The Impeachment Thread

#20,776
#20,776
GVF said:
So far the only thing to corroborate is that Trump did nothing wrong or illegal, so if the next testimony is corroboration, Schiff will need a bigger coffin for all the nails. The Dems may think they can also impeach him on bad taste and childishness, but all of that fluff will be thrown out at trial.
Click to expand...
Everyone testified that he did something wrong. The only debate is about how wrong.
 
#20,777
#20,777
luthervol said:
Those 5 or 7 didn't hear the phone call that will be discussed today, so they are irrelevant to that particular piece of evidence.
I do completely agree with your last two sentences. I'm just not convinced there are enough senators willing to do that.
Click to expand...
These witnesses that will testify will be giving their opinion on what they believe. The transcripts are out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolnJC
#20,781
#20,781
luthervol said:
Those 5 or 7 didn't hear the phone call that will be discussed today, so they are irrelevant to that particular piece of evidence.
I do completely agree with your last two sentences. I'm just not convinced there are enough senators willing to do that.
Click to expand...

You must have missed that part about Volker being the only witness to date to have direct interaction with both presidents and testified that one made no deals and the other perceived no deals. Damage done. Only the Dems would regard Sondland as a ore revered person and more credible witness. The best thing Pelosi can do for herself at this point is go in there and pull the plug, and distance herself from Schiff. This charade is like a reverse mortgage commercial WITH all the hype.
 
#20,782
#20,782
BigOrangeD said:
Just another opinion. Like I said, many others disagree and this includes two highly regard legal scholars on your side of the aisle. You just keep ignoring the obvious due to your blind hatred for our great President.
Click to expand...

They advance arguments--good ones--for their position. In contrast, Turley just notes that the Constitutional convention rejected adding "maladministration." That says nothing about how they were defining bribery at the time. In fact, turley is begging the question by assuming bribery had a narrow definition and that what Trump did would only be covered by the amorphous "maladministration" provision that was rejected. He does nothing to explain what bribery meant at the time.
 
#20,788
#20,788
.
170517-al-green-ew-630p_91f9fbd187c62d1c3d112727dd4f64b7.fit-760w.jpg

1574258042073.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol and 1972 Grad
#20,792
#20,792
GVF said:
You must have missed that part about Volker being the only witness to date to have direct interaction with both presidents and testified that one made no deals and the other perceived no deals. Damage done. Only the Dems would regard Sondland as a ore revered person and more credible witness. The best thing Pelosi can do for herself at this point is go in there and pull the plug, and distance herself from Schiff. This charade is like a reverse mortgage commercial WITH all the hype.
Click to expand...
lol.....Volker has already admitted he didn't know what was going on at the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: evillawyer
#20,794
#20,794
BigOrangeD said:
@evillawyer
Another very liberal Attorney on Bribery and Impeachment - ALAN DERSHOWITZ
Click to expand...

He's not looking at either the current legal definition of bribery in the US Code, or how it was understood when the Constitution was written. Read the article I linked. It ha real arguments, not sound bites
 
#20,795
#20,795
If something is so terrible it rises to the level of impeachment it should be bi-partisan. I have no doubt if President Trump committed a crime enough Rs would vote for impeachment and removal. The crap the far left is pulling is sad and scary. I also hope Rs in the House remember this and pull this same stuff the next time a radical leftist is elected President.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol and BigOrangeD
#20,796
#20,796
GVF said:
Same phone call, right? Same phone call that atleast a half dozen listened in on. Same phone call that just last week all you looney's said the best note taker in the country documented said phone call. And look how that is working for ya.
Click to expand...
no. The phone call between Sonland and Trump.
 
#20,797
#20,797
volfanjustin said:
If something is so terrible it rises to the level of impeachment it should be bi-partisan. I have no doubt if President Trump committed a crime enough Rs would vote for impeachment and removal. The crap the far left is pulling is sad and scary. I also hope Rs in the House remember this and pull this same stuff the next time a radical leftist is elected President.
Click to expand...
Then we can’t trust your judgment.
 
#20,799
#20,799
volfanjustin said:
If something is so terrible it rises to the level of impeachment it should be bi-partisan. I have no doubt if President Trump committed a crime enough Rs would vote for impeachment and removal. The crap the far left is pulling is sad and scary. I also hope Rs in the House remember this and pull this same stuff the next time a radical leftist is elected President.
Click to expand...
That's more an indictment of the republicans intent on standing by Trump no matter what.
 
#20,800
#20,800
luthervol said:
lol.....Volker has already admitted he didn't know what was going on at the time.
Click to expand...

True. He did add that fluff to appease Schiff down in the basement, but when asked direct under oath questions he clearly stated that the POTUK never felt he was being pressured to agree to anything, nor did the POTUS say anything illegal or improper. He did scold Trump on his tweeting. And rightly so. But he also admitted that nothing illegal was said or perceived by either party.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top