The Impeachment Thread

I’ll now regrettably accept you feigned intelligence with your discussion of the 2007/2098 economy. Too bad it was enjoyable. Now back to what now seems to be your true lil boy persona. Have a nice day. I’ll have no further replies to your bulls!t

😬
 
Last edited:
We constantly ask our politicians to do the right thing even if it's not in their political self interest.
I'm not going to complain on that rare occasion when they actually do that.
I'm not seeing either side act honorably at this point, for me they are a wash. I couldn't be president, I would offend everyone.
 
Yea but no one with a brain is buying their BS anymore. But it sure is fun to watch them.

View attachment 242959
Karlan had made a point earlier during the House Judiciary Committee's hearing about impeachment in response to a question from Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, on how Trump as president was different from a king.

Karlan said kings could do no wrong because their word was law. But Karlan said Trump was wrong to say that Article 2 of the Constitution allows him to do anything he wants.

“The Constitution says there can be no titles of nobility, so while the president can name his son Barron, he can’t make him a baron,”
 
I honestly don't follow any logic here.

Please read this piece. It's legal, but sums up the issues you seem to be batting around pretty well.

Did President Trump Commit the Federal Crime of Bribery?

TLDR...

"To the extent Trump solicited an announcement unrelated to any actual investigation, he was not soliciting an official act that may be described as part of “logrolling.” Trump thus went beyond the exchange of public acts that constitute political or diplomatic logrolling. His conduct would support a finding of an exchange of official acts (by Trump) for things of value (the public statement sought from Zelensky) and as no public justification for seeking the statement has been offered, the corrupt intent necessary to maintain a bribery charge. "
So when he says he is looking into 2016 election interference, whether you believe that to be a valid reason or not, is that not the offered justification? I will say that I at least appreciate you trying to hold a rational discussion unlike others on here. We may disagree but we can still respect each other.
 
Let me be very clear about one thing: If Obama did 1/10th of what Trump has done throughout his presidency the republicans(all of them) would have simultaneously spontaneously combusted.

Nope because we would have never known about it since none in the MSM would have reported on it. Anyone else reporting it would have just been shouted down as a racist crackpot.
 
I honestly don't follow any logic here.

Please read this piece. It's legal, but sums up the issues you seem to be batting around pretty well.

Did President Trump Commit the Federal Crime of Bribery?

TLDR...

"To the extent Trump solicited an announcement unrelated to any actual investigation, he was not soliciting an official act that may be described as part of “logrolling.” Trump thus went beyond the exchange of public acts that constitute political or diplomatic logrolling. His conduct would support a finding of an exchange of official acts (by Trump) for things of value (the public statement sought from Zelensky) and as no public justification for seeking the statement has been offered, the corrupt intent necessary to maintain a bribery charge. "
So when he says he is looking into 2016 election interference, whether you believe that to be a valid reason or not, is that not the offered justification? I will say that I at least appreciate you trying to hold a rational discussion unlike others on here. We may disagree but we can still respect each other.
literally shaking rn

Even if it’s true that there aren’t any experts of color, as he puts it, this idiot wouldn’t care. He would rather have someone of color that isn’t qualified up there than 4 people that are. What if all 4 were of color? No one would say a word about it. People like Al Green detract from issues of real racism. Educate the youth. That’s where we have to attack the issue in my opinion.
 
You do understand that Trump, Mulvaney, and John Bolton have all refused to cooperate with the investigation. The White house has also refused to turn over any documents. We all know why, they refuse to testify under oath because they are guilty as hell. Yay obstruction! So much for cooperation and transparency.
Lol. How can you cooperate when they say you can't have your lawyers present?
Expecting anyone to show up is laughable.
 
Advertisement

Back
Top