The First Trump Impeachment Thread

[schriznoeder]

 

[QMany]

Thinking back to his testimony, Turley focused on "bribery," QPQ, etc. He just ignored any analysis or reasoning to rebut that it is an abuse of power to ask a foreign government to smear a political opponent with a "ginned-up" investigation announcement, regardless of aid. 

[QMany]

Lying. That is the GOP's only defense.

 

 

[Nebfanatic]

2 minutes ago, QMany said:

Thinking back to his testimony, Turley focused on "bribery," QPQ, etc. He just ignored any analysis or reasoning to rebut that it is an abuse of power to ask a foreign government to swear a political opponent with a "ginned-up" investigation announcement, regardless of aid. 

I think it was Gerhardt who said asking Zelensky for the investigation in and of itself is impeachable. 

[TGHusker]

 

Judge Nap - says easiest case against trump  is 'obstruction of Congress'

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/foxs-andrew-napolitano-i-would-vote-for-impeachment-if-i-were-in-congress/

Quote

 

Fox News Judicial Analyst Andrew Napolitano has long argued about the judicial merit of the current impeachment proceedings, but Wednesday morning put as fine a point as possible on where he stands. Asked by America’s Newsroom anchor Bill Hemmer if he’d vote for impeachment if he were a member of the House of Representatives, Napolitano answered that yes, he would vote FOR impeachment.

Napolitano opened by stating that “Democrats have credibly argued that he committed impeachable offenses,” explaining that  “by directing his subordinates to not” participate in the investigation led to articles of impeachment in the three cases that proceeded this ordeal. “We know that from history, every time the House of Representatives has looked at that with respect to a president they found it to be impeachable.” He then added, “reasonable minds cannot disagree without rejecting history and constitutional norm.”

Hemmer followed by asking plainly “if you were in the house would you vote for impeachment?”

“I certainly would,” before joking that he never would be a member of Congress, before adding “but I would on that count.”

Hemmer brought in fellow Fox News contributor Andrew McCarthy to rebut Napolitano’s point and argued that the White House took a defensible position by calling the impeachment proceedings a “partisan stunt.”

For Democrats who see clear evidence of President Donald Trump’s high crimes and misdemeanors, Fox News Senior Napolitano has been an outlier of insight on Fox News. He has consistently applied his knowledge of constitutional law to the commander in chief and argued against the full-throated defense of the embattled president so prevalent on Fox News opinion programming.

 

 

[NM11046]

3 hours ago, QMany said:

 

She just quoted a Brett Kavanaugh judicial opinion to support impeachment. *CHEF'S KISS*

It has been and continues to be the courageous women testifying in these hearings that will save the country.

 

Which makes it fascinating that seeing the strength and capabilities and courage that exists that we are seeing such issues convincing our own citizens that a woman can be a capable president.

[BigRedBuster]

 

[BigRedBuster]

14 minutes ago, NM11046 said:

It has been and continues to be the courageous women testifying in these hearings that will save the country.

 

Which makes it fascinating that seeing the strength and capabilities and courage that exists that we are seeing such issues convincing our own citizens that a woman can be a capable president.

 

Why only the women who have testified?

[knapplc]

The GOP's witnesses. The people THEY called to defend Trump. Those people said this.

 

 

 

 

[schriznoeder]

 

[BigRedBuster]

Ok....this talking point is really starting to piss me off. I’m no fan of Hillary, but Republicans have declared her guilty of one hell of a lot of bad things without a trial. LOCK HER UP!!!!!

 

Now they’re crying because poor little trump is actually being taken to trial?

 

 

[Nebfanatic]

The thing is Trump isn't guilty yet. We aren't even to the part where they determine that. Everything is by the book. If we followed Trumps idea of due process, investigations wouldn't be allowed to be conducted in the first place. Criminals would have to turn themselves in for crimes and they must have 2 forms of first hand evidence or there would be no basis for a trial. Funny thing is we even have that in this case.

[NM11046]

13 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

Why only the women who have testified?

Didn't say only.

 

The feedback on Yovanovitch and Fiona Hill was very strong.  Karlan today has held her own in a way none of the men around her are.  It started with Sally Yates speaking out.  There are many folks who have done the right thing, I just think the women have surprised a lot of people and find it interesting that is the case and then we have such issues actually electing one to higher office.

[BigRedBuster]

3 minutes ago, NM11046 said:

Didn't say only.

 

The feedback on Yovanovitch and Fiona Hill was very strong.  Karlan today has held her own in a way none of the men around her are.  It started with Sally Yates speaking out.  There are many folks who have done the right thing, I just think the women have surprised a lot of people and find it interesting that is the case and then we have such issues actually electing one to higher office.

I guess I see a very strong and confident woman today but not different than the men. 

[BigRedBuster]

Good God.....

 

this whole .....”there’s just too much hate” crap from Republicans is sickening. Trump came into office riding a wave of hate.

 

look in the f#&%ing mirror.