The Impeachment Process Has Officially Begun (23 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

 

[efil4]

So, if the whistleblower's attorney was part of the #coup and #rebellion groups on Twitter, was the whistleblower part of that too?

Oh. right, I forgot. We're not supposed to know who the whistleblower is, so we can't tell if he was a #coup #rebellion groupie like his lawyer.

Good grief.

so if im "anti-drug dealer" and i call the cops on a guy slinging drugs, he can then claim innocence from dealing because im "anti drug dealer"????

 

[LA - L.A.]

So, if the whistleblower's attorney was part of the #coup and #rebellion groups on Twitter, was the whistleblower part of that too?

Since everything the whistleblower said in his complaint has been confirmed by multiple, credible sources, it doesn't matter what Twitter groups they belonged to.

All that matters is the evidence of what Trump did or didn't do.

Can you provide any evidence that shows Trump did not do what the whistleblower said Trump did?

 

[efil4]

"Motives" to do what? Provide legal representation to someone?

the smear campaign is about to begin in earnest.

this is direct out of Trumps playbook on any accusations he has ever faced. He said so publicly and in print. Deny deny deny then attack accuser.

 

[EmBeeFiveOhFour]

We can't believe anything we hear from the guy who witnessed gasoline being poured on a fire until we hear from the neighbor who called 911 to report the fire. It was a Perfect Fire!

 

[SaintForLife]

"Motives" to do what? Provide legal representation to someone?

My post was tongue-in-cheek, but his tweets about coup and rebellion are interesting to say the least.

 

[efil4]

My post was tongue-in-cheek, but his tweets about coup and rebellion are interesting to say the least.

What is interesting about them?

 

[LA - L.A.]

We shouldn't be questioning Zaid's motives. From what I've heard he's a great guy.

Please provide your source for the last image that you added as an attachment.

That image would be easy to fake, so I'd like to check out it's source to gauge the credibility of it.

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

It must be a visual thing
On the radio he comes across fine

 

[superchuck500]

My post was tongue-in-cheek, but his tweets about coup and rebellion are interesting to say the least.

I guess. I don't like anyone that's part of the process to be using words like coup and rebellion, but I don't see the relevance. If the whistleblower allegations were false, I think the whole line of inquiry about who the whistleblower is and what associations and history he might have would be relevant. But that's just not the case - the facts are about 95% agreed upon and testified to by relevant officials under oath.

This is more a case of interpretation of facts than facts themselves. The whistleblower has virtually no role whatsoever in any of this - other than turning the light on. But this case isn't about lights, it about what's in the room. So the posture fo the advocate lawyer representing him is even less relevant than anything associated with the whistleblower himself. IMO.

 

[EmBeeFiveOhFour]

Maybe it's already addressed in this thread, but did the White House ever explain why the publicly released readout from April summarizing Trump's first call with the Ukraine guy claimed that they discussed efforts to "root out corruption" while the transcript showed they didn't discuss corruption at all (but Trump did discuss how Ukraine women were in the Miss Universe pageants)?

 

[SaintForLife]

Please provide your source for the last image that you added as an attachment instead of just providing the direct link.

That image would be easy to fake, so I'd like to check out it's source to gauge the credibility of it.

Here is a link to his own YouTube account

 

[LA - L.A.]

Here is a link to his own YouTube account

It's a broken link. Where did you get the image and the alleged access to his youtube account? Why do you believe that link was supposed to go to his actual youtube account?

 

[insidejob]

Nunes is so annoying.

 

[Dadsdream]

Okay, you're going to have to connect those dots. How is Mark Zaid acting as a proxy to bring about the events that transpired among Giuliani, Trump, Sondland, Volker, Mulvaney, and the Zelensky administration between April 2019 and September 2019.

Show your work.

The fact that there are Twitter groups called #coup and #rebellion and that there are people who are involved in the impeachment process who belong to those group is sufficient to raise concerns, in my opinion.

If the whistleblower was also part of groups like this, everything that transpired since is forever stained and it's all a travesty foisted on the nation by a group of malcontent government employees who don't want to abide with the decision of the American electorate, in my opinion.

Alas, we cannot know the whistleblower's identity. Too bad. Let's ignore the obvious and dig into the obscure and find something else! Oh, boy.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

He's doing better now.

He made a good crack about speaking Russian, Ukrainian, and a little bit of English.

I beginning to believe that it has to do with his overall comfort level as he is an AD officer whose testimony may be disparaging against the CiC.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Bold choice Nunes, I will expect the same vigor from the Intel Committee when they are holding other hearings when trump appointees refuse to answer the committee's questions.

 

[Burtifus]

Alas, we cannot know the whistleblower's identity. Too bad. Let's ignore the obvious and dig into the obscure and find something else! Oh, boy.

You think the facts of this investigation to date are obscure? Reasonable people could disagree if this is impeachable behavior but the fact pattern is very easy to follow and seems extremely reliable due to the multiple witnesses, documented conversations, transcripts.

Is the fact that those on the extreme left set out to undo the 2016 election results (you are correct there) mean no investigation of wrong-doing by this administration is legitimate?

 

[LA - L.A.]

Let's ignore the obvious and dig into the obscure and find something else!

Isn't that exactly what you are doing?

Are you not ignoring the obvious that has been confirmed by the testimony of several, credible witnesses and by Trump's own release of the notes from his second call with the president of Ukraine?

Are you not digging into obscure facts about the whistleblower and their attorney to find anything else to look at so you can continue to ignore what is painfully obvious from all the testimony and the notes provided by Trump himself?