It's time to impeach the impeachers

Giuliano said:

I don't know about the Russian collusion stuff, but I seem to recall some of Trump's buddies went to jail as a result of that investigation.

Click to expand...

News to me.

I do remember though that Donald Trump Junior admitted wanting to collude with the Russians -- I think maybe he was too dumb to know how to do it.

Click to expand...

Improving trade with Russia and China would be a godsend to the US.

The facts are known in this case. Trump asked "Monica" Zelensky to dig up dirt on Hunter Biden.

Click to expand...

False. Pure nonsense. We even have the transcript of the actual phone conversation. We also have Biden himself admitting he engaged in blatant quid pro quo. When you have a Presidential candidate admitting, nay BOASTING that he engaged in quid pro quo, and then turning around and accusing Trump of doing what he boasted about in public, you just can't make this stuff up. Hypocrisy at its finest.

That's asking for foreign interference in an American election.

Click to expand...

Smoke another bowl because no one was asking for foreign interference in an American election other than the Clinton campaign, President Obama, the justice department, the FBI, etc. They were all in on it. They all knew the Steel dossier was a work of pure fiction from the start, and yet no one bats an eye when that comes to light.

If you like that kind of thing, I just you have wet your pants in joy over it. I find it disgraceful.

Click to expand...

What's disgraceful is how the Mueller investigation got off the ground at all. Why aren't any of those clowns being indicted? They're all guilty of engaging in blatant treason. Welcome to the biggest most glorious banana republic in the world.

Giuliano said:

If the Democrats are the ones in fear, why is it that it's the Republicans whining and raising such a fuss over nothing? If Trump is so very right about impeachment increasing his popularity so that it ensures his re-election, why aren't the Republicans rejoicing about it?

Click to expand...

Because they're just as deep into the swamp as their demoncratic counterparts. Did you notice how Mitch MaCrackpot admitted that they wouldn't be calling any witnesses? What kind of legitimate impeachment proceeding doesn't call witnesses? He basically gave Pelousy an engraved invitation to go ahead with this farce because they all know that it allows them to say that they did all they could to impeach Trump while simultaneously preventing anything that would surely land them in prison for the rest of their lives seeing the light of day.

shnarkle said:

For Clinton to get dragged into court for fornicating was a bit ridiculous imo. After all, the US is a country that practically glorifies free sex, fornication, deviancy, perversions of all kinds, etc. Trump's impeachment is only the next step in the government's decline into a circus.

Click to expand...

Why do you repeat that tired line the Democrats used? Clinton was not dragged into court for fornicating. He lied under oath about things that had to do with sex; and I think anyone who lies under oath doesn't deserve to be President, not when he swore to uphold the laws of the land.

The thing about Trump is that the establishment hates him. When everyone hates someone that bad, they have to be doing something right. I can't figure out what's really going on. Trump is either a complete buffoon, or he's a genius.

Click to expand...

I'd say many decent people find him detestable. You think that makes him great?

Willie T said:

I think one of the most shameful parts of all this charade is Nancy trying to act like "Mother Mary" with her phony holiness pose in all this. I've rarely seen such open hatred as the way she shook her bony finger at that reporter while informing him of how good a Catholic she was and much she prayed for our president.

Click to expand...

She didn't say she was a good catholic. She said she was a good alcoholic.

Giuliano said:

It's rather silly to repeat this talking point about nullifying the democratic election and the more than 63 million people who voted for him.

Click to expand...

And yet the demoncrats are always the first ones to roll out that nonsense each and every time they lose an election.

do you genuinely think it's fine for a President to ask a foreign government to investigate his political opponents?

Click to expand...

When a foreign government was already involved in an investigation, and uncle Joe barges in giving them an ultimatum to nix it within the next six hours or lose how many billions of dollars was it again???? Yeah, maybe someone might want to look into what's really going on there. How about the fact that the Steel dossier was a complete fabrication from the start? How come no one seems bothered by an investigation based upon claims that were known to be fabricated?

Giuliano said:

Why do you repeat that tired line the Democrats used? Clinton was not dragged into court for fornicating.

Click to expand...

Sorry, my bad. Refresh my memory. Why was he dragged in to testify?

He lied under oath about things that had to do with sex; and I think anyone who lies under oath doesn't deserve to be President, not when he swore to uphold the laws of the land.

Click to expand...

The laws of the land don't really forbid fornication. Granted he lied under oath. That's not my point. My point is that for a country that celebrates fornication, adultery, etc. to ask him if he engaged in some sexual act is ridiculous. Same thing with regards to Trump paying off what's her name Daniels?

I'd say many decent people find him detestable. You think that makes him great?

Click to expand...

Where did I say anything about Clinton being great? Hallucinate much?

shnarkle said:

News to me.

Click to expand...

What planet have you been on? A total of 34 people were indicted.


Criminal charges brought in the Special Counsel investigation (2017–2019) - Wikipedia

The Special Counsel initiated criminal proceedings against 34 people—seven U.S. nationals, 26 Russian nationals, and one Dutch national—and three Russian organizations. The charges were brought in three different jurisdictions: the District of Columbia (D.D.C.), the Eastern District of Virginia (E.D. Va.), and the Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.). Several cases were also referred to other prosecutors, resulting in charges against two individuals. The Special Counsel indictments have resulted in convictions, plea deals, and jail time in several cases.

Rick Gates' case just got settled two days ago. Aren't you keeping up with the news?

Improving trade with Russia and China would be a godsend to the US.

Click to expand...

He seems to be alienating our allies for their wanting to trade with them. The Ukraine is doing a deal with Russia. Germany is. The US is getting left out of some things.

Story here: Subscribe to read | Financial Times

False. Pure nonsense. We even have the transcript of the actual phone conversation.

Click to expand...

In which Trump named the company Hunter Biden worked for. I'd call that strong arming.

We also have Biden himself admitting he engaged in blatant quid pro quo. When you have a Presidential candidate admitting, nay BOASTING that he engaged in quid pro quo, and then turning around and accusing Trump of doing what he boasted about in public, you just can't make this stuff up. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Click to expand...

Source? I haven't seen this.

Smoke another bowl because no one was asking for foreign interference in an American election other than the Clinton campaign, President Obama, the justice department, the FBI, etc. They were all in on it. They all knew the Steel dossier was a work of pure fiction from the start, and yet no one bats an eye when that comes to light.

Click to expand...

Why did Trump ask Zelensky to investigate that particular company then?

Why did all those Trump people meet with Russians in Trump Tower? Trump Tower meeting - Wikipedia

Trump Jr. initially told reporters that the meeting had been "primarily about adoptions". He then released a statement saying it had been a "short introductory meeting" concerning "a program about the adoption of Russian children". A few days later Trump Jr. acknowledged that he went into the meeting expecting to receive opposition research from Veselnitskaya that could hurt Clinton's campaign, adding that none was presented and that the conversation instead focused on the Magnitsky Act. Later a statement from Trump Jr.'s lawyer said Veselnitskaya had claimed to have information "that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Mrs. Clinton" but "it quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information". Trump Jr. said he felt the adoption issue was her "true agenda all along" and the claims of helpful political information were a pretext. After learning that the New York Times was about to publish the series of emails setting up the meeting, Trump Jr. himself published the email chain via Twitter, and explained that he considered the meeting to be "political opposition research". He summarized the meeting as "such a nothing... a wasted 20 minutes".

He wanted to collude with the Russians. Something didn't go as planned. Either Veselnitskaya had nothing to offer or Trump Jr. didn't offer her what she wanted so she didn't deliver on what he wanted.

What's disgraceful is how the Mueller investigation got off the ground at all. Why aren't any of those clowns being indicted? They're all guilty of engaging in blatant treason. Welcome to the biggest most glorious banana republic in the world.

Click to expand...

That investigation was very productive since 26 Russians got prosecuted. I think that sent an important message to Russia to be more cautious about what they do. A few Americans got indicted too, but it seems the dragnet caught more Russians than Americans -- and that too can be seen as good news although I am disappointed by the people associated with the President who did get involve in shabby behavior.

shnarkle said:

Sorry, my bad. Refresh my memory. Why was he dragged in to testify?

Click to expand...

In the case of Paula Jones, the allegation was sexual assault, not sex.

The laws of the land don't really forbid fornication. Granted he lied under oath. That's not my point. My point is that for a country that celebrates fornication, adultery, etc. to ask him if he engaged in some sexual act is ridiculous. Same thing with regards to Trump paying off what's her name Daniels?

Click to expand...

It's one thing to do something, another to lie about it and besmirch the reputation of someone who's telling the truth. I honestly don't care that much about people's sex lives; but I do care if they lie about it and try to victimize others trying to keep their sex lives secret.

Where did I say anything about Clinton being great? Hallucinate much?

Click to expand...

You need to catch your breath. You do not appear your usual sharp self. My comment about being great was made about Trump, not Clinton.

shnarkle said:

And yet the demoncrats are always the first ones to roll out that nonsense each and every time they lose an election.

Click to expand...

What nonsense?

When a foreign government was already involved in an investigation, and uncle Joe barges in giving them an ultimatum to nix it within the next six hours or lose how many billions of dollars was it again???? Yeah, maybe someone might want to look into what's really going on there. How about the fact that the Steel dossier was a complete fabrication from the start? How come no one seems bothered by an investigation based upon claims that were known to be fabricated?

Click to expand...

I guess you can either believe Donald Trump or the American intelligence community. Much in that dossier was true.

Trump–Russia dossier - Wikipedia

Enoch111 said:

Here is an excellent article on the sham impeachment of Donald Trump

December 17, 2019
The Impeachment Show Trial
By E.W. Jackson and Jerome Corsi

Representatives Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler set a very dangerous precedent when they refused to conduct impeachment hearings according to constitutional due process standards. Democrats are so desperate for power that they would overturn the election of a President of the United States based on their biased and partisan interpretation of his telephone conversation with a foreign leader.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was initially reluctant to risk the electoral backlash of impeachment. She finally bowed to far-left pressure, ignoring the President's astounding economic and foreign policy successes. Her worst nightmare is coming true -- rising approval for President Trump and rising disapproval for the Democrat Party and their presidential candidates.

This is because the impeachment process we are witnessing is decidedly un-American. Using secretive, totalitarian-style, one-party interrogations is not due process and is unworthy of a constitutional republic.

Democrats ignored the constitutional standard for impeachment to remove a president: “Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors.” No unbiased adjudicator could conclude that President Trump’s telephone discussion with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky is an impeachable offense. Far from a “high crime,” the President was carrying out his duty to the people of the United States. He was guarding our treasure and protecting our national integrity. Ukraine has been one of the most corrupt nations in the world, and he was right to request an investigation. If taxpayer funded aide was used as leverage to enrich the former vice president’s son, the American people should know.

Instead of thanking the President for his diligence, Democrats in Congress had the temerity to accuse him of committing an “abuse of power.” The Executive Branch of the United States government is separate and co-equal. George Washington University law professor and constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley told the House Judiciary Committee that it would be Congress abusing power if they try to stop the President from exercising his constitutional prerogatives. Schiff, Nader and Pelosi ignored that unbiased counsel.

They have chosen instead to drag the country through an impeachment process while trampling the constitutional and due process rights of a sitting President. If they ignore his rights, why would they respect those of the average citizen?

Due process rules are not reserved to criminal trials alone. They are essentially the same in regulatory and administrative hearings. Those rules reach even to private entities operating under “color of law.” To suggest that a proceeding as grave as a presidential impeachment need not follow the same basic procedural rules of fairness is ludicrous on its face.

Hearsay is excluded from evidence in court proceedings because it is notoriously unreliable. Yet Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent and acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine William Taylor were called before the House Intelligence Committee with great pomp and ceremony to offer only hearsay. Defendants always have a right to confront their accusers, yet the “whistleblower” remains an anonymous figure.

Adam Schiff went beyond hearsay to outright falsehood. Speaking on the floor of Congress, he reported that President Trump said to President Zelensky, “I want you to dig up dirt on my opponent and lots of it.” The President said nothing of the kind. Schiff later claimed it was a “parody.” This is the same Adam Schiff who said he had incontrovertible evidence that President Trump colluded with Russia. The only conclusion supported by evidence is that Adam Schiff is a pathological liar.

Democrats also violated the principle that the accused has a right to a vigorous defense. The earliest hearings were closed to Republicans. Information from those inquiries was selectively leaked to the press. Depositions were taken in secret. Rep. Andy Biggs, Chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, compared the sessions to Soviet secret hearings. He proposed a resolution on the House floor to condemn and censure Schiff, but of course House Democrats tabled the proposal.

Long gone is the Democratic Party of President John F. Kennedy, Vice President Hubert Humphrey, Senators Scoop Jackson and Sam Nunn. It is now a party of hardcore leftists, more aligned with Karl Marx than Thomas Jefferson. They are now completely driven by extreme leftist ideology. Lacking evidence that President Trump committed any crime or even did anything morally wrong, they recklessly passed articles of impeachment, with no regard to the great damage they are doing to our Republic. The Democratic Party once had statesmen, but it is now the refuge of demagogues.

Their Stalinist impeachment show trial demonstrated gross disrespect for our elections and the peaceful transition of power. This has been nothing less than an attempted coup d’etat, but these de facto communist revolutionaries will face the wrath of the American voter. Tuesday, November 3, 2020 will be a day of reckoning.

Bishop E.W. Jackson, retired attorney and Dr. Jerome Corsi, author and journalist are members of the STAND Against Communism Political Action Committee. www.standagainstcommunism.com

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/12/the_impeachment_show_trial.html

Click to expand...

The House has the power to impeach, from the US Constitution:
'

5: The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."

Click to expand...

Is there anything in that last sentence they violated.

The house democrats, according to Fox News, at least, totally disregarded past precedent and made it a very partisan matter. I do not see how it is a Constitutional issue, but it is a bad way of going about it and sets a bad precedent. Our country is very divided now, and setting a partisan precedent for impeachment, and a pattern of trying to impeach a president before any incriminating evidence is show is a bad thing.

There are so many laws on the books, we all probably break laws without realizing it. The president probably does the same thing. The standard for crimes are high. It's ambiguous as to whether the misdemeaners for a president need to be high.

6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

7: Judgment in Cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
{/quote]

That is what the Senate has to do. The oath they decided on, historically, involves being impartial. Do you think they will follow that?

Click to expand...

Giuliano said:

What planet have you been on? A total of 34 people were indicted.

Click to expand...

It really doesn't matter what planet I've been hanging out on. What matters is one's ability to comprehend simple English. I didn't say it was news to me that anyone was indicted. I said it was news to me that anyone went to jail. You do know the difference between being indicted and going to jail or prison, don't you?


Criminal charges brought in the Special Counsel investigation (2017–2019) - Wikipedia

The Special Counsel initiated criminal proceedings against 34 people—seven U.S. nationals, 26 Russian nationals,[/QUOTE]

Did you know that the Russian nationals all responded to the indictments? Did you notice how they were all then subsequently brushed under the rug? Do you know why??? Because they're trumped up charges and no one expected any of them to respond to them.

jail time in several cases.

Click to expand...

Again, this is news to me. I don't believe it. Wikipedia is notorious for being fabricating lies.

Rick Gates' case just got settled two days ago. Aren't you keeping up with the news?

Click to expand...

Settled? what does that mean? They settled out of court? What? Is he behind bars now? How long is his sentence? Obviously, if anyone is doing time, then I am not keeping up with the news.

He seems to be alienating our allies for their wanting to trade with them.

Click to expand...

He? The whole government is against it. Republicrats and Democretins alike.

The Ukraine is doing a deal with Russia. Germany is. The US is getting left out of some things.

Click to expand...

They're getting left out of a lot of things, and this trend is only going to continue as they keep proceeding with this idiotic game plan. This has been going on for decades. It's never going to work. The US has to forget about pointless conflicts, and regime change in foreign countries, and start working on improving trade with everyone.

In which Trump named the company Hunter Biden worked for. I'd call that strong arming.

Click to expand...

Strong arming? Get real for a minute. Biden broke the law, and the President is supposed to just look the other way?? Why?

Source? I haven't seen this.

Click to expand...

It's all over the internet.

Why did Trump ask Zelensky to investigate that particular company then?

Click to expand...

Since when is it against the law for a sitting President to see if an investigation of corruption might be necessary?

Why did all those Trump people meet with Russians in Trump Tower? Trump Tower meeting - Wikipedia

Please find something a bit less biased than wiki links.

He wanted to collude with the Russians.

Click to expand...

If they want to collude with the Russians, then why are they doing everything imaginable to thwart the Russians? Why are the Russians violating US sanctions by sending military hardware into Venezuela? How can they be interested in the same goals if the US has sanctions on Venezuela?

Something didn't go as planned. Either Veselnitskaya had nothing to offer or Trump Jr. didn't offer her what she wanted so she didn't deliver on what he wanted.

Click to expand...

Your tin foil hat is showing.

That investigation was very productive since 26 Russians got prosecuted.

Click to expand...

Again, you're dreaming. Wake up. No Russians were prosecuted. They all responded, and what's his name dropped the whole thing. They swept it under the rug. Document where any of these Russians were convicted. It's pure fantasy. They all responded immediately because they knew it was nonsense.

Giuliano said:

What nonsense?

Click to expand...

That elections need to be by democratic vote.

I guess you can either believe Donald Trump or the American intelligence community. Much in that dossier was true.

Click to expand...

Nothing in the dossier was true.

Trump–Russia dossier - Wikipedia

Click to expand...

Again, wiki links are notorious for fabricating nonsense. There are people who have corrected wiki links for their own biographies, only to have them immediately changed. They aren't considered legitimate sources. LOL.

shnarkle said:

The thing about Trump is that the establishment hates him. When everyone hates someone that bad, they have to be doing something right. I can't figure out what's really going on. Trump is either a complete buffoon, or he's a genius.

Click to expand...

Totally agree. Well said.

Time alone will show us....

Giuliano said:

In the case of Paula Jones, the allegation was sexual assault, not sex.

Click to expand...

Oh, big difference. And how long after the fact was this? Wasn't she paid off? The fact that she was still alive indicates she must have been paid off, no? Maybe they forgot to pay her off, and she got her revenge. Hilary must not have known about her, or forgot to suicide her.

It's one thing to do something, another to lie about it and besmirch the reputation of someone who's telling the truth.

Click to expand...

Her reputation took a dive long before Clinton lied about it.

I honestly don't care that much about people's sex lives; but I do care if they lie about it and try to victimize others trying to keep their sex lives secret.

Click to expand...

Huh? Paul Jones was trying to keep her sex life secret? How does one keep their sex life a secret when they're a witness in an impeachment proceeding?

You need to catch your breath. You do not appear your usual sharp self. My comment about being great was made about Trump, not Clinton.

Click to expand...

Beside the point. Here, let me correct it so you can respond to what I meant. "Where did I say anything about Trump being great? Hallucinate much?"

Mayflower said:

They were wanting to impeach before that call was even made.

Click to expand...

They've been smarting ever since their man swore: "I never had sexual relations with that woman".

Giuliano said:

I remind you that Pelosi resisted the idea of impeachment for a long time.

Click to expand...

Pelosi is a consummate politician. She does what is politically expedient, period. You're smart enough to see this about her.

Stan B said:

It is rather scary that less than a couple hundred evil people can summarily nullify the wishes 63,000,000 people!!

Click to expand...

There was also evil people in the days of Jesus.

In the book of Esther, when the king sent out the decree to protect the "Jews" (who were the Judahites of the Babylonian captivity), "many of the people of the land BECAME JEWS: for the fear of the Jews fell upon them." (ESTHER 8:17) This king ruled "from India unto Ethiopia" compassing the territory occupied by the Hittites, Hivites, Jebusites and Canaanites, so it is probable that tens of thousands of these people collectively known as "EDOM" professed the name "Jew" to escape the king's wrath. They were NOT descendants of Jacob-Israel, though they had now become "Jews." This was 500 years BEFORE Christ.

Herod was born in southern Palestine. His father, Antipater, was an Edomite (a Semitic people, identified by some scholars as Arab, who converted to Judaism in the 2nd century BCE)

Joh 8:33 They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?
Jesus didn’t disagree with the fact they were of Abraham, but by the way of Esau. How
else could they say they had never been in bondage?
Joh 8:34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
Joh 8:35 And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.
Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
Joh 8:37 I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.
Joh 8:38 I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.

shnarkle said:

The thing about Trump is that the establishment hates him. When everyone hates someone that bad, they have to be doing something right. I can't figure out what's really going on. Trump is either a complete buffoon, or he's a genius.

Click to expand...

or maybe he is a buffoon and God is genius.

VictoryinJesus said:

or maybe he is a buffoon and God is genius.

Click to expand...

We're all buffoons when compared to the foolishness of God. Yes, I can easily see how God chooses to make his power known through fools to spotlight the fact that there is no other way these things could happen.