292 Votes Needed For Impeachment

[smallvoice]

Other than stealing from his charity and his fake college, obstructing a congressional investigation, lying nonstop... Completely on the level. Until his tax returns come out.

Got a conviction supporting any of that nonsense, Rob?

 

[iguanaman]

I don't think one party (either party) should use the term oversight to conduct endless investigations for political purposes. I would be for zero investigations being allowed unless a 2/3's majority in either house agreed to the investigation. Just because a party is in power shouldn't give them a green light to conduct any investigations they want and that goes for Republicans as well.

LOL So you objected to the "endless" investigations of Obama? You do know that the failed Benghazi "investigation" lasted over 4 years and was one of 4 major investigations of Obama by the GOP House. That does not include the "tan suit" uproar either. Obama cooperated with those investigations and turned over 1000's of requested documents.

 

[iguanaman]

Every witness testified there was no bribery. You are twisting Mulvaney's words.

LOL Mulvaney stated that the aid money was predicated on announcing the investigations and that "everybody does it so deal with it"

Mulvaney admits quid pro quo, says military aid withheld to get Ukraine to probe Democrats - ABC News

 

[poweRob]

Got a conviction supporting any of that nonsense, Rob?

I got a fake college forced to shut down and money paid back to its "graduates" and a fake charity shut down that had a $2 million fine and mandatory classes on how not to steal from charities. What do you have?

:lol:

 

[iguanaman]

Surely you don't believe that nonsense. Without even one shred of actual damning "testimony", the Dims in the House were hell-bent on impeachment, Trump only needed to be elected. This nonsense has been going on since IMMEDIATELY after the swearing-in. Due process requires that he be found guilty, not merely the subject of Dim testimony. Did you notice how many Rep witnesses were called to present the other side?

The Replicants called no witnesses that could rebut the testimony of his own staff. His Chief of staff went on TV and stated exactly what all the witnesses said. That Trump predicated the release of vital miltiary aid for Ukraine on the announcements of investigations on Biden and Crowdstrike.

Mulvaney admits quid pro quo, says military aid withheld to get Ukraine to probe Democrats - ABC News

 

[HumblePi]

One word: magnitsky.

The Magnitsky act sanctions should remain in place.

Hell yes, they should. Bill Browder was Sergei Magnitsky's client. Bill Browder did a lot of business in Russia. Bill Browder was instrumental in getting the Magnitsky Act passed by Congress.

Bill Browder is possibly the most wanted man in Russia. He was arrested last year while traveling through Spain and held on a Russian warrant. He was released but he's definitely traveling with a big bullseye on his back.

from Wiki:
[snip] He (Browder) is the CEO and co-founder of Hermitage Capital Management, the investment advisor to the Hermitage Fund, which at one time was the largest foreign portfolio investor in Russia [end]

 

[Paradoxical]

If you can't muster up 2/3's in the House, how do you expect to muster up 2/3's in the Senate? You guys new this going in.

The impeachment clown circus is over They do NOT want this to ho tyo trial,

 

[ocean515]

LOL Mulvaney stated that the aid money was predicated on announcing the investigations and that "everybody does it so deal with it"

Mulvaney admits quid pro quo, says military aid withheld to get Ukraine to probe Democrats - ABC News

Gross misrepresentation of the facts.

Mick Mulvaney Briefing Transcript: "Get Over It" Regarding Ukraine Quid Pro Quo - Rev

Reporter (M): (22:25)
But to be clear, what you just described is a quid pro quo. It is funding will not flow unless the investigation into into the Democratic server happened as well.
Mick Mulvaney: (22:35)
We do that all the time with foreign policy. We were holding up money at the same time for what was it? The Northern triangle countries. We were holding up aid at the Northern triangle countries so that they would change their policies on immigration. By the way, and this speaks to an important … I’m sorry? This speaks to important point because I heard this yesterday and I can never remember the gentleman who … Was it McKinney? Is that his name? I don’t know him. He testified yesterday. And if you go and if you believe the news reports, because we’ve not seen any transcripts of this. The only transcript I’ve seen was Sondland’s testimony this morning.


​

 

[iguanaman]

Gross misrepresentation of the facts.

Mick Mulvaney Briefing Transcript: "Get Over It" Regarding Ukraine Quid Pro Quo - Rev

Reporter (M): (22:25)
But to be clear, what you just described is a quid pro quo. It is funding will not flow unless the investigation into into the Democratic server happened as well.
Mick Mulvaney: (22:35)
We do that all the time with foreign policy. We were holding up money at the same time for what was it? The Northern triangle countries. We were holding up aid at the Northern triangle countries so that they would change their policies on immigration. By the way, and this speaks to an important … I’m sorry? This speaks to important point because I heard this yesterday and I can never remember the gentleman who … Was it McKinney? Is that his name? I don’t know him. He testified yesterday. And if you go and if you believe the news reports, because we’ve not seen any transcripts of this. The only transcript I’ve seen was Sondland’s testimony this morning.


​

So "we do that all the time" is a denial of Quid pro quo? Hardly. Withholding vital military aid appropriated by Congress for an ally that is at war with Russia is a violation of our national security and you know it. And no we do not do that all the time either.

 

[ocean515]

So "we do that all the time" is a denial of Quid pro quo? Hardly. Withholding vital military aid appropriated by Congress for and ally that is at war with Russia is a violation of our national security and you know it

Quid pro quo is an element of every negation of any kind. Whether it's buying tires, or negotiating a trade deal.

And you can save yourself some time, I'm well aware of the meme the left is pushing about "vital military aid".

President Trump provided that vital military aid. Obama never did.

 

[iguanaman]

Quid pro quo is an element of every negation of any kind. Whether it's buying tires, or negotiating a trade deal.

And you can save yourself some time, I'm well aware of the meme the left is pushing about "vital military aid".

President Trump provided that vital military aid. Obama never did.

LOL Right Trump provided the aid when he got caught running a "drug deal". That just shows he knew it was wrong. And just like the Europeans did not give Ukraine aid when the reality is they have supplied 2/3rds of the money given since 2014.

 

[HumblePi]

For anyone that doesn't know much about the Magnitsky Act, it may help to get familiar with it through this video. The reason it's important is because the Magnitsky Act, which was passed by Congress in 2012, is precisely why Putin began to groom Trump to be the 'Manchurian candidate' and why Putin directly interfered with the election.

The video is a little graphic and contains some photos of Sergei Magnitsky's autopsy.

 

[Perotista]

With respect, “feelings” are the result of Trump’s many misdeeds, lies, conspiracy theories, bigoted policies, etc.. The disdain many Americans have for Trump is well founded.

Well founded in your eyes. For others not so. America is fairly evenly split on this, split basically along party lines. We're living in the political era of polarization and ultra high partisanship, that doesn't surprise me much. The divide. One side wants to get rid of Trump no matter the cost, the other wants him to say no matter what or what the future may bring. Neither side owns a majority. If RCP is right, their averages of the most recent polls, the people are split 47-47 on the impeachment and removal proposal. Stalemate. When all is said and done, the status quo remains.

We went 130 years between the first impeachment and the second. Then only 20 years to bring the third. Polarization and partisanship at work. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if impeachment becomes the norm. That whenever the House is controlled by the opposite party of the president, impeachment here it comes. Lose an election, try to impeach the winner. Is this what the future holds?

We've already entered the era where anything Republican is automatically opposed by the Democrats and vice versa. Has political parties become so important that both have take the Capital, the Big A out of America and made it into a little one?

I have no doubt that if Hillary won, the Republican House would be trying to impeach her. I have little doubt that if the democrats win the White House in 2020, then the Republicans regain the House, impeachment is on the way for the democratic winner in 2020.

I'll let the two major parties battle this out. Perhaps more and more Americans will get tired of the polarization, the ultra high partisanship shown by both, the unwillingness to compromise and work for the good of the country, that all of this to include impeachment weakens both so much that a viable third party will rise. A dream perhaps, but one I cherish.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

If you can't muster up 2/3's in the House, how do you expect to muster up 2/3's in the Senate? You guys new this going in.

“You guys”? I have as much to do with the impeachment proceedings as you.

Expectation of the Senate’s verdict is not a valid reason for Congress to ignore their Constitutional duty..

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Well founded in your eyes. For others not so. America is fairly evenly split on this, split basically along party lines. We're living in the political era of polarization and ultra high partisanship, that doesn't surprise me much. The divide. One side wants to get rid of Trump no matter the cost, the other wants him to say no matter what or what the future may bring. Neither side owns a majority. If RCP is right, their averages of the most recent polls, the people are split 47-47 on the impeachment and removal proposal. Stalemate. When all is said and done, the status quo remains.

We went 130 years between the first impeachment and the second. Then only 20 years to bring the third. Polarization and partisanship at work. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if impeachment becomes the norm. That whenever the House is controlled by the opposite party of the president, impeachment here it comes. Lose an election, try to impeach the winner. Is this what the future holds?

We've already entered the era where anything Republican is automatically opposed by the Democrats and vice versa. Has political parties become so important that both have take the Capital, the Big A out of America and made it into a little one?

I have no doubt that if Hillary won, the Republican House would be trying to impeach her. I have little doubt that if the democrats win the White House in 2020, then the Republicans regain the House, impeachment is on the way for the democratic winner in 2020.

I'll let the two major parties battle this out. Perhaps more and more Americans will get tired of the polarization, the ultra high partisanship shown by both, the unwillingness to compromise and work for the good of the country, that all of this to include impeachment weakens both so much that a viable third party will rise. A dream perhaps, but one I cherish.

Parties be damned, Trump’s lies, bigotry, divisive rhetoric, phony conspiracies, etc., are not imaginary and they are not matters of perception. They are facts.

If the Dems take back the White House next year and the Republicans initiate their own impeachment proceedings, I say fine, go ahead. As long as they have strong evidence to support their actions as the Dems do now.

 

[smallvoice]

The Replicants called no witnesses that could rebut the testimony of his own staff. His Chief of staff went on TV and stated exactly what all the witnesses said. That Trump predicated the release of vital miltiary aid for Ukraine on the announcements of investigations on Biden and Crowdstrike.

Mulvaney admits quid pro quo, says military aid withheld to get Ukraine to probe Democrats - ABC News

So you think this is done without due process? Typical lynch crowd....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Paradoxical]

The objective isn't to remove the President. The objective is to generate material for campaign ads using taxpayer dollars.

Trump is already using the banana Republic attempted coup. I saw one ad that was the best I ever saw. The Dems bit off more than they can chew.

 

[mrjurrs]

The left is now setting a precedent that all presidents can now be impeached and the left have flat out said that you don't even need a crime to impeach. Obama could have been impeached numerous times. This is not what the constitution meant, that it was ok for all presidents to be impeached.

Wa,wa,wa, need a tissue?

 

[smallvoice]

I got a fake college forced to shut down and money paid back to its "graduates" and a fake charity shut down that had a $2 million fine and mandatory classes on how not to steal from charities. What do you have?

:lol:

So your answer is NO. Got it.

 

[smallvoice]

The Replicants called no witnesses that could rebut the testimony of his own staff. His Chief of staff went on TV and stated exactly what all the witnesses said. That Trump predicated the release of vital miltiary aid for Ukraine on the announcements of investigations on Biden and Crowdstrike.

Mulvaney admits quid pro quo, says military aid withheld to get Ukraine to probe Democrats - ABC News

What's a Replicant? I don't think whatever they are, they can call witnesses. The Dims didn't let the Republicans call any during their kangaroo court, so why would they let Replicants?

 

[smallvoice]

Parties be damned, Trump’s lies, bigotry, divisive rhetoric, phony conspiracies, etc., are not imaginary and they are not matters of perception. They are facts.

If the Dems take back the White House next year and the Republicans initiate their own impeachment proceedings, I say fine, go ahead. As long as they have strong evidence to support their actions as the Dems do now.

All that is only in YOUR imagination, especially the Libs taking the White House....

 

[SoCal]

It still will be useful to have Republican Senators vote to acquit a President who so obviously has abused his powers for his own benefit. It will be the death knell of the "law and order" party.

I understand that when the Repub Senators vote, they'll be wearing their new uniforms...

 

[iguanaman]

What's a Replicant? I don't think whatever they are, they can call witnesses. The Dims didn't let the Republicans call any during their kangaroo court, so why would they let Replicants?

LOL What are "Dims"?

 

[RaleBulgarian]

All that is only in YOUR imagination, especially the Libs taking the White House....

You’re either deluded or lying. No other possibilities for your absurd comment.

 

[poweRob]

So your answer is NO. Got it.

MOar cultspeak.