Only there isn't any impeachment, CNN

[Rickeroo]

2 other articles of impeachment: What is the first article that Trump is impeached under?

How can Democrats waste time if Trump is impeached?

How can Ivanka defend her father from impeachment when he hasn't been impeached?

 

[gdgyva]

Nancy, the progressives, and the democrats have to keep this story running

It is their one and only opportunity to beat Trump in 2020 based on what is happening now...with one caveat, which is the economy

If that slides and goes into a recession, beating him seems more likely

But the impeachment inquiry story is to try and change votes in 2020...nothing more

There will never be an actual vote in the house to impeach....where they send to senate

That is what puts the democrats at risk....and Nancy knows it

So play this out, delay, stall, and keep the news churning as long as possible

Her only problem is that the witnesses are drying up....and therefore the news bits

 

[Mycroft]

Nancy, the progressives, and the democrats have to keep this story running

It is their one and only opportunity to beat Trump in 2020 based on what is happening now...with one caveat, which is the economy

If that slides and goes into a recession, beating him seems more likely

But the impeachment inquiry story is to try and change votes in 2020...nothing more

There will never be an actual vote in the house to impeach....where they send to senate

That is what puts the democrats at risk....and Nancy knows it

So play this out, delay, stall, and keep the news churning as long as possible

Her only problem is that the witnesses are drying up....and therefore the news bits

Nancy is doing what she can to affect the economy. As long as she can avoid ratifying the USMCA, she is holding back the economy. This gives the Dems more ability to talk about "recession" and blame it on Trump. She knows the useful idiots won't blame her for her own actions.

 

[MrWonka]

How can Ivanka defend her father from impeachment when he hasn't been impeached?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! The same way all of Hitler's fans still defend him to this day, by claiming the Holocaust didn't happen.

Unlike Republicans Democrats like to make sure they've collected ALL of the evidence before they charge someone. Even when they have a mountain of evidence it's better to have more. Particularly when you're charging the leader of a cult, and half the people on the jury are members of that cult.

By the way, just yesterday a former Ethics Attorney for George W. Bush(a Republican) came forward and pointed out that since Trump knows he's about to be impeached, and he knows the Senate will be the Jury that every dollar Trump is donating to the campaigns of Republican Senators right now is by definition a felony for bribery.

 

[haymarket]

Perhaps if we see the first missing part of this transcript we could answer your question?

 

[HumblePi]

View attachment 67267433

2 other articles of impeachment: What is the first article that Trump is impeached under?

How can Democrats waste time if Trump is impeached?

How can Ivanka defend her father from impeachment when he hasn't been impeached?

You seem to be having a problem with the word itself and how it's used in a sentence. How is it possible to discuss or report on impeachment hearings, impeachment votes, impeachment witnesses or anything to do with 'impeachment' unless you actual use the word? The word is in the Constitution. It made it much simpler for the founding fathers to write 'impeachment' rather than keep repeating all these words "shall be removed from office if it's proven that a president can be convicted of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

 

[Rickeroo]

You seem to be having a problem with the word itself and how it's used in a sentence. How is it possible to discuss or report on impeachment hearings, impeachment votes, impeachment witnesses or anything to do with 'impeachment' unless you actual use the word? The word is in the Constitution. It made it much simpler for the founding fathers to write 'impeachment' rather than keep repeating all these words "shall be removed from office if it's proven that a president can be convicted of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

In the screenshot, I do approve of the "inquiry" qualifier, perhaps "process" would work as well.

According to the definition, impeachment is similar to an indictment in criminal law. Trump has not been indicted, not been charged.

The press is using terminology to give the impression that he has already been charged.

 

[HumblePi]

In the screenshot, I do approve of the "inquiry" qualifier, perhaps "process" would work as well.

According to the definition, impeachment is similar to an indictment in criminal law. Trump has not been indicted, not been charged.

The press is using terminology to give the impression that he has already been charged.

But using 'inquiry' isn't complete without the transitive verb coming after it. For instance, "Inquiry into _____?" The "process of _______"? As far as not being charged yet, this is where any investigation leads -- to charges. For instance, if a man is arrested after being suspected of committing a crime, like robbing a gas station, he's not legally charged with the crime until evidence has been established that leads to criminal charges. The impeachment process is similar. Testimony is heard, documents are presented and evidence shown that would lead to whether or not an indictment of a crime like abuse of power, obstruction of justice or high crimes and misdemeanors can be brought forth. Once that's all been established, then the House takes a vote based on the evidence whether to impeach or not impeach.

 

[Media_Truth]

In the screenshot, I do approve of the "inquiry" qualifier, perhaps "process" would work as well.

According to the definition, impeachment is similar to an indictment in criminal law. Trump has not been indicted, not been charged.

The press is using terminology to give the impression that he has already been charged.

Trump has ZERO respect for the laws that govern our country. This time he went to far, and there is too much evidence. Regrettably, he must be impeached.

 

[OpportunityCost]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! The same way all of Hitler's fans still defend him to this day, by claiming the Holocaust didn't happen.

Unlike Republicans Democrats like to make sure they've collected ALL of the evidence before they charge someone. Even when they have a mountain of evidence it's better to have more. Particularly when you're charging the leader of a cult, and half the people on the jury are members of that cult.

By the way, just yesterday a former Ethics Attorney for George W. Bush(a Republican) came forward and pointed out that since Trump knows he's about to be impeached, and he knows the Senate will be the Jury that every dollar Trump is donating to the campaigns of Republican Senators right now is by definition a felony for bribery.

Thanks for the Godwin, please exit the thread in an orderly fashion with all the other people who can't make a point without smearing the other side. Yes, I mean you.

 

[OpportunityCost]

Trump has ZERO respect for the laws that govern our country. This time he went to far, and there is too much evidence. Regrettably, he must be impeached.

Where does fabricating a Russian meddling story and collusion fall into respect for our laws? Oh wait those are all democrats, that's different.

 

[Media_Truth]

Where does fabricating a Russian meddling story and collusion fall into respect for our laws? Oh wait those are all democrats, that's different.

It's good to know that you realized your mistake, and that now we can discuss the matter of whether or not Trump committed the crime of bargaining with a foreign government for a political favor.

 

[OpportunityCost]

It's good to know that you realized your mistake, and that now we can discuss the matter of whether or not Trump committed the crime of bargaining with a foreign government for a political favor.

LOL It shouldn't be different and that's the point. Glad you openly admitted your tribalism.

 

[Deuce]

View attachment 67267433

2 other articles of impeachment: What is the first article that Trump is impeached under?

How can Democrats waste time if Trump is impeached?

How can Ivanka defend her father from impeachment when he hasn't been impeached?

You're complaining about semantics of headlines?

 

[What if...?]

Where does fabricating a Russian meddling story and collusion fall into respect for our laws? Oh wait those are all democrats, that's different.

The meddling story is part of the factual record.

Except for Conservative media, where it was the democrats, in Ukraine, with the DNC server.

 

[Jason Warfield]

In the screenshot, I do approve of the "inquiry" qualifier, perhaps "process" would work as well.

According to the definition, impeachment is similar to an indictment in criminal law. Trump has not been indicted, not been charged.

The press is using terminology to give the impression that he has already been charged.

No, impeachment is not an indictment; it is the inquiry process to determine if the next step...going to the Senate...is necessary. Once it hits the Senate...THEN...it becomes a legal process. I really don't understand why you people are having such a hard time with this concept.

The press isn't stating, or giving the impression that Trump is being charged...YOU are doing that. The news are simply reporting the steps the House is taking in the impeachment process. The liberal punditry may be crowing about Trump's action being illegal, bit pundits are expressing opinion, not news. Further, conservative pundits are also expressing erroneous statements by insisting that this process is illegal and misleading their viewers on what impeachment is...it is no secret that organizations like FOX News like muddy the waters with journalism and punditry to create false talking points.

Please research before you post.

 

[Mr Person]

Where does fabricating a Russian meddling story and collusion fall into respect for our laws? Oh wait those are all democrats, that's different.

It's laid out in detail in a long report you made sure not to read. Please stop lying.

 

[OpportunityCost]

It's laid out in detail in a long report you made sure not to read. Please stop lying.

Please stop lying yourself. You know how prosecutions are set up and how they are shaded to reveal what they are trying to. Not the whole truth and nothing but the truth. You know better.

 

[OpportunityCost]

No, impeachment is not an indictment; it is the inquiry process to determine if the next step...going to the Senate...is necessary. Once it hits the Senate...THEN...it becomes a legal process. I really don't understand why you people are having such a hard time with this concept.

The press isn't stating, or giving the impression that Trump is being charged...YOU are doing that. The news are simply reporting the steps the House is taking in the impeachment process. The liberal punditry may be crowing about Trump's action being illegal, bit pundits are expressing opinion, not news. Further, conservative pundits are also expressing erroneous statements by insisting that this process is illegal and misleading their viewers on what impeachment is...it is no secret that organizations like FOX News like muddy the waters with journalism and punditry to create false talking points.

Please research before you post.

The **** they aren't. More Democrats Want Trump Removed Than Wanted Nixon Out

Please don't spin while you post.

 

[Mr Person]

Trump has ZERO respect for the laws that govern our country. This time he went to far, and there is too much evidence. Regrettably, he must be impeached.

Where does fabricating a Russian meddling story and collusion fall into respect for our laws? Oh wait those are all democrats, that's different.

It's laid out in detail in a long report you made sure not to read. Please stop lying.

Please stop lying yourself. You know how prosecutions are set up and how they are shaded to reveal what they are trying to. Not the whole truth and nothing but the truth. You know better.

I know that a prosecution does not attempt to frame someone for a crime but then announce that they are clearing that person of that crime. :roll:

Trump skated on criminal conspiracy because Mueller felt there was insufficient evidence of an explicit agreement. However, Team Trump knowingly welcomed Russian interference on his behalf and didn't report it. He also laid out 10+ instances of obstruction, but did not make a statement about guilt because he could not make a statement about guilt under the rules that controlled him.

Russia did meddle. They intend to again. The only people lying are those who say that this, along with everything else laid against Trump, is some kind of deluded conspiracy to take him specifically down. And you know that.




PS: Yeah, I do know about prosecutorial shenanigans because I'm a criminal defense lawyer. These are not those shenanigans, and when there are shenanigans they are usually aimed at the poor defendants - the ones with a state appointed lawyer who does not have the resources (because states make sure to cripple the defense as much as they can in appointed cases) to properly dig through everything. Even petty stuff, like in Suffolk County, MA. (Boston area). There, the DA's office has a habit in murder cases of dumping one or two banker's boxes of materials on the defense a week or two before trial, claiming they "forgot" and it was an "accident", but then demanding trial not get rescheduled. Why? Well, one or two weeks before a murder trial, you are putting in a good 16 hour day every day to make sure you've re-memorized everything front to back to front to back.

Then you get a box or two of brand new material and you're screwed. You can't prepare as well. That sort of thing. Or destroyed evidence. Or arranging with prison guards to send a professional 'snitch' into the defendant's cell, and no matter what actually happens, that snitch will be called to testify that actually the defendant confessed to the whole thing. How convenient! And the snitch will deny a deal....buuuuut a year later suddenly they're asking a judge to reduce his sentence. Etc.

Against a president? Nah. And especially not by a lifetime Republican with a sterling reputation for taking down evil people, appointed by a republican, overseen by a republican, in a republican administration, with a whole bunch of republicans around him. Worst you lot came up with was some propaganda about Strozyk or however it's spelled. But guess what? That lifetime Republican with a sterling reputation for taking down evil people, appointed by a republican, overseen by a republican, in a republican administration, with a whole bunch of republicans around him ripped him off the case when he found out AND nothing the guy had done was improper.




Just stop lying. You backed the wrong horse. Trump is ****. He's corrupt. Admit your error and feel better.

 

[Jason Warfield]

The **** they aren't. More Democrats Want Trump Removed Than Wanted Nixon Out

Please don't spin while you post.

I didn't say that we don't want Trump out...what I was doing was refuting your statement because it is factually wrong. Please think before you post.

 

[OpportunityCost]

I know that a prosecution does not attempt to frame someone for a crime but then announce that they are clearing that person of that crime. :roll:

Trump skated on criminal conspiracy because Mueller felt there was insufficient evidence of an explicit agreement. However, Team Trump knowingly welcomed Russian interference on his behalf and didn't report it. He also laid out 10+ instances of obstruction, but did not make a statement about guilt because he could not make a statement about guilt under the rules that controlled him.

Russia did meddle. They intend to again. The only people lying are those who say that this, along with everything else laid against Trump, is some kind of deluded conspiracy to take him specifically down. And you know that.




PS: Yeah, I do know about prosecutorial shenanigans because I'm a criminal defense lawyer. These are not those shenanigans, and when there are shenanigans they are usually aimed at the poor defendants - the ones with a state appointed lawyer who does not have the resources (because states make sure to cripple the defense as much as they can in appointed cases) to properly dig through everything. Even petty stuff, like in Suffolk County, MA. (Boston area). There, the DA's office has a habit in murder cases of dumping one or two banker's boxes of materials on the defense a week or two before trial, claiming they "forgot" and it was an "accident", but then demanding trial not get rescheduled. Why? Well, one or two weeks before a murder trial, you are putting in a good 16 hour day every day to make sure you've re-memorized everything front to back to front to back.

Then you get a box or two of brand new material and you're screwed. You can't prepare as well. That sort of thing. Or destroyed evidence. Or arranging with prison guards to send a professional 'snitch' into the defendant's cell, and no matter what actually happens, that snitch will be called to testify that actually the defendant confessed to the whole thing. How convenient! And the snitch will deny a deal....buuuuut a year later suddenly they're asking a judge to reduce his sentence. Etc.

Against a president? Nah. And especially not by a lifetime Republican with a sterling reputation for taking down evil people, appointed by a republican, overseen by a republican, in a republican administration, with a whole bunch of republicans around him. Worst you lot came up with was some propaganda about Strozyk or however it's spelled. But guess what? That lifetime Republican with a sterling reputation for taking down evil people, appointed by a republican, overseen by a republican, in a republican administration, with a whole bunch of republicans around him ripped him off the case when he found out AND nothing the guy had done was improper.




Just stop lying. You backed the wrong horse. Trump is ****. He's corrupt. Admit your error and feel better.

Yes, Russia meddled, however OBAMA was in a position to do something about that, not Trump. Secondly Trump did not welcome or entreat the meddling, his contacts with Russian counterparts were the same thing every incoming administration tries to do in getting a feel for who they are going to have foreign dealings with.

Mueller didn't press the obstruction because he could not prove it in the first place or he would have pushed those recommendations more strongly to Congress, who did nothing to act on them.

The Mueller report was a house of cards as a prosecution, we both know this and neither one of has to be lying to admit that.

PS, the lying thing, its just an ad hom you can get away with under the rules here, its still an ad hom. So quitcher lyin, ya hear!?! :roll:

 

[Mr Person]

Where does fabricating a Russian meddling story and collusion fall into respect for our laws? Oh wait those are all democrats, that's different.

vs.

Yes, Russia meddled

Oh so now they DID meddle and it isn't a fabrication?

however OBAMA was in a position to do something about that, not Trump.

Oh it's Obama's fault. Nevermind your earlier lie, it went from not happening to happening but being Obama's fault. Right.

:lamo


And what would you instead be saying if Obama had gone on TV and announced that the Russians were interfering on Trump's behalf? Right. You'd be claiming he was trying to rig the election. You'd still be claiming it today. You....ok, not you, but RW media....RW media shapes its narrative to fit whatever new bad thing comes out about Trump. Hannity and the other talking heads say it. The next morning you, along with all the other Trump supporters, are saying the exact same thing.

I argue with various people on the left all the time here. I see them arguing amongst themselves. You? You all say the same thing: the exact lies cooked up the night before on Fox et. al. You'd just be uttering different lies if Obama had revealed Russian interference.

Secondly Trump did not welcome or entreat the meddling, his contacts with Russian counterparts were the same thing every incoming administration tries to do in getting a feel for who they are going to have foreign dealings with.

Why do you lie so much? He entreated AND welcomed it. It's laid out in the report. There was just no proof beyond a reasonable doubt of explicit agreement, so, he 'cleared' Trump.

He, being a lifelong Republican with a sterling reputation, appointed by a republican, overseen by a republican, and in a republican administration. A lifelong Republican - remember this, because I've seen too many of you trip over yourselves - you ALSO want us to believe that he "completely exonerated" Trump (he didn't). So you need him to have told the truth for your own propaganda to work. Ooopsie-daisy?

Mueller didn't press the obstruction because he could not prove it in the first place or he would have pushed those recommendations more strongly to Congress, who did nothing to act on them.

That's an OpportunityCost-grade lie.

Anyone who paid the slightest bit of honest attention knows (1) DOJ policy bound Mueller, (2) DOJ policy explicitly prohibited Mueller (or anyone governed by the DOJ rules) from seeking to indict a sitting President.





Why are the lies you tell so numerous AND so stupid?

 

[dairyair]

vs.



Oh so now they DID meddle and it isn't a fabrication?




Oh it's Obama's fault. Nevermind your earlier lie, it went from not happening to happening but being Obama's fault. Right.

:lamo


And what would you instead be saying if Obama had gone on TV and announced that the Russians were interfering on Trump's behalf? Right. You'd be claiming he was trying to rig the election. You'd still be claiming it today. You....ok, not you, but RW media....RW media shapes its narrative to fit whatever new bad thing comes out about Trump. Hannity and the other talking heads say it. The next morning you, along with all the other Trump supporters, are saying the exact same thing.

I argue with various people on the left all the time here. I see them arguing amongst themselves. You? You all say the same thing: the exact lies cooked up the night before on Fox et. al. You'd just be uttering different lies if Obama had revealed Russian interference.






Why do you lie so much? He entreated AND welcomed it. It's laid out in the report. There was just no proof beyond a reasonable doubt of explicit agreement, so, he 'cleared' Trump.

He, being a lifelong Republican with a sterling reputation, appointed by a republican, overseen by a republican, and in a republican administration. A lifelong Republican - remember this, because I've seen too many of you trip over yourselves - you ALSO want us to believe that he "completely exonerated" Trump (he didn't). So you need him to have told the truth for your own propaganda to work. Ooopsie-daisy?








That's an OpportunityCost-grade lie.

Anyone who paid the slightest bit of honest attention knows (1) DOJ policy bound Mueller, (2) DOJ policy explicitly prohibited Mueller (or anyone governed by the DOJ rules) from seeking to indict a sitting President.





Why are the lies you tell so numerous AND so stupid?

Exactly.
If Obama said anything about Russia meddling to hurt Hilary without 3 smoking guns would've had the RW falling all over the place and screaming rigged election.

 

[Integrityrespec]

Nancy is doing what she can to affect the economy. As long as she can avoid ratifying the USMCA, she is holding back the economy. This gives the Dems more ability to talk about "recession" and blame it on Trump. She knows the useful idiots won't blame her for her own actions.

It's really a shame that democrats are dumb enough to look but not see NP ruining the country, refusing to do anything to make the economy better or to improve healthcare, or prescription drug prices or secure the border, because she only wants to get the Presidency back in the hands of a crazy democrat so they can waste more more and ruin the economy while they give away the farm. .Democrats are not ging to let trump get anything done on USMCA and that's a shame because it would be a huge gain for the countries working folks.