Pelosi: Impeachment Is Moving Forward

[Keith&Co.]

The Trump Admin doesn't seem to get what loyalty is all about or what is or isn't legal. These people can go to jail for lying.

Wel, he never has. He feels loyalty is entirely towards him, but he doesn't have to return any loyalty to his subjects.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Former senior Pompeo staffer, McKinley to testify today. This could put the SoS's head in the noose along with the President, AG, President's lawyer, etc...

 

[Treedbear]

The Trump Admin doesn't seem to get what loyalty is all about or what is or isn't legal. These people can go to jail for lying.

Wel, he never has. He feels loyalty is entirely towards him, but he doesn't have to return any loyalty to his subjects.

Saying they're his subjects or associates is too generous. Trump thinks of everyone he's associated with as expendable henchman.

A henchman is a loyal employee, supporter, or aide to some powerful figure engaged in nefarious or criminal enterprises. A henchman is typically relatively unimportant in the organization, a minion, whose value lies primarily in their unquestioning loyalty to their leader. The term henchman is often used derisively (even comically) to refer to an individual of low status who lacks any moral compass of their own.

 

[ZiprHead]

Newly uncovered tax documents show Trump kept '2 sets of books' and may have committed financial fraud

Newly uncovered tax documents from President Donald Trump that were obtained by ProPublica contain several inconsistencies that could point to financial fraud.

The discrepancies in the numbers made some Trump properties look more valuable to lenders and less valuable to tax authorities, ProPublica said. At least one of the filings was made after Trump took office in 2017.

The public may soon get a window into the president's closely held financial records after two separate court rulings ordered Trump to turn over years of tax returns to Congress and to New York prosecutors.

An employee at the IRS also recently blew the whistle on "inappropriate efforts to influence" the agency's audit of Trump's taxes.

 

[Elixir]

Newly uncovered tax documents show Trump kept '2 sets of books' and may have committed financial fraud

Newly uncovered tax documents from President Donald Trump that were obtained by ProPublica contain several inconsistencies that could point to financial fraud.

The discrepancies in the numbers made some Trump properties look more valuable to lenders and less valuable to tax authorities, ProPublica said. At least one of the filings was made after Trump took office in 2017.

The public may soon get a window into the president's closely held financial records after two separate court rulings ordered Trump to turn over years of tax returns to Congress and to New York prosecutors.

An employee at the IRS also recently blew the whistle on "inappropriate efforts to influence" the agency's audit of Trump's taxes.

Trump "may have committed financial fraud"?

 

[Trausti]

 

[angelo]

Newly uncovered tax documents show Trump kept '2 sets of books' and may have committed financial fraud

Newly uncovered tax documents from President Donald Trump that were obtained by ProPublica contain several inconsistencies that could point to financial fraud.

The discrepancies in the numbers made some Trump properties look more valuable to lenders and less valuable to tax authorities, ProPublica said. At least one of the filings was made after Trump took office in 2017.

The public may soon get a window into the president's closely held financial records after two separate court rulings ordered Trump to turn over years of tax returns to Congress and to New York prosecutors.

An employee at the IRS also recently blew the whistle on "inappropriate efforts to influence" the agency's audit of Trump's taxes.

Trump "may have committed financial fraud"?

Accusations with that kind of evidence only wouldn't stand up in any court of law in any Western Democratic country on Earth in the 21st century.

 

[Patooka]

Trump "may have committed financial fraud"?

Accusations with that kind of evidence only wouldn't stand up in any court of law in any Western Democratic country on Earth in the 21st century.

I spent 3 years working at the Parramatta office of the ATO in the INB division. You're wrong.

 

[angelo]

Trump "may have committed financial fraud"?

Accusations with that kind of evidence only wouldn't stand up in any court of law in any Western Democratic country on Earth in the 21st century.

I spent 3 years working at the Parramatta office of the ATO in the INB division. You're wrong.

Well if all the accusations turn out to be fact and not a continuing witch hunt since the 2016 election, which I very much doubt, then you'll have your pound of flesh, right!

 

[Patooka]

I spent 3 years working at the Parramatta office of the ATO in the INB division. You're wrong.

Well if all the accusations turn out to be fact and not a continuing witch hunt since the 2016 election, which I very much doubt, then you'll have your pound of flesh, right!

If you are found keeping two sets of books (in other words, discrepancies in Notices of Assessment in several holdings) in Australia, you are instantly slapped with a $50,000 fine from Interpretations and Compliance.
That was in 2002, I'm guessing the penalty has increased.

So your argument that "Accusations with that kind of evidence only wouldn't stand up in any court of law in any Western Democratic country" is clearly bullshit.

 

[Keith&Co.]

So your argument that "Accusations with that kind of evidence only wouldn't stand up in any court of law in any Western Democratic country" is clearly bullshit.

Easily shown, just imagine if anyone found Hillary telling the DNC and the IRS two different numbers for the amount of money collected at one single fund-raising dinner in 2014.
That'd be enough to have her shot and her body buried at a crossroads with a stake through her heart, and the earth salted for ten cubits around.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I spent 3 years working at the Parramatta office of the ATO in the INB division. You're wrong.

Well if all the accusations turn out to be fact and not a continuing witch hunt since the 2016 election, which I very much doubt, then you'll have your pound of flesh, right!

Why is every accusation a witch hunt. He ran a phony predatory University and had to give every student their money back.

 

[southernhybrid]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/17/trump-melts-when-he-cannot-control-news/

“Currently, 52% say Trump should be impeached and removed from office, while 46% say he should not be. This is roughly the opposite of what Gallup found in June when asked in the context of special [counsel] Robert Mueller’s investigation.” It took a year for public support for impeaching President Richard M. Nixon to reach the level that we reached in a little over a month. “More Democrats now favor Trump being removed from office than did for Nixon in July 1974 (71%). As many independents now favor Trump being impeached as did Nixon at the same time.”
Trump, who seemingly cared only about not being removed from office, is now flipping out thanks to the realization that he will in all likelihood join a select, tiny club of impeached presidents (Presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton). He finally appears to grasp that he is about to suffer a permanent stain on his presidency. As a smart political observer suggested to me, his full-blown panic also might reflect a genuine worry that Republicans will abandon him in the Senate, thus putting him in real jeopardy of removal.

Yes! The impeachment is moving along and the public is quickly becoming more supportive of, not only the impeachment, but Trump's removal from office. I remember the Nixon impeachment. Trump is much more corrupt than Nixon, plus Trump is totally clueless with basically no understanding of the law, the role of the president or the basics of government.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/17/trump-melts-when-he-cannot-control-news/

“Currently, 52% say Trump should be impeached and removed from office, while 46% say he should not be. This is roughly the opposite of what Gallup found in June when asked in the context of special [counsel] Robert Mueller’s investigation.” It took a year for public support for impeaching President Richard M. Nixon to reach the level that we reached in a little over a month. “More Democrats now favor Trump being removed from office than did for Nixon in July 1974 (71%). As many independents now favor Trump being impeached as did Nixon at the same time.”
Trump, who seemingly cared only about not being removed from office, is now flipping out thanks to the realization that he will in all likelihood join a select, tiny club of impeached presidents (Presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton). He finally appears to grasp that he is about to suffer a permanent stain on his presidency. As a smart political observer suggested to me, his full-blown panic also might reflect a genuine worry that Republicans will abandon him in the Senate, thus putting him in real jeopardy of removal.

Yes! The impeachment is moving along and the public is quickly becoming more supportive of, not only the impeachment, but Trump's removal from office. I remember the Nixon impeachment. Trump is much more corrupt than Nixon, plus Trump is totally clueless with basically no understanding of the law, the role of the president or the basics of government.

This is true but congressional republicans were more sane concerning Watergate back then. Not so today.

 

[southernhybrid]

True. But, if they lose enough support, they might do what is needed. All they care about is remaining in office, sadly. Time will tell.

 

[southernhybrid]

So, it's the Democrats who were the corrupt ones in 2016 /s/


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/us/politics/donald-trump-impeachment-news.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

The acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, told reporters that the U.S. withheld military aid to force Ukraine to investigate corruption, which he said would include scrutinizing Democrats.

Here’s what you need to know:

Mulvaney said U.S. military aid for Ukraine was held up pending Ukraine’s investigation of Democrats.
The death of an impeachment leader raises questions going forward.
Trump ally Sondland will say Giuliani’s goal was to involve Ukraine in the Trump re-election bid.
President Trump still has friends on Capitol Hill.
Catch up on impeachment: What you need to know about the inquiry.

Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, told reporters that the release of military aid to Ukraine this summer was linked in part to White House demands that Ukraine’s government investigate what he called corruption by Democrats in the 2016 American presidential campaign.

It was the first time a White House official has publicly acknowledged what a parade of current and former administration officials have told impeachment investigators on Capitol Hill.

“The look-back to what happened in 2016 certainly was part of the thing that he was worried about in corruption with that nation,” Mr. Mulvaney told reporters, referring to Mr. Trump. “And that is absolutely appropriate.”

He said that the aid was initially withheld because, “Everybody knows this is a corrupt place,” and the president was demanding Ukraine clean up its own government. But Mr. Trump also told Mr. Mulvaney that he was concerned about what he thought was Ukraine’s role in the 2016 campaign.

So, basically they are admitting they are guilty, but it's no big deal. Get over it!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It really is too bad when the Dems fixed the 2016 election with the Steele Dossier and Ukrainians, that they forgot to use any of it publicly to use it to actually fix the election.

 

[PyramidHead]

It really is too bad when the Dems fixed the 2016 election with the Steele Dossier and Ukrainians, that they forgot to use any of it publicly to use it to actually fix the election.

Hang on, which part of the American government does Steele work for again?

 

[blastula]

It really is too bad when the Dems fixed the 2016 election with the Steele Dossier and Ukrainians, that they forgot to use any of it publicly to use it to actually fix the election.

Hang on, which part of the American government does Steele work for again?

Your point?

 

[Keith&Co.]

So, it's the Democrats who were the corrupt ones in 2016 /s/


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/us/politics/donald-trump-impeachment-news.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

The acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, told reporters that the U.S. withheld military aid to force Ukraine to investigate corruption, which he said would include scrutinizing Democrats.

Here’s what you need to know:

Mulvaney said U.S. military aid for Ukraine was held up pending Ukraine’s investigation of Democrats.
The death of an impeachment leader raises questions going forward.
Trump ally Sondland will say Giuliani’s goal was to involve Ukraine in the Trump re-election bid.
President Trump still has friends on Capitol Hill.
Catch up on impeachment: What you need to know about the inquiry.

Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, told reporters that the release of military aid to Ukraine this summer was linked in part to White House demands that Ukraine’s government investigate what he called corruption by Democrats in the 2016 American presidential campaign.

It was the first time a White House official has publicly acknowledged what a parade of current and former administration officials have told impeachment investigators on Capitol Hill.

“The look-back to what happened in 2016 certainly was part of the thing that he was worried about in corruption with that nation,” Mr. Mulvaney told reporters, referring to Mr. Trump. “And that is absolutely appropriate.”

He said that the aid was initially withheld because, “Everybody knows this is a corrupt place,” and the president was demanding Ukraine clean up its own government. But Mr. Trump also told Mr. Mulvaney that he was concerned about what he thought was Ukraine’s role in the 2016 campaign.

So, basically they are admitting they are guilty, but it's no big deal. Get over it!

Packaging it as 'every president does it' so the Senate can repeat Clinton's results. Did it, but not worth kicking him to the curb for....