D
dvdjs
Guest
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
- Status
W
Woodyl57
Guest
Thanks. You forgot the one where he suggested Russia should try and find Hillary’s missing emails. Smoking gun proof! Those dastardly republicans!
W
Woodyl57
Guest
Embrace the constitution with your twist when it suits you but the house has impeachment authority, not the speaker of the house, her minions, her wagging little finger of power, not the majority. House hasn’t voted, she won’t hold the vote, thus trying to remove a president with no respect for the institutions you all suddenly love.
W
Woodyl57
Guest
What is funny is this hypocritical nonsense doing everything it decries the other side of doing.
M
mristau
Guest
I don’t think anyone here has suggested that the Speaker or any of her assorted appendages has the power to impeach on their own. I don’t want to speak for everyone, but I think we’re all pretty clear that impeachment requires a majority vote of the House. I’m fairly certain that you must be talking about a full vote of the House to start an impeachment inquiry, which I can also assure you is not called for anywhere in the Constitution.
D
dvdjs
Guest
Trump’s impeachment will come form a vote of the House, just as the constitution demands. You seem to be conflating the impeachment with the inquiry.
W
Woodyl57
Guest
I am not. The house HAS not opened the inquiry or rather it has 3 times already and voted it down all three times. They are running a cloak and dagger inquiry now to prevent full minority involvement and control the flow of all these “obvious” violations.
Spin this how you like and start yammering about courts and precedent, etc. But this is exactly the type of shenanigans you all jibber jabber about Trump doing 10 times a day. House has the votes, open the inquiry, let the light in, and throw the book at the guy! Problem is, either they don’t have the book or something else so they hide.
Senate will probably Not convict anyway and the guy up above can blame Republicans as being complicit, Barr as being Trump cover boy, whatever else you got when the IG report comes out or Durhams report. Hillary was guilty I say, but you shoot back “she was investigated and I trust that, besides your deflecting again”. No, you trust the government when they rule your way, call them compromised and complicity when they don’t and I consider your arguments hypocrisy.
Spin this how you like and start yammering about courts and precedent, etc. But this is exactly the type of shenanigans you all jibber jabber about Trump doing 10 times a day. House has the votes, open the inquiry, let the light in, and throw the book at the guy! Problem is, either they don’t have the book or something else so they hide.
Senate will probably Not convict anyway and the guy up above can blame Republicans as being complicit, Barr as being Trump cover boy, whatever else you got when the IG report comes out or Durhams report. Hillary was guilty I say, but you shoot back “she was investigated and I trust that, besides your deflecting again”. No, you trust the government when they rule your way, call them compromised and complicity when they don’t and I consider your arguments hypocrisy.
E
Economist
Guest
This ought to be spelled out in HUGE, BOLD letters!
W
Woodyl57
Guest
Yes, for all us dumb people that want an open fair process!
D
dvdjs
Guest
Again you seem to conflating votes on articles of impeachment with investigative processes that may or may not lead up to motions for votes on articles of impeachment. Here is the record
Efforts to impeach Donald Trump - Wikipedia
Here are the articles of impeachment brought against Trump by house member Green in July of 2019:
The fact that these particular articles were voted down at that time has no relevance to ongoing investigations.
As to the constitutionality of these investigation, here are more sources:
Must the House Vote to Authorize an Impeachment Inquiry?
Despite what White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy have argued, it is constitutionally acceptable for the House to initiate an
www.lawfareblog.com
Fact-Checking 5 Claims About the Impeachment Inquiry (Published 2019)
President Trump and his defenders have inaccurately attacked the impeachment inquiry for what they say are procedural and constitutional violations, a faulty premise and a lack of support.
There is no requirement for a full House vote to commence investigations about matters that may lead to impeachment. When articles are composed, members may bring them up for a full hose vote. If a majority of House members are in support the articles, then Trump will be impeached.
W
Woodyl57
Guest
Ok, ok, you got me backing off with my tail between my legs on this one.
Scares me to death since I trust Pelosi and schiff as much as you trust trump
Scares me to death since I trust Pelosi and schiff as much as you trust trump
Last edited:
E
Economist
Guest
Not necessarily “dumb”, just ignorant (or confused). The process is open and fair. Exactly like any other grand jury investigation. Before charges are brought, the grand jury decides if charges SHOULD be brought, or not. There are no lawyers for the accused present. The witnesses are not allowed to coordinate their testimony.
Once charges are brought, THEN the lawyers can step up and start cross-examinations, bring their own witnesses, etc… This is the proper method. By the way, the republicans sitting in the house are allowed to ask their own questions, so your objections are totally without merit.
Just for your edification… to help you to overcome your ignorance.
I bet that Al Capone did not like or trust the prosecutors either.
Last edited:
W
Woodyl57
Guest
Thanks, your so kind.
W
Woodyl57
Guest
I am sure he didn’t. This is a fair point. I only ask that you remember that If these current investigation with the IG and Durham don’t come back as you like.bet that Al Capone did not like or trust the prosecutors either.
D
dvdjs
Guest
Pelosi has been a steady, restraining force. But the needle has moved.
Here’s a pretty decent account of where we are now, and how all of this is likely to unfold, by Peggy Noonan.
The Impeachment Needle May Soon Move The mood has shifted against Trump, but the House has to show good faith and seriousness.
W
Woodyl57
Guest
@dvdjs and @Economist I have to go to my daughters soccer party. You both irritate me to no end but I appreciate the conversation. I am happy to have learned something, though my mind is unchanged.
Regardless, none of us will influence the outcome either way.
Peace
Regardless, none of us will influence the outcome either way.
Peace
E
Economist
Guest
That investigation is over. The trumpists (Mulvaney, Giuliani, et al. ) delivered the necessary evidence. The outcome, the verdict of impeachment is all but certain. The second phase, the actual trial is still ahead. The jury will be the Senate. It is likely that the Republicans will NOT convict and Trump will be released from the hook. It will be very said, but we shall have to accept it.
W
Woodyl57
Guest
The durham investigation is in full swing and results not expect until spring. IG report is due out any day so I am not sure what you mean they are over. (I think we are talking about different investigations)
The second part is where I disagree. I dont know much about the guiliani side but Mulvaney I saw the whole of the exchange and that is just wishful thinking by the Dems. At best he said she said on intent of what he was trying to say. He laid out clearly in the exchange the 3 items they withheld aid for, though most media outlets didn’t make that part clear including fox. Not saying nothing there, saying it isn’t a slam dunk whether you want it to be or not.
Last edited:
E
Economist
Guest
Mulvaney tried to backpedal on what he said - unsuccessfully, I might add. The number and the serious nature of impeachable offenses are there for everyone to see. Even ONE of them, the suggestion that China or Ukraine should open an investigation on the Bidens is sufficient to impeach Trump. They call and open interference in the upcoming elections, ant that the “sine qua non” of the impeachable offenses. The rest is just icing on the cake.
So, for the time being, the process is legal and proper. As I said, the actual trial will be in the Senate, and the senators might choose not to convict. It will be a travesty, but during the mafia trials it also happened, if the jurors were sufficiently intimidated. And the Republicans up for re-election are in a very precarious position, that is why they are so quiet.
W
Woodyl57
Guest
Again, disagree and think assumption of intent or not colors what is seen as obvious. I personally think the more “obvious” is used is the precursor to crying foul on unwanted results. That does go both ways, I understand.
Same true on other side. Over 40 Dem congress members in red districts that don’t want to be on record which is one reason they chose not to formally initiate the investigation legal or not.
I’m not trying to change your mind but just suggesting not everything I am saying is just out of ignorance, but perspective.
- Status