Take This Impeachment And Shove It...

[Cow Poke]

So says the blind man.

And here we go - --

[JimL]

I do? How do you know that?



He has never talked to me, Jim. Never.



That's a lie, and repeating it over and over just shows the kind of you are.

Sure, CP.

[One Bad Pig]

CP, you believe Trump when he said he withheld the aid because he was concerned about corruption. I showed you that he is lying to you.

Not by a country mile, Jim.

Your refusal to actually answer to that shows who is in the bubble. Facts don't have any effect on you.

CEPG0BtWoAAlovd.jpg

JimL strikes again!

[Mountain Man]

impeachment_swamp-1536x1108.jpg

[Watermelon]

There's no obligation to comply with unlawful demands - and the burden would not be on the accused in a congressional matter unless or until Congress sought enforcement.

And, no, it's not. You (general) can commit obstruction of justice in relation to a congressional committee's LAWFUL actions - but there is no such crime as obstruction of congress.

In a House full of lawyers, this is damning. They wouldn't have accidentally said 'congress' meaning 'justice' - so, why the wording? Most reasonable conclusion is that they KNEW the could not prove the elements of obstruction of justice.

You guys are thinking about it in the wrong setting. Let’s say it was an unlawful demand so you ignored it. Because of that they claim obstruction and use it as evidence in articles of Impeachment. The only way to stop them is to take them to court meaning the burden is on you.

I’m not talking about what’s allowed or not allowed in court but what they did out of court.

Congress has sent multiple subpoenas to Trump which were ignored. Attempts to enforce through courts have taken much time and Trump appeals all the losses and nothing has been resolved.

Pelosi then took the control out of the courts and instead of trying to enforce other subpoenas the tactic became to use the non compliance as evidence of obstruction. They drop any new court actions and start publicly claiming obstruction and pointing out all the ignored subpoenas.

Republicans are in a position where they have to defend the president by claiming unfairness and illegitimacy of the proceedings but they can’t deny the democrats from using the obstruction evidence for one of the articles of impeachment unless they take it to court and hope for an unlikely win.

I think my initial comment was just saying this was a good move.

[Teallaura]

I'm sure they get some small donors who are to ignorant to understand that Trump couldn't care less about them but the larger portion of there money is coming from wealthy donors who understand that hedging their bets aren't going to help them this go round.

Source: Western Journal

The Trump campaign alone received 1.1 million individual donations last quarter, Fox News reported.



Source

© Copyright Original Source

Not 'some' - a significant proportion.


He's not actively running compared to the Democrats entire field yet he's blowing them all out of the water in fundraising. That's not 'just the base' or 'party loyalists' - there are a LOT of the American people supporting Trump with their wallets.

2020 is gonna be a looooooooooooooooooong year for the Dems.

[rogue06]

You guys are thinking about it in the wrong setting. Let’s say it was an unlawful demand so you ignored it. Because of that they claim obstruction and use it as evidence in articles of Impeachment. The only way to stop them is to take them to court meaning the burden is on you.

You are omitting that unlike the rest of us the President has the right of Executive Privilege. That makes it a whole 'nuther ball game.

[Teallaura]

You guys are thinking about it in the wrong setting. Let’s say it was an unlawful demand so you ignored it. Because of that they claim obstruction and use it as evidence in articles of Impeachment. The only way to stop them is to take them to court meaning the burden is on you.

Precedent says otherwise - the House went to the Court when Nixon claimed exec privilege. Coequal branches can equal funky proceedings.

I’m not talking about what’s allowed or not allowed in court but what they did out of court.

For which the House never sought relief in court.

Congress has sent multiple subpoenas to Trump which were ignored. Attempts to enforce through courts have taken much time and Trump appeals all the losses and nothing has been resolved.

The House had recourse - request certiorari. They didn't do it. Why? Well, 'demand letters' aren't actually subpoenas - and if they thought they were valid, the House Dems would have been knocking on the Court's doorstep. Roberts and Gorsuch, and likely Alito and Kavenaugh would have almost certainly sided with the House IF the subpoenas were valid. But if not, RBG and Breyer would almost certainly sided against.

Pelosi then took the control out of the courts and instead of trying to enforce other subpoenas the tactic became to use the non compliance as evidence of obstruction. They drop any new court actions and start publicly claiming obstruction and pointing out all the ignored subpoenas.

Proving that she wasn't sure of their validity - optically, a 9-0 decision against Trump would have won this for the Dems. Instead, they shied away - because the 7-2 against the House was more likely.

Republicans are in a position where they have to defend the president by claiming unfairness and illegitimacy of the proceedings but they can’t deny the democrats from using the obstruction evidence for one of the articles of impeachment unless they take it to court and hope for an unlikely win.

Dude, they ARE the court now. This doesn't go to the High Court - it goes to the Senate. The Republicans will hammer home that unlike the Nixon inquiry, the House didn't authorize the Judiciary committee and the 'inquiry' was run in the basement by Intel - also without authorization, which is why the subpoenas are in question - per Wilkinson - to the Senate and the American people. The case for 'obstruction' is already DOA.

I think my initial comment was just saying this was a good move.

Maybe - but you were mistaken. It's a stupid move that undercuts the Dems logic in not going to the Court in the first place.

[JimL]

Source: Western Journal

The Trump campaign alone received 1.1 million individual donations last quarter, Fox News reported.



Source

© Copyright Original Source

Not 'some' - a significant proportion.


He's not actively running compared to the Democrats entire field yet he's blowing them all out of the water in fundraising. That's not 'just the base' or 'party loyalists' - there are a LOT of the American people supporting Trump with their wallets.

2020 is gonna be a looooooooooooooooooong year for the Dems.

The most significant portion of his donations come from big money donors.

[NorrinRadd]

She was trying so hard not to laugh at the cheering.

To me, that looks more like Mad Mom face.

[Cow Poke]

To me, that looks more like Mad Mom face.

To me, it looks like mad wife face. Though, personally, I've never seen that in MY house.

[Cow Poke]

The most significant portion of his donations come from big money donors.

The most significant portion of his votes come from little or no money donors.

[NorrinRadd]

... The Democrats have shot themselves in the foot with Javelin missiles.

Missile Toes -- How seasonal.

[Cow Poke]

Missile Toes -- How seasonal.

[JimL]

The most significant portion of his votes come from little or no money donors.

The most significant portion of his votes come from uninformed, misinformed, easily led, members of the tribe.