Originally posted by Mountain Men
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Take This Impeachment And Shove It...
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by diryfloor View PostThat is just the tip of the iceberg...
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostThat's not direct evidence of a crime, that's a non-binding opinion of one committee of Congress. And incidentally, that same committee had found that the Obama administration had broken the law at least 7 different times.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...d-federal-law/
In fact, it's quite typical for the GAO to form the opinion that a president has violated one law or another, but unless it's brought before a judge who upholds the opinion, it really doesn't mean anything.
Sam started a thread about it here:
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...nt-Control-Act
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by dirtfloor View PostDoes this count? WaPo
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...d-federal-law/
In fact, it's quite typical for the GAO to form the opinion that a president has violated one law or another, but unless it's brought before a judge who upholds the opinion, it really doesn't mean anything.
Sam started a thread about it here:
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...nt-Control-Act
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostI will accept direct evidence that he broke the law and not biased guesswork that paints targets around arrows and calls them bullseyes.A cornerstone of President Trump’s impeachment defense is the argument that his administration delayed the release of congressionally appropriated military assistance to Ukraine due to his concerns about corruption in that country. Another is that the articles of impeachment currently being considered by the Senate don’t deal with illegal conduct.
But a decision released Thursday by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO), a federal agency that oversees the use of taxpayer funds, undercuts both of these specious defenses: It explains in detail why the hold was unlawful, and it further illustrates that the White House knew — or should have known — that the hold was illegal, but went ahead and did it anyway.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by DivineOb View PostSo we're back to this again. Other than Trump confessing "Yes I did criming" you won't accept anything.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostWe can hope enough of them still have a conscience. But the lack of conscience seen here daily makes it hard to hold onto that hope.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostThere may be a few who do, but that could be for political reasons. Problem is that the leadership, Moscow Mitch, is dishonoring his oath of impartiality right from the get go by rigging the trial set-up to favor the defense. Unfortunately it's going to take a few principled republicans to actually honor their oaths to up-end the intended set-up. Not sure if we'll get that or not.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostI have no confidence any of them will honor their oaths in this regard.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by firstfloor View PostThe reputation of the SCOTUS is in his hands;
“Do you solemnly swear that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of Donald John Trump, president of the United States, now pending, you will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws, so help you God?” Grassley asked. “I do,” Roberts said.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostIt's not an inference. Giuliani's letter clearly states that he is acting as a representative for Trump "as a private citizen, not as President of the United States." In his "capacity as personal counsel to President Trump and with his knowledge and consent", Giuliani requests the meeting with Zelensky.
You don't have to infer what is explicitly stated.
--Sam
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Watermelon View PostCould you provide more information on the Ukrainians concerns over Biden? I’m genuinely interested.
On an unrelated note, it’s amazing how many people in government are seemingly still so loyal to Obama. He sounds like a great guy.
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign...-ukraine-story
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostYou could infer it, I suppose, but there are many other reasons a president chooses to use unofficial channels. For instance, Ukraine had tried to contact the US concerning Joe Biden on several occasions, but they were repeatedly stonewalled in the official channels by Obama holdovers. It wasn't until Guilani got involved that they started making forward progress.
You don't have to infer what is explicitly stated.
--Sam
Leave a comment:
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
|
6 responses
45 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by whag
Yesterday, 08:38 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
|
42 responses
231 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by whag
Yesterday, 03:53 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
|
24 responses
104 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Ronson
Yesterday, 02:40 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
|
32 responses
176 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Yesterday, 08:22 AM | ||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
|
73 responses
291 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 03:51 AM |
Leave a comment: