The Trump Impeachment Thread

  • Thread starter Dotini
  • 2,103 comments
  • 84,707 views

Will the current Articles of Impeachment ever be sent from the House to the Senate?

  • Total voters
    24
  • Poll closed .
TexRex
Hey, look who wants to appear interested in discussion by responding to a solicitation for an explanation of remarks directed toward someone else but has demonstrated no interest in offering a good faith explanation of his own remarks when one is solicited. It more than kinda-sorta calls into question his agenda.
Click to expand...
Would you like me to share the detailed reasoning of the highly connected lawyer who advised me of the dilemma his fellow Democrats are in? I would like to do that. Unfortunately, the conversation took place at a restaurant over drinks, and I took no notes. If it would please you, I will get together with the man again as I do regularly and next time take some notes and with his permission I will share them with the forum. My agenda is not to persuade, but to share, listen and learn.
 
TexRex
Hey, look who wants to appear interested in discussion by responding to a solicitation for an explanation of remarks directed toward someone else but has demonstrated no interest in offering a good faith explanation of his own remarks when one is solicited. It more than kinda-sorta calls into question his agenda.
Click to expand...
Hey, look who claims to ignore people but has no problem chiming in when he thinks he has an opportunity to stroke his ego...
 
Last edited:
Chrunch Houston
While the current proceedings aren't exactly fair, my main gripe was that they started the whole thing without a vote. Now they have had one. I just wanted the Democrat house members to be held accountable. Now they will be.

I don't suppose you bothered to read any of the other 109 pages of the report I linked to. The summary I posted is backed up with facts.
Click to expand...

Trump blocks subpoenas and refuses to let anyone of his inner circle testify or even come to defend himself. Complaining about how unfair it is and that there isnt any due process, is simply because of his own doing (again).

The democrat house members should be held accountable to what exactly? They are following house rules. Trump is the one who violates the rules.

edit:
Chrunch Houston
I don't suppose you bothered to read any of the other 109 pages of the report I linked to. The summary I posted is backed up with facts.
Click to expand...

Mine are too. :P

- watch eric the viking
- look at maps. They are always flat
- Watch the expertwitnesses on youtube.

You are blinding yourself from the truth by people who are moving the goalpost.

1. Aid assistence was withheld
2. Trump asked for athe ukranians to do a press conference anouncing investigating H. Biden
3. Trump used his personal lawyer
4. Trump only released the aid after the whistle was blown
5. Trump is refusing to adhere to subpenas or testify
6. Trump spreads the claim of Ukraine interference in the election (what does that have to do with the request to investigate Biden?)
7. Trump hid the evidence on a secure server
8. Trump made the "no quid pro quo" phonecall after finding out about the whistleblower

Everything else the Republicans are using to attack and discredit witnesses are irrelevant. The theory that ukraine influenced the election is irrelevant (doesnt get mentioned in phonecall). A lot of witnesses that did show up and testify are Trump appointees or served under both republicans and democrats.
 
Last edited:
Danoff
He withheld money (aid), but promised to hand it over in exchange for a personal favor from the Ukraine. How is that not bribery? Where's the difficulty here?
Click to expand...

But that didn't happen. They got the aid and no favor was granted. Conversely, Ukraine got no aid for eight years under Obama, and Russia annexed a third of the country.
 
milefile
But that didn't happen. They got the aid and no favor was granted. Conversely, Ukraine got no aid for eight years under Obama, and Russia annexed a third of the country.
Click to expand...

Aid was released after he got busted. It's still bribery.

Edit:

I haven't finished watching this video, but this lawyer explains why attempted bribery is still a crime starting at 9:20.



Edit 2:

He also points at that the technical violation of federal statute is "solicitation" and that there's not really such a thing as attempted solicitation because the violation is in the act.
 
Last edited:
milefile
But that didn't happen. They got the aid and no favor was granted. Conversely, Ukraine got no aid for eight years under Obama, and Russia annexed a third of the country.
Click to expand...

Conspiring to murder someone is still a crime. Let’s say I am planning a terrorist attack on your hometown. I get caught on the phone discussing the plan. Is the fact that the attack did not happen going to prove my innocence?

Irrelevant, Obama didn’t ask Ukraine a favor. Not giving aid is not a crime. That said, Congress allocated the aid.
 
milefile
Ukraine got no aid for eight years under Obama, and Russia annexed a third of the country.
Click to expand...
Ukraine was actively "supported" by the Obama State Department (Victoria Nuland, et al) in the overthrow of its pro-Russian regime. A priceless gift of freedom from domination from our worst enemy and opening the way for our influence, weapons and ultimately NATO. Alas, it is still the most corrupt state in Europe, as Hunter Biden can attest.
 
Dotini
Ukraine was actively "supported" by the Obama State Department (Victoria Nuland, et al) in the overthrow of its pro-Russian regime. A priceless gift of freedom from domination from our worst enemy and opening the way for our influence, weapons and ultimately NATO. Alas, it is still the most corrupt state in Europe, as Hunter Biden can attest.
Click to expand...

What was the corrupt thing hunter Biden did thoug?
 
ryzno
Seriously?
Click to expand...

yes. Republicans use it to move the goalpost. But how is it different then the Trump kids using their dads name to enrich themselves?

what is worse. Being accused of Enriching yourself using your politician dads name. (Which I imagine happens a lot anyways)
or
Being accused of withholding resources to ask a foreign country to help meddle in a domestic and democratic election?
 
The US has meddled in over 80 foreign elections, Russia over 40. Rudyard Kipling called it "The Great Game". The great powers systematically "influence" minor powers in strategic rivalry for commercial and military advantage. It is helpful to know what your ultimate goal is.
 
PocketZeven
What was the corrupt thing hunter Biden did thoug?
Click to expand...
The only thing that Hunter did, as far as I know, was to take a sweet job on the board of a supposedly corrupt gas company.

The company was under investigation. Joe Biden demanded that the prosecutor investigating the company be fired and threatened to withhold $1bn in loan guarantees if he wasn't.

Then he bragged about it.

 
Dotini
The US has meddled in over 80 foreign elections, Russia over 40. Rudyard Kipling called it "The Great Game". The great powers systematically "influence" minor powers in strategic rivalry for commercial and military advantage. It is helpful to know what your ultimate goal is.
Click to expand...

This is the outcome of globalism. Don't forget Israel. Any country with power uses that power to advantage.
 
Chrunch Houston
The only thing that Hunter did, as far as I know, was to take a sweet job on the board of a supposedly corrupt gas company.

The company was under investigation. Joe Biden demanded that the prosecutor investigating the company be fired and threatened to withhold $1bn in loan guarantees if he wasn't.

Then he bragged about it.
Click to expand...

Your version of the events, and your implication, are credibly disputed.

But Ukrainian prosecutors and anti-corruption activists with knowledge of the matter argue that the timeline of developments in the Burisma case and Shokin's stint as chief prosecutor simply does not fit the narrative being put forward by Trump and his allies.

Moreover, they say that Shokin himself was the biggest obstacle standing in the way of the investigation.

Daria Kaleniuk, executive director of the Kyiv-based Anti-Corruption Action Center (AntAC), told RFE/RL that Shokin "dumped important criminal investigations on corruption associated with [former President Viktor] Yanukovych, including the Burisma case."
Click to expand...
 
milefile
But we're not talking about murder. We're talking about foreign policy.
Click to expand...

We're talking about a corrupt action from the president. It's very painstakingly detailed in the video I posted. The video leaves it "up to you" to determine how to conclude, he just gives you the facts and the legal standards. But, it's super clear. Again, this is as open and shut a case as cases get.
 
milefile
. But we're not talking about murder. We're talking about foreign policy.
Click to expand...
Attempting to commit a crime is still a crime, I've lost count of the number of examples of this that have been given, and ignored.

It's also not foreign policy, Trump didn't do this to further US interests abroad or to benefit the US at home, he did it to further his own personal interests. Which, again, has been pointed out and ignored numerous times.

Chrunch Houston
Well that doesn't add up. According to that article Biden's visit was in December, but the prosecutor wasn't fired until March. That is a lot longer than the six hours Biden claims in the video.
Click to expand...
Which is covered in the article itself, odd that you ignored it!

Then again you missed the following as well...

"But there is a long list of Western organizations, governments, and diplomats, as well as Ukrainian anti-corruption groups, that wanted to see Shokin fired.

They include the International Monetary Fund, the European Union, the U.S. government, foreign investors, and Ukrainian advocates of reform."

... did Biden also threaten these bodies?

Come to think of it, why are not the Republicans who also supported the removal also being targeted by Trump?

https://www.vox.com/2019/10/3/20896869/trump-biden-ukraine-2016-letter-portman-johnson
 
Last edited:
Scaff
Trump didn't do this to further US interests abroad or to benefit the US at home
Click to expand...

And some of what is being used as evidence that he's innocent is actually evidence that he's guilty (as that video I posted goes through). Case in point, Trump didn't actually particularly care whether the investigation was carried out. He cared about the public message stating that the investigation was going to occur. Once it was apparent that the message was not going to go off as intended, he stopped caring about corruption in Ukraine and released the funds. Releasing the funds after he got caught shows a lack of concern for corruption, and a personal interest, not innocence.

If he was really worried about corruption, he wouldn't have released it.

Also pointed out in the video I posted, and this is an angle that I haven't seen covered much, is what the presenter calls "black propaganda". The idea being that you spread propaganda in a way that conceals that source. That is literally what was attempted here. Trump was trying to use the Ukraine to spread propaganda about Biden, and concealing the source (that it was coming from him) by having them do the speaking. That notion alone (in my opinion) is enough to call him corrupt and call for impeachment - regardless of whether bribery occurred (though it did).

There's another angle too, which doesn't get covered much, which is that Trump withheld a meeting because Ukraine had not announced the investigation. And this as well was bribery, and is separately impeachable. It doesn't have to be hundreds of millions in aid. The bribing can be done by withholding a simple meeting.

There's an extortion angle here as well (also mentioned in that video), since Ukraine needs those funds to actually fight a war. So I think the impeachable offenses roughly (I'm probably missing some) looks like this:

- Obstruction in the Mueller investigation
- Obstruction in the impeachment investigation (at a minimum threatening the whistleblower (execution), pelosi (treason), and various witnesses)
- Bribing Ukraine with aid
- Extorting Ukraine
- Bribing Ukraine with a white house meeting
- Attempting Black Propaganda (yes I think this should count on its own)
- Refusing release funds as required by congress (yes I think this should count on its own too, it's an abuse of executive powers)

So by my (admittedly quick) count here, we're looking at a minimum of 7 separately impeachable offenses.
 
Scaff
"But there is a long list of Western organizations, governments, and diplomats, as well as Ukrainian anti-corruption groups, that wanted to see Shokin fired.

They include the International Monetary Fund, the European Union, the U.S. government, foreign investors, and Ukrainian advocates of reform."
Click to expand...

Never Trumpers.
 
Chrunch Houston
The company was under investigation. Joe Biden demanded that the prosecutor investigating the company be fired and threatened to withhold $1bn in loan guarantees if he wasn't.

Then he bragged about it.

Click to expand...


Where did you get the information? Source please! This story is the definition of "fake news". I have been amazed how for example Fox has blatantly copied this narrative knowing that it is completely false.

Because joe biden demanded that the proscecuter be fired for not investigating corruption. You understand how that story is incredibly misleading?

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/...orced-out-ukraines-top-prosecutor/3785620002/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/c-span-video-joe-biden-ukraine/

milefile
But we're not talking about murder. We're talking about foreign policy.
Click to expand...
Yes, but an attempt to a crime is still a crime. One of the arguments against impeachment is the press conference didnt happen and the aid was released. That doesnt make Trump innocent from attempting to have a foreign country investigate his political rival.
 
Last edited:
Danoff
- Refusing release funds as required by congress (yes I think this should count on its own too, it's an abuse of executive powers)
Click to expand...
milefile
But we're not talking about murder. We're talking about foreign policy.
Click to expand...
Defense[?]: "But the Constitution provides that the president is the federal official that is primarily responsible for the relations of the United States with foreign nations."

Okay, sure, heading up foreign relations and policy matters is among the enumerated powers of the executive office. The problem is that not everything is permissible to this end.

Impoundment of appropriated funds is among the methods to accomplish things with regards to foreign relations, but it has its own limitations. Per the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, and we (the People and the current administration) have Nixon to thank for this, the impoundment of funds must be approved by the entire legislative branch--both the House and the Senate--within 45 days of initial impoundment or be appropriated as originally mandated.

No legislative measure was passed during the two months that funds were withheld. This is an impeachable offense in and of itself.

milefile
But that didn't happen. They got the aid and no favor was granted.
Click to expand...
Funds were withheld July 3, 2019 and were finally appropriated September 11, 2019.

That the solicited party did not act in accordance to a solitation does not negate solicitation of a bribe. Solicitation of a bribe is itself a criminal act and is highlighted specifically as grounds for impeachment. Also, short of a stray ping pong ball being lodged into the would-be solicitor's throat prior to the criminal act, thus preventing it, there is no "attempted" solicitation of a bribe. Accepting the solicitation may also be a crime, and is dependant upon the solicitation, but the solicitation of a bribe is a crime whether it's accepted or not.
 
Last edited:
TexRex
Funds were withheld July 3, 2019 and were finally appropriated September 11, 2019.

That the solicited party did not act in accordance to a solitation does not negate solicitation of a bribe. Solicitation of a bribe is itself a criminal act and is highlighted specifically as grounds for impeachment. Also, short of a stray ping pong ball being lodged into the would-be solicitor's throat prior to the criminal act, thus preventing it, there is no "attempted" solicitation of a bribe. Accepting the solicitation may also be a crime, and is dependant upon the solicitation, but the solicitation of a bribe is a crime whether it's accepted or not.
Click to expand...

To add to that, the whislteblower complaint was filed on august 12. And september 9 was when lawmakers first found out about the whistleblower complaint. Also Trump's alleged "no quid pro quo" phonecall was on (edit) september 7.

All after the whistleblower complaint was filed.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Earth
Things You Want To See In GT6 Besides Vehicles and Tracks
167 168 169
Replies
5K
Views
354K
GTV0819
GTV0819

Latest Posts

Back