Still no evidence of anything impeachable.... maybe the evidence is in the prize egg at the egg hunt.

[AUFAN78 3,911]

11 hours ago, AU9377 said:

A specific act on the part of the President constituting an abuse of power and the nature of that action constituting obstruction of Congress were the articles of impeachment. 

 

12 hours ago, AU9377 said:

In Trump impeachment #1, witnesses included Trump appointed ambassadors, State Dept. officials, enlisted active duty military personnel working as National Security Advisors and others all giving testimony proving the allegations.

The hold on defense aid was temporary. Ukraine got it all. The delay caused no harm and Zelensky stated he felt no pressure.

A president does have a legitimate interest in policing corruption, particularly potential US Government corruption, in countries we provide significant aid.

At the end of the day, It was a political prosecution that trivialized impeachment. 

[AUFAN78 3,911]

3 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

If the Trump impeachment proceedings hadn’t taken place, would this truly be going on now?  Gotta stop this cycle.

Highly doubtful. Agree.

[AUFAN78 3,911]

1 hour ago, auburnatl1 said:

 

Not the point. This is a silly nva retribution snipe hunt. Nothing more. The voters will decide on equivalence soon enough.

Hard to argue.

[AU9377 4,967]

59 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

 

The hold on defense aid was temporary. Ukraine got it all. The delay caused no harm and Zelensky stated he felt no pressure.

A president does have a legitimate interest in policing corruption, particularly potential US Government corruption, in countries we provide significant aid.

At the end of the day, It was a political prosecution that trivialized impeachment. 

That would be the party line right?  Donald Trump was not policing corruption.  If I thought you would actually read it, I would take the time to restate the testimony of every Republican Trump appointed official that made that very clear.  A couple that testified are Tim Morrison, National Security Advisor in the White House.  He is a Republican appointed by Trump. Another is Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the E.U.  He is the man that donated $1 million to Trump's inauguration fund and was awarded with an ambassador appointment.  There were many more.

Any argument that claims there was no evidence of Trump leveraging aid to Ukraine on Ukraine opening an investigation into his political rival is just dishonest.

The Republican party attempted to impeach Bill Clinton for having consensual oral sex with an intern in the Oval office.  Spare me the argument that the Trump impeachment was trivial, while that was some constitutional crisis.  For the love of God. 

[AU9377 4,967]

1 hour ago, AUFAN78 said:

Highly doubtful. Agree.

Had Obama or Biden either one done the same, you would have demanded they be impeached and likely put on trial for treason.

[AU9377 4,967]

2 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

What a BS statement.  A partner and other associates have testified about wrong doings, whistle blowers have risked their careers to shine a light on the Biden Crime family, bank records point toward nafarious activity and it is obvious Hunter and/or Joe is guilty of FARA.  The arrested FBI informant that had worked for the FBI was NOT the primary driving force.  He was the author of the FD 2023 form that the FBI had hidden for years.  That form was requested last May and the investigation into Hunter had begun at least by 2022 well before the request for the FD 2023 request in May of 2023.  He might have been a source, but there is enough smoke without him to proceed.

The GOP won’t bring an impeachment vote because they feel they don’t have the votes with such a slim majority.  It’s not because they don’t have the evidence.  It is political.  There is no reason to bring impeachment if they know it won’t get past the Senate, not because he isn’t guilty but because of partisan politics.

 

No, what will happen is the stage is set when Biden is no longer the President as the precedents has been set.  These hearings are nothing more than a Jan 6th committee hearing to let the public know Joe is scum. I wonder why Hunter didn’t show up?  He said he wanted to testify in a public forum.  Will he go to jail as he defied a Congressional subpoena?

He has already testified in a closed door deposition that he asked be public.  He testified for an entire day and the uncovered nothing.  If he came back now, all he is giving House Republicans a platform to make baseless accusations.    He did say that he would be glad to come back if Jared and the Trump children would also be subjected to a public questioning concerning their finances.

[AU9377 4,967]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

 

 

You all do love stuff like that.  This is what the right does.  If you state the underlying accusation over and over  in a way that assumes it is factual, it becomes a fact for those that believe.

[I_M4_AU 7,857]

48 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

He has already testified in a closed door deposition that he asked be public.  He testified for an entire day and the uncovered nothing.  If he came back now, all he is giving House Republicans a platform to make baseless accusations.    He did say that he would be glad to come back if Jared and the Trump children would also be subjected to a public questioning concerning their finances.

Classic diversion.  The testimony exposed the lies that were told by Jim Biden and others, but that wasn’t an admission of guilt just inconsistencies.  Isn’t that what depositions are supposed to be about?

[I_M4_AU 7,857]

47 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

You all do love stuff like that.  This is what the right does.  If you state the underlying accusation over and over  in a way that assumes it is factual, it becomes a fact for those that believe.

Yes only the right does that….bloodbath.

[AU9377 4,967]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

Classic diversion.  The testimony exposed the lies that were told by Jim Biden and others, but that wasn’t an admission of guilt just inconsistencies.  Isn’t that what depositions are supposed to be about?

The reason they have nothing is that there is nothing.  This is the same reason John Durham wasted tens of millions of dollars to write a report finding nothing.... because there was nothing to be found.  Ofcourse Hunter was trying to line his pockets because of who his dad was.  That never has been and never will be a crime. It is especially not a crime that is commuted to others based simply on a family member association. 

The difference between myself and many of you, when it comes to politics, is that I have willing voted for Republicans and Democrats.  I voted for Nikki Haley in the Georgia primary last week, even though she wasn't going to win.  I would have voted for her over Biden, provided that she did not pick a maga running mate.  Unfortunately, she isn't bat s*** crazy enough to actually get enough votes in the Republican party these days.

[AUFAN78 3,911]

8 hours ago, AU9377 said:

That would be the party line right?  Donald Trump was not policing corruption.  If I thought you would actually read it, I would take the time to restate the testimony of every Republican Trump appointed official that made that very clear.  A couple that testified are Tim Morrison, National Security Advisor in the White House.  He is a Republican appointed by Trump. Another is Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the E.U.  He is the man that donated $1 million to Trump's inauguration fund and was awarded with an ambassador appointment.  There were many more.

Nothing I stated is incorrect. I watched much of the testimony and read the remainder. Lots of political pandering. Nothing impeachable.

8 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Any argument that claims there was no evidence of Trump leveraging aid to Ukraine on Ukraine opening an investigation into his political rival is just dishonest.

It wasn't improper to seek info on Biden squeezing Kyiv to fire a prosecutor. That could have proven relevant to the Barr/Durham investigation. Not impeachable.

8 hours ago, AU9377 said:

The Republican party attempted to impeach Bill Clinton for having consensual oral sex with an intern in the Oval office.  Spare me the argument that the Trump impeachment was trivial, while that was some constitutional crisis.  For the love of God. 

Those voices in your head are reappearing. The Constitution gives the president sweeping foreign affairs authority. Trump would arguably have the power to deny aid altogether. But this was merely a temporary delay. And BTW, no consequence to Ukraine's defense. To portray what happened as an impeachable offense is the next stage in a tireless political campaign. It trivializes impeachment. 

 

 

 

[AUFAN78 3,911]

9 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Had Obama or Biden either one done the same, you would have demanded they be impeached and likely put on trial for treason.

Horse hockey. These are not impeachable or treasonous actions. Aren't you an attorney? Damn.

[AUFAN78 3,911]

8 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

Yes only the right does that….bloodbath.

Don't get me started on the bloodbath commentary. Sadly, even Kinzinger took the bait. 

[AUFAN78 3,911]

6 hours ago, AU9377 said:

The reason they have nothing is that there is nothing.  This is the same reason John Durham wasted tens of millions of dollars to write a report finding nothing.... because there was nothing to be found. 

Mueller

[Gowebb11 9,328]

It’s past time for the knuckleheads in Congress (BOTH PARTIES) to stop investigating and impeaching, and start governing for the good of the American 🇺🇸 people. Our government has become a 24/7 streaming of bad reality TV. 

[AU9377 4,967]

9 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Horse hockey. These are not impeachable or treasonous actions. Aren't you an attorney? Damn.

To be clear, you have no problem with a U.S. President bribing a foreign country and enlisting their help in attacking their political opponents in U.S. elections.  Had Ukraine done what he asked, that action could have very well influenced the outcome in 2020 by preventing Biden from being the nominee.  We now know that those allegations would have been without merit.  We don't have a king, we have an executive.  That executive doesn't have the right to benefit himself personally by using the power of the office in that manner.

Suppose Biden engineered a plan, by threatening to withdraw U.S. troops from South Korea, to have South Korea announce that their intelligence services had uncovered an agreement between Trump and the North Korean President to funnel money to the Trump Organization thru China in exchange for U.S. missile technology?   None of it would need to be true, but would deliver a damaging blow to Trump's bid for the White House.  You see that as an acceptable use of the power of the office of President?

Richard Nixon deserves an apology for being forced to resign.  After all, we are now concluding that he was all powerful and untouchable.

[AU9377 4,967]

10 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Mueller

That was a real investigation conducted by the Republican Dept. of Justice.  Mueller was appointed by acting AG, Rod Rosenstein, after Jeff Sessions recused himself from the matter, as he was required to do.  The Democrats had no input into that appointment.  That is the correct way to investigate.  Thank you for reminding us all of how the system works.

[AU9377 4,967]

10 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Don't get me started on the bloodbath commentary. Sadly, even Kinzinger took the bait. 

The comical part is that I had to google what you all were talking about.  Trump says so much truly crazy BS that it gets ignored.  I suppose your people over at Fox took a 5 minute break from their Hunter Biden coverage to focus on that.

[homersapien 11,387]

21 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

 

The hold on defense aid was temporary. Ukraine got it all. The delay caused no harm and Zelensky stated he fe lt no pressure.

A president does have a legitimate interest in policing corruption, particularly potential US Government corruption, in countries we provide significant aid.

At the end of the day, It was a political prosecution that trivialized impeachment. 

None of that proves Trump did not do what everyone knows he did.  We heard his words in the tape of the conversation.

You are exhibit "A" for demonstrating how Trump has lowered the acceptable standard of behavior for a president of the United States.

Edited March 22 by homersapien

[I_M4_AU 7,857]

41 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

Trump says so much truly crazy BS that it gets ignored

Trump has never said a word in the last 7 years that have been ignored by the press.

[AUFAN78 3,911]

2 hours ago, AU9377 said:

To be clear, you have no problem with a U.S. President bribing a foreign country and enlisting their help in attacking their political opponents in U.S. elections.  Had Ukraine done what he asked, that action could have very well influenced the outcome in 2020 by preventing Biden from being the nominee.  We now know that those allegations would have been without merit.  We don't have a king, we have an executive.  That executive doesn't have the right to benefit himself personally by using the power of the office in that manner.

Bribing and asking a foreign leader to investigate possible corruption aren't the same. It is common for presidents to ask their foreign counterparts to assist Justice Department investigations.  

2 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Suppose Biden engineered a plan, by threatening to withdraw U.S. troops from South Korea, to have South Korea announce that their intelligence services had uncovered an agreement between Trump and the North Korean President to funnel money to the Trump Organization thru China in exchange for U.S. missile technology?   None of it would need to be true, but would deliver a damaging blow to Trump's bid for the White House.  You see that as an acceptable use of the power of the office of President?

You mean like Crossfire Hurricane?

2 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Richard Nixon deserves an apology for being forced to resign.  After all, we are now concluding that he was all powerful and untouchable

What? Let me guess, those voices again. SMDH

[AUFAN78 3,911]

2 hours ago, AU9377 said:

That was a real investigation conducted by the Republican Dept. of Justice.  Mueller was appointed by acting AG, Rod Rosenstein, after Jeff Sessions recused himself from the matter, as he was required to do.  The Democrats had no input into that appointment.  That is the correct way to investigate.  Thank you for reminding us all of how the system works.

And let me remind you:

 "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities".

the investigation "does not conclude that the President committed a crime"

 

Edited March 22 by AUFAN78

[AUFAN78 3,911]

2 hours ago, AU9377 said:

The comical part is that I had to google what you all were talking about. Sure you did.  And Trump called Melania Mercedes, right? 

Trump says so much truly crazy BS that it gets ignored.  I agree he says crazy stuff daily. It hardly gets ignored. CNN or the rest of the alphabet media won't allow that to happen.

I suppose your people over at Fox took a 5 minute break from their Hunter Biden coverage to focus on that. Your people? Hardly. But you're free to present evidence of this finding. 

 

[AUFAN78 3,911]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

None of that proves Trump did not do what everyone knows he did.  We heard his words in the tape of the conversation.

You are exhibit "A" for demonstrating how Trump has lowered the acceptable standard of behavior for a president of the United States.

Here is the transcript:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6429034-White-House-memo-on-Trump-call-with-Ukraine

What part of asking a foreign leader to investigate possible corruption is impeachable? 

I've stated previously I thought it inappropriate for Trump to point to the Biden's specifically. He should have suggested to root out corruption no matter how high up it goes, even in our own government. Zelensky would have gotten the point and likely there would have been nothing to criticize. Trump went about it crudely for sure. But it wasn't impeachable. 

[AU9377 4,967]

15 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

And let me remind you:

 "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities".

the investigation "does not conclude that the President committed a crime"

 

Those were the findings and that also has nothing to do with his actions regarding Ukraine months after he was sworn in as President. 

Some of you act as though there was no reason to investigate Trump campaign ties to Russia.  Trump's campaign manager had been on the Russian payroll just a couple years prior, for crying out loud.  Thankfully, the investigation did not find any collusion between the two, but it did establish the existence of a Russian disinformation campaign. Mueller's team isn't the only investigative panel to reach that conclusion.

Below is the Republican led Senate Select Committee on Intelligence's Report concerning Russian interference in the 2016 election. The Kremlin funded Internet Research Agency is referred to in the report as the "IRA." Pretending that the concern about connections between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin were in some way unfounded is just nonsense.  Again, keep in mind, it wasn't Democrats that chose to move forward with Mueller being appointed.  Republicans started that process.

The Senate committee's findings were crystal clear.....

".........that the IRA sought to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election by harming Hillary Clinton's chances of success and supporting Donald Trump at the direction of the Kremlin."

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Report_Volume2.pdf

Can you imagine the yelling and screaming that House Republicans would be doing today if the same intelligence sources concluded the Kremlin was supporting Biden's campaign?  Step out of that swamp of hypocrisy long enough to consider what actually occurred.