Mega-Thread: Impeachment Proceedings & Inquiry of Trump

[Crispin]

That's the problem with partisans, they think their party is always right and infallible, you're not better than a me in this regard.

Fixed that for you son. Ditching your POTUS already?

[Orbitus]

That's the problem with partisans, they think their party is always right and infallible, you're not better than a trumpster in this regard.

Sorry, but there is only 1 truth here. And Trump is lucky that the Democrats aren't moving faster towards his impeachment. And with Trump fucking over our allies, Republicans might vote against him at this rate now.

[Machismo]

Back on topic. The State Department ordered Sondland not to appear before the House for testimony. So more obstruction from Pompeo.

It's weird how often Trump's administration refuses to testify on things they claim to be completely innocent.

[Noxx79]

That's the problem with partisans, they think their party is always right and infallible, you're not better than a trumpster in this regard.

Time for you to abide by your signature.

Stop being g partisan. Stop being emotional. Stop lying.

You could always prove BoTh SiDEs by posting a Fox News article about how Adam schiff is a hypocrite fur following the law

[Dontrike]

That's the problem with partisans, they think their party is always right and infallible, you're not better than a trumpster in this regard.

Hilarious coming from you.

[Thekri]

That's the problem with partisans, they think their party is always right and infallible, you're not better than a trumpster in this regard.

So your argument is that there are multiple competing versions of reality? One in which Trump is both innocent and guilty simultaneously? That is really deep, perhaps you should use that in a philosophy class. However it isn't really relevant to politics.

I don't dislike Trump because I am a partisan, as most people know, I started on the Republican side, and wound up where I am (Helping democratic campaigns in three states) because reality disagreed with the republican positions. Because I can use my brain without help, and I can see the disastrous consequences of selling your morals like the Republicans have. I can see that we have a President that is completely unhinged, lashing out like a madman, and flitting from one irresponsible and ill-considered policy proposal to the next. I can see our national institutions being eroded before our eyes, with each flagrant disregard of governmental norms. I can see our climate and our society betrayed as each of our executive departments is turned over to the industry they are supposed to regulate. I see the world order we built collapsing around us, as Russia and China make fools of us the world over.

And I hear the laughter of the world in the face of our President when he stands in front of the United Nations and claims he accomplished something good.

Partisan does not mean reality stops being reality.

[zenkai]

So your argument is that there are multiple competing versions of reality? One in which Trump is both innocent and guilty simultaneously? That is really deep, perhaps you should use that in a philosophy class. However it isn't really relevant to politics.

I don't dislike Trump because I am a partisan, as most people know, I started on the Republican side, and wound up where I am (Helping democratic campaigns in three states) because reality disagreed with the republican positions. Because I can use my brain without help, and I can see the disastrous consequences of selling your morals like the Republicans have. I can see that we have a President that is completely unhinged, lashing out like a madman, and flitting from one irresponsible and ill-considered policy proposal to the next. I can see our national institutions being eroded before our eyes, with each flagrant disregard of governmental norms. I can see our climate and our society betrayed as each of our executive departments is turned over to the industry they are supposed to regulate. I see the world order we built collapsing around us, as Russia and China make fools of us the world over.

And I hear the laughter of the world in the face of our President when he stands in front of the United Nations and claims he accomplished something good.

Partisan does not mean reality stops being reality.

You took that one line and made up your own argument and made a paragraph out of it? So I take it you side with the other guy who said only his side is right? If you had a brain as you claimed, why would you side with notion there is only black and no white?

[Flarelaine]

I wonder if the Ukrainian President is watching all the people he talked to being accused of a crime just for talking to him, and saying "Yeah, I'm totally going to start the Biden investigation now. This looks like something I want to stick my dick into."

Zelensky is already in hot water at home for trying to negotiate with Putin. I can't really blame him; Ukraine alone is not in the same league and their supposed ally is busy extorting them and cosying up to Russia.

[Thekri]

You took that one line and made up your own argument and made a paragraph out of it? So I take it you side with the other guy who said only his side is right? If you had a brain as you claimed, why would you side with notion there is only black and no white?

There is a lot of shades of grey in the world. You have seen my posts on foreign policy and specific issues stating as much. However, Donald Trump's suitability for office is not a shade of grey. It is as black and white as it gets. He is a criminal conman, a unrepentant scammer, a total narcissist, and a serial liar. The GOP's cowardice in supporting this criminal is not black and white either. It is deeply morally wrong an betrayal of our nation.

So no, I don't agree that the democrat side is completely right. I disagree with them on a lot of things, including a lot of their core platforms (Including gun control, abortion, student loan forgiveness, etc), however it is true that the GOP side is completely wrong, because any good policies they may have are completely negated by their unwillingness to serve the good of the nation.

[Breccia]

Back on topic. The State Department ordered Sondland not to appear before the House for testimony.

Considering

Sondland's lawyer said his client was "profoundly disappointed" that State did not allow him to testify, and expressed hope that the issues raised by State would be resolved promptly to allow him to testify.

"Ambassador Sondland believes strongly that he acted at all times in the best interests of the United States, and he stands ready to answer the Committee’s questions fully and truthfully," Robert Luskin, Sondland's lawyer, said in a statement.

As a sitting U.S. ambassador, Luskin said his client had no choice but to follow the State Department's direction. He noted that Sondland had traveled to Washington from Brussels to appear.

(source)

why not just quit, and appear anyhow? I mean, what good is an ambassador who's wanted for questioning by his own government? Isn't his practical use pretty much over while this is going on, maybe forever?

"Hey Germany, hey France, sorry I'm late. I'm here to negotiate a brand new trade deal after Trump put tariffs on...what?"
"Shouldn't you be dealing with your own problem first? It looks like you're supposed to answer for the actions you were caught doing."
"Well, the State Department said no, so --"
"And we're supposed to trust you? The State Dept you're working for is also accused of wrongdoing."
"'Oh come on, we need to get a trade deal going! It's another $7.5 billion that will actually go directly to the average American grocery bill!"
"Also, remember that part where you got caught trying to extort a foreign country? And...now you want to talk to us? Why would we ever trust you? What quid pro quo are you going to ask from us? Whatever it is, we won't do it."
"But I was acting under direct...um, direction...of Pompeo and Trump! That's part of my job!"
"No, part of your job is dealing with other countries in good faith. You were caught doing the opposite."
"But...oh, Finland sent a text, hold on. It says...what the hell is 'vittu saatana perkele'?"

Bla bla bla essence context parody.

The guy's own text messages just neutered him anyhow. And he clearly wants his name cleared. Since his job is now tainted beyond use, why not just quit, clear his name under oath, and hope he gets hired by someone afterwards? Shrugging and saying "whoops, hands are tied!" is not making him look less like a Trump stooge.

[Paranoid Android]

Back on topic. The State Department ordered Sondland not to appear before the House for testimony. So more obstruction from Pompeo.

Man they are punking the Democrats. I understand this is a step before say holding him in contempt. After Lewandowski, the WH is emboldened.

Also this is easy for us, isn't it?

If you have nothing to hide than why not let the person testify?

I'm sure Trumpkins will say something about Congressional witchunt something, something Democrats. But it's not. It is the power of Congress to you know check the Executive branch.

[DocSavageFan]

I know this is an old post (still catching upon this thread) but fuck the clintons. Lock them all up for life. That changes NOTHING about what is going on. Trump broke the law. Period. End of story. This is straight up trolling and that is bad enough but we have an actual mod of this forum participating in this shit while banning anyone who actually disagrees with reality.

If you have a beef with the mods...please take it up with them and leave me out of it.

And for the record, I'm NOT trying to antagonize or upset people....just stating the facts of the matter. You going to be OK?

[Redwyrm]

Time to add Obstruction and Failure to Comply with Subpoena. And start sending US Marshalls to arrest some people.

[Breccia]

Time to add Obstruction and Failure to Comply with Subpoena. And start sending US Marshalls to arrest some people.

I'll be honest, I don't know how much of a driving force Sondland was. The texts sure don't make him look good, though. But if he makes the choice that doing his job is more important that following the law, well, there are consequences to that kind of behavior.

Oh, and of course, Trump can't pardon him.

In Ex Parte Grossman, a 1925 case, the Supreme Court carved out a narrow exception to the president’s broad power to issue pardons for federal offenses. Chief Justice William Howard Taft — the former president — explained that “a pardon cannot stop” the charge of civil (as opposed to criminal) contempt.

The distinction may be hard to grasp for nonlawyers, but what it means is that the president can arguably pardon criminal contempt convictions that aim to punish wrongdoers. In fact, President Trump recently pardoned Joe Arpaio for this very charge.

But the pardon power does not extend to civil contempt, which is used by government bodies to ensure that individuals comply with government directives, rather than as punishment for something they have already done.

@cubby can probably provide more details. Now, Trump could try pardoning Sondland of the crimes he's accused of, which in turn is admission, and also, Sondland then can't use the 5th anymore.

[shimerra]

But the same can be said about many on the left. So again, your point?

So then your original point was stupid and a waste of time to even type or an attempt to be the partisan hack you usually are trying to imply something bad about the side you don't like while excusing the one you do.


So which is it are you stupid or a hypocrite? I'd say both.

[Themius]

Time to add Obstruction and Failure to Comply with Subpoena. And start sending US Marshalls to arrest some people.

There are Capitol police they can use

[Noxx79]

But the same can be said about many on the left. So again, your point?

That’s adorable.

[SirBeef]

But the same can be said about many on the left. So again, your point?

Show us your evidence. Or is this just proof that conservatives rely on feels over facts.

[DocSavageFan]

Short version: I'm 100% obstructing this shit.

Short version: Impeachment inquiry 'by decree' isn't going to fly...follow established precedent and hold an impeachment inquiry vote within the House.

[Edge-]

Short version: Impeachment inquiry 'by decree' isn't going to fly...follow established precedent and hold an impeachment inquiry vote within the House.

Again, not actual legal precedent but more a formality.

You know, those things that Republicans have been tossing left and right because they're inconvenient. You don't get to cry because the other team starts playing the same game and you realize that you don't like how it's played.