What are these impeachable offense the president committed that all these legal experts have chimed in about? They about to remove a sitting president. What’s everyone going to do about it?
Impeachable Offenses?
- Thread starter SilentStalkr
- Start date
picking your nose in class is an impeachable offense waisting millions upon millions of tax payer money on nothing not once but 3 times is not no wonder Washington is a cesspool of filth , they still are not going to get him out of office and they should loose the election but either way life goes on and jimmy cracked corn .
Impeachment Offense occurred on 08 Nov 2016.
They are? I haven't had time to tune into the circus lately but last I saw they were just blowing smoke. And every time somone dumped water on their cigarette they find a new one to light to keep giving the impression of a nearby fire. Never saw any fire though. Has that much changed recently?
WTF are you talking about??? They got nothing but an endless parade of fools and everyone knows it. I am beginning to think that there won't even be a vote because they know they have nothing.
When and IF it passes and goes to the Senate, call me.
That is not going to happen.
Impeachment is nothing but a ruse to fool the "undecided" voter into thinking that Trump is evil. Give that "undecided" voters are usually dumber than shit, its a brilliant tactic.
They never expected to actually remove him from office, but just to use the process against him in the election since they can't win by playing fair. All parties participating in the process should be hung for treason.
They never expected to actually remove him from office, but just to use the process against him in the election since they can't win by playing fair. All parties participating in the process should be hung for treason.
Last edited:
Kind of hard to take this serious regardless of what is going on.
He thought they were voting in favor of eating peaches, peach cobbler, peach ice cream, peach pie, peach schnapps, peach sammiches and that's about all I know about that ??
He thought they were voting in favor of eating peaches, peach cobbler, peach ice cream, peach pie, peach schnapps, peach sammiches and that's about all I know about that ??
I think the whole thing is a ruse to distract the country from key issues, including border security, Ruth Bader Ginsberg's impending demise, & the Democrat socialists' attempts at gun-grabbing in VA.
They may impeach in the House but not in the Senate.
Beauty of that is multifaceted.
First, once impeachment hearings begin in the Senate, any Senator is prohibited from campaigning/fundraising for the course of the hearing. With Booker, Warren et al running let’s see how long any “hearing” will last.
Second, once it starts in the Senate all the testimony and individuals shifty Schiff wouldn’t allow can now be called including Schiff himself. That could be entertaining and enlightening.
Once opened the entire story can come out including this railroading Schiff has tried.
I actually hope it goes to the Senate.
Impeachment by the House is a done deal. The problem with this is imo, completely against the Dems. This should be one of those “be careful what you wish for” moments.
It could actually be entertaining.
Im kidding guys. This ain’t going nowhere! As someone else said this is just to rile their base up. I’m just doing my part to keeping you alls fighting spirit up and running.?
You just made my argument for why I don’t think the house will bring it to a vote.
But then again if they do go this route they just cleared the way for a nominee. Would be a good strategy for getting a few senators out of the race.
Nothing more than a planned offensive campaign parroted by the media to keep focus off the true crimes that took place.
Remember, the Democrats accuse you of doing what they actually do.
There is more actual evidence that democrats, with the help of govt agencies and proxies spied on, falsified info on and colluded with foreign govts against the Trump campaign. A feedback loop of weaponized govt and media.
I also DGAF even if Trump did ask Ukraine to look into the Bidens. Creepy Joe only running to keep from being investigated. And, lets be honest here...the Bidens are dirty AF. Obvious is obvious. Joe was caught on camera saying he blackballed Ukraine. Its believable too since Joe isnt very smart. No Fn way in the lords good name was crackhead Hunter Biden justified in getting paid like that without daddy greasing some serious palms. Crazy and largely ignored.
Trump isnt a saint. Hes got plenty of dirty laundry. But my priorities align closet to his at this point. It is what it is. Whether there is follow through...
Signed,
Registered independent.
Remember, the Democrats accuse you of doing what they actually do.
There is more actual evidence that democrats, with the help of govt agencies and proxies spied on, falsified info on and colluded with foreign govts against the Trump campaign. A feedback loop of weaponized govt and media.
I also DGAF even if Trump did ask Ukraine to look into the Bidens. Creepy Joe only running to keep from being investigated. And, lets be honest here...the Bidens are dirty AF. Obvious is obvious. Joe was caught on camera saying he blackballed Ukraine. Its believable too since Joe isnt very smart. No Fn way in the lords good name was crackhead Hunter Biden justified in getting paid like that without daddy greasing some serious palms. Crazy and largely ignored.
Trump isnt a saint. Hes got plenty of dirty laundry. But my priorities align closet to his at this point. It is what it is. Whether there is follow through...
Signed,
Registered independent.
Last edited:
The Dems face a real dilemma if this goes to the Senate. First of all the Majority gets to write the rules and has the power of Subpoena which could possibly include Schitt and the so called whistleblower. Witnesses from the Intelligence Committee secret hearings could be called and cross examined and the full testimony exposed. McConnell could drag out the hearings preventing Democratic senators from campaigning though the Iowa primaries. Biden's dealings in the Ukraine would be front and center and no doubt Uncle Joe's need do well shithole son may be subpoenaed to testify.
meanwhile, the Trump agenda has ground to a screeching halt, an intended consequence
Treason and bribery are obvious. High crimes are a broad brush for criminal activity but misdemeanors I think confuses people. At the time the phrase was written it wasn't a category of crimes Like we think of now (Class A, Class B), etc.. It just meant something like 'misdeeds' as it did in British law at the time and is there as a catch all. Not all crimes are impeachable but not all things that are impeachable have to be criminal. Its really more of how much of a threat to the Republic are they.
If Trump got a speeding ticket- a crime but not impeachable. If he called in to work and said Im taking a 6 month vacation- hold my calls- that could be impeachable (the rule was written long before the 25th Amendment could be used).
That said- Trump didnt commit bribery and didnt do anything outside normal Presidential powers and what is historically expected of our Presidents to do. Nothing remotely impeachable.
If Trump got a speeding ticket- a crime but not impeachable. If he called in to work and said Im taking a 6 month vacation- hold my calls- that could be impeachable (the rule was written long before the 25th Amendment could be used).
That said- Trump didnt commit bribery and didnt do anything outside normal Presidential powers and what is historically expected of our Presidents to do. Nothing remotely impeachable.
9:00est today, Pelosi says she has instructed Nadler to move forward with with multiple articles of impeachment.
Their hope is this allows the swing state dems to vote no on some and yes on at least 1. Not going to work out well for them.
Their hope is this allows the swing state dems to vote no on some and yes on at least 1. Not going to work out well for them.
The Dems are painting this as the President's motive was political in nature: this is FALSE as no evidence was brought forth to prove this. I do think the President was looking for criminal activity on Joe Biden and his son, which could be criminal acts committed by both. This is what they should be looking at, but their hatred for the President creates TDS in these lunatics. The whole investigation is hypothetical in nature with no facts. Every Dem scholar testified yesterday out of hatred. Total bull shit!
I loved the part where one of the leftist, idiot professors said that Impeachment is the law, and that the crimes are defined in the Constitution. The Republican witness called bullshit, and said that the crimes were stated but not defined. This is terribly obvious to anyone who has taken English in Jr. High School.
About sixty seconds later, right after he obliterated that stupid statement, the same fucking professor stated that the "crime" doesn't have to meet any legal standards.
It was a logic/debate comedy, and I thought it was great that they had these three, lettered, drooling idiots against one guy who simply stated what the words are, and stuck to the facts.
At the end of the day, as @Expert684 alludes to above, if Trump's motive was ONLY self serving, and he asked for the investigations and public announcement thereof ONLY because of how it would help him in the campaign then he IS guilty of bribery, which IS a high crime, but this is nearly impossible to prove, even if there wasn't a shit ton of exculpatory evidence that this was not the sole motive.
If on the other hand, demanding Ukraine investigate corruption specifically or in the abstract had any legitimate purpose vis a vis US aid, and foreign relations, then it's irrelevant that The President's campaign would also benefit from it (in the abstract).
The reason Biden gets a pass for a far more egregious and flagrant case of bribery for personal gain is that Ukraine IS fucking corrupt, and the prosecutor he wanted fired was probably corrupt as well (they all are!!!). No one is investigating, because they assume his motives are pure, but Trump's are as bas as they could be. That's all this is.
The whole thing is retarded. If it didn't benefit Trump he probably would not have brought up Barisma and Biden in particular. That part of their argument I believe. But, in order to make a case out of that, just like in what Joe Biden did, you have to have no compelling state interest in rooting out corruption in a country we're going to send aid to. There is a paper trail the size of a superhighway to prove Trump thought Ukraine is corrupt, he didn't trust them, and he wanted to have confidence in the new President before sending aid. If this didn't happen it would be a dereliction of duty.
The truth is all right there. The facts are not in dispute from either side. If you hate Trump his motives are black as night, and if you love him he was motivated by pure patriotism. The truth is somewhere in-between, but that alone makes this not a crime at all, because they have to prove motive, and not only can they not do that, but the contrary is supported by a ton of evidence.
According to the left's legal theory on this one you cannot even investigate anyone if bringing them to justice benefits you in any way. That is absurd on it's face. This is nothing but a bunch of entitled babies throwing a temper tantrum because The Queen Mafia Don lost to this cur.
There's the whole thing in a nutshell. Free of charge on Snipers Hide!
About sixty seconds later, right after he obliterated that stupid statement, the same fucking professor stated that the "crime" doesn't have to meet any legal standards.
It was a logic/debate comedy, and I thought it was great that they had these three, lettered, drooling idiots against one guy who simply stated what the words are, and stuck to the facts.
At the end of the day, as @Expert684 alludes to above, if Trump's motive was ONLY self serving, and he asked for the investigations and public announcement thereof ONLY because of how it would help him in the campaign then he IS guilty of bribery, which IS a high crime, but this is nearly impossible to prove, even if there wasn't a shit ton of exculpatory evidence that this was not the sole motive.
If on the other hand, demanding Ukraine investigate corruption specifically or in the abstract had any legitimate purpose vis a vis US aid, and foreign relations, then it's irrelevant that The President's campaign would also benefit from it (in the abstract).
The reason Biden gets a pass for a far more egregious and flagrant case of bribery for personal gain is that Ukraine IS fucking corrupt, and the prosecutor he wanted fired was probably corrupt as well (they all are!!!). No one is investigating, because they assume his motives are pure, but Trump's are as bas as they could be. That's all this is.
The whole thing is retarded. If it didn't benefit Trump he probably would not have brought up Barisma and Biden in particular. That part of their argument I believe. But, in order to make a case out of that, just like in what Joe Biden did, you have to have no compelling state interest in rooting out corruption in a country we're going to send aid to. There is a paper trail the size of a superhighway to prove Trump thought Ukraine is corrupt, he didn't trust them, and he wanted to have confidence in the new President before sending aid. If this didn't happen it would be a dereliction of duty.
The truth is all right there. The facts are not in dispute from either side. If you hate Trump his motives are black as night, and if you love him he was motivated by pure patriotism. The truth is somewhere in-between, but that alone makes this not a crime at all, because they have to prove motive, and not only can they not do that, but the contrary is supported by a ton of evidence.
According to the left's legal theory on this one you cannot even investigate anyone if bringing them to justice benefits you in any way. That is absurd on it's face. This is nothing but a bunch of entitled babies throwing a temper tantrum because The Queen Mafia Don lost to this cur.
There's the whole thing in a nutshell. Free of charge on Snipers Hide!
With Jerry "The Hut" Nadler all things unethical are possible. What a peach of a guy! Anyone beside me see the resemblence he has to "Jabba the Hut"
I loved the part where one of the leftist, idiot professors said that Impeachment is the law, and that the crimes are defined in the Constitution. The Republican witness called bullshit, and said that the crimes were stated but not defined. This is terribly obvious to anyone who has taken English in Jr. High School.
About sixty seconds later, right after he obliterated that stupid statement, the same fucking professor stated that the "crime" doesn't have to meet any legal standards.
It was a logic/debate comedy, and I thought it was great that they had these three, lettered, drooling idiots against one guy who simply stated what the words are, and stuck to the facts.
At the end of the day, as @Expert684 alludes to above, if Trump's motive was ONLY self serving, and he asked for the investigations and public announcement thereof ONLY because of how it would help him in the campaign then he IS guilty of bribery, which IS a high crime, but this is nearly impossible to prove, even if there wasn't a shit ton of exculpatory evidence that this was not the sole motive.
If on the other hand, demanding Ukraine investigate corruption specifically or in the abstract had any legitimate purpose vis a vis US aid, and foreign relations, then it's irrelevant that The President's campaign would also benefit from it (in the abstract).
The reason Biden gets a pass for a far more egregious and flagrant case of bribery for personal gain is that Ukraine IS fucking corrupt, and the prosecutor he wanted fired was probably corrupt as well (they all are!!!). No one is investigating, because they assume his motives are pure, but Trump's are as bas as they could be. That's all this is.
The whole thing is retarded. If it didn't benefit Trump he probably would not have brought up Barisma and Biden in particular. That part of their argument I believe. But, in order to make a case out of that, just like in what Joe Biden did, you have to have no compelling state interest in rooting out corruption in a country we're going to send aid to. There is a paper trail the size of a superhighway to prove Trump thought Ukraine is corrupt, he didn't trust them, and he wanted to have confidence in the new President before sending aid. If this didn't happen it would be a dereliction of duty.
The truth is all right there. The facts are not in dispute from either side. If you hate Trump his motives are black as night, and if you love him he was motivated by pure patriotism. The truth is somewhere in-between, but that alone makes this not a crime at all, because they have to prove motive, and not only can they not do that, but the contrary is supported by a ton of evidence.
According to the left's legal theory on this one you cannot even investigate anyone if bringing them to justice benefits you in any way. That is absurd on it's face. This is nothing but a bunch of entitled babies throwing a temper tantrum because The Queen Mafia Don lost to this cur.
There's the whole thing in a nutshell. Free of charge on Snipers Hide!
It really doesn't matter what happened when Congress wants to impeach you they do, Clinton was getting his dicked sucked on so they impeached him. Nixon I can see since they committed crimes. Impeachment began the night Trump won, all this smoke and mirrors is to show some made up form of improprieties by Trump so they can sell it to the SHEEP so they don't understand that the Democrats are removing their President that they elected simply because they don't like him.
If the people weren't SHEEP then 60 million Patriots would storm Congress during the impeachment vote and drag out the Democrats and hold street trials and fast track the sentencing for TREASON.
^ Clinton got impeached because he lied during the Paula Jones trial and lied to the congress and conspired with witnesses to lie for him. If he would have just told the congress to go screw themselves he would have been a lot better off.
I wonder if the timing of this is meant to keep the Senate busy all next year so they cant have hearings on Amy Barrett Cohen replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Clinton was not impeached for getting his dick sucked, fucking his intern, or sticking his cigars in her vagina. Which he did. He was impeached for lying to a Federal Grand Jury, which he was totally and undeniably guilty of doing. Even that felony should not have risen to impeachment, and the Republicans paid for it as that rapist mfer got re-elected.
Republicans are only reaping what they sowed.
They insisted on impeaching Clinton for things that plenty of other presidents likely did. - (ETA I'm talking about lies. A lie to the Grand Jury is no more serious than a lie to the American People.)
The Democrats had been waiting for the opportunity to return the favor.
When Obama was in office in 2016 Republicans refused to bring allow votes on the Supreme Court nominee.
Democrats will do the same thing.
Open your eyes, this is just like professional wrestling. The actors get the "party" whipped up and angry over an issue because it detracts from what's really going on behind closed doors. It's all subterfuge.
If we hate Dems we'll always vote Repub. If we hate Repubs we will always vote Dem.
It's a tactic and I think it's humorous when individuals are die hard one way or the other. Why? Because they have been fooled.
The two party system needs to go.
For the record I am a gun toting, freedom loving, and God fearing conservative.
They insisted on impeaching Clinton for things that plenty of other presidents likely did. - (ETA I'm talking about lies. A lie to the Grand Jury is no more serious than a lie to the American People.)
The Democrats had been waiting for the opportunity to return the favor.
When Obama was in office in 2016 Republicans refused to bring allow votes on the Supreme Court nominee.
Democrats will do the same thing.
Open your eyes, this is just like professional wrestling. The actors get the "party" whipped up and angry over an issue because it detracts from what's really going on behind closed doors. It's all subterfuge.
If we hate Dems we'll always vote Repub. If we hate Repubs we will always vote Dem.
It's a tactic and I think it's humorous when individuals are die hard one way or the other. Why? Because they have been fooled.
The two party system needs to go.
For the record I am a gun toting, freedom loving, and God fearing conservative.
Last edited:
I hate the Republicans too, but I’m not voting for communist kleptocrats. There really isn’t a choice, but you’re fooling yourself that there ever was one. There is only limiting their power as much as possible. They all suck. It’s just some suck way more. Our Founders knew we would always/only have the choice of the lesser of two evils. They limited their power because of it. Whoever is for expanding their power and their reach is the enemy of a free people.
Yesterday, best view:
If you have direct knowledge of what is in the Schiff report, please raise your hand.
Let the record show that no hands are raised.
Supposition, Assumption, Presumption all are based on zero factual evidense.
The two people on the phone stated nothing worng or out of bounds happened, and the discussion was based on CORRUPTION done by a sitting VP in teh past to mess with a sovereign states well being(FACTS)
If you have direct knowledge of what is in the Schiff report, please raise your hand.
Let the record show that no hands are raised.
Supposition, Assumption, Presumption all are based on zero factual evidense.
The two people on the phone stated nothing worng or out of bounds happened, and the discussion was based on CORRUPTION done by a sitting VP in teh past to mess with a sovereign states well being(FACTS)
also THE reason they waited till right before elections...
I keep seeing this all the time by people that say they "only voted for trump because killary was running against him." Tell me, did the bad trump grab your pu**y? If the freakin libs cant find dirt after 4 years and as many investigations...I would love to know what dirt you know about...?
Actually honest question as I hear this all the time...
This I think is the real reason for ALL these investigations. They want to catch him purgering (sp) himself like Clinton. He is always a step ahead declining to say anything/defend himself and the media throws a huge fit ea time. Brilliant.
Regards,
DT
OP,
Doeasnt matter if you are confused and asking the question.
If you are here you probably "see" just fine.
What matters is that those without your "sight" are asking the question.
A superficial glance at this process should make anyone with half a brain cell understand the kangaroo court making a mockery of justice.
Im not concerned about OPs confusion but I really hope those that would never come here are asking questions.
Doeasnt matter if you are confused and asking the question.
If you are here you probably "see" just fine.
What matters is that those without your "sight" are asking the question.
A superficial glance at this process should make anyone with half a brain cell understand the kangaroo court making a mockery of justice.
Im not concerned about OPs confusion but I really hope those that would never come here are asking questions.
Actually, perjury should be something to be impeached for.
Bill Clinton was impeached in 1998. He had already been re-elected in 1996. The GOP lost 2 seats in the House to keep their slim majority. and lost 4 seats in the senate to have a 50-50 split, which then they controlled the tie-break vote with Dick Cheney.
What else ya got?
I remembered it being worse than that, but I will certainly take your word if you looked it up.
Wasn't that when the Jumpin' Jim Jeffords thing happened and they lost the Senate? Or, was that later?
I said he was guilty. I just think that the Republicans would have made out better if they had censured him rather than impeaching. To this day the Democrats narrative that it was about sex is perpetuated. They obviously played their hand much better if people are still referring to it as an impeachment over sex.
Articles 1 & 2 are perjury, and 3 is witness tampering/intimidation. Nowhere in it are any of the siliceous details of the Star Report included.
They vote either "guilty" or "not guilty". Everyone who voted "not guilty" voted against facts that were beyond any doubt. In this case they'll be voting motive, not based on actions. That makes this very, very different.
Wasn't that when the Jumpin' Jim Jeffords thing happened and they lost the Senate? Or, was that later?
I said he was guilty. I just think that the Republicans would have made out better if they had censured him rather than impeaching. To this day the Democrats narrative that it was about sex is perpetuated. They obviously played their hand much better if people are still referring to it as an impeachment over sex.
Articles 1 & 2 are perjury, and 3 is witness tampering/intimidation. Nowhere in it are any of the siliceous details of the Star Report included.
They vote either "guilty" or "not guilty". Everyone who voted "not guilty" voted against facts that were beyond any doubt. In this case they'll be voting motive, not based on actions. That makes this very, very different.
Last edited:
They will fail and they will not quit trying.
They will eventually resort to violence, which is always the last refuge of the incompetent.
This matter is being played out on a field we are not permitted to access.
The very idea that the people grant their power to the elected is and has been subverted by big money, big politics, and massive subterfuge to the point where the electorate simply gets to observe as the elected gives them the collective finger very minute of every day. More is not permitted.
The patriots of the day in the 1770's finally realized that laws imposed by those who were not their representatives were not laws at all; they were chains of their own forging, forged by their own peaceful submission to outrage.
We keep this up, we get to live in the gulags of our own making. A gulag is not a place, ours is our willing submission to outrage.
I say, "Enough"; while we still have them means to say, "No".
What say you?
Greg
They will eventually resort to violence, which is always the last refuge of the incompetent.
This matter is being played out on a field we are not permitted to access.
The very idea that the people grant their power to the elected is and has been subverted by big money, big politics, and massive subterfuge to the point where the electorate simply gets to observe as the elected gives them the collective finger very minute of every day. More is not permitted.
The patriots of the day in the 1770's finally realized that laws imposed by those who were not their representatives were not laws at all; they were chains of their own forging, forged by their own peaceful submission to outrage.
We keep this up, we get to live in the gulags of our own making. A gulag is not a place, ours is our willing submission to outrage.
I say, "Enough"; while we still have them means to say, "No".
What say you?
Greg
The Democrats will impeach him - the Senate will not convict. Meanwhile our Government has done *JACK SHIT* for months while they all hurl insults at each other.
Get on with it. Even Trump is telling them to get it done so we can move on.
Git 'er dun and let's get on with it.
VooDoo
Get on with it. Even Trump is telling them to get it done so we can move on.
Git 'er dun and let's get on with it.
VooDoo
Similar threads
