DonLever

Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the US - Impeached By House, Acquited By Senate

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

They're just in the "investigation" phase. It pretty much does sound like a done deal, but Pelosi is pretty sharp. If an Impeachment vote hurts (or doesn't help) Democrat prospects for the 2020 election, Schiff and co won't be able to push her.

 

I think what she's banking on is that the publicity surrounding the process will be enough to swing the fence sitters over to the Dems. If she sees an Impeachment vote having the opposite effect, she won't let it happen, whether or not it's the right thing to do.

Umm are you saying it's a political move then? Like is that not absolutely ridiculous?

Edited by Ryan Strome
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

Umm are you saying it's a political move then? Like is that not absolutely ridiculous?

Partly. 

Trump is absolutely worthy of impeachment, on multiple items. The Ukraine one has a ton of evidence, whistleblowers, etc so it's all but a sure thing. 

 

What both Democrats and Republicans are doing is trying to control the narrative now. Republicans want to attack the process, even though they are doing it exactly how every impeachment investigation has gone before. Make it look like a sham and try to get the Democrats to finish the investigation faster so it doesn't linger in the media. Democrats probably want to keep it going at a slow pace to keep it in the news so it can't be hidden under a rug by the time election time comes around. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Duodenum said:

Partly. 

Trump is absolutely worthy of impeachment, on multiple items. The Ukraine one has a ton of evidence, whistleblowers, etc so it's all but a sure thing. 

 

What both Democrats and Republicans are doing is trying to control the narrative now. Republicans want to attack the process, even though they are doing it exactly how every impeachment investigation has gone before. Make it look like a sham and try to get the Democrats to finish the investigation faster so it doesn't linger in the media. Democrats probably want to keep it going at a slow pace to keep it in the news so it can't be hidden under a rug by the time election time comes around. 

Well yes the Ukraine thing is an impeachable act imo.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

Umm aren't you saying it's a political move then? Like is that not absolutely ridiculous?

Pretty much. And no, I don't believe it is.

 

Trump absolutely deserves to be Impeached and there is a majority of Democrats who are advocates, despite the possible political cost. However, there's a reason that Pelosi is in charge. She's the one who resisted an Impeachment investigation up until the Ukraine thing happened and she''l resist again if this process doesn't move the needle enough in swing states.

 

The good news is (unless of course, one is a Trump fan) the numbers of late seem to be supportive of the Impeachment investigation. Removal is another story, as I said earlier. Depending on who's doing the counting, it looks like about half the population. That being said, using national numbers in the US is a fools game as we saw in 2016. It's the numbers in Michigan, Florida, Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania that will likely dictate whether an actual vote is held.

Edited by RUPERTKBD
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:

 

https://www.businessinsider.my/us-killed-isis-al-baghdadi-trump-syria-kurds-intel-community-2019-10/

Trump actively tried to derail the 3 biggest things that helped take out ISIS leader al-Baghdadi

 

  • President Donald Trump congratulated US special forces, and himself, this weekend for the military strike in Syria that killed the Islamic State’s leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
  • But a more detailed look at the operation suggests the success came in spite of – and not because of – Trump.
  • The strike wouldn’t have been possible without three key factors, all of which Trump has tried to derail: a US troop presence in Syria; the Kurdish allies who were abandoned when Trump withdrew US troops; and the US intelligence community that Trump has spent three years attacking.

Hands up, everyone that's surprised by this......

 

....that's what I thought....

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, Trump was in Chicago today to deliver a speech to Chiefs of Police and was a bit perturbed that Chi-Town's chief decided to skip the event, "Because Trump's presence did not align with his or the city's "core values."

 

As one would expect, Trump handled this with his usual measure of Decorum: "Here's a man that could not bother to show up for a meeting of police chiefs ... in his hometown and with the president of the United States. And you know why? It's because he's not doing his job"

 

Pretty rich coming from a guy who couldn't be bothered attending a Remembrance ceremony because it was raining....<_<

 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/newspolitics/trump-blasts-chicago-police-chief-in-first-visit-to-city-as-president/ar-AAJtqy5?li=AAggNb9

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

So, Trump was in Chicago today to deliver a speech to Chiefs of Police and was a bit perturbed that Chi-Town's chief decided to skip the event, "Because Trump's presence did not align with his or the city's "core values."

 

As one would expect, Trump handled this with his usual measure of Decorum: "Here's a man that could not bother to show up for a meeting of police chiefs ... in his hometown and with the president of the United States. And you know why? It's because he's not doing his job"

 

Pretty rich coming from a guy who couldn't be bothered attending a Remembrance ceremony because it was raining....<_<

 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/newspolitics/trump-blasts-chicago-police-chief-in-first-visit-to-city-as-president/ar-AAJtqy5?li=AAggNb9

What an absolute turd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ryan Strome said:

Isn't the house majority Democrats ?

Yes.

 

Quote

Isn't it nearly 100% they will all vote together?

Probably but your guess is as good as mine at this point.  The Republicans are fairly predictable in how they vote.  Democrats, not so much.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there goes one of the GOP talking points.  I guess they will respond by saying it's a partisan witch hunt.  

 

NPR article link

House Will Vote To Formalize Impeachment Procedures In Ongoing Inquiry

 

 

https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/102819-0

Dear Colleague on Next Steps in House's Ongoing Impeachment Inquiry

OCTOBER 28, 2019 
PRESS RELEASE

H. Res. ___ — Directing certain committees to continue their ongoing investigations as part of the existing House of Representatives inquiry into whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its Constitutional power to impeach Donald John Trump, President of the United States of America, and for other purposes. 

***

Dear Democratic Colleague,

For weeks, the President, his Counsel in the White House, and his allies in Congress have made the baseless claim that the House of Representatives’ impeachment inquiry “lacks the necessary authorization for a valid impeachment proceeding.”  They argue that, because the House has not taken a vote, they may simply pretend the impeachment inquiry does not exist.

Of course, this argument has no merit.  The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives “shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.”  Multiple past impeachments have gone forward without any authorizing resolutions.  Just last week, a federal court confirmed that the House is not required to hold a vote and that imposing such a requirement would be “an impermissible intrusion on the House’s constitutional authority.”  More than 300 legal scholars have also refuted this argument, concluding that “the Constitution does not mandate the process for impeachment and there is no constitutional requirement that the House of Representatives authorize an impeachment inquiry before one begins.”

The Trump Administration has made up this argument – apparently out of whole cloth – in order to justify its unprecedented cover-up, withhold key documents from multiple federal agencies, prevent critical witnesses from cooperating, and defy duly authorized subpoenas.

This week, we will bring a resolution to the Floor that affirms the ongoing, existing investigation that is currently being conducted by our committees as part of this impeachment inquiry, including all requests for documents, subpoenas for records and testimony, and any other investigative steps previously taken or to be taken as part of this investigation.  

This resolution establishes the procedure for hearings that are open to the American people, authorizes the disclosure of deposition transcripts, outlines procedures to transfer evidence to the Judiciary Committee as it considers potential articles of impeachment, and sets forth due process rights for the President and his Counsel.

We are taking this step to eliminate any doubt as to whether the Trump Administration may withhold documents, prevent witness testimony, disregard duly authorized subpoenas, or continue obstructing the House of Representatives.  

Nobody is above the law.

best regards,

Speaker Pelosi's signature

 
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:

Well, there goes one of the GOP talking points.  I guess they will respond by saying it's a partisan witch hunt.  

 

NPR article link

House Will Vote To Formalize Impeachment Procedures In Ongoing Inquiry

 

 

https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/102819-0

Dear Colleague on Next Steps in House's Ongoing Impeachment Inquiry

OCTOBER 28, 2019 
PRESS RELEASE

H. Res. ___ — Directing certain committees to continue their ongoing investigations as part of the existing House of Representatives inquiry into whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its Constitutional power to impeach Donald John Trump, President of the United States of America, and for other purposes. 

***

Dear Democratic Colleague,

For weeks, the President, his Counsel in the White House, and his allies in Congress have made the baseless claim that the House of Representatives’ impeachment inquiry “lacks the necessary authorization for a valid impeachment proceeding.”  They argue that, because the House has not taken a vote, they may simply pretend the impeachment inquiry does not exist.

Of course, this argument has no merit.  The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives “shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.”  Multiple past impeachments have gone forward without any authorizing resolutions.  Just last week, a federal court confirmed that the House is not required to hold a vote and that imposing such a requirement would be “an impermissible intrusion on the House’s constitutional authority.”  More than 300 legal scholars have also refuted this argument, concluding that “the Constitution does not mandate the process for impeachment and there is no constitutional requirement that the House of Representatives authorize an impeachment inquiry before one begins.”

The Trump Administration has made up this argument – apparently out of whole cloth – in order to justify its unprecedented cover-up, withhold key documents from multiple federal agencies, prevent critical witnesses from cooperating, and defy duly authorized subpoenas.

This week, we will bring a resolution to the Floor that affirms the ongoing, existing investigation that is currently being conducted by our committees as part of this impeachment inquiry, including all requests for documents, subpoenas for records and testimony, and any other investigative steps previously taken or to be taken as part of this investigation.  

This resolution establishes the procedure for hearings that are open to the American people, authorizes the disclosure of deposition transcripts, outlines procedures to transfer evidence to the Judiciary Committee as it considers potential articles of impeachment, and sets forth due process rights for the President and his Counsel.

We are taking this step to eliminate any doubt as to whether the Trump Administration may withhold documents, prevent witness testimony, disregard duly authorized subpoenas, or continue obstructing the House of Representatives.  

Nobody is above the law.

best regards,

Speaker Pelosi's signature

 

Which witch is which?  Isn't that Nancy Pelosi's signature?  I guess she's using her broom to sweep away Trump?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're not saying boo, they're saying "Boo-urns!" "Boo-urns!"

 

 

Trump got a really good taste of what people who don't attend his Mussolini-esque rallies think about him.

Edited by Red Light Racicot
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those wondering............

 

The 2 independent Senators are Bernie Sanders and Angus King who caucus with Democrats.

 

image.thumb.png.78b1291095f77878c57d27b83a9b3128.png

Edited by nuckin_futz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, nuckin_futz said:

For those wondering............

 

The 2 independent Senators are Bernie Sanders and Angus King who caucus with Democrats.

 

image.thumb.png.78b1291095f77878c57d27b83a9b3128.png

I don't see any way 20 Republican Senators vote to Impeach. Off the top of my head the "maybes" would be Murkowski, Collins, Romney, Lee, Rubio and Sasse...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An army veteran had expressed concerns about Trump's call with Zelensky and he knows what was actually said, since he was on the call....

 

Now, in advance of his deposition before the House Intel committee, the Trump apologists are pulling out all the stops in an attempt to discredit him:

 

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/10/29/1895822/-As-Lt-Col-Alexander-Vindman-arrives-for-deposition-Republicans-work-to-attack-the-messenger

 

Quote

 

How do you undercut a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army and top expert on Ukraine testifying about his concerns over actions that threaten the security of Ukraine and the United States and over a phone call he personally witnessed? To paraphrase Dr. Ian Malcolm, Republicans … find a way.

There’s Fox News determining that Vindman is actually a Ukrainian double agent working inside the White House, with convicted former Deputy Attorney General John Yoo tossing on a charge of “espionage” against Vindman. The crime? Talking to Ukrainian officials who called the White House out of concern for what Rudy Giuliani was doing in their country.

There’s Sean Duffy on CNN declaring that, since Vindman was born in Ukraine, he has “an affinity for Ukraine,” but “I don't know that he's concerned about American policy.” Vindman was brought to the United States when he was 3 years old. He’s spent the last 41 years in the United States, including serving in the United States Army since 1998. That includes a 2003 deployment to Iraq in which Vindman was wounded. It would seem he has some claim to be concerned about the United States.

The He’s Not Really One of Us kit was unpacked again on Fox & Friends, on which Brian Kilmeade again dismissed the Purple Heart recipient’s connections to the country he’s served for decades. Instead, says Kilmeade, Vindman "… tends to feel simpatico with Ukraine.” And to stick even more distance between this darn double-agenty espionager and good red-hat-wearing Americans, Kilmeade also made sure to frame it by saying, “We also know he was born in the Soviet Union.” 

And of course Donald Trump tweeted in to call Vindman a “Never Trumper.” A term he helpfully defined last week as meaning “human scum.” 

All of which shows just how much the right continues to fixate on undermining the messengers—because it can’t live with the message. 

 

I'm sure the usual Trump apologists will be along shortly to tell me how "CNN is just as bad".....:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another blow to the Coal industry....and (naturally) to Trump's mantra of "promises made, promises kept".

 

I guess we can put "Reviving the coal industry" in the same category as "Repeal and Replace", "Build the Wall" and "Lock her up"....

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/29/business/murray-energy-bankruptcy/index.html

 

Quote

 

The slow death of the American coal industry has forced Murray Energy, the largest private coal miner in the United States, to file for bankruptcy protection Tuesday.

Murray Energy's bankruptcy has been telegraphed for years. It recently failed to make payments to lenders, and the company entered into a forbearance agreement that bought it time to negotiate a restructuring. But that grace period came and went, and Murray Energy was unable to pay its bills. S&P Global Ratings downgraded the company's credit rating to "default" earlier this month.
The coal company formed a restructuring agreement with some of its lenders, representing about 60% of Murray's $1.7 billion in liabilities. The company announced Tuesday it has received $350 million in credit to keep its business operational through bankruptcy.
Robert Murray, the self-proclaimed king of the coal industry, has been replaced as CEO. Murray Energy announced Tuesday that former Chief Financial Officer Robert Moore will take over as the company's new chief executive. Robert Murray will remain as the company's chairman.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Yet another blow to the Coal industry....and (naturally) to Trump's mantra of "promises made, promises kept".

 

I guess we can put "Reviving the coal industry" in the same category as "Repeal and Replace", "Build the Wall" and "Lock her up"....

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/29/business/murray-energy-bankruptcy/index.html

 

 

I wonder if this will have any effect on his law suit against HBO's John Oliver?

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nuckin_futz said:

I wonder if this will have any effect on his law suit against HBO's John Oliver?

Forgot about that. The end of this article states that it was dropped last year apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   1 member