President Donald Trump - Formal Impeachment Inquiry Announced

Cody montana

1800_Ladladlad wrote: »

This is how I envision all of the orange man bad posters on this thread.

https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/1182478053043257344

Looks like a slow dance flash mob.
Great fun. ðŸ‘

Woodsie1

Cody montana wrote: »

Looks like a slow dance flash mob.
Great fun. ðŸ‘

Looks like a bunch of deranged morons:pac:

Outlaw Pete

Cody montana wrote: »

Everyone will be burning them in the future.

Well, that can't be good for global warming.

notobtuse

mcmoustache wrote: »

Look at Overheal's post again and don't forget to check the link before you click on it.

My bad... I read name as Mueller instead of Murdock.

drunkmonkey

The Whistleblower doesn't want to testify. That can't end well for the dims.

notobtuse

I understand the whistleblower’s lawyers have asked Congress for their client to submit testimony in writing instead of giving his testimony in person. I don’t believe there is any precedent for this type of thing, so it should be denied.

But Shiff will probably grant the request. That way Shiff can ask the questions and his staff can help steer the written answers.

If the whistleblower felt so strongly that what Trump did was so bad then have the courage to testify, keeping your identity withheld. His identity should be kept confidential but those that fed him the false information shouldn’t be shielded. Maybe the Senate should also start an investigation so Republicans can ask some questions, too.

And I'm confident his identity will come out at some point by the Democrats. That way he can become the darling of the Democrats and the Left, appear at political rallies, rake in millions in donations because he is being so persecuted and fearful, go on the talk show and liberal news circuits, and write a couple of books.

notobtuse

Woodsie1 wrote: »

Looks like a bunch of deranged morons:pac:

Yeah, but over here we call them Democrats.

Overheal

notobtuse wrote: »

I understand the whistleblower’s lawyers have asked Congress for their client to submit testimony in writing instead of giving his testimony in person. I don’t believe there is any precedent for this type of thing, so it should be denied.

in fact there is mountains of precedent - including Trump giving a testimony in writing to Mueller. You just really don’t pay attention at all do you?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/25/us/politics/trump-written-answers-mueller.html

Outlaw Pete

These violent far leftists are out of control.


https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/1182515583599951872

James Brown

These two look like classy gents...

Two Giuliani Associates Who Helped Him on Ukraine Charged With Campaign-Finance Violations
The two men were charged with four counts, including conspiracy, falsification of records and lying to the Federal Election Commission about their political donations, which included a $325,000 donation through a limited liability company to a super PAC formed to support Mr. Trump, according to the indictment. Geoffrey Berman, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan, said Thursday the investigation was continuing.

Messrs. Parnas and Fruman, both Florida businessmen who are U.S. citizens born in former Soviet republics, made a brief appearance in federal court in Virginia Thursday, dressed in T-shirts. They were arrested at Dulles International Airport on Wednesday while awaiting an international flight with one-way tickets, according to people familiar with the matter.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/two-foreign-born-men-who-helped-giuliani-on-ukraine-arrested-on-campaign-finance-charges-11570714188

This is your team at work comrades

Russian connection, Ukraine fiddling, election funding malpractice. It's like the mob ffs.

Overheal

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

These violent far leftists are out of control.


https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/1182515583599951872

Your megathread dump for all these fake videos is the Antifa thread I thought

Outlaw Pete

notobtuse wrote: »

And I'm confident his identity will come out at some point by the Democrats. That way he can become the darling of the Democrats and the Left, appear at political rallies, rake in millions in donations because he is being so persecuted and fearful, go on the talk show and liberal news circuits, and write a couple of books.

Yeah, most likely. Although some of the Obama holdovers did receive death threats tbf.

This chap, for example, who was NSC Director for Ukraine:

James Brown

notobtuse wrote: »

I understand the whistleblower’s lawyers have asked Congress for their client to submit testimony in writing instead of giving his testimony in person. I don’t believe there is any precedent for this type of thing, so it should be denied.

But Shiff will probably grant the request. That way Shiff can ask the questions and his staff can help steer the written answers.

If the whistleblower felt so strongly that what Trump did was so bad then have the courage to testify, keeping your identity withheld. His identity should be kept confidential but those that fed him the false information shouldn’t be shielded. Maybe the Senate should also start an investigation so Republicans can ask some questions, too.

And I'm confident his identity will come out at some point by the Democrats. That way he can become the darling of the Democrats and the Left, appear at political rallies, rake in millions in donations because he is being so persecuted and fearful, go on the talk show and liberal news circuits, and write a couple of books.

So attacking the whistle blower again? All you're doing is looking desperate. Why do you dislike the way America works? Maybe you should go back to where you came from? You seem like you hate America.

notobtuse

Why won’t Pelosi hold a House floor vote to officially open an impeachment inquiry for this preposterous and manufactured supposed crisis? Oh, wait, I may have indirectly answered my own question... but I digress.

As I recall a floor vote was held for the Clinton impeachment inquiry, and a floor vote was held for the Nixon impeachment inquiry. But no vote for Trump? Why?

I can guess the real reasons why Pelosi is abusing her power…

Because it would endanger Democrats in hotly contested districts having to vote for an impeachment inquiry based pretty much on nothing more than partisan grounds.

Because if she held the vote she would be compelled to provide Republicans the right to also subpoena and have access to all the witnesses.

And the biggest 'because' in all is she can't allow the American people see the disingenuous claims that the inquiry is based upon.

Trump was right in his letter that inquiry, as it now stands, is partisan and illegitimate.

I understand CONGRESS (in this case the HOUSE) can start an impeachment inquiry for anything their little minds come up with, but the HOUSE is not one person with Pelosi being lord and master... The HOUSE is comprised of 435, or so, members.

notobtuse

Matt Barrett wrote: »

So attacking the whistle blower again? All you're doing is looking desperate. Why do you dislike the way America works? Maybe you should go back to where you came from? You seem like you hate America.

Nope... just keeping the whistleblower accountable.

And how dare you tell me to go back to where I came from... Nobody in their right mind wants to go back to New Jersey. :pac:

Overheal

notobtuse wrote: »

Why won’t Pelosi hold a House floor vote to officially open an impeachment inquiry for this preposterous and manufactured supposed crisis? Oh, wait, I may have indirectly answered my own question... but I digress.

As I recall a floor vote was held for the Clinton impeachment inquiry, and a floor vote was held for the Nixon impeachment inquiry. But no vote for Trump? Why?

I can guess the real reasons why Pelosi is abusing her power…

Because it would endanger Democrats in hotly contested districts having to vote for an impeachment inquiry based pretty much on nothing more than partisan grounds.

Because if she held the vote she would be compelled to provide Republicans the right to also subpoena and have access to all the witnesses.

And the biggest 'because' in all is she can't allow the American people see the disingenuous claims that the inquiry is based upon.

Trump was right in his letter that inquiry, as it now stands, is partisan and illegitimate.

I understand CONGRESS (in this case the HOUSE) can start an impeachment inquiry for anything their little minds come up with, but the HOUSE is not one person with Pelosi being lord and master... The HOUSE is comprised of 435, or so, members.

So Trump is unsealing Grand Jury evidence now is he?

Igotadose

notobtuse wrote: »

I understand CONGRESS (in this case the HOUSE) can start an impeachment inquiry for anything their little minds come up with, but the HOUSE is not one person with Pelosi being lord and master... The HOUSE is comprised of 435, or so, members.

They all do get to vote to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate. Any ideas how many GOP will vote for them?

Outlaw Pete

Overheal wrote: »

Your megathread dump for all these fake videos is the Antifa thread I thought

Says the chap who keeps posting "BREAKING NEWS" and then linking to nonsense clickbait articles on Mediaite that have little or no substance.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

This is your team at work comrades

Yeah, people should be more careful about who they associate with.


https://twitter.com/SaraCarterDC/status/1182329950847881217

Igotadose

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Yeah, people should be more careful about who they associate with.

So, you support prosecution for campaign finance violation. Good to know.

Billy Mays

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

These violent far leftists are out of control.


https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/1182515583599951872

I'd say your twitter feed is fascinating

Overheal

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Says the chap who keeps posting "BREAKING NEWS" and then linking to nonsense clickbait articles on Mediaite that have little or no substance.

still more substance than anything you post

Yeah, people should be more careful about who they associate with.


https://twitter.com/SaraCarterDC/status/1182329950847881217

Did Obama orchestrate him any favors like Trump did for the ex soviet goons? Which US ambassador did Obama recall to appease this donor? What scheme were they in? Was this man seen palling around with the DNC co chair and the President’s son while he ran Obama’s business? Was he also a client to Obama’s personal lawyer? Was he fleeing the country at the time of his indictment? Did Obama’s attorney arrange to fly over and scheme with him overseas?

hetuzozaho

Billy Mays wrote: »

I'd say your twitter feed is fascinating

Timeline must be good too!

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

You know nothing about Twitter to say that it takes a lot to get banned there. I've been posting on there for years and had multiple accounts temp suspended

notobtuse

Igotadose wrote: »

They all do get to vote to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate. Any ideas how many GOP will vote for them?

Trouble in comprehension? I was referring to the impeachment inquiry process... but good attempt at moving the goalposts.

Overheal

notobtuse wrote: »

Trouble in comprehension? I was referring to the impeachment inquiry process... but good attempt at moving the goalposts.

Don’t need a vote on that though

mad muffin

Overheal wrote: »

Your megathread dump for all these fake videos is the Antifa thread I thought

Fake?

Ah now… I knew you were the Chief-In-Disingenuousness

But that statement that the video is fake just takes the biscuit.

You better not dare call out anyone posting in bad faith after that post. That video is a live news feed. And you have the audacity to call it fake. I suppose you would. Being as you are Chief-in-Bad fait posting.

I’ll go one step further and say you are a disgrace. You are a mod ffs. I expect a slightly higher standard. But reading other Mods on this site. I’m not surprised. Not in the slightest.

Overheal

mad muffin wrote: »

Fake?

Ah now… I knew you were the Chief-In-Disingenuousness

But that statement that the video is fake just takes the biscuit.

You better not dare call out anyone posting in bad faith after that post. That video is a live news feed. And you have the audacity to call it fake. I suppose you would. Being as you are Chief-in-Bad fait posting.

I’ll go one step further and say you are a disgrace. You are a mod ffs. I expect a slightly higher standard. But reading other Mods on this site. I’m not surprised. Not in the slightest.

You have done nothing but post in bad faith. The video is 'fake news', having nothing to do with impeachment, and having no veracity that the people in the video were indeed 'far left.' Rapidly pushed by the Daily Tucker Carlson

Also not a mod except in the forums I mod, of course.

mad muffin

By the way. Zelensky was happy that Yovanovitch was recalled. As he told Trump on the call.

Zelensky said he agreed with Trump "100 per cent" that the former US ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, was "a bad ambassador.

“It was great that you were the first one who told me that she was a bad ambassador because I agree with you 100%,” Zelensky said. “Her attitude towards me was far from the best as she admired the previous president and she was on his side. She would not accept me as a new president well enough.”

Overheal

mad muffin wrote: »

By the way. Zelensky was happy that Yovanovitch was recalled. As he told Trump on the call.

Zelensky said he agreed with Trump "100 per cent" that the former US ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, was "a bad ambassador.

Can't say I take any significance in that statement? Doesn't alleviate the fact that Giuliani/Trump conspired with the ex soviets who wanted her removed.

mcmoustache

mad muffin wrote: »

By the way. Zelensky was happy that Yovanovitch was recalled. As he told Trump on the call.

Zelensky said he agreed with Trump "100 per cent" that the former US ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, was "a bad ambassador.

Would you expect him to say "She was great and you're an ass for removing her. Now, about those funds..."?

Overheal

mcmoustache wrote: »

Would you expect him to say "She was great and you're an ass for removing her. Now, about those funds..."?

^