Official President Trump Impeachment Inquiry Thread

[Intense Observer 344]

I was hoping for witnesses so we could get Schiff, Eric CIAramella, Hunter Biden, and Joe Biden on the stand.

Given their desperation and collusion with the MSM to bamboozle the public with faux outrage over 100% legal actions.... I hope Mitch and the Republicans tell the Dems to go fock themselves. No witnesses. No trial. Dismissed.

The melts will be glorious and the only people who will care are the retards who are beyond help anyways.

[Voltaire 4,552]

I think we're better off with Biden getting the nomination. He's as exciting as stale bread and it'll make the freak show's head explode (and stay home). If Bernie were to win, the freaks would have to blame themselves and the Dems may look in the mirror.

This is important because AOC is eligible to run come 2024 which could be a first rate Dem clown show that I'm really looking forward to. That'd potentially give Trumpism another nine years.

[Hawkeye21 1,848]

On 1/26/2020 at 7:35 AM, Intense Observer said:

He brings up the polls because the enemy of the people trashes him and America 24/7 to influence dipshits like you and your comrades.

Take away your propaganda outlets and Americans are doing better than ever and Trump support is growing across all demographics.

If the MSM wasn't intent on destroying this country and actually reported the news Trump's approval would be >80%.

So yes, it is important for him to tweet all the time and hype the polls. 

1. It is the only way to bypass the MSM spin

2. It triggers the fock out of pillow biters like you

So triggered.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

3 hours ago, Voltaire said:

I think we're better off with Biden getting the nomination. He's as exciting as stale bread and it'll make the freak show's head explode (and stay home). If Bernie were to win, the freaks would have to blame themselves and the Dems may look in the mirror.

This is important because AOC is eligible to run come 2024 which could be a first rate Dem clown show that I'm really looking forward to. That'd potentially give Trumpism another nine years.

As I have said before, how could Biden be Trump's political rival if his own party doesn't nominate him? The Dems have painted themselves into yet another corner where they are forced to nominate a person who is rather unelectable.  So, Biden will get the nomination because they have built a strategy around him which includes a huge investigation and lawsuit when he loses.

[FeelingMN 273]

10 hours ago, Intense Observer said:

The retard board is over here.

Not shocking at all that on the eve of day 1 of Trump's defense ABC leaks an 82 minute private dinner party conversation that included 30 seconds about Ukraine, all prompted by the 2 Ukrainian guests that nobody knew, who are now under arrest for the 100% subjectively enforced violation of campaign donation laws and are therefore claiming OMB.

Then, totally by coincidence, on the eve of day 2 of Trump's defense, the NYT leaks a transcript of a book written by none other than Dem Favorite John "Never Met A War He Didn't Love" Bolton. Bolton, who served briefly in Trump's administration before being fired, without starting a single war btw, is now doing the OMB media/book tour.

Where have we seen this before?

- Michael Avennati

- Michael Cohen

- Omarosa

- Stormy Daniels

- James Comey

- Half a dozen other fired/disgraced RINOs

 

If you are dumb enough to believe any of this bullshite then you deserve the self inflicted misery you put yourself through.

#WeGotHeemThisTime!!!

It wasn't a media fabrication or some deep state conspiracy but Trump himself who tweeted he would have supporters even if he killed someone on 5th Avenue.  What do you think he meant by that?  

Bonus points if you can answer without using Obama, Hillary, Liberals, or MSM.  

[FeelingMN 273]

13 hours ago, 5-Points said:

Honest question. 

What has President Trump done to warrant impeachment that every President before him didn't do? 

And don't give me any buIIshit dem talking point about trying to influence an election. Everything politicians do is an attempt to influence an election. 

Give me one solid piece of concrete evidence of a high crime or misdemeanor worthy of impeachment and removal from office. 

One.

 

I'll hang up and listen. 

Every President before Trump withheld foreign aid in exchange for information on a political rival?  If every President has done that, why doesn't Trump just admit what he did?  If all this falls under the umbrella of....all politicians try to influence an election, that's all I'm doing.....just say it. Why isn't he?

Clinton got busted for getting blown in his office, then perjured himself.  If Trump has done nothing wrong, he should testify under oath.  Or at least let someone else testify who could help exonerate him.  But none of that will happen.  Why?

Fact is all of this looks very bad for Trump.  And honestly I don't want him removed from office any other way than through voting his ass out because any other way might fracture the country even more.  No matter what happens, someone's gonna be pissed.  It's a messed up situation no matter what side you're on.  

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,565]

2 minutes ago, FeelingMN said:

Every President before Trump withheld foreign aid in exchange for information on a political rival?  If every President has done that, why doesn't Trump just admit what he did?  If all this falls under the umbrella of....all politicians try to influence an election, that's all I'm doing.....just say it. Why isn't he?

Clinton got busted for getting blown in his office, then perjured himself.  If Trump has done nothing wrong, he should testify under oath.  Or at least let someone else testify who could help exonerate him.  But none of that will happen.  Why?

Fact is all of this looks very bad for Trump.  And honestly I don't want him removed from office any other way than through voting his ass out because any other way might fracture the country even more.  No matter what happens, someone's gonna be pissed.  It's a messed up situation no matter what side you're on.  

Watch the video I posted a page ago and get back to me. This isn’t a case

[drobeski 3,061]

7 minutes ago, FeelingMN said:

Every President before Trump withheld foreign aid in exchange for information on a political rival?  If every President has done that, why doesn't Trump just admit what he did?  If all this falls under the umbrella of....all politicians try to influence an election, that's all I'm doing.....just say it. Why isn't he?

Clinton got busted for getting blown in his office, then perjured himself.  If Trump has done nothing wrong, he should testify under oath.  Or at least let someone else testify who could help exonerate him.  But none of that will happen.  Why?

Fact is all of this looks very bad for Trump.  And honestly I don't want him removed from office any other way than through voting his ass out because any other way might fracture the country even more.  No matter what happens, someone's gonna be pissed.  It's a messed up situation no matter what side you're on.  

What was the "information on a political rival" regarding ? 

I'll give you a hint..

It begins with C 

[Utilit99 4,099]

13 minutes ago, FeelingMN said:

Every President before Trump withheld foreign aid in exchange for information on a political rival?  If every President has done that, why doesn't Trump just admit what he did?  If all this falls under the umbrella of....all politicians try to influence an election, that's all I'm doing.....just say it. Why isn't he?

Clinton got busted for getting blown in his office, then perjured himself.  If Trump has done nothing wrong, he should testify under oath.  Or at least let someone else testify who could help exonerate him.  But none of that will happen.  Why?

Fact is all of this looks very bad for Trump.  And honestly I don't want him removed from office any other way than through voting his ass out because any other way might fracture the country even more.  No matter what happens, someone's gonna be pissed.  It's a messed up situation no matter what side you're on.  

Dear God.....

[TimmySmith 2,782]

18 minutes ago, FeelingMN said:

Every President before Trump withheld foreign aid in exchange for information on a political rival?  If every President has done that, why doesn't Trump just admit what he did?  If all this falls under the umbrella of....all politicians try to influence an election, that's all I'm doing.....just say it. Why isn't he?

First off, the investigation existed already. Joe quashed it. Why are dems afraid of re-opening the investigation of a clean guy?  And Trump has been more than open about it. 

[FeelingMN 273]

8 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

Watch the video I posted a page ago and get back to me. This isn’t a case

Fact:  John Bolton, NSA to Trump during the time in question, allegedly has stated there was a quid pro quo.  We won't know for sure unless he testifies which ol' sausage fingers is opposed to because he might something bad about Trudeau or Boris Johnson or something.  

 

A trial without witnesses.  A POTUS without morals.  It's the world we live in.

3 minutes ago, drobeski said:

What was the "information on a political rival" regarding ? 

I'll give you a hint..

It begins with C 

Cool?  No problem whatsoever investigating the Bidens or the Clintons or anyone else.  Screw them all.

Are they still investigating?  In the name of justice and whatnot?

[drobeski 3,061]

1 minute ago, FeelingMN said:

Fact:  John Bolton, NSA to Trump during the time in question, allegedly has stated there was a quid pro quo.  We won't know for sure unless he testifies which ol' sausage fingers is opposed to because he might something bad about Trudeau or Boris Johnson or something.  

 

A trial without witnesses.  A POTUS without morals.  It's the world we live in.

Cool?  No problem whatsoever investigating the Bidens or the Clintons or anyone else.  Screw them all.

Are they still investigating?  In the name of justice and whatnot?

Corruption  ...  the "dirt" you guys whine about was corruption.  

Kills the whole theory when you get down to the nitty gritty. 

[5-Points 2,715]

11 minutes ago, FeelingMN said:

Every President before Trump withheld foreign aid in exchange for information on a political rival?  If every President has done that, why doesn't Trump just admit what he did?  If all this falls under the umbrella of....all politicians try to influence an election, that's all I'm doing.....just say it. Why isn't he?

Clinton got busted for getting blown in his office, then perjured himself.  If Trump has done nothing wrong, he should testify under oath.  Or at least let someone else testify who could help exonerate him.  But none of that will happen.  Why?

Fact is all of this looks very bad for Trump.  And honestly I don't want him removed from office any other way than through voting his ass out because any other way might fracture the country even more.  No matter what happens, someone's gonna be pissed.  It's a messed up situation no matter what side you're on.  

President Trump didn't withhold aid, he briefly delayed it's release. And it wasn't in exchange for information on a political rival, it was in an effort to investigate alleged corruption involving high ranking US officials.

Regardless of which side of the aisle you're on, you should be in favor of getting to the bottom of that issue. I mean, if attempting to investigate alleged corruption is worthy of impeachment and removal from office, surely engaging in said corruption should be worthy of disqualification for holding the same office. No? 

 

Also, since when is soliciting a foreign entity for dirt on a political rival illegal? I mean it's not like the Trump administration paid the Ukraine for a fraudulent dossier on Biden or anything. They simply delayed the release of aid until they could ascertain the level of corruption, if any, in the new Ukranian administration.  

[FeelingMN 273]

3 minutes ago, TimmySmith said:

First off, the investigation existed already. Joe quashed it. Why are dems afraid of re-opening the investigation of a clean guy?  And Trump has been more than open about it. 

Why withhold aid then?  Why not allow others to testify to help support your case?

[RLLD 3,455]

I heard that the "source" of this idea that Bolton suggests in his book that Trump told him it was a quid pro quo came from the New York Times, OK....I will need AT LEAST three more news sources before I even begin to believe this.

 

 

[drobeski 3,061]

19 minutes ago, FeelingMN said:

Why withhold aid then?  Why not allow others to testify to help support your case?

I say let's have witnesses,  but it must include the whistleblower and all communications  he was involved in. Agree ?

[FeelingMN 273]

1 minute ago, drobeski said:

I say let's have witnesses,  but it must include the whistleblower and all communications  he was involved in. Agree ?

Sure....why not.  A trial should have witness testimony.  Let's have Trump testify under oath too.  Clinton did.  And if Trump did nothing wrong all he has to do is tell the truth.  Should be easy.

[drobeski 3,061]

Just now, FeelingMN said:

Sure....why not.  A trial should have witness testimony.  Let's have Trump testify under oath too.  Clinton did.  And if Trump did nothing wrong all he has to do is tell the truth.  Should be easy.

Sure, Schiff up there too under oath. Easy peasy.

[Utilit99 4,099]

1 minute ago, FeelingMN said:

Sure....why not.  A trial should have witness testimony.  Let's have Trump testify under oath too.  Clinton did.  And if Trump did nothing wrong all he has to do is tell the truth.  Should be easy.

Clinton lied under oath. Why are you so proud of that?

[TimmySmith 2,782]

31 minutes ago, FeelingMN said:

Why withhold aid then?  Why not allow others to testify to help support your case?

Corruption.  There is a precedent about withholding aid because of it.   And Trump has/had no case, it's the Ukraine's case.

[5-Points 2,715]

14 minutes ago, FeelingMN said:

Sure....why not.  A trial should have witness testimony.  Let's have Trump testify under oath too.  Clinton did.  And if Trump did nothing wrong all he has to do is tell the truth.  Should be easy.

If witness testimony is so crucial to the case, why weren't these witnesses called by the house during their process? 

This trial should be based on the case that the House Dems built. This isn't the time to dig for more evidence. This is the time to argue the case based on the "facts" that they provided. If they didn't need witnesses to build their case they don't need them to argue their case. 

[lickin_starfish 1,477]

It looks like certain posters are okay with Government officials pumping our tax dollars into shitthole countries, and funneling the money back into their own pockets through their children.

These same posters believe that if someone wants this corruption investigated, that person should be silenced and removed.

These same posters also plan on voting for a Presidential candidate who has vowed to steal our tax money and give it to illegals.

These posters are anti-American pieces of shitt.

[Utilit99 4,099]

Just now, 5-Points said:

If witness testimony is so crucial to the case, why weren't these witnesses called by the house during their process? 

This trial should be based on the case that the House Dems built. This isn't the time to dig for more evidence. This is the time to argue the case based on the "facts" that they provided. If they didn't need witnesses to build their case they don't need them to argue their case. 

Exactly!!

This is not some open ended trial to see what they can charge him with in the end. It's crazy how the left has gone so far off the rails.

[Voltaire 4,552]

Bolton is despicable cancer and should never have been given a job but he was. He's the deepest of deep state and was always the last person on the planet I want whispering in the president's ear and I was livid when he was hired. To have this hardcore Bushtard around is looking worse now if he blows a hole in the defense's case.

Regardless of what I think of him, let him testify. The defense says there was no quid pro quo, if there was, Bolton could sabotage that part of the defense, but then they should have never made that claim in the first place.

The good thing is that Bolton's testifying opens the door to Hunter and Joe Biden testifying.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,578]

6 minutes ago, lickin_starfish said:

It looks like certain posters are okay with Government officials pumping our tax dollars into shitthole countries, and funneling the money back into their own pockets through their children.

These same posters believe that if someone wants this corruption investigated, that person should be silenced and removed.

These same posters also plan on voting for a Presidential candidate who has vowed to steal our tax money and give it to illegals.

These posters are anti-American pieces of shitt.

Well said. 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,565]

54 minutes ago, FeelingMN said:

Fact:  John Bolton, NSA to Trump during the time in question, allegedly has stated there was a quid pro quo.  We won't know for sure unless he testifies which ol' sausage fingers is opposed to because he might something bad about Trudeau or Boris Johnson or something.  

 

A trial without witnesses.  A POTUS without morals.  It's the world we live in.

Cool?  No problem whatsoever investigating the Bidens or the Clintons or anyone else.  Screw them all.

Are they still investigating?  In the name of justice and whatnot?

I know you aren’t a moron bro. But you are starting to sound like one

FACT and allegedly in the same sentence cmon man

[Utilit99 4,099]

6 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Bolton is despicable cancer and should never have been given a job but he was. He's the deepest of deep state and was always the last person on the planet I want whispering in the president's ear and I was livid when he was hired. To have this hardcore Bushtard around is looking worse now if he blows a hole in the defense's case.

Regardless of what I think of him, let him testify. The defense says there was no quid pro quo, if there was, Bolton could sabotage that part of the defense, but then they should have never made that claim in the first place.

The good thing is that Bolton's testifying opens the door to Hunter and Joe Biden testifying.

Do you want the government to sit in this trial for the next two months? It's a useless waste of time and money.

What do these people make per hour (broken down from salary that is)? How many are there that are involved across the board? And where does the money come from to pay their salaries?

[drobeski 3,061]

13 minutes ago, lickin_starfish said:

It looks like certain posters are okay with Government officials pumping our tax dollars into shitthole countries, and funneling the money back into their own pockets through their children.

These same posters believe that if someone wants this corruption investigated, that person should be silenced and removed.

These same posters also plan on voting for a Presidential candidate who has vowed to steal our tax money and give it to illegals.

These posters are anti-American pieces of shitt.

Well said 

[drobeski 3,061]

Whistleblower, by far and away the most important witness.

When is he testifying?

[5-Points 2,715]

15 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Bolton is despicable cancer and should never have been given a job but he was. He's the deepest of deep state and was always the last person on the planet I want whispering in the president's ear and I was livid when he was hired. To have this hardcore Bushtard around is looking worse now if he blows a hole in the defense's case.

Regardless of what I think of him, let him testify. The defense says there was no quid pro quo, if there was, Bolton could sabotage that part of the defense, but then they should have never made that claim in the first place.

The good thing is that Bolton's testifying opens the door to Hunter and Joe Biden testifying.

Bolton has an axe to grind with regards to President Trump. Nothing good can come from him testifying. 

He's trying to sell books. Let him do that on his own dime. 

[Strike 3,944]

5 minutes ago, drobeski said:

Whistleblower, by far and away the most important witness.

When is he testifying?

Schiffforbrains says he still doesn't know his identity, even though everyone else does, so how can he testify

[5-Points 2,715]

18 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Exactly!!

This is not some open ended trial to see what they can charge him with in the end. It's crazy how the left has gone so far off the rails.

This whole notion that President Trump should testify is ludicrous. The next defense attorney that recommends his client take the stand will be the first. Once he's under oath there's no telling what kind of buIIshit questions these shameless Dems will ask him in an attempt to get him to contradict himself so they can say he lied. Or ask him about his tax returns or any other unrelated issue they want to bring up. 

Strange how the left needed to rush to impeach but now want a long drug out trial. Couldn't be strictly about optics, could it? 

 

 

[Voltaire 4,552]

21 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Do you want the government to sit in this trial for the next two months? It's a useless waste of time and money.

What do these people make per hour (broken down from salary that is)? How many are there that are involved across the board? And where does the money come from to pay their salaries?

Tactically, it's best to keep Warren and Sanders tied up in Washington while Joe runs around campaigning to his heart's content. Then after Super Tuesday, call him and Hunter in to testify and sink his campaign at that point.

I do really want to hear from the Bidens, if Bolton opens the door for that, OK. I think once people see there really was corruption going on in Ukraine and see what quid pro quo actually looks like, it'll work out better.

 

 

[lod001 1,235]

1 hour ago, RLLD said:

I heard that the "source" of this idea that Bolton suggests in his book that Trump told him it was a quid pro quo came from the New York Times, OK....I will need AT LEAST three REAL more news sources before I even begin to believe this.

 

 

That's more like it.

[lod001 1,235]

1 hour ago, lickin_starfish said:

It looks like certain posters are okay with Government officials pumping our tax dollars into shitthole countries, and funneling the money back into their own pockets through their children.

These same posters believe that if someone wants this corruption investigated, that person should be silenced and removed.

These same posters also plan on voting for a Presidential candidate who has vowed to steal our tax money and give it to illegals.

These posters are anti-American pieces of shitt.

Low IQ, low energy, pieces of sh1t with raging TDS.

[lod001 1,235]

52 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

Bolton has an axe to grind with regards to President Trump. Nothing good can come from him testifying. 

He's trying to sell books. Let him do that on his own dime. 

Bolton and Trump are the exact same personality and Trump told Bolton to go fock himself so you know Bolton is going to retaliate any way he can since he got biatchslapped in front of the world. 

[FeelingMN 273]

1 hour ago, 5-Points said:

President Trump didn't withhold aid, he briefly delayed it's release. And it wasn't in exchange for information on a political rival, it was in an effort to investigate alleged corruption involving high ranking US officials.

Regardless of which side of the aisle you're on, you should be in favor of getting to the bottom of that issue. I mean, if attempting to investigate alleged corruption is worthy of impeachment and removal from office, surely engaging in said corruption should be worthy of disqualification for holding the same office. No? 

 

Also, since when is soliciting a foreign entity for dirt on a political rival illegal? I mean it's not like the Trump administration paid the Ukraine for a fraudulent dossier on Biden or anything. They simply delayed the release of aid until they could ascertain the level of corruption, if any, in the new Ukranian administration.  

Agree with the bolded part 100%.  

 

47 minutes ago, lickin_starfish said:

It looks like certain posters are okay with Government officials pumping our tax dollars into shitthole countries, and funneling the money back into their own pockets through their children.

These same posters believe that if someone wants this corruption investigated, that person should be silenced and removed.

These same posters also plan on voting for a Presidential candidate who has vowed to steal our tax money and give it to illegals.

These posters are anti-American pieces of shitt.

Certain posters?  Who?

 

39 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

I know you aren’t a moron bro. But you are starting to sound like one

FACT and allegedly in the same sentence cmon man

I'm not stating what is alleged is fact.  That would be contradictory.  The fact is that Bolton can allegedly blow the defense's argument to shreds.  It remains alleged because we haven't actually heard anything from him yet, and probably won't because Trump is worried he'll open up about what Trump thinks about some Italian leader or something.  

 

 

22 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

This whole notion that President Trump should testify is ludicrous. The next defense attorney that recommends his client take the stand will be the first. Once he's under oath there's no telling what kind of buIIshit questions these shameless Dems will ask him in an attempt to get him to contradict himself so they can say he lied. Or ask him about his tax returns or any other unrelated issue they want to bring up. 

Strange how the left needed to rush to impeach but now want a long drug out trial. Couldn't be strictly about optics, could it? 

 

 

Regardless of the politics being played, and what side of the aisle you're on, you should be in favor of getting to the bottom of the issue.  Right?

Clinton testified.  So there's precedent that a President testify during an impeachment trial....if you really wanted to get to the bottom of the issue.

 

[Strike 3,944]

11 minutes ago, FeelingMN said:

I'm not stating what is alleged is fact.  That would be contradictory.  The fact is that Bolton can allegedly blow the defense's argument to shreds.  It remains alleged because we haven't actually heard anything from him yet, and probably won't because Trump is worried he'll open up about what Trump thinks about some Italian leader or something.  

I've read that the "sources" are taking Bolton's quote out of context; that it had nothing to do with Ukraine and everything to do with Russia.  I won't comment on the truth either way because, quite honestly, I don't give a fock.  If the Dems wanted Bolton's testimony they had their chance to get it and chose not to.  It's not the Senate's job to do their investigation for them.  Whether he testifies or not doesn't matter to me.  Just something to keep in mind if it turns out to be B.S. as so many other "bombshells" have over the last few years.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

11 minutes ago, FeelingMN said:

Regardless of the politics being played, and what side of the aisle you're on, you should be in favor of getting to the bottom of the issue.  Right?

So true.  And I think there is 100% agreement that the issue started in the Ukraine. Let the chips fall where they may.

[5-Points 2,715]

1 hour ago, FeelingMN said:

Regardless of the politics being played, and what side of the aisle you're on, you should be in favor of getting to the bottom of the issue.  Right?

Clinton testified.  So there's precedent that a President testify during an impeachment trial....if you really wanted to get to the bottom of the issue.

 

If not for the complete lack of integrity with which the Dems have conducted themselves thus far throughout President Trump's first term I would say, sure, go ahead and call witnesses that they deemed unnecessary to call in the House. 

At this point, however, I say fock them. The defense has no obligation to aid the prosecution in its sham investigation. When the ball was in their court, they lied, cheated and stole their way through the game. Now that they are no longer in control of the process they have to play by the rules they are given. 

But in the interest of getting to the bottom of the matter I say conduct a complete thorough investigation into Burisma/Biden. Then, when that investigation is complete and any trials and convictions that may stem from that investigation have played out, sure, then we can conduct an investigation into whether or not what President Trump did was illegal or if his request for continued investigations were warranted. 

 

First things first though.