Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: The Impeachment and Removal of Donald J. Trump  (Read 1284 times)

Offline Tom Scully

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1147
Re: The Impeachment and Removal of Donald J. Trump
« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2019, 01:06:57 AM »
Quote
https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/06/politics/legal-scholars-letter-trump-impeachment/
More than 500 legal scholars sign letter saying Trump committed 'impeachable conduct'
More than 500 legal scholars signed on to a letter published Friday accusing President Donald Trump of having "engaged in impeachable conduct" in his ...
CNN
December 6, 2019 ...
.
Quote
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/more-than-500-law-professors-say-trump-committed-impeachable-conduct/2019/12/06/35259c16-183a-11ea-a659-7d69641c6ff7_story.html
More than 500 law professors say Trump committed ‘impeachable conduct’
More than 500 legal scholars have signed on to an open letter asserting that President Trump committed “impeachable conduct” and that lawmakers would be ...
The Washington Post
December 6, 2019...

Quote
Op-Ed: President Trump argues he is above the law. A thousand prosecutors say he’s wrong
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-berwick-parker-trump-mueller-obstruction-justice-20190530-story.html
May 30, 2019 - If anyone else in the U.S. had obstructed justice the way President Trump ... more than 1,000 former federal prosecutors had signed a statement ...

Quote
STATEMENT BY FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTORS - DOJ ...
https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1
May 6, 2019
We served under both Republican and Democratic administrations at different levels of the federal system: as line attorneys, supervisors, special prosecutors, United States Attorneys, and senior officials at the Department of Justice. ... The President’s stated reason was that he ...
......The Mueller report describes several acts that satisfy all of the elements for an obstruction charge: conduct that obstructed or attempted to obstruct the truth-finding process, as to which the evidence of corrupt intent and connection to pending proceedings is overwhelming. These include:
......

Obstruction is a crime deserving prosecution to the fullest extent of the law because it defies the law through blocking thorough criminal investigation of the
underlying crime the obstruction is committed in reaction to the investigation of.


Trump appointed Attorney General William Barr rewarded President Trump's obstructing the Mueller investigation, encouraging Trump to further obstruct
since the result of obstructing Mueller's efforts to inform the American electorate about the integrity of the 2016 presidential campaign and Trump's legitmacy was thwarted by Trump himself.

Only a guilty or other criminally compromised candidate would interfere in an investigation confirming his legitimacy to hold that office. A candidate who
acted ethically and transparently would welcome an investigation confirming the fairness of his "win" and right to hold office.

Now, Trump's elected fellow party members are attempting to reward President Trump for obstruction of Congress, in the process, sawing off the very branch of the Constitutional "tree" they are standing on. In a marriage, such perverted, blind, subservient behavior is reserved for cuckolds.

The "joke" is on the White Nationalists who "coined" this term. Trump is permitted by them and by the rest of the Trump party, to "cuck" all of them!

Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuckservative
"Cuckservative" is a pejorative[1] formed as a portmanteau of "cuck", a shortened form of the word cuckold, and the political designation conservative.[2] It has become a label used by white nationalists and the alt-right in the United States.[3][4][5][6]

The word "cuckservative" reached a high level of mainstream political conversation around mid-July 2015, where it gained media attention just a few weeks before the start of the first Republican primary debate for the 2016 United States presidential election.[4][7]

The term, as well as the shortened form "cuck" for cuckold, originated on websites such as 4chan (specifically the /pol/ imageboard) and 8chan, the right-wing message board My Posting Career,[1][3] the blog The Right Stuff,[8] and other sites in the alt-right movement.[3][9][10].....
« Last Edit: December 07, 2019, 01:10:12 AM by Tom Scully »

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1650
Re: The Impeachment and Removal of Donald J. Trump
« Reply #11 on: December 07, 2019, 03:49:12 AM »
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/more-than-500-law-professors-say-trump-committed-impeachable-conduct/2019/12/06/35259c16-183a-11ea-a659-7d69641c6ff7_story.html
More than 500 law professors say Trump committed ‘impeachable conduct’
More than 500 legal scholars have signed on to an open letter asserting that President Trump committed “impeachable conduct” and that lawmakers would be ...
The Washington Post
December 6, 2019...

Op-Ed: President Trump argues he is above the law. A thousand prosecutors say he’s wrong
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-berwick-parker-trump-mueller-obstruction-justice-20190530-story.html
May 30, 2019 - If anyone else in the U.S. had obstructed justice the way President Trump ... more than 1,000 former federal prosecutors had signed a statement ...

Quote
STATEMENT BY FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTORS - DOJ ...
https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1
May 6, 2019
We served under both Republican and Democratic administrations at different levels of the federal system: as line attorneys, supervisors, special prosecutors, United States Attorneys, and senior officials at the Department of Justice. ... The President’s stated reason was that he ...
......The Mueller report describes several acts that satisfy all of the elements for an obstruction charge: conduct that obstructed or attempted to obstruct the truth-finding process, as to which the evidence of corrupt intent and connection to pending proceedings is overwhelming. These include:
......


It's like Deja vu all over again. And it's only been a little over a year. What a farce. It did not work in keeping Kavanaugh off of the bench of the highest court in the land. It will do nothing to sway Republican Senators.

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1650
Re: The Impeachment and Removal of Donald J. Trump
« Reply #12 on: December 07, 2019, 03:54:28 AM »
Unfathomable’: More than 2,400 law professors sign letter opposing Kavanaugh’s confirmation

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2018/10/04/unprecedented-unfathomable-more-than-law-professors-sign-letter-after-kavanaugh-hearing/

 BS:

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
Re: The Impeachment and Removal of Donald J. Trump
« Reply #13 on: December 08, 2019, 03:00:27 PM »
 God I hope this whole impeachment thing is a deep state operation utilizing Trump Derangement Syndrome, otherwise the left, or at least the Democrats have lost their minds

Online Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2931
Re: The Impeachment and Removal of Donald J. Trump
« Reply #14 on: December 08, 2019, 06:33:07 PM »
God I hope this whole impeachment thing is a deep state operation utilizing Trump Derangement Syndrome, otherwise the left, or at least the Democrats have lost their minds

You're ging with KGB-boy Vladimir Putin and his agent, Julian Assange, right?

--  MWT
« Last Edit: December 08, 2019, 07:41:03 PM by Thomas Graves »

Offline Tom Scully

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1147
Re: The Impeachment and Removal of Donald J. Trump
« Reply #15 on: December 08, 2019, 07:17:21 PM »
God I hope this whole impeachment thing is a deep state operation utilizing Trump Derangement Syndrome, otherwise the left, or at least the Democrats have lost their minds

Do tell... I am hoping I am not misunderstanding you, because it sure seems you are blaming the cops for the bank robber robbing the bank.
In addition to reinforcing the Constitutional authority of Congress to investigate the Executive and to hold the President accountable to the Constitution, eleven months from the next election, there is the urgency to discourage, if not to prevent this president from using the powers of his office to benefit him personally by attempting to gain political advantage in the coming election, as conditioning military aid authorized by Congress to a foreign country under military attack by Russia on a requirement the leader of the country under Russian attack agree to announce investigation of the President's strongest political adversary, Joe Biden!

Quote
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/11/20/other-knife-gordon-sondland-stuck-trumps-back/
By Philip Bump  - November 20, 2019 at 12:12 p.m. EST

...In addition to directly alleging a quid pro quo that was well-known within the administration, Sondland’s testimony undercut Trump’s claims in another, quieter way. At several points in his testimony, he suggested it was only the announcement of investigations that was a priority for the White House.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) asked Sondland at one point to clarify the outline of the quid pro quo.

“He had to get those two investigations if that official act was going to take place,” Schiff said.

“Correct,” Sondland replied. “He had to announce the investigations. He didn’t actually have to do them, as I understood it.”...

...“Well, they would have to announce that they were going to do it,” Sondland replied.

“Right, because they — because Giuliani and President Trump didn’t actually care if they did them, right?” Goldman asked.

“I never heard, Mr. Goldman, anyone say that the investigations had to start or had to be completed,” Sondland said. “The only thing I heard from Mr. Giuliani or otherwise was that they had to be announced in some form. And that form kept changing.”

“Announced publicly?” Goldman asked.

“Announced publicly,” Sondland replied.

“And you, of course, recognized that there would be political benefits to a public announcement as opposed to a private confirmation, right?” Goldman asked.

“Well, the way it was expressed to me was that the Ukrainians had a long history of committing to things privately and then never following through,” Sondland replied. “So President Trump presumably — again, communicated through Mr. Giuliani — wanted the Ukrainians on record publicly that they were going to do these investigations. That’s the reason that was given to me.”

“But you never heard anyone say that they really wanted them to do the investigations,” Goldman said, “just that they wanted them to announce them.”

“I didn’t hear either way,” Sondland replied.

Goldman later pointed to testimony from acting Ukraine ambassador William B. Taylor Jr. in which he recalled Sondland saying that Ukraine needed to be in a “public box.”

“It goes back to my earlier comment that — again, coming from the Giuliani source, because we didn’t discuss this specifically, President Trump — that they wanted whatever commitments Ukraine made to be made publicly so that they would be on the record and be held more accountable,” Sondland said. “Whatever those commitments were."

It’s an interesting evolution in Sondland’s responses. It’s clear he understands the difference between an investigation that’s announced and one that’s completed. It also seems clear that he understands how the investigations might be politically useful....

..Another possibility, of course, is that Sondland was under the impression that the investigations were in fact secondary to the announcement of the investigations. That’s a potentially significant development, strongly bolstering the idea that the intent of the investigations was purely political. The announcement itself would serve Trump in the way the late-October announcement of the reopening investigation into Hillary Clinton helped Trump in 2016. That reopening went nowhere, but the political damage had been done.

There were other, more significant components to Sondland’s testimony. But the significance of his suggestion that the call for investigation was simply a public relations move and nothing more shouldn’t be underestimated. If true, it severely undercuts Trump’s already shaky defense about what he wanted from Ukraine’s president....

This is by George Conway, legal scholar and spouse of the President's 2016 campaign manager and current prominent political advisor.:

https://twitter.com/JohnWDean/status/1202306453513494528


Quote
https://www.vox.com/2019/12/6/20998714/rudy-giuliani-quid-pro-quo-tweets-ukraine-biden
But Giuliani’s tweet reveals the hollowness of that talking point. “Corruption” is just a stand-in word for “Biden.” He doesn’t even try to hide it.
December 6, 2019

.....But Giuliani’s tweet reveals the hollowness of that talking point. “Corruption” is just a stand-in word for “Biden.” He doesn’t even try to hide it.
https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1202704722857267200


Even though Giuliani’s tweet gives up the game, White House spokesperson Hogan Gidley appeared on Fox News on Friday, still claiming that Trump “didn’t press [Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelensky on anything other than getting to the bottom of corruption in his country. We know that.”

HOGAN GIDLEY TODAY: Trump "didn't press Zelensky on anything other than getting to the bottom of corruption in his country. We know that"

But if Giuliani’s tweet isn’t enough to convince you otherwise, consider that the word “corruption” doesn’t appear even once in the summaries of the Trump-Zelensky calls released by the White House.

Of course, the notion that arguably the most personally corrupt president in American history ever had good-faith concerns about corruption abroad was hard to believe from the get-go — some might say as hard to believe as Attorney General William Barr’s claim that he couldn’t find an available room in the Washington, DC, area for his $30,000 holiday party anywhere other than the Trump International Hotel just blocks from the White House.

Verifiable facts support the opposite. If every effort is not made to halt reinforcing Trump for breaking his solemn oath of office, the vow to "preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States, so help me God," Trump's obstruction of the Mueller investigation and of Congress's unambiguous constitutional authority to investigate and to hold the the Executive branch accountable will result in the Executive being unaccountable to his oath, to the law.

Quote
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/04/us/politics/turley-impeachment.html
Trump Blocked Key Impeachment Witnesses. Should Congress Wait?
At the first House Judiciary Committee impeachment hearing, Republicans’ witness said lawmakers were rushing the process and should instead let court fights over access to witnesses play out.
By Charlie Savage - Dec. 4, 2019

.....When a president systematically blockades congressional subpoenas and instructs current and former aides not to provide documents and testimony, that is another basis to impeach, argued another witness, Michael J. Gerhardt, a University of North Carolina law professor and author of “The Federal Impeachment Process: A Constitutional and Historical Analysis.”

“In this situation, the full-scale obstruction of those subpoenas, I think, torpedoes separation of powers and, therefore, your only recourse is to, in a sense, protect your institutional prerogatives, and that would include impeachment,” Mr. Gerhardt testified.

Notably, Mr. Turley — who said he had not voted for Mr. Trump — did not assert the president did nothing wrong, as hard-core supporters of the president have done. He said that a now famous call in which Mr. Trump pressured Ukraine’s president to announce investigations that could benefit him politically “was anything but perfect,” and that Congress had a legitimate reason to scrutinize it.

But, he argued, it is premature to rush forward with impeachment while Congress has yet to obtain potentially knowable facts about what Mr. Trump said to his aides about withholding a White House meeting and $391 million in military aid that Ukraine desperately needed to shore up its defenses against Russian aggression....

...“There remain core witnesses and documents that have not been sought through the courts,” Mr. Turley wrote, adding that the House “is moving forward based on conjecture, assuming what the evidence would show if there existed the time or inclination to establish it.”

But Mr. Turley made only a passing reference in his written statement to the problem that has bedeviled impeachment investigators: The White House has directed top aides to Mr. Trump not to cooperate with the House, while asserting that they are immune from being subpoenaed to testify about their discussions with the president....
« Last Edit: December 08, 2019, 07:17:50 PM by Tom Scully »

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
Re: The Impeachment and Removal of Donald J. Trump
« Reply #16 on: December 09, 2019, 01:52:57 AM »
 What military attack is that?

Online Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2931
Re: The Impeachment and Removal of Donald J. Trump
« Reply #17 on: December 09, 2019, 02:57:53 AM »
What military attack is that?

Matthew,

Do you not believe that Putin sent Russian special forces (aka "Little Green Men") into Crimea in 2014 to steal it from Ukraine, and that Russian mercenaries and "regulars" have been fighting Ukrainian forces in eastern Ukraine with tanks, artillery and electronic warfare stuff, etc, since 2014?

Or do you think that's Fake News?

--  MWT  ;)
« Last Edit: December 09, 2019, 03:18:13 AM by Thomas Graves »

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
Re: The Impeachment and Removal of Donald J. Trump
« Reply #18 on: December 09, 2019, 03:31:04 AM »
 I know Russian troops were stationed in Sevastopol before February of 14 Even if we were to accept the little green men story, are we to believe a few soldiers cowered the Crimeans without a shot?

 Where is your evidence of Russian troops and tanks in the Easter Ukraine?

 Wgy would you think your say so would be proof of anything?
« Last Edit: December 09, 2019, 03:38:05 AM by Matt Grantham »

Online Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2931
Re: The Impeachment and Removal of Donald J. Trump
« Reply #19 on: December 09, 2019, 03:58:54 AM »
I know Russian troops were stationed in Sevastopol before February of 14 Even if we were to accept the little green men story, are we to believe a few soldiers cowered the Crimeans without a shot?

 Where is your evidence of Russian troops and tanks in the Easter Ukraine?

 Wgy would you think your say so would be proof of anything?

You've been reading the wrong "news sources," dude.

Or do you limit yourself to YouTube videos?

--  MWT  ;)

PS  Here's a good one from Bellingcat.

You've heard of Bellingcat, haven't you?

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2016/07/04/russias-200th-motorized-infantry-brigade-donbass-tell-tale-tanks/

-- MWT  ;)


« Last Edit: December 09, 2019, 04:06:35 AM by Thomas Graves »

 

Mobile View