Official President Trump Impeachment Inquiry Thread

[IGotWorms 3,315]

14 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I've found that they only accept news from Fox News and Breitbart.  Maybe Al Jazeera and possibly BBC, if it's something good about Trump.  Anything negative towards Trump is false.

They’re rejecting Fox News now too. I believe the only acceptable sources now are random twitter accounts posting unsourced conspiracy theories

[Hawkeye21 1,855]

Just now, IGotWorms said:

They’re rejecting Fox News now too. 

I've been noticing.

[MDC 5,893]

13 minutes ago, The Observer said:

I didn't say you asked him to stop. I said you're crying like a little girl. How many times do you have say that he mentioned your kid? That's whining. Stop. Make a change in yourself if you want people to treat you with respect. Otherwise, be a man when you get it back.

Exactly. Dude mentions my wife every day, then cries about being classless if I give it back. Are families off limits or not?

Pick a side.  

[TimmySmith 2,782]

I hated FOX news before I loved it. Probably will again.

 

[Big Guy 1,400]

FOX was corporate / moderate long before Trump came around.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

9 minutes ago, MDC said:

Exactly. Dude mentions my wife every day, then cries about being classless if I give it back. Are families off limits or not?

Pick a side.  

You go after my wife and call my kid a retarded 

[RLLD 3,455]

8 minutes ago, TimmySmith said:

I hated FOX news before I loved it. Probably will again.

 

Same. I used to find it farcical and unwatchable, now I feel that way about CNN....have always felt that way about MSDNC as well....  crazy how this entire thing has shifted.

[MDC 5,893]

Want to lay off family? Fine. Keep it up you get it back. See how that works? Cuck.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

1 minute ago, MDC said:

Want to lay off family? Fine. Keep it up you get it back. See how that works? Cuck.

I'm good. You're triggered. Lol. 

[OldMaid 1,838]

Jesus, can you two start a separate slap fight thread for this sh!t?

[Mr. Hand 482]

1 minute ago, MDC said:

Want to lay off family? Fine. Keep it up you get it back. See how that works? Cuck.

Calling his kid a "retard" is about as low as one can get. Of course.....coming from you that isn't surprising.

[The Observer 641]

30 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

"Mentioned". Get a grip meathead. As a matter of fact, but out unless you're going to criticize both sides. 

MDC was having fun with bit. You were complaining. I also know from experience that you initiate the personal attacks. So I was loving that you were getting it back.  But when I saw you whining about it, I thought I'd do you favor and let you know how pathetic and hypocritical you looked to everyone.  hth

[The Observer 641]

22 minutes ago, MDC said:

Exactly. Dude mentions my wife every day, then cries about being classless if I give it back. Are families off limits or not?

Pick a side.  

Apparently his family is off limits, but everyone else's is fair game.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

1 minute ago, Mr. Hand said:

Calling his kid a "retard" is about as low as one can get. Of course.....coming from you that isn't surprising.

Not just mine. He's a POS. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

1 minute ago, The Observer said:

MDC was having fun with bit. You were complaining. I also know from experience that you initiate the personal attacks. So I was loving that you were getting it back.  But when I saw you whining about it, I thought I'd do you favor and let you know how pathetic and hypocritical you looked to everyone.  hth

Love how you downplayed it with "mentioned". Par for you, dishonest as usual.  

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

1 minute ago, The Observer said:

Apparently his family is off limits, but everyone else's is fair game.

Again, I haven't called for it to stop. Again, wtf are you talking about? 

[Mr. Hand 482]

2 minutes ago, The Observer said:

MDC was having fun with bit. You were complaining. I also know from experience that you initiate the personal attacks. So I was loving that you were getting it back.  But when I saw you whining about it, I thought I'd do you favor and let you know how pathetic and hypocritical you looked to everyone.  hth

Once again....the pot calling the kettle black.

[Hawkeye21 1,855]

3 minutes ago, OldMaid said:

Jesus, can you two start a separate slap fight thread for this sh!t?

It seems obvious they just need to fock each other and get it over with.  So much sexual tension between them.

[The Observer 641]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Hand said:

Calling his kid a "retard" is about as low as one can get. Of course.....coming from you that isn't surprising.

Three times I've seen MDC offer a peace treaty to keep family members off limits. This is what Hardcore wants.  He's just making the mistake of thinking he can pick and choose who gets made fun of.  If you took away personal attacks (truth or lies), Hardcore would have like seven posts a week. So of course he's not agreeing to a treaty. He'll just continue crying like a toddler every day.  sad

[MDC 5,893]

7 minutes ago, The Observer said:

Apparently his family is off limits, but everyone else's is fair game.

Wives, girlfriends, stepkids, divorces etc. all fair game. Just don’t attack HT’s kid or he will cry about it. We’re supposed to believe this guy was a Marine. 

[The Observer 641]

2 minutes ago, MDC said:

Wives, girlfriends, stepkids, divorces etc. all fair game. Just don’t attack HT’s kid or he will cry about it. We’re supposed to believe this guy was a Marine. 

The amount of hypocrisy is hilarious. And lack of self-awareness to recognize it himself.

[IGotWorms 3,315]

Washington (CNN) — House Democrats on Thursday issued a subpoena to Energy Secretary Rick Perry for documents related to the Trump administration's contacts with Ukraine as part of the ongoing House impeachment inquiry. 

The subpoena was issued by the House Intelligence Committee in consultation with the House Foreign Affairs and Oversight committees. It is just the latest in a series of subpoenas issued by House Democrats to administration officials and others as they investigate Trump's contacts with Ukraine in the wake of a whistleblower complaint alleging that President Donald Trump pressured the Ukrainian President to solicit interference in the 2020 election by urging him to investigate Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden's family.

 

 

That’s a lot of subpoenas from folks who supposedly don’t have the power to issue ‘em

[Intense Observer 344]

22 hours ago, The Observer said:

Dragging it out?  Lol. the White House won't provide any documents or people that Congress wants to interview.  This could be over in a week if Trump wanted it to be. and if he had nothing to hide. You know it and I know it

Muh Russia 2.0

Fock the Dems and their never ending quest to interfere with elections.

Every piece of exculpatory evidence turned over is either ignored or claimed to be debunked.

See transcript. See Volker testimony. See State Dept IG documents. See video of Joe Biden admitting to quid pro quo and interference. 

The traitors deserve what is coming.

[Intense Observer 344]

22 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

I don’t think you get it. Their share of the tax burden is comparatively small while yours is large. You could cut spending all you want, that reality would remain the same. The bottom line dollar amount you pay would go down but theirs would go down so much more. No matter what, you lose.

In 2016, the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined. The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid roughly $538 billion, or 37.3 percent of all income taxes, while the bottom 90 percent paid about $440 billion, or 30.5 percent of all income taxes.Nov 13, 2018

 

https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2018-update/

 

Do you have info that contradicts this?

Please share.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

37 minutes ago, MDC said:

Wives, girlfriends, stepkids, divorces etc. all fair game. Just don’t attack HT’s kid or he will cry about it. We’re supposed to believe this guy was a Marine. 

Just you. 

[Hawkeye21 1,855]

3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Just you. 

Seriously, instead of responding to every post he makes just fock him and move on.  You'll both feel better.  A good ol' hate fock.

[IGotWorms 3,315]

18 minutes ago, Intense Observer said:

In 2016, the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined. The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid roughly $538 billion, or 37.3 percent of all income taxes, while the bottom 90 percent paid about $440 billion, or 30.5 percent of all income taxes.Nov 13, 2018

 

https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2018-update/

 

Do you have info that contradicts this?

Please share.

That’s because they have more money than the bottom 90%. Yes it’s that bad

[Big Guy 1,400]

1 hour ago, OldMaid said:

Jesus, can you two start a separate slap fight thread for this sh!t?

Amen to that

Sadly the thread would be huge, with only those 2 posting

[Intense Observer 344]

Re: Fox poll on impeachment

 

Gallup party affiliation

Republican 29%

Democrat 31%

Independent 38%

 

Fox poll

Republican 40%

Democrat 48%

Independent 12%

 

Also, according to the Fox poll:

85% of Dems said impeach
39% of indies said impeach
13% of Repubs said impeach

Something doesn't add up.

I guess if you juke your sampling the usual idiots never make it past the headline so they run with it.

 

Meanwhile, in the real world:

 

 

Curb stomp incoming 11/3/2020

[The Observer 641]

28 minutes ago, Intense Observer said:

Re: Fox poll on impeachment

 

Gallup party affiliation

Republican 29%

Democrat 31%

Independent 38%

 

Fox poll

Republican 40%

Democrat 48%

Independent 12%

 

Also, according to the Fox poll:

85% of Dems said impeach
39% of indies said impeach
13% of Repubs said impeach

Something doesn't add up.

I guess if you juke your sampling the usual idiots never make it past the headline so they run with it.

 

Meanwhile, in the real world:

 

 

Curb stomp incoming 11/3/2020

It's a shame Fox News is so slanted against poor Trump. ROFL

And I'd love to know the average IQ at that Trump rally. Can you just imagine the kind of person that would actually  go to one of those?  Oof

[Big Guy 1,400]

29 minutes ago, Intense Observer said:

Re: Fox poll on impeachment

 

Gallup party affiliation

Republican 29%

Democrat 31%

Independent 38%

 

Fox poll

Republican 40%

Democrat 48%

Independent 12%

 

Also, according to the Fox poll:

85% of Dems said impeach
39% of indies said impeach
13% of Repubs said impeach

Something doesn't add up.

I guess if you juke your sampling the usual idiots never make it past the headline so they run with it.

 

Meanwhile, in the real world:

 

 

Curb stomp incoming 11/3/2020

The People's President 

[drobeski 3,061]

The House democrats will keep doing this until someone in the media begins to hit them with hard questions that expose the nonsense.

Today Chairman Adam Schiff (House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence); Chairman Elijah E. Cummings (Committee on White House Oversight; and Chairman Eliot L. Engel (House Committee on Foreign Affairs) continue sending carefully worded letters under the guise of ‘subpoenas’. [Main Link Here]

Again, just like all prior examples, this is not a “subpoena”, it is a letter calling itself a “subpoena” and carries NO legal penalty for non-compliance. A legislative “letter” needs to carry judicial enforcement authority –A PENALTY– in order to be a “subpoena”.

There is no penalty that can be associated with these demands because the Legislative Branch has not established compulsion authority (aka judicial enforcement authority), as they attempt to work through their non-constitutional “impeachment inquiry” process.

 

REPORT THIS AD

It has long been well established by SCOTUS that Congress has lawful (judicial authority) subpoena powers pursuant to its implied responsibility of legislative oversight.  However, that only applies to the powers enumerated in A1§8. Neither foreign policy (Ukraine) nor impeachment have any nexus to A1§8.  The customary Legislative Branch subpoena power is limited to their legislative purpose. 

There is an elevated level of subpoena, made power possible by SCOTUS precedent, that carries inherent penalties for non-compliance, and is specifically allowed for impeachment investigations.  That level of elevated House authority requires a full House authorization vote.

 

In this current example the Legislative Branch is expressing their “impeachment authority” as part of the Legislative Branch purpose.  So that raises the issue of an entirely different type of subpoena:… A demand from congress that penetrates the constitutional separation of powers; and further penetrates the legal authority of Executive Branch executive privilege.

It was separately established by SCOTUS during the Nixon impeachment investigation that *IF* the full House votes to have the Judiciary Committee commence an impeachment investigation, then Judiciary (only) has subpoena power that can overcome executive privilege claims. 

 

REPORT THIS AD

There has been NO VOTE to create that level of subpoena power.

As a consequence, the House has not created a process to penetrate the constitutionally inherent separation of powers, and/or, the legally recognized firewall known as ‘executive privilege’.   The House must vote to authorize the committee impeachment investigation, and through that process the committee gains judicial enforcement authority.  This creates the penalty for non-compliance with an impeachment subpoena.

A demand letter only becomes a “subpoena”, technically meaning: ‘a request for the production of documents with a penalty for non-compliance’, when the committee has judicial enforcement authority. That process establishes an enforcement penalty.

The current demand letters cannot carry a penalty because the demands do not contain judicial enforcement authority…. because the impeachment investigation was not authorized by the chamber.

The reason judicial enforcement authority is constitutionally required is because creating Judicial enforcement authority, creating the penalty for non-compliance, gives the Executive Branch a process to appeal any legislative demand via the Judicial Branch (federal courts).

Absent a penalty for non-compliance, which factually makes a subpoena a ‘subpoena’, the Executive Branch has no process to engage an appellate review by federal courts. This is the purposeful trick within the Pelosi/Lawfare road-map.

Pelosi and Lawfare’s plans are designed for public consumption; she/they are creating the illusion of something that doesn’t exist.  The purpose of all this fraudulent impeachment activity is to create support for an actual impeachment process.

Because the current Lawfare/Pelosi roadmap intends to work around judicial enforcement authority, the impeachment process is destined by design to end up running head-first into a constitutional problem; specifically separation of power and executive privilege. That predictable constitutional issue will end up with arguments to The Supreme Court.

THAT appears to be why Democrats and left-wing activists have been working for months to de-legitimize the Supreme Court. They always intended to run into this problem. They planned for it.

The Lawfare impeachment road-map is designed to conflict with the constitution. It is a necessary -and unavoidable- feature of their impeachment plan, not a flaw.

[Gladiators 1,904]

52 minutes ago, Intense Observer said:

Re: Fox poll on impeachment

 

Gallup party affiliation

Republican 29%

Democrat 31%

Independent 38%

 

Fox poll

Republican 40%

Democrat 48%

Independent 12%

 

Also, according to the Fox poll:

85% of Dems said impeach
39% of indies said impeach
13% of Repubs said impeach

Something doesn't add up.

I guess if you juke your sampling the usual idiots never make it past the headline so they run with it.

 

Meanwhile, in the real world:

 

 

Curb stomp incoming 11/3/2020

Great to see a group of people who love America all gathered together.

[IGotWorms 3,315]

Washington (CNN) — At least four national security officials were so concerned by the Trump administration's efforts to pressure Ukraine for political purposes that they shared their discontent with a White House lawyer both before and after President Donald Trump's July phone call with Ukraine's President, The Washington Post reported Thursday, citing US officials and other people familiar with the matter.

The revelation of the discussions with National Security Council legal adviser John Eisenberg establish that US officials had delivered notable warnings through official White House channels even before Trump's July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskythat set off a whistleblower complaint. 

According to the Post, officials were alarmed by the removal of then-US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch in May, the promotion of Ukraine-related conspiracies from Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and indications in White House meetings that Trump wanted the Ukrainian government to deliver politically damaging information on former Vice President Joe Biden.

 

Officials told the Post that shortly after the call took place, national security adviser John Bolton and other senior officials were being contacted by subordinates with problems about what Trump had said to Zelensky. 

"When people were listening to this in real time there were significant concerns about what was going on — alarm bells were kind of ringing," one person familiar with the sequence of events told the paper. "People were trying to figure out what to do, how to get a grasp on the situation."

Bolton -- who was fired last month -- was among the officials who moved to obtain a rough transcript of the call that was already being "locked down" on a highly classified network, officials told The Post.

[drobeski 3,061]

52 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Washington (CNN) — At least four national security officials were so concerned by the Trump administration's efforts to pressure Ukraine for political purposes that they shared their discontent with a White House lawyer both before and after President Donald Trump's July phone call with Ukraine's President, The Washington Post reported Thursday, citing US officials and other people familiar with the matter.

The revelation of the discussions with National Security Council legal adviser John Eisenberg establish that US officials had delivered notable warnings through official White House channels even before Trump's July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskythat set off a whistleblower complaint. 

According to the Post, officials were alarmed by the removal of then-US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch in May, the promotion of Ukraine-related conspiracies from Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and indications in White House meetings that Trump wanted the Ukrainian government to deliver politically damaging information on former Vice President Joe Biden.

 

Officials told the Post that shortly after the call took place, national security adviser John Bolton and other senior officials were being contacted by subordinates with problems about what Trump had said to Zelensky. 

"When people were listening to this in real time there were significant concerns about what was going on — alarm bells were kind of ringing," one person familiar with the sequence of events told the paper. "People were trying to figure out what to do, how to get a grasp on the situation."

Bolton -- who was fired last month -- was among the officials who moved to obtain a rough transcript of the call that was already being "locked down" on a highly classified network, officials told The Post.

[Intense Observer 344]

1 hour ago, drobeski said:

He is committed, I'll give him that.

Meanwhile, on Earth,

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/joe-biden-worked-with-whistleblower-when-he-was-vice-president-officials-reveal?_amp=true&__twitter_impression=true

Michael Atkinson, the Intelligence Community's inspector general, told members of Congress that the whistleblower had a "professional tie" to a 2020 Democratic candidate. He had written earlier that while the whistleblower's complaint was credible, he had shown "some indicia of an arguable political bias ... in favor of a rival political candidate."

A retired CIA officer told the Washington Examiner, “From everything we know about the whistleblower and his work in the executive branch then, there is absolutely no doubt he would have been working with Biden when he was vice president."

As an experienced CIA official on the NSC with the deep knowledge of Ukraine that he demonstrated in his complaint, it is probable that the whistleblower briefed Biden and likely that he accompanied him on Air Force Two during at least one of the six visits the 2020 candidate made to the country.

A former Trump administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters, said Biden’s work on foreign affairs brought him into close proximity with the whistleblower either at the CIA or when he was detailed to the White House.

“This person, after working with Biden, may feel defensive towards him because he feels [Biden] is being falsely attacked. Maybe he is even talking to Biden’s staff,” the former official said. “Maybe it is innocent, maybe not.”

[Intense Observer 344]

tldr:

WOMP WOMP

[Big Guy 1,400]

Trump's Rally tonight was awesome! 

 

speaking about The Left.....

"These People are Sick!!!" 

"These People are Crazy!!!"

[Big Guy 1,400]

Speaking on Joe Biden......

"He was never considered smart, he was never considered a good Senator, He was only a good Vice President, because he understood.....

How to kiss, Barack Obama's ass" 

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

1 hour ago, Intense Observer said:

He is committed, I'll give him that.

Meanwhile, on Earth,

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/joe-biden-worked-with-whistleblower-when-he-was-vice-president-officials-reveal?_amp=true&__twitter_impression=true

Michael Atkinson, the Intelligence Community's inspector general, told members of Congress that the whistleblower had a "professional tie" to a 2020 Democratic candidate. He had written earlier that while the whistleblower's complaint was credible, he had shown "some indicia of an arguable political bias ... in favor of a rival political candidate."

A retired CIA officer told the Washington Examiner, “From everything we know about the whistleblower and his work in the executive branch then, there is absolutely no doubt he would have been working with Biden when he was vice president."

As an experienced CIA official on the NSC with the deep knowledge of Ukraine that he demonstrated in his complaint, it is probable that the whistleblower briefed Biden and likely that he accompanied him on Air Force Two during at least one of the six visits the 2020 candidate made to the country.

A former Trump administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters, said Biden’s work on foreign affairs brought him into close proximity with the whistleblower either at the CIA or when he was detailed to the White House.

“This person, after working with Biden, may feel defensive towards him because he feels [Biden] is being falsely attacked. Maybe he is even talking to Biden’s staff,” the former official said. “Maybe it is innocent, maybe not.”

Your own link states the report is credible. If that is the case, bias doesn't really matter now does it? If there is evidence of wrongdoing, move accordingly. If not, shut it down. I don't know either way, and don't really care.