The Impeachment Process Has Officially Begun (3 Viewers)

[Andrus]

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

 

[Beach Friends]

You want to ask the following question:

"I would like to know if everything in his complaint was true and accurate."

If the answer to this is 'yes', does that not make every other question on your list irrelevant?

Not at all. Plus, if you think anyone would just call it a day after receiving that response you are incorrect.

I really would think that anyone who watched the testimony in the House would have an appreciation for the fact that a person's oral testimony has a strong tendency to look different on critical issues than what was provide in written statements.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Not at all. Plus, if you think anyone would just call it a day after receiving that response you are incorrect.

I really would think that anyone who watched the testimony in the House would have an appreciation for the fact that a person's oral testimony has a strong tendency to look different on critical issues than what was provide in written statements.

I'm trying to make sense of this. You think proving that the entire whistleblower complaint is true and accurate is not enough?

 

[SaintForLife]

Senator Rand Paul, he's channeling his inner honey badger here.

 

[SaintForLife]

You want to ask the following question:

"I would like to know if everything in his complaint was true and accurate."

If the answer to this is 'yes', does that not make every other question on your list irrelevant?

Think about how it would sound to a nornal American citizen who doesn't follow politics. If you told them that the person who basically started the impeachment of the President the United States doesn't need to testify or be heard from.

 

[Beach Friends]

I'm trying to make sense of this. You think proving that the entire whistleblower complaint is true and accurate is not enough?

First, his merely stating that he stands by his allegations would not prove them. But, more importantly the specifc issues he raised does not exhaust the issues he needs to be questioned about. If you go back and look at the areas I mentioned I think that should come through.

I tend to think this guy has information on the Bidens that he neglected to mention in this complaint, and more importantly did not raise earlier.

 

[Nebaghead]

Think about how it would sound to a nornal American citizen who doesn't follow politics. If you told them that the person who basically started the impeachment of the President the United States doesn't need to testify or be heard from.

How would it sound to a normal American citizen who doesn’t follow politics that an anonymous person who reported questionable behavior and activity to authorities and was corroborated by others is being asked to risk his personal and families safety by the accuser to testify.

 

[MT15]

His allegations were proven to be true by witness testimony.

What do you think he knows about Joe Biden?

 

[Beach Friends]

How would it sound to a normal American citizen who doesn’t follow politics that an anonymous person who reported questionable behavior and activity to authorities and was corroborated by others is being asked to risk his personal and families safety by the accuser to testify.

Everyone who would have a desire to harm him already knows he is. No legitimate reason to pretend otherwise.

 

[Nebaghead]

Everyone who would have a desire to harm him already knows he is. No legitimate reason to pretend otherwise.

Not the nut jobs of the world. An Arizona man was arrested for threatening to kill Schiff. He was a convicted felon.
The president called for him to be taken care of like a treasonous traitor.

 

[MT15]

Not the nut jobs of the world. An Arizona man was arrested for threatening to kill Schiff. He was a convicted felon.
The president called for him to be taken care of like a treasonous traitor.

I think it needs to be clarified that the president called for the whistleblower to be treated like a treasonous traitor. He will probably pardon the nut job who threatened Schiff.

I know that sounds like a joke and Trump supporters probably think it’s funny that someone threatened Schiff, but it’s not really funny. The man had several weapons that resulted in him facing five years if convicted of the threat and ten years for firearms violations.

 

[SaintForLife]

How would it sound to a normal American citizen who doesn’t follow politics that an anonymous person who reported questionable behavior and activity to authorities and was corroborated by others is being asked to risk his personal and families safety by the accuser to testify.

He already has government protection right?

 

[SaintForLife]

I think it needs to be clarified that the president called for the whistleblower to be treated like a treasonous traitor. He will probably pardon the nut job who threatened Schiff.

I know that sounds like a joke and Trump supporters probably think it’s funny that someone threatened Schiff, but it’s not really funny. The man had several weapons that resulted in him facing five years if convicted of the threat and ten years for firearms violations.

Do you honestly think most Trump supporters are fine with that wacko threatening Schiff? Unfortunately politicians have threats against them on both sides in this extra charged political environment.

 

[MT15]

He already has government protection right?

what makes you say that?

 

[MT15]

Do you honestly think most Trump supporters are fine with that wacko threatening Schiff? Unfortunately politicians have threats against them on both sides in this extra charged political environment.

No, not really. But going from the hateful stuff being said by Trump about Schiff and the fact that most Trump supporters end up sounding just like Trump, I can imagine some digital high fives and chuckles about it.

 

[SaintForLife]

what makes you say that?

I thought I had read somewhere that he did have government protection already. I need to go back and see where I saw that.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Senator Rand Paul, he's channeling his inner honey badger her


Actually, I have answered that question several times. First, he said he decided to file his complaint after speaking to 6 people. I would have liked to have known who those 6 people were and the details of those conversations. Really, that's enough right there.

But I would also like to know whether he intentionally left the box blank that asked whether he had previously reported the subject matter of his complaint. I would like to know if anyone advised him to do that.

I would like to know the extent to which he coordinated with other people before he made his complaint.

I would like to know if everything in his complaint was true and accurate.

I would.like to know whether in 2017 he had a conversation with the guy who now serves on Schiff's staff during which they discussed the need to find a way to get Trump out of office.

I would like to know the extent of his knowledge about Biden's involvement in the Ukraine as it might relate to Burisma.

I would like to ask him a lot of questions about the January 19, 2017 WH meeting with officials from the Ukraine, which supposedly was for the purpose of those officials to explore whether an investigation into Burisma would cause tensions in the relationship between our nations given the fact that Hunter was Burisma's board.

Those are just a few of the areas I can think of off the top of my head. I am sure that if I had the knowledge of those who have lived with this issue for some time I could spend the rest of the evening discussing questions I would like to ask.

What is the actual accusation against J. Biden regarding Burisima? Is it similar to this?

After boost from Perry, backers got huge gas deal in Ukraine

KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — Two political supporters of U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry secured a potentially lucrative oil and gas exploration deal from the Ukrainian government soon after Perry proposed one of the men as an adviser to the country's new president.

apnews.com

Ukraine awarded the contract to Perry’s supporters little more than a month after the U.S. energy secretary attended Zelenskiy’s May inauguration. In a meeting during that trip, Perry handed the new president a list of people he recommended as energy advisers. One of the four names was his longtime political backer Michael Bleyzer.

A week later, Bleyzer and his partner Alex Cranberg submitted a bid to drill for oil and gas at a sprawling government-controlled site called Varvynska. They offered millions of dollars less to the Ukrainian government than their only competitor for the drilling rights, according to internal Ukrainian government documents obtained by The Associated Press. But their newly created joint venture, Ukrainian Energy, was awarded the 50-year contract because a government-appointed commission determined they had greater technical expertise and stronger financial backing, the documents show.

 

[Nebaghead]

I thought I had read somewhere that he did have government protection already. I need to go back and see where I saw that.

Glad my tax dollars have to be wasted to protect someone that our president threatened.

 

[Beach Friends]

Significantly, the most recent Gallop poll shows that President Trump's approval rating is the highest it has ever been.

What a resilient President we have.