Politics Happy Impeachment Eve!

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Now you’re just trolling for the fun of it. You were in high school (at least) when Clinton was impeached. How did you feel then???? Especially when all he did (besides lying about it) was receive a consensual hummer in the Oval Office. The Republicans spent Clinton’s entire eight years trying to roadblock, prosecute and impeach him on far, far less serious bullshit than what the Democrats have against Trump.

I remember how gut punched I felt when the Republicans stole (yes, stole) the 2000 election and a mental midget was installed in the White House. Did the Democrats try to impeach Bush??? That would be “no”. When Bush led us into the Iraq War on falsified info, did the Democrats impeach?? Again, “no”.

What Trump has done is impeachable. The obstruction charge alone is inarguable. If the man did not have something to hide, he would not be ordering his minions to ignore the law by refusing to testify. If the president (a servant of the people) is immune from accountability, then we are no longer a Democracy, just another dictatorship.

The Republicans have pretty much made and manipulated the rules. Funny how they (and you) whine when the Democrats start to play by those rules.....

These do not add up to "High Crimes and Misdemeanors". Not even close.

But thanks for lowering the bar for impeachment. The next Democrat President (whenever the fuck that is) will thank you for the retaliatory impeachment.

 

[yankeesince59]

Yes, always. Since day 1. Evidence be damned, or not. This is a targeted impeachment attempt made in bad faith.

And that's why Trump instructed them not to cooperate.

Again, that's grossly exaggerated BS, and you know it. And exactly what "evidence" are you speaking of?

And I'm still waiting for you to answer my simple question; "why did Trump instruct current and previous cabinet members to not cooperate with subpoenas?"

 

[yankeesince59]

These do not add up to "High Crimes and Misdemeanors". Not even close.

But thanks for lowering the bar for impeachment. The next Democrat President (whenever the fuck that is) will thank you for the retaliatory impeachment.

Try again.

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

These do not add up to "High Crimes and Misdemeanors". Not even close.

But thanks for lowering the bar for impeachment. The next Democrat President (whenever the fuck that is) will thank you for the retaliatory impeachment.

So.....did what Clinton get impeached for by the Republicans amount to “high crimes and misdemeanors”? Asking for a friend...Your Republican friends are the ones who set the bar at it’s current height. Some of us don’t lose our memories after twenty plus years.....but apparently MAGA does. Or perhaps self examination and shame aren’t Republican virtues.....

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Again, that's grossly exaggerated BS, and you know it. And exactly what "evidence" are you speaking of?

And I'm still waiting for you to answer my simple question; "why did Trump instruct current and previous cabinet members to not cooperate with subpoenas?"

I did answer it. Its a fishing expedition.

Have congress enforce the subpoenas then.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

So.....did what Clinton get impeached for by the Republicans amount to “high crimes and misdemeanors”? Asking for a friend...Your Republican friends are the ones who set the bar at it’s current height. Some of us don’t lose our memories after twenty plus years.....but apparently MAGA does. Or perhaps self examination and shame aren’t Republican virtues.....

I don't agree with the BJ Clinton impeachment.

However, lying under oath is way worse than anything that Trump has done.

 

[stampedehero]

Everyone knows how the Senate will handle this. DUH.

This is about putting the stain of impeachment on his legacy—the most corrupt administration in US history.

Actually, after the civil war, President Andrew Johnson's administration was ultra corrupt. The Presidents who served from the civil war up to the end of that century are in the same category. Newspapers could lie to get circulation and back door politics was prevalent throughout this period.

 

[yankeesince59]

I did answer it. Its a fishing expedition.

Have congress enforce the subpoenas then.

Sorry, but no, you didn't answer it after the first time I asked you...instead, you've sidestepped the question. "why did TRUMP instruct current and previous cabinet members to not cooperate with subpoenas?"....... Try it again without shitting the bed this time.

Unless he has something to hide, there's absolutely NO reason for him not to comply".

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Sorry, but no, you didn't answer...instead, you sidestepped the question. "why did TRUMP instruct current and previous cabinet members to not cooperate with subpoenas?"....... Try it again without shitting the bed this time.

Unless he has something to hide, there's absolutely NO reason for him not to comply".

I repeat my answer: Its a targeted impeachment attempt based on bad faith. He has no reason to give the democrats any rope. If he wants the subpoenas enforced, have the democrats go to court to have them enforced.

 

[yankeesince59]

I don't agree with the BJ Clinton impeachment.

However, lying under oath is way worse than anything that Trump has done.

So was Clinton guilty of "high crimes and misdemeanors"?

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

So was Clinton guilty of "high crimes and misdemeanors"?

I would not consider it an impeachable offense, personally. So, no.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Sorry, but no, you didn't answer it after the first time I asked you...instead, you've sidestepped the question. "why did TRUMP instruct current and previous cabinet members to not cooperate with subpoenas?"....... Try it again without shitting the bed this time.

Unless he has something to hide, there's absolutely NO reason for him not to comply".

That thought process is the same reason I always get excused from jury duty. I always answer in the affirmative when lawyers/judges ask if it would color my view of a defendant who chose not to testify on his own behalf. Then they boot me because hey, 5th amendment.

However, I do think it's disingenuous to say, "well he's not cooperating with people who are unabashedly out to get him, so he must have done something wrong!"

 

[SlyPokerDog]

As I was drifting off to sleep last night I was listening to this.

https://podcasts.google.com/?feed=a...X0KHeTVCm4QjrkEegQIBRAG&ep=6&at=1576691282923

What a weird time in history.

 

[yankeesince59]

I repeat my answer: Its a targeted impeachment attempt based on bad faith. He has no reason to give the democrats any rope. If he wants the subpoenas enforced, have the democrats go to court to have them enforced.

"Rope"?...what rope. If he has nothing to hide and if the people who were subpoenaed had been allowed to testify they would surely clear Trump, right?

If he had allowed them to testify, this whole thing could/would have already been completed a long time ago, one way or the other...those witnesses could have easily blown the Dems plans right out of the water.

The simple answer is that your boy is guilty, and THAT is why he forbade them to testify.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

the Dems have already been blown out of the water. Which is why they look like fools.

 

[twobullz]

Sorry, but no, you didn't answer it after the first time I asked you...instead, you've sidestepped the question. "why did TRUMP instruct current and previous cabinet members to not cooperate with subpoenas?"....... Try it again without shitting the bed this time.

Unless he has something to hide, there's absolutely NO reason for him not to comply".

I will answer for you because you will never get one of his supporters to. If trump or any of his underlings go under oath they are going to have to do one of two things. Tell the truth and or Lie. Either one and they will bury trump. So it is easier to just spin it and sidestep it rather then testify.

 

[yankeesince59]

I would not consider it an impeachable offense, personally. So, no.

Ahhh, so you don't consider Clinton committing a felony as just cause for impeachment?...I see.

So you're somehow spinning and using that as a defense for Trump?

 

[yankeesince59]

I will answer for you because you will never get one of his supporters to. If trump or any of his underlings go under oath they are going to have to do one of two things. Tell the truth and or Lie. Either one and they will bury trump. So it is easier to just spin it and sidestep it rather then testify.

Exactly.

 

[yankeesince59]

the Dems have already been blown out of the water. Which is why they look like fools.

lol...don't you ever get tired of being wrong?

 

[yankeesince59]

That thought process is the same reason I always get excused from jury duty. I always answer in the affirmative when lawyers/judges ask if it would color my view of a defendant who chose not to testify on his own behalf. Then they boot me because hey, 5th amendment.

However, I do think it's disingenuous to say, "well he's not cooperating with people who are unabashedly out to get him, so he must have done something wrong!"

Well, that would assume that an ever day criminal trial is the same as as an impeachment inquiry/trial...they're not. "Checks and balances" vs criminal law.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Ahhh, so you don't consider Clinton committing a felony as just cause for impeachment?...I see.

So you're somehow spinning and using that as a defense for Trump?

Just saying that what Clinton did was much worse than whatever the Dems are throwing at Trump. And I still don't think it passes the threshold for impeachment.

 

[barfo]

Just saying that what Clinton did was much worse than whatever the Dems are throwing at Trump. And I still don't think it passes the threshold for impeachment.

 

[yankeesince59]

Just saying that what Clinton did was much worse than whatever the Dems are throwing at Trump. And I still don't think it passes the threshold for impeachment.

LOL, yeah, right.

If Trump allowed the subpoenaed cabinet members to testify, they would certainly clear him, right?

 

[yankeesince59]

\
barfo, this stuff is just unbelievable.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Well, that would assume that an ever day criminal trial is the same as as an impeachment inquiry/trial...they're not. "Checks and balances" vs criminal law.

I'm not commenting on his obligation, though, just his mindset. You asked "why" would he instruct people not to cooperate--that's why. If you have zero confidence in the investigators to analyze information objectively, why would you give them anything?

 

[yankeesince59]

I'm not commenting on his obligation, though, just his mindset. You asked "why" would he instruct people not to cooperate--that's why. If you have zero confidence in the investigators to analyze information objectively, why would you give them anything?

Because they would also be questioned/cross-examined by Republican congressmen as well as Dems.

Like I said earlier, had the subpoenaed cabinet members been allowed to testify, this whole thing would have been over a long time ago.

 

[barfo]

That thought process is the same reason I always get excused from jury duty. I always answer in the affirmative when lawyers/judges ask if it would color my view of a defendant who chose not to testify on his own behalf. Then they boot me because hey, 5th amendment.

However, I do think it's disingenuous to say, "well he's not cooperating with people who are unabashedly out to get him, so he must have done something wrong!"

The problem with a 5th amendment argument is that a criminal defendant cannot prevent others from testifying by claiming 5th amendment rights.

barfo

 

[Natebishop3]

This is the beginning of the end of the Republican party.

See this is why I could never be a Democrat... they don't live in reality at all.

I'm definitely not a Republican anymore, but I can't go over to La La land where free healthcare falls from the sky and everyone can live in peace and harmony.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

The problem with a 5th amendment argument is that a criminal defendant cannot prevent others from testifying by claiming 5th amendment rights.

barfo

Yeah, I never claimed or even suggested that they could.

 

[Lanny]

"Always"?..That's simply not true...you're just regurgitating what some others have said. Have the Dems disliked Trump since the beginning?...certainly, he made it very easy to dislike him. Were their some whispers by a very few early on?...probably. But even that dingbat Pelosi was initially against impeachment.

Answer one simple question, why did Trump instruct current and previous cabinet members to not cooperate with subpoenas?

You would think that Trump would want his people to testify and his documents entered as evidence to prove his innocence. Why doesn't he do this? Oh, I think I know, I think I know.