Impeachment of Donald J. Trump

  • Thread starter Thread starter dvdjs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And? If one determines (rightly or wrongly) what they consider as facts, does that give them the right to publicly enter into judgment and calumny or detraction? I think not. It is so easy to miss the mark re facts, as was evidenced in this trial, that one may not have a well-formed conscience based on what one considers to be true.

Nevertheless, going back to the right to continue the public onslaught unabated just because one believes they are ‘right’ is not what the 8th commandment allows. Shall I quote the particulars? I trust you are familiar with the CCC on this.
So, what you are saying is that you cannot call a corrupt politician corrupt based on your reading of Catholic teaching? Well, I am sure you are very sincere and will begin pointing out this flaw to all the posters that slam Democratic political leaders that were duly elected and appointed by God (at least, according to your understanding). After you do that, I will review what you have to say.
If you aren’t afraid of the truth please do your research
on the FISA warrants, the Steele Dossier and Michael
Avenatti. Learn the real facts. @drcube
Well, I figured you could point out what was proven false in the Steele dossier if such a thing existed. I guess it doesn’t.
 
And if they discern that their constituents don’t like those facts, they will vote against witnesses.
No. Like their constituents, they’ll pay attention to whether the Dems have actually produced any facts to prove their arguments. Since the Dems have not done so, and didn’t bother to call the witnesses they now pretend are crucial for someone else to call, the conclusion is pretty obvious.
They possibly will have to. It is unlikely that Trump will begin to act in a non-corrupt matter now after learning he can get away with it.
The only major figures who appear to be getting away with corruption are Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton. But in time they might be held accountable for their crimes.
Again, you seem very confident that Bolton has nothing, but that doesn’t really explain why the Republicans were so scared to have him testify then.
They weren’t scared. They knew he had nothing and knew the Dems knew it too, which is why they never called him as a witness in the impeachment hearings.
Trump tried to extort the Ukrainian government into investigating and announcing an investigation into his political opponents by withholding US taxpayer money earmarked for Ukraine by Congress and you are claiming the Democrats are nefarious for not just letting this extortion pass?
Trump was within his rights, even his duties. Biden bragged about extorting the president of Ukraine. The only people who really know about whether Trump was pressuring Zelensky are Trump and Zelensky, and both deny it.
 
No. Like their constituents, they’ll pay attention to whether the Dems have actually produced any facts to prove their arguments. Since the Dems have not done so, and didn’t bother to call the witnesses they now pretend are crucial for someone else to call, the conclusion is pretty obvious.
The sole blame for lack of witnesses is on the Trump’s administration for blocking witnesses and the Senate Republicans for having the only impeachment trial in the history of America to have no witnesses. It is interesting that they can’t see that.
The only major figures who appear to be getting away with corruption are Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton. But in time they might be held accountable for their crimes.
Of course, three years after “Lock Her Up” and no charges against Hillary Clinton yet. I would think a reasonable person would conclude there is nothing there, but you seem to continue to fixate on her. As far as Biden goes, the resources available show no corruption so that is a figment of right wing imagination.
They weren’t scared. They knew he had nothing and knew the Dems knew it too, which is why they never called him as a witness in the impeachment hearings.
If they weren’t scared, the Senate allows him to testify. They didn’t. Any reasonable person can see that.
Trump was within his rights, even his duties. Biden bragged about extorting the president of Ukraine. The only people who really know about whether Trump was pressuring Zelensky are Trump and Zelensky, and both deny it.
Ah, the falsehood about Biden 'bragging about extorting the president of Ukraine". Debunked, over and over again. Do you ever feel a twinge of guilt over repeating it knowing darn well it isn’t true?
 
The sole blame for lack of witnesses is on the Trump’s administration for blocking witnesses and the Senate Republicans for having the only impeachment trial in the history of America to have no witnesses. It is interesting that they can’t see that.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) Ridgerunner:
Absolutely wrong. Initially, the Dems neglected to vote the impeachment to enable the managers to issue subpoenas. Trump did refuse to honor those subpoenas, as they were illegally issued. After that, when they could validly issue them, the Dems didn’t. They always claimed they wanted Bolton, for example, but never actually subpoenaed him. Can’t blame Trump for any of that. Either the Dems were just incompetent or deliberately tried to act illegally and were resisted.

There were witnesses in the Trump impeachment. The dems just didn’t call any of them before the Senate, probably because they didn’t have any fact evidence that was favorable to them. They called 13 witnesses in the impeachment hearing and had 28,000 documents. It was their job to assemble the evidence and present it to the senate. They did present all the written testimony and at least a lot of the video testimony. They wanted the Senate to call yet more witnesses without ever telling the Senate what those peoples’ testimony would be? Why didn’t they depose them to find out?

Because they knew there was nothing there.
the resources available
Trump wanted an investigation, but the Dems impeached him for that. It’s not over yet.
If they weren’t scared, the Senate allows him to testify. They didn’t. Any reasonable person can see that.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) Ridgerunner:
Any reasonable person knows the Dems could have deposed Bolton during the impeachment or subpoenaed him to testify live. But they didn’t do either because they knew he didn’t have anything but general criticism of Trump.
Ah, the falsehood about Biden 'bragging about extorting the president of Ukraine". Debunked, over and over again. Do you ever feel a twinge of guilt over repeating it knowing darn well it isn’t true?
Kind of hard to deny what he said on film and everybody knows who isn’t in denial over it because it has been on nationwide television. I have no guilt at all for telling the truth.
 
So, what you are saying is that you cannot call a corrupt politician corrupt based on your reading of Catholic teaching?
Not exactly. I’m saying that standing in a public podium and propagating that so-and-so or an entire political party is corrupt based on one’s own research and internal certainty is not something that our faith teaches. IIRC, you labeled the entire Republican party as corrupt. Each and every person? You know this for a fact?

Maybe you aren’t familiar with the CCC on this subject.

2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty:
  • of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
  • of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them;
  • of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.
2497 By the very nature of their profession, journalists have an obligation to serve the truth and not offend against charity in disseminating information. They should strive to respect, with equal care, the nature of the facts and the limits of critical judgment concerning individuals. They should not stoop to defamation.

It is difficult to walk the line with respect to this commandment, and many, including me, fail at times. But we really need to stop and think before publicly disclosing what we believe about others that is defamatory and without good reason.
 
Last edited:
I know. The media they watch must protect them from
the real story so they don’t realize how they have been
lied to. Very sad. The democrats want to keep them
in the dark.
If you aren’t afraid of the truth please do your research
on the FISA warrants, the Steele Dossier and Michael
Avenatti. Learn the real facts. @drcube
When someone makes allusions to some grand set of “secret evidence” like this, but can’t summarize the main points, it is virtually always an unfounded conspiracy theory. So, in your own words, summarize these “real facts” and why they are exculpatory to the president.
 
It is difficult to walk the line with respect to this commandment, and many, including me, fail at times. But we really need to stop and think before publicly disclosing what we believe about others that is defamatory and without good reason.
You have to call an awful lot of other people liars to assert that the president is not corrupt.
 
Who has the mind of God to judge him and make that claim? It is purely personal opinion formed through the expositions from the media, many of which I have found to be completely false. Unless you know the facts yourself of the inner workings of one’s soul, it is called “rash judgment” and even if you or I know the facts for certain, it still does not give us the right to broadcast them to those who did not know therm. That’s called detraction, or possibly slander. One may indeed not like him or his character and be rebuffed by his personality, but that is not a license to detract him.
It amazes me that seemingly few here know the dangers of spreading defamation. Are we all Catholics?
 
You are right about the vindication claim and opposing claim.
To add one thing, if Bolton and Parnas publish that Trump did it all as alleged, it will be more devestating for Trump because they strong armed witnesses into silence in the trial.
You can bet the farm Trump will attack them as not believable, but that will have limited value when you hide.
 
Last edited:
Who has the mind of God to judge him and make that claim? It is purely personal opinion formed through the expositions from the media, many of which I have found to be completely false.
This just doesn’t seem like a serious argument.

Lets consider a case where Trump just walks up and shoots someone on 5th avenue. The media shows the video of the shooting and reports: “Trump shoots man on 5th ave, is a murderer.”

“But wait!” you say "We are not God, we do not know his mind. It is unfair to call him a ‘murderer,’ after all the media is untrustworthy, so believing he killed someone in cold blood is simply your opinion!

Now you might say that’s not a fair comparison and “murder” is different from “corruption.” That is incorrect. Bribery is a corrupt act, in which you exchange something of value to yourself for an official act. Solicitation of bribery is a corrupt act, wherein you solicit something of value to yourself in exchange for some official act on your part. All the evidence shows that Trump did in fact solicit a bribe from Ukraine. The GOP isn’t even really contesting the facts anymore, their defense has been reduced to “well, Trump’s removal would be bad for the country.” Therefore he is corrupt, in the same way that he would be a murderer if he shot someone on 5th Ave.
 
Last edited:
I think it worthwhile to point out an irony.
Trump dispatched men and set them in motion. He apparently coerced a foreign leader to perform a personal political benefit.
But that benefit was essentially a request FOR FALSE WITNESS. Because it was to go on TV AND INCRIMINATE BY ALLEGATION.
THE PURPOSE? Political harm to another.
 
40.png
7_Sorrows:
I know. The media they watch must protect them from
the real story so they don’t realize how they have been
lied to. Very sad. The democrats want to keep them
in the dark.
If you aren’t afraid of the truth please do your research
on the FISA warrants, the Steele Dossier and Michael
Avenatti. Learn the real facts. @drcube
When someone makes allusions to some grand set of “secret evidence” like this, but can’t summarize the main points, it is virtually always an unfounded conspiracy theory. So, in your own words, summarize these “real facts” and why they are exculpatory to the president.
There is no conspiracy theory. The FISA warrants against Carter Page were illegaly obtained based on the fake dossier

Maybe read about the first lawsuit he is filing.
 
Too much ink has been spilled on this already. When one suspects that there is a standoff and the other party’s mind is firmly set, there is little use in spending any more ink. Rather than open-mindedly trying to understand my words, you strive to convict me of your mindset.
Solicitation of bribery is a corrupt act, wherein you solicit something of value to yourself in exchange for some official act on your part. All the evidence shows that Trump did in fact solicit a bribe from Ukraine.
See what I mean? Have a pleasant weekend.
 
Last edited:
You keep ramping up the rhetoric.Trump didn’t “ coerce “ anybody and you know it.
 
Last edited:
There is no conspiracy theory. The FISA warrants against Carter Page were illegaly obtained based on the fake dossier

Maybe read about the first lawsuit he is filing.
I’m not hearing a connection to the impeachment. I am also aware that only some of the warrants against Carter Page have been called into question.

Which Carter Page lawsuit? This one that got thrown out?


This other one that got thrown out?


This one that the courts won’t revisit?

 
Last edited:
Absolutely wrong. Initially, the Dems neglected to vote the impeachment to enable the managers to issue subpoenas. Trump did refuse to honor those subpoenas, as they were illegally issued. After that, when they could validly issue them, the Dems didn’t. They always claimed they wanted Bolton, for example, but never actually subpoenaed him. Can’t blame Trump for any of that. Either the Dems were just incompetent or deliberately tried to act illegally and were resisted.

There were witnesses in the Trump impeachment. The dems just didn’t call any of them before the Senate, probably because they didn’t have any fact evidence that was favorable to them. They called 13 witnesses in the impeachment hearing and had 28,000 documents. It was their job to assemble the evidence and present it to the senate. They did present all the written testimony and at least a lot of the video testimony. They wanted the Senate to call yet more witnesses without ever telling the Senate what those peoples’ testimony would be? Why didn’t they depose them to find out?

Because they knew there was nothing there.
Trump blocked the testimony of White House officials including Bolton. This is why the House went ahead on Impeachment for Obstruction of Congress. They felt the case was strong enough to go ahead with the abuse of power charge for extortion. They proved that case, but felt that Bolton would make the case more compelling and wanted witnesses at the Impeachment Trial as had been done for every other impeachment trial. The Senate (in fear) and Trump (in fear) didn’t allow the testimony.
Any reasonable person knows the Dems could have deposed Bolton during the impeachment or subpoenaed him to testify live. But they didn’t do either because they knew he didn’t have anything but general criticism of Trump.
Another possibility is that it isn’t the real Bolton, but actually he has been replaced by an alien that would have no knowledge of Trump since he just arrived at the Earth. But I try to work in reality. Speaking of which…
Kind of hard to deny what he said on film and everybody knows who isn’t in denial over it because it has been on nationwide television. I have no guilt at all for telling the truth.

I’m not denying what he said. I’m denying he said what you made up about him saying. His words were different and there is no evidence that he was acting in corrupt motives. But that’s between you and God.
 
Not exactly. I’m saying that standing in a public podium and propagating that so-and-so or an entire political party is corrupt based on one’s own research and internal certainty is not something that our faith teaches. IIRC, you labeled the entire Republican party as corrupt. Each and every person? You know this for a fact?

Maybe you aren’t familiar with the CCC on this subject.

2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty:
  • of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
  • of detraction who, without objectively valid reason , discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them ;
  • of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.
2497 By the very nature of their profession, journalists have an obligation to serve the truth and not offend against charity in disseminating information. They should strive to respect, with equal care, the nature of the facts and the limits of critical judgment concerning individuals. They should not stoop to defamation.

It is difficult to walk the line with respect to this commandment, and many, including me, fail at times. But we really need to stop and think before publicly disclosing what we believe about others that is defamatory and without good reason.
I have good reason to think that the entire Republican federal officeholders are corrupt, so my conscience is good. I’m looking forward to seeing you make similar posts to those on this site that attack Democrats.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top