additional counts. That's how I read it. Otherwise, I didn't seem to get the rest of their point or see how it tied to the Mueller Report.
     
    wardorican said:
    To be fair, the daily kos is a garbage liberal source that doesn't stick to the facts and is heavily biased.

    At best, their connection to the Mueller Report is that, well, there is already a case for obstruction of Justice, so if you actually build a strong case on the Ukraine situation, you might as well throw those in as additional counts. That's how I read it. Otherwise, I didn't seem to get the rest of their point or see how it tied to the Mueller Report.
    Click to expand...
    Last post on this as I’m not trying to be combative. I posted the most liberal source I could find just to say both sides see these two things tied together. The other side of the isle is saying that this is just an extension of the mueller case. Because they didn’t get the impeachment from that investigation, they are desperately trying this avenue as means to overturn America’s vote in 2016.
     
    Lazybones said:
    Last post on this as I’m not trying to be combative. I posted the most liberal source I could find just to say both sides see these two things tied together. The other side of the isle is saying that this is just an extension of the mueller case. Because they didn’t get the impeachment from that investigation, they are desperately trying this avenue as means to overturn America’s vote in 2016.
    Click to expand...

    The motivation of the current impeachment investigation doesn't validate or invalidate the findings of the investigation. Evidence is evidence regardless of what the motivation is that leads to finding that evidence. Since this is a legislative process and not a judicial process, there is no "fruit of the poisonous tree" justification for overlooking the findings of this impeachment investigation.

    That's why the only relevant discussion is on those issues and arguments that directly relate to the current progress and findings of the impeachment investigation itself.
     
    Lazybones said:
    Last post on this as I’m not trying to be combative. I posted the most liberal source I could find just to say both sides see these two things tied together. The other side of the isle is saying that this is just an extension of the mueller case. Because they didn’t get the impeachment from that investigation, they are desperately trying this avenue as means to overturn America’s vote in 2016.
    Click to expand...

    It’s not true, but they don’t have a lot of other arguments to defend this president’s conduct. So I definitely get why you would rather talk about made up stuff rather than discuss the behavior and abuses of this administration.
     
    And now Mulvaney walks it back:

    White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said Thursday that the flow of security assistance to Ukraine was not conditioned on Kiev investigating a conspiracy related to 2016 election interference, walking back statements he made earlier in the day.
    Mulvaney issued a statement Thursday afternoon accusing the media of “misconstruing” his earlier remarks to the press at the White House “to advance a biased and political witch hunt against President Trump.”

    “Let me be clear, there was absolutely no quid pro quo between Ukrainian military aid and any investigation into the 2016 election,” Mulvaney said. “The president never told me to withhold any money until the Ukrainians did anything related to the server.”
    Click to expand...
    thehill.com

    Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe

    White House acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said Thursday that the flow of security assistance to Ukraine was not conditioned on Kiev investigating a theory related to 2016 election interference, walking back sta
    thehill.com thehill.com
     
    Brandon13 said:
    And now Mulvaney walks it back:

    thehill.com

    Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe

    White House acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said Thursday that the flow of security assistance to Ukraine was not conditioned on Kiev investigating a theory related to 2016 election interference, walking back sta
    thehill.com thehill.com
    Click to expand...
    Got him back on message.

    One Trump adviser said Mulvaney did “far more damage” than Sondland’s testimony, calling it “totally inexplicable.”
    “He literally said the thing the president and everyone else said did not happen,” the adviser said.
    One person who spoke to Trump said, however, that he was pleased with Mulvaney’s performance.

    Mulvaney also caught the Justice Department by surprise when he asserted that Ukraine’s “cooperating in an ongoing investigation with our Department of Justice” was connected to aid money being withheld. A department official said, “If the White House was withholding aid in regards to the cooperation of any investigation at the Department of Justice, that is news to us.”
    Click to expand...

     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom