Pelosi: Impeachment Is Moving Forward

[Gun Nut]

Gee, I dunno. Do you think it might have something to do with the head of the Department of Justice believing a President can't be indicted? Kinda makes the alleging of a crime being committed rather redundant.

Actually, it is far more insidious than that. It does not make it redundant, rather the opposite - it makes it unethical at least, and illegal to suggest a crime was committed at most. If a member of the justice department is prevented from Indicting someone for any particular reason, then it is the indictment itself that serves as the accusation. If you cannot indict, you cannot even suggest there was some reason to indict.

 

[Elixir]

What will be the story if another Billionaire, this time from the other side of the ledger wins the White House? [Bloomberg]

Probably something like:

BLOOMBERG WINS!

Duh.

The left more than anything else hate the Trump because he's a billionaire

Wake up, angelo - he's NOT a billionaire. He's in debt up past his eyeballs to Deripaska, Firtash, MBS and god only knows which other despots.

besides he being a buffoon.

Yeah there is THAT. But Bush was a buffoon and didn't attack the Constitution - at least not directly.

It's reported that Bloomberg has ten times Trumps worth.

If that is "reported" it's totally made up. Not true at all. That would put him in ten times as much debt as Cheato is. Ten times negative 100 million would be negative one billion, and that would be a conservative estimate. Trump is likely in nearly a billion dollars of debt - most of which will be forgiven if he can deliver Ukraine unto Putin.

That most certainly must get up the socialists noses. What, a president coming from the privileged classes?

You really need to educate yourself better - Bloomberg's dad was a book keeper for a dairy. Didn't come from a "privileged class" by any stretch.
He made his own billions. Trump inherited and squandered 400 million dollars he got from his dad, using it only to dig himself deeper in debt.

Wiki:

In March 2009, Forbes reported Bloomberg's wealth at $16 billion, a gain of $4.5 billion over the previous year, the world's biggest increase in wealth in 2009.[35] At that time, there were only four fortunes in the U.S. that were larger (although the Walmart family fortune is split among four people). He had moved from 142nd to 17th in the Forbes list of the world's billionaires in only two years.[36][37] Subsequently, Forbes reported his wealth at $22 billion, then $31 billion, then $43.3 billion, and ranked him 11th-, then 10th-, then 6th-richest in the U.S.[23][38][39] As of November 2019, Bloomberg was the 14th richest person in the world, with a net worth estimated at $58 billion.[3]

If he spends a tenth of that, only Putin and MBS can save Cheato from a humiliating drubbing. So far he has only spent about 200 of his 58,000 millions. What's $200 to someone with $58k in their pocket? Chump change.

 

[ZiprHead]

Legal scholars battle it out on the impeachment and what is required for impeachment! Who will win the first battle?

In this corner...

Show

Legal Scholar A
[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpXr-sfwaDk[/YOUTUBE]

v

And his opponent, in this corner...

Show

Legal Scholar... umm... A

[YOUTUBE]https://youtu.be/xmf2PodFgi4[/YOUTUBE]

Here is Ken Starr's reasons for impeaching Clinton, including lying to the people (not under oath) about a personal affair.

crap, wrong video.

 

[lpetrich]

Amee Vanderpool on Twitter: "Trump's legal defense brief reads like one of his campaign rallies-it's a series of false rhetorical flourishes, intellectually sloppy, and reads like a barely coherent howl of rage.
It's expected from Trump, but his lawyers should know better. https://t.co/zorXg6jL3J" / Twitter
noting
The 'Answer of President Donald J. Trump' Raises Questions - The Atlantic - "Trump’s Impeachment Brief Is a Howl of Rage - The document released by the president’s lawyers reads more like the scream of a wounded animal than a traditional legal filing."

The House managers’ brief is an organized legal document. It starts with the law, the nature and purposes of Congress’s impeachment power, then walks through the evidence regarding the first article of impeachment, which alleges abuse of power, and seeks to show how the evidence establishes the House’s claim that President Trump is guilty of this offense. It then proceeds to argue that the offense requires his removal from office.

Its conclusion: “President Trump has betrayed the American people and the ideals on which the Nation was founded. Unless he is removed from office, he will continue to endanger our national security, jeopardize the integrity of our elections, and undermine our core constitutional principles.”

By contrast, the White House’s “Answer of President Donald J. Trump” to the articles of impeachment, filed by the president’s personal lawyer Jay Sekulow and the White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, does not read like a traditional legal argument at all.

It calls impeachment “a dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their President,” suggesting ignorance of the Constitution. It also calls the articles of it “a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election,” and “constitutionally invalid on their face,” which is very bizarre.

Its language is a bit more lawyerly than Trump's speeches:
“Witch hunt!” -> “lawless process that violated basic due process and fundamental fairness.”
Democrats as a “disgrace” -> “an affront to the Constitution.”
Plot to destroy his presidency -> “highly partisan and reckless obsession with impeaching the president [that] began the day he was inaugurated and continues to this day.”

The documents:
President Trump Impeachment Brief
Answer of President Trump

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

The republican base is an emotional base, not a rational base. So it all makes sense.

 

[Deepak]

Amee Vanderpool on Twitter: "Trump's legal defense brief reads like one of his campaign rallies-it's a series of false rhetorical flourishes, intellectually sloppy, and reads like a barely coherent howl of rage.
It's expected from Trump, but his lawyers should know better. https://t.co/zorXg6jL3J" / Twitter
noting
The 'Answer of President Donald J. Trump' Raises Questions - The Atlantic - "Trump’s Impeachment Brief Is a Howl of Rage - The document released by the president’s lawyers reads more like the scream of a wounded animal than a traditional legal filing."

The House managers’ brief is an organized legal document. It starts with the law, the nature and purposes of Congress’s impeachment power, then walks through the evidence regarding the first article of impeachment, which alleges abuse of power, and seeks to show how the evidence establishes the House’s claim that President Trump is guilty of this offense. It then proceeds to argue that the offense requires his removal from office.

Its conclusion: “President Trump has betrayed the American people and the ideals on which the Nation was founded. Unless he is removed from office, he will continue to endanger our national security, jeopardize the integrity of our elections, and undermine our core constitutional principles.”

By contrast, the White House’s “Answer of President Donald J. Trump” to the articles of impeachment, filed by the president’s personal lawyer Jay Sekulow and the White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, does not read like a traditional legal argument at all.

It calls impeachment “a dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their President,” suggesting ignorance of the Constitution. It also calls the articles of it “a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election,” and “constitutionally invalid on their face,” which is very bizarre.

Its language is a bit more lawyerly than Trump's speeches:
“Witch hunt!” -> “lawless process that violated basic due process and fundamental fairness.”
Democrats as a “disgrace” -> “an affront to the Constitution.”
Plot to destroy his presidency -> “highly partisan and reckless obsession with impeaching the president [that] began the day he was inaugurated and continues to this day.”

The documents:
President Trump Impeachment Brief
Answer of President Trump

The process written into The Constitution violates The Constitution

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Changes have been made to McConnell's plans.

1) 3 days for opening arguments instead of 2 days, which means hours will be 1 PM to 9 PM instead of 1 PM to 1 AM.
2) House evidence is to be submitted unless there is a vote to oppose it.

I'm uncertain if 2) is relevant to evidence in the House inquiry or additional evidence that the House has received since the articles were compiled.

 

[blastula]

McConnell wants to make it go by faster, but limiting the days for argument also means the trial will run into prime time.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Years ago I read in one of Al Franken's books where he wrote that Republican strategy is to #1: attack. This has been true in every election. Trump personified the strategy.

Now if you watch the debate on having the impeachment trial, opening arguments, you can see the whole defense team of Republicans is just personally attacking the prosecutors. There's barely any substance to a real defense against the available evidence. Basically, it's the phone call was perfect and Democrats are poopy heads.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'm tired of this bullshit.

Sekulow said that Democrats sought to target Trump over his interactions with Ukraine after the Russia investigation didn’t work in their favor.

“When the Russia investigation failed, it devolved into the Ukraine,” he said.

The Russia investigation was launched by Rod Rosenstein... a guy Trump appointed to the Department of Justice!

The Ukraine issue stemmed from a whistleblower report which was covered up by the Executive Branch.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

link to article

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Now if you watch the debate on having the impeachment trial, opening arguments, you can see the whole defense team of Republicans is just personally attacking the prosecutors. There's barely any substance to a real defense against the available evidence. Basically, it's the phone call was perfect and Democrats are poopy heads.

They know what their base wants and they also know that there isn't enough attention span to consider dealing in facts. Mitch and friends know they have no rational defense so they're going to continue to carry on with the screams and the lies. It's all they have. It's simply the educational state of the nation at this point.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

GOP are just saying no to subpoenas.

 

[ZiprHead]

GOP are just saying no to subpoenas.

And making extremely poor excuses and lying to justify doing so.

 

[blastula]

 

[angelo]

The difference is that we (the ubiquitous "left") are willing to criticize "our side" (and this part's important) for legitimate issues regarding their performance in office. But not for stupid billshit like a fake child sex ring in a basement that doesn't exist, or you know, wearing a tan suit.

If the (f)rightwing could understand this simple concept, they could go a long way towards at least restoring a pretense of having principles.

Legitmate: Obama’s use of drone strikes against terrorists without trial is a potential crime against the understood norms of justice globally.

Not legitmate: OMFG, Obama is going to invade Texas!

Did Obuma assassinate Osama bin Laden or was that really Trump in disguise?

 

[angelo]

The left more than anything else hate the Trump because he's a billionaire

Wake up, angelo - he's NOT a billionaire. He's in debt up past his eyeballs to Deripaska, Firtash, MBS and god only knows which other despots.

besides he being a buffoon.

Yeah there is THAT. But Bush was a buffoon and didn't attack the Constitution - at least not directly.

It's reported that Bloomberg has ten times Trumps worth.

If that is "reported" it's totally made up. Not true at all. That would put him in ten times as much debt as Cheato is. Ten times negative 100 million would be negative one billion, and that would be a conservative estimate. Trump is likely in nearly a billion dollars of debt - most of which will be forgiven if he can deliver Ukraine unto Putin.

That most certainly must get up the socialists noses. What, a president coming from the privileged classes?

You really need to educate yourself better - Bloomberg's dad was a book keeper for a dairy. Didn't come from a "privileged class" by any stretch.
He made his own billions. Trump inherited and squandered 400 million dollars he got from his dad, using it only to dig himself deeper in debt.

Wiki:

In March 2009, Forbes reported Bloomberg's wealth at $16 billion, a gain of $4.5 billion over the previous year, the world's biggest increase in wealth in 2009.[35] At that time, there were only four fortunes in the U.S. that were larger (although the Walmart family fortune is split among four people). He had moved from 142nd to 17th in the Forbes list of the world's billionaires in only two years.[36][37] Subsequently, Forbes reported his wealth at $22 billion, then $31 billion, then $43.3 billion, and ranked him 11th-, then 10th-, then 6th-richest in the U.S.[23][38][39] As of November 2019, Bloomberg was the 14th richest person in the world, with a net worth estimated at $58 billion.[3]

If he spends a tenth of that, only Putin and MBS can save Cheato from a humiliating drubbing. So far he has only spent about 200 of his 58,000 millions. What's $200 to someone with $58k in their pocket? Chump change.

Oh yea, and Elvis was spotted eating a special banana and jelly burger at Maccas, and the moon landings were faked, and JFK survived the assassination and lived to a ripe old age in a home for the disabled. Why is it that most conspiracy theorists hail from the left?

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Why is it that most conspiracy theorists hail from the left?

They don't. People on the left like MLK, Susan B. Anthony, Jefferson, FDR, Lincoln, etc. were certainly not Alex Jones material.

If not for peddling these impulsive and emotional childish conspiracy theories Trumpo, his goons and his base would be lost for a purpose.

 

[ZiprHead]

View attachment 25774

CNN poll: 51% say Senate should remove Trump from office

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

So... let me get this straight. Trump assassinates a foreign top general without a declaration of war or consent of congress.... and he'll get away with that... but you want to impeach him over a phone call....

Ok then.

You must think that's impeachable, or you wouldn't have brought it up.