Impeachment of Donald J. Trump

  • Thread starter Thread starter dvdjs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Aquinas11 said:
Yeah , now you can be impeached without committing a crime
Click to expand...
TBD on the crime. I expect Trump will be charged when he leaves office.
Aquinas11 said:
Now you’re starting to describe the liberal mindset
Click to expand...
Ah, a petty insult. Really shows you are winning the argument.
Aquinas11 said:
Biden did that on video & Dems cool w it

Trump does NOT do it on Phone & Dems irate

Again people stop taking these people seriously , it’s ALL FAKE
Click to expand...
I’ve explained why Biden’s actions were appropriate and Trump’s were not.
Aquinas11 said:
I know you’re not sure which is the problem

Founders set up 3 branches so whenever dispute between Exe and Leg, either can go to third Jud for decision
Click to expand...
Trump failed to comply with subpoenas. That opens up the obstruction of Congress, much like Nixon was charged with.
Ridgerunner said:
Which the only real witnesses said he didn’t do.
Click to expand...
The transcript of the call was clear and Mulvaney admitted it was.
Ridgerunner said:
Your prerogative.
Click to expand...
Based on your posts.
 
drcube said:
TBD on the crime
Click to expand...
Verbal admission no crime can be cited, thus entire process a farce

You clearly want future GOP house to impeach Dem POTUS saying “TBD on crime”
 
Last edited:
Aquinas11 said:
Verbal admission no crime can be cited, thus entire process a farce

You clearly want future GOP house to impeach Dem POTUS saying “TBD ok crime”
Click to expand...
Oh, I think he committed a crime. Whether or not it get pursued after he leaves office is the TBD.
 
drcube said:
Ah, a petty insult. Really shows you are winning the argument.
Click to expand...
“Not logical” was your words

Now your words are a “petty insult”

Suggest not using words that you consider a “petty insult”
 
drcube said:
I’ve explained why
Click to expand...
Biden engaging in verbal threats is not intimidation but Trump asking for help w DOJ is intimidation

Yeah we know
drcube said:
That opens up the obstruction of Congress, much like Nixon was charged with.
Click to expand...
Nixon involved in crime and COURT RULED ON SUBPOENAS

Suggest re-reading the caps text 10 times
 
Last edited:
drcube said:
Trump failed to comply
Click to expand...
Then Obama failed to comply too since he opposed many subpoenas and went to Court

You mentioned Trump charged after leaves office, when you think Obama will be charged? Or is your argument entirely political
 
Last edited:
It would help to understand what Obstruction of Justice is, “Obstruction of Congress” when the subpoenas weren’t even issued during the actual proceedings as stated which must be the case under Federal Code, as well as the fact of other factors play into here, Executive Privilege and the legal right to challenge subpoenas. There has been lots of push and pull with subpoenas between the two branches. Nothing really new except now Dems are trying to claim it’s Obstruction of Congress which isn’t even a known crime under our Federal Code.
 
Last edited:
Aquinas11 said:
“Not logical” was your words

Now your words are a “petty insult”

Suggest not using words that you consider a “petty insult”
Click to expand...
It wasn’t logical. You said that the Democrats using the checks and balances in the Constitution was destroying the checks and balances provided by the Constitution. And, yes, what you wrote was a petty insult.
 
Opposing witnesses! Not witnesses hiding.
Bolton said he would testify in the Senate. He said he would not in the House. That is a substantial difference as I see it.
 
You challenge subpoenas to Stonewall testimony. If you are ok with testimony you don’t challenge.
And it was a blanket order not to testify or SUPPLY DOCUMENTS.
AND EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE WAS NEVER ASSERTED.
 
He was given opportunity to participate and chose not to. A boycott of cooperation is not consistent with a valid desire to participate
 
Inherently lawful? Where is there a lawful vs unlawful subpoena issue raised by these facts?
I assumed we were talking about this impeachment.
 
Aquinas11 said:
Biden engaging in verbal threats is not intimidation but Trump asking for help w DOJ is intimidation

Yeah we know

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) drcube:
Click to expand...
I wonder at what point a misunderstanding turns into just plain lies about what I said.
Aquinas11 said:
Nixon involved in crime and COURT RULED ON SUBPOENAS

Suggest re-reading the caps text 10 times
Click to expand...
Read the impeachment charges and get back to me.
Aquinas11 said:
Then Obama failed to comply too since he opposed many subpoenas and went to Court

You mentioned Trump charged after leaves office, when you think Obama will be charged? Or is your argument entirely political
Click to expand...
Obama didn’t extort a foreign government for personal gain, so he wouldn’t be charged with that crime.
Aquinas11 said:
Statue section?
Click to expand...
Title 18; Section 201
 
mrad25 said:
Lots Constitutional scholars who disagree with this notion you are trying to put forward. The Constitution is clear treason, bribery, or high crimes and misdemeanors - which amount to those crimes similar of treason, bribery
Click to expand...
The classic counterexample is to consider a President who, while in office, moves to Moscow and says that he’ll be running the country from there. Not criminal, but such a dereliction of duty would absolutely deserve impeachment.
 
Maximus1 said:
He was given opportunity to participate and chose not to.
Click to expand...
What was the specific “opportunity to participate” he was given?

How did he or his lawyers “chose not to”?

Go ahead and cite a source for your claim
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top