Official President Trump Impeachment Inquiry Thread

[RLLD 4,254]

32 minutes ago, Strike said:

Why would he change strategies?  Now they're not even impeaching him for "quid pro quo"/"Bribery".  They're just using vague terms that could apply to any President they don't like.  Pretty focking disgusting.

What I find more concerning is that they seem to not even care that its plain for all to see, they are doing it no matter what. They are basically saying to anyone listening, "fock you, we run this and will do what we want....."

I mean, holy sh!t.....

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

I’m old enough to remember Hillary Clinton deleting 33,000 emails and forensically wiping the server AFTER receiving a congressional subpoena.

Democrats didn’t impeach her.

They nominated her for president.

[KSB2424 3,148]

I wonder what happens next?  Honestly I actually think a good amount of Republicans are glad, they want to have a trial where they can subpoena people and ask questions on their terms. 

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

31 minutes ago, KSB2424 said:

I wonder what happens next?  Honestly I actually think a good amount of Republicans are glad, they want to have a trial where they can subpoena people and ask questions on their terms. 

It's not a given that all Dems will vote Yes. This may be a ploy by the Dems to cater to their rabid base while letting those in moderate districts make a statement against impeaching.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

5 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

It's not a given that all Dems will vote Yes. This may be a ploy by the Dems to cater to their rabid base while letting those in moderate districts make a statement against impeaching.

There is no doubt that they have polled and polled and polled their own to get concrete numbers.  There are certain members in toss up districts that they know have to vote against it.  The votes might not be there. We haven't heard the "c-word" (censure) yet, but when we start hearing it, it's over.  

[RLLD 4,254]

1 hour ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

I’m old enough to remember Hillary Clinton deleting 33,000 emails and forensically wiping the server AFTER receiving a congressional subpoena.

Democrats didn’t impeach her.

They nominated her for president.

She thinks the right way, so she can break the law...that is how they think

[BudBro 183]

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/former-ukrainian-prosecutor-exposes-yovanovich-perjury-george-kents-motive-impeach

Both sides of the aisle are stealing taxpayer funds that are laundered through Ukraine.  All who are on the "take" want Trump gone.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Just now, BudBro said:

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/former-ukrainian-prosecutor-exposes-yovanovich-perjury-george-kents-motive-impeach

Both sides of the aisle are stealing taxpayer funds that are laundered through Ukraine.  All who are on the "take" want Trump gone.

Yep. Lindsey Graham is rumored to be one of them.

Would explain his inaction at the Senate Judiciary Committee hence why Grassley is taking back control. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,515]

31 minutes ago, TimmySmith said:

There is no doubt that they have polled and polled and polled their own to get concrete numbers.  There are certain members in toss up districts that they know have to vote against it.  The votes might not be there. We haven't heard the "c-word" (censure) yet, but when we start hearing it, it's over.  

Censure doesn’t apply to the president. 

[TimmySmith 2,782]

5 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Censure doesn’t apply to the president.  

I am pretty sure congress can censure a dog if they choose.  

[Hardcore troubadour 15,515]

1 minute ago, TimmySmith said:

I am pretty sure congress can censure a dog if they choose.  

Nope. Otherwise presidents would be getting censured once a month. 

[Masshole 642]

Turley cuts thru the BS  again with his article in The Hill today.   The 2 excerpts below pretty well state how the media is inaccurately spinning the Horowitz report:

Horowitz did say that the original decision to investigate was within the discretionary standard of the Justice Department. That standard for the predication of an investigation is low, simply requiring “articulable facts.” He said that, since this is a low discretionary standard, he cannot say it was inappropriate to start.

Despite this shockingly damning report, much of the media is reporting only that Horowitz did not find it unreasonable to start the investigation, and ignoring a litany of false representations and falsifications of evidence to keep the secret investigation going. Nothing was found to support any of those allegations, and special counsel Robert Mueller also confirmed there was no support for collusion and conspiracy allegations repeated continuously for two years by many experts and members of Congress.

 

Full article.  It's worth a read:  https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/473709-horowitz-report-is-damning-for-the-fbi-and-unsettling-for-the-rest-of-us

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Obstruction of Congress - Bullsh!t charge since they had no impeachment authority i.e. didn't vote in Judiciary PRIOR to asking for testimony.

Abuse of Power - Again, bullsh!t since Trump is in charge of Foreign policy.

What happened to Worms, MDC and the other queens?

[BudBro 183]

25 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

Yep. Lindsey Graham is rumored to be one of them.

Would explain his inaction at the Senate Judiciary Committee hence why Grassley is taking back control. 

The article states "trillions" of dollars.  Those in play must have complete organizations with a payroll.  Think how many were paying the Army Lt. Colonel Vindman to watch over their laundry scheme.  Anybody who is testifying against Trump is somehow involved in the crimes.  We pay taxes and they steal them and put them in their bank accounts.

[MDC 7,498]

16 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

Obstruction of Congress - Bullsh!t charge since they had no impeachment authority i.e. didn't vote in Judiciary PRIOR to asking for testimony.

Abuse of Power - Again, bullsh!t since Trump is in charge of Foreign policy.

What happened to Worms, MDC and the other queens?

What’s your question Freak? 

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

4 minutes ago, MDC said:

What’s your question Freak? 

Have you stopped sucking peemus yet?

[MDC 7,498]

13 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

Have you stopped sucking peemus in my jerkoff fantasies yet?

Fixed. Anything else or did you just miss me, Freak?

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

12 minutes ago, MDC said:

Fixed. Anything else or did you just miss me, Freak?

Of course I missed you. My foot has been growing restless without some retard to stomp.

[drobeski 3,061]

Jordan tearing new azzholes....

 

[MDC 7,498]

6 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

Of course I missed you. My foot has been growing restless without some retard to stomp.

You should try kicking yourself in the ass.  

[KSB2424 3,148]

9 minutes ago, drobeski said:

Jordan tearing new azzholes....

 

Wowza

[Gladiators 1,995]

9 minutes ago, drobeski said:

Jordan tearing new azzholes....

 

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Jordan focking savaged them.

So all the 'Right wing conspiracies' about Trump getting spied on, spies within the Trump campaign, FISA abuses, etc...........all proven true.

Come back Worms.............only 5 more years to go.

[RLLD 4,254]

Imagine, they were coming after YOU......for a moment.....does this seem like anything remotely fair?  Does it not seem corrupt?

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

So the IG report takes the FBI's word for it that Papadopoulos' loose lips in a bar in May of 2016 caused Crossfire Hurricane investigation to be opened up in July of 2016. Why then was the FBI/CIA running OCONUS Lures in December of 2015 per Strzok's text messages?

This is why Barr/Durham disagree with Horowitz's conclusion that the investigation started appropriately. Horowitz was ONLY allowed to interview/investigate people STILL in the DOJ/FBI. Durham knows Strzok was former (or still active?) CIA, running Halper/Mifsud at Papadopoulos/Page. 

[fandandy 3,313]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Nope. Otherwise presidents would be getting censured once a month. 

It seems like when Clinton was impeached Gephardt was calling instead for censure.  

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/12/10/ag-barr-trump-campaign-was-clearly-spied-upon/

Barr states Horowitz was just focusing on FBI role. There were other entities (CIA and Foreign) involved. "It's clear the Trump campaign was spied on".

[Hardcore troubadour 15,515]

2 hours ago, fandandy said:

It seems like when Clinton was impeached Gephardt was calling instead for censure.  

Sometimes even the refs don’t know the rules. 

[iam90sbaby 2,621]

They knew they would never be able to impeach him anyway.  If you are looking at this like “they were wrong again” they weren’t, the entire goal of this is to obstruct and distract and they accomplished that goal again. 

[drobeski 3,061]

3 hours ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/12/10/ag-barr-trump-campaign-was-clearly-spied-upon/

Barr states Horowitz was just focusing on FBI role. There were other entities (CIA and Foreign) involved. "It's clear the Trump campaign was spied on".

Durham has the goods. 

[5-Points 3,570]

5 hours ago, TimmySmith said:

There is no doubt that they have polled and polled and polled their own to get concrete numbers.  There are certain members in toss up districts that they know have to vote against it.  The votes might not be there. We haven't heard the "c-word" (censure) yet, but when we start hearing it, it's over.  

C-Word

 

Small group of Democrats floats censure instead of impeachment

It's an unlikely outcome, but it underscores lingering angst among some moderates.

A small group of vulnerable House Democrats is floating the longshot idea of censuring President Donald Trump instead of impeaching him, according to multiple lawmakers familiar with the conversations.

Those Democrats, all representing districts that Trump won in 2016, huddled on Monday afternoon in an 11th-hour bid to weigh additional — though unlikely — options to punish the president for his role in the Ukraine scandal as the House speeds toward an impeachment vote next week.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,363]

Jim Jordan is my favorite politician 

[avoiding injuries 1,595]

6 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

Jim Jordan is my favorite politician 

Matt Gaetz is challenging him on my scorecard. 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,363]

12 minutes ago, avoiding injuries said:

Matt Gaetz is challenging him on my scorecard. 

Agree. I’m leaning on building my roster around the seasoned vet. But Gaetz is really high on my keeper league list

[Big Guy 1,414]

Is this really a solemn day?      Is nobody really above the law? 

 

the left is an absolute joke

[SUXBNME 1,516]

25 minutes ago, Big Guy said:

 

 

the left is an absolute joke

Much like your peemus :kneeslapper:

[Big Guy 1,414]

5 minutes ago, SUXBNME said:

Much like your peemus :kneeslapper:

munch on my what?

[RLLD 4,254]

7 hours ago, SUXBNME said:

Much like your peemus :kneeslapper:

Ok, but exactly HOW much do you like his peemus? 

[RLLD 4,254]

13 hours ago, 5-Points said:

C-Word

 

Small group of Democrats floats censure instead of impeachment

It's an unlikely outcome, but it underscores lingering angst among some moderates.

A small group of vulnerable House Democrats is floating the longshot idea of censuring President Donald Trump instead of impeaching him, according to multiple lawmakers familiar with the conversations.

Those Democrats, all representing districts that Trump won in 2016, huddled on Monday afternoon in an 11th-hour bid to weigh additional — though unlikely — options to punish the president for his role in the Ukraine scandal as the House speeds toward an impeachment vote next week.

I cannot see that getting much traction.  The Dem leadership has lost a significant amount of "control" within the party that is starting to show its fractures.  They have to see this through now, come what may.

I still think it is a miscalculation and another example of the deep state thinking and using older strategies to go after their political rivals. I think this entire debacle strengthens Trump in the end, they made a mistake....

[lickin_starfish 1,942]

The Democrats would have been better off if they had pushed for policies that make life better for American citizens, instead of trying to impeach a President who is trying to make life better for American citizens.