Mega-Thread: Impeachment Proceedings & Inquiry of Trump

[Orbitus]

My whole assertion is that if no Republican votes for the inquiry, it can not , by definition be bipartisan. It's the first thing I said. You can pretend that did not happen, but that is the only way you can say bipartisan. Please show me how I have wavered from that at all? Please show me how the actual inquiry is bipartisan? And just because Republicans are going to ask questions, does not make anything bipartisan.

I want the democrats to call a fellow democrat this week. They are gathering people to testify about the impeachment proceedings. They should call democrat Alan Dershowitz and let him speak about the impeachment. I doubt they would as they are only going to call democrats they know will tote the party line.

- - - Updated - - -



what are you talking about. Bipartisan means both parties. You are saying all Republicans int he house are comp[lite with what Trump has done. that's imbecilic.

As @Nelinrah stated, why would they call fellow pedophile and Epstein supporter Alan Dershowitz, when he had NOTHING to do with Ukraine or anything? Literally all of the witnesses called so far, have been tied to Ukraine or the scandal themselves somehow.

[Cthulhu 2020]

With Nixon and Clinton, impeachment proceedings were initiated and based on legitimate investigations using special prosecutors and law enforcement investigations. Impeachment proceedings with Trump were not initiated in this manner...there was no special prosecutor nor any Justice Department investigation of the matter.

Democrats are following the rules set by Republicans in 2015. Suck it up buttercup. Democrats didn't make the rules, now Republicans are whining that Democrats are going by the rulebook made by... Republicans.

The Nixon and Clinton impeachments were held in a bipartisan manner...and every effort was made to give the appearance of a fair and legitimate process. However, in contrast to the Nixon and Clinton hearings, Democrats are refusing to allow several witnesses to testify who's testimony may be favorable to Trump. They are also not letting Trump’s legal team cross-examine witnesses.

Although GOP members are given the opportunity to "cross-examine" witnesses, Democrats are interrupting and halting lines of questioning they don't particularly like. Democrats have unfairly framed every aspect of this horseshit "investigation" by magnifying only those aspects of the matter they wish to be magnified...and actively suppressing anything else that does not conform to their partisan narrative. This is not fair.

There is bipartisanship, there are Republicans on the committee. Remember when they were having closed door hearings of witnesses, and Republicans that were INVITED TO THE HEARINGS instead just sat outside the hearings and then stormed in with a mob on the confidential hearings (which is illegal by the way) crying that no Republicans were invited? Yeah, that happened. They deliberately sat out on hearings they were invited to, only to create a mob and storm the hearings.

Republicans aren't presenting facts, all they're doing is attacking the process, much like you are. There are 3 articles of impeachment being considered so far, abuse of power, quid pro quo, and bribery. Witness intimidation is also on there. All of these are being considered, and all of them are things Trump did, things that he blatantly admitted to doing. And then he said that it wasn't bribery. What he's basically doing is as if he shot and killed someone himself, admitted to it, then started ranting and raving that it wasn't murder. And then... providing no rebuttal other than "Killing someone isn't murder!" "Withholding funds until Ukraine announces their investigation into Biden isn't bribery or quid pro quo!"

Democrats clearly aren't interested in due process or allowing an even-handed picture of circumstances revolving around this matter. It's now obvious that they want Trump impeached in the House by year-end....in their rush, they will not even wait until January to get testimony from several witnesses who have first hand knowledge....which is now possible with a recent court ruling. As such, it's now painfully clear that they don't support a legitimate investigation of the facts. We're dealing with a lynch mob mentality here. People aren't stupid...they're starting to see this sham for what it is and the poll numbers are reflecting it.

Bottom line...there is nothing that's even remotely fair about this process and it's in no way comparable to the professional way the Nixon and Clinton impeachments were handled. And those who are attempting to portray it as such are being dishonest as hell.

I do continue to love and giggle at how Trumpkins aren't actually providing a coherent defense of Trump, other than attacking the process. A process where Democrats are following the rules and policies set by the Republicans in 2015. "This isn't fair! You're not following the rules! Running the ball to the end zone isn't a touch down!" This is being referred to as the snowflake defense.

[Fugus]

Why do you guys keep responding to him? You know exactly what he is doing and the more you respond the more you give him oxygen to lie. It isn't like we have new waves of people reading these all the time who don't know them already. Better to just ignore them and let their lies fall off the pages than to allow them to fill page after page because they keep getting fed.

[Slirith]

Why do you guys keep responding to him? You know exactly what he is doing and the more you respond the more you give him oxygen to lie. It isn't like we have new waves of people reading these all the time who don't know them already. Better to just ignore them and let their lies fall off the pages than to allow them to fill page after page because they keep getting fed.

Folks won't listen, they'll keep interacting with these trolls like derps.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Why do you guys keep responding to him? You know exactly what he is doing and the more you respond the more you give him oxygen to lie. It isn't like we have new waves of people reading these all the time who don't know them already. Better to just ignore them and let their lies fall off the pages than to allow them to fill page after page because they keep getting fed.

I tend to pop in for one reply now and then. I don't like to sit around nagging them with their fallacies and lies. All they're able to do at this point is attack the process. None of them have a true defense for Trump himself. And they tend to think "it wasn't bribery" is a true defense. It's not. As I said above, it's as if Trump shot and subsequently killed someone, and just said "It wasn't murder!" That's not a defense. It's an untrue statement. A lie. No one, not even Trump's goons have a way of proving it wasn't a lie. They just drop a shit that says "It wasn't bribery!" on it and then fling it at everyone as if it means anything.

[Fugus]

I tend to pop in for one reply now and then. I don't like to sit around nagging them with their fallacies and lies. All they're able to do at this point is attack the process. None of them have a true defense for Trump himself. And they tend to think "it wasn't bribery" is a true defense. It's not. As I said above, it's as if Trump shot and subsequently killed someone, and just said "It wasn't murder!" That's not a defense. It's an untrue statement. A lie. No one, not even Trump's goons have a way of proving it wasn't a lie. They just drop a shit that says "It wasn't bribery!" on it and then fling it at everyone as if it means anything.

My thing is, don't respond to them, they keep speaking into the wind and realize they aren't getting traction, they go because all that happens is their page falls off and they can't derail for pages on end.

But I have lost track of how many times I have had to skip 5+ pages because people having a back and forth between them.

Just don't respond to them, don't give them the oxygen they need to keep lying and derailing the thread. The people here know how they are, we don't have a mass influx of new people into this section who honestly believe them and even if we did, it would be better to just let their replies fall off the pages rather than giving them a chance to keep their lies alive.

Feeding them doesn't help anything, it just makes things harder to read and gives them more time to lie. Even if their lies are debunked repeatedly, they still got the time to repeat them.

[Breccia]

In a story that is about Trump's impeachment and therefore is on topic, [uirl=https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/472690-trump-floats-taking-case-to-supreme-court-to-stop-impeachment]Trump tweets because of course he does[/url] that he should take this to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court, of course, has nothing to do with impeachment. There is a difference between swimming, and flailing your arms and splashing while drowning.

Oddly enough, Trump did ask his rabid fanbase to read the transcripts. Plural. Since he only released one document he claimed was a transcript (it wasn't but at this point who's counting) he must mean the transcripts of the witnesses who testified. Gotta say, that's not the route I expected him to go, considering almost all the witnesses did nothing but say "Trump and Giuliani are committing unethical, illegal acts" while Schiff drank a glass of water.

[PACOX]

Trump punks out on his invitation to the judiciary hearing.

A judge give 'king' Trump a good old American salute and upholds McGahn's subpoena.

Schiff submits his report tomorrow, and this is after Parnas submitted a bunch of material involving Trump and Giuliani.

Its still Monday.

[Xyonai]

Parnas submitted a bunch of material involving Trump and Giuliani..

Context for those interested.

[Xeones]

The sad part is that you typed that seriously. How can something that only one party supports be bipartisan? How can it be bipartisan if the only witnesses being allowed to testify have to be ALLOWED by the other party? This has been completely partisan, like your comments.

The only people the republicans wanted who were blocked are people who had literally no testimony to give on the event sparking the impeachment impeachment and people with second hand knowledge that I can recall off hand.

- - - Updated - - -

Republicans did call witnesses. Did you miss it? It kind of backfired on them.

The only witness denied as far as I know was the whistleblower and that's because he wasn't being called for testimony, but rather so his identity could be known and retribution enacted.

They also asked for Hunter Biden and some other unrelated individual I can't recall the name of. People who literally had no knowledge about Trumps activities in Ukraine and thus had zero ability to give testimony in the hearing.

[nonameelf]

They also asked for Hunter Biden and some other unrelated individual I can't recall the name of. People who literally had no knowledge about Trumps activities in Ukraine and thus had zero ability to give testimony in the hearing.

Yeah, not going to count them as witnesses since they didn't witness anything.

[PACOX]

The biggest whiner about so called witch hunts and sham investigations was invited to just sit on a public hearing, hell just send a representative. Crumbled like cheeto getting stepped on by Lady Justice. Sad.

[DocSavageFan]

I see crying about process is still the only argument Republicans have to defend Trump. Democrats gave Republicans basically everything they asked for. What else exactly would need to be given to make you people stop whining about the process?

The bolded speaks volumes about your level of willful ignorance regarding this matter.

[Grapemask]

The bolded speaks volumes about your level of willful ignorance regarding this matter.

Have you really sunken to just yelling "everyone is ignorant!" when the facts are no longer on your side?

[Bodakane]

The bolded speaks volumes about your level of willful ignorance regarding this matter.

List for us what they didn't give Repubs then..

Actually state your case.

[Stormspellz]

The bolded speaks volumes about your level of willful ignorance regarding this matter.

actually says more about yours then his

[cubby]

The bolded speaks volumes about your level of willful ignorance regarding this matter.

Your statement speaks volumes of your continued willful ignorance in this matter (am I doing that right? ).

Your history of mistruths is legion on these forums, and your ability to ignore both facts and reality continues to shine throughout this Impeachment Proceeding discussion. What you are parroting is exactly what the House GOP members are asking you to do - lie about the evidence and deflect the facts so the country can continue to be ruled (yes, ruled, not governed) by a known con-man/grifter/felon while the rest of the thinking world tries to lawfully get out of this mess.

And you continue to ignore the tough questions, seeking instead to deflect answers and lie about facts. Or have you come up with an answer to Trump already having confessed, on live television, to bribery and extortion?

- - - Updated - - -

List for us what they didn't give Repubs then..

Actually state your case.

He won't, because he can't. The House GOP Impeachment game plan is a single level of lies and deflections. Nothing they claim has any substance, they are going for pure media talking points and sound bites, hoping against hope that Trump's ignorant and rabid fan-base will continue to swallow the lies he feeds them every day.

The House GOP Impeachment team literally has not a single valid point against the Impeachment Proceedings in regards to Trump's bribery and extortion.

[DocSavageFan]

Here's a portion of the GOP's 123 page draft rebuttal to the impeachment clown show.

FINDINGS

Democrats allege that President Trump pressured Ukraine to initiate investigations into his political rival, former Vice President Biden, for the purpose of benefiting the President in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The evidence does not support the Democrats’ allegations. Instead, the findings outlined below are based on the evidence presented and information available in the public realm.

• President Trump has a deep-seated, genuine, and reasonable skepticism of Ukraine due to its history of pervasive corruption.
• President Trump has a long-held skepticism of U.S. foreign assistance and believes that Europe should pay its fair share for mutual defense.
• President Trump’s concerns about Hunter Biden’s role on Burisma’s board are valid. The Obama State Department noted concerns about Hunter Biden’s relationship with Burisma in 2015 and 2016.
• There is indisputable evidence that senior Ukrainian government officials opposed President Trump’s candidacy in the 2016 election and did so publicly. It has been publicly reported that a Democratic National Committee operative worked with Ukrainian officials, including the Ukrainian Embassy, to dig up dirt on then-candidate Trump.
• The evidence does not establish that President Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election for the purpose of benefiting him in the 2020 election.
• The evidence does not establish that President Trump withheld a meeting with President Zelensky for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election.
• The evidence does not support that President Trump withheld U.S. security assistance to Ukraine for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election.
• The evidence does not support that President Trump orchestrated a shadow foreign policy apparatus for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election.
• The evidence does not support that President Trump covered up the substance of his telephone conversation with President Zelensky by restricting access to the call summary.
• President Trump’s assertion of longstanding claims of executive privilege is a legitimate response to an unfair, abusive, and partisan process, and does not constitute obstruction of a legitimate impeachment inquiry.

[Stormspellz]

Here's a portion of the GOP's 123 page rebuttal to the impeachment clown show.

FINDINGS

Democrats allege that President Trump pressured Ukraine to initiate investigations into his political rival, former Vice President Biden, for the purpose of benefiting the President in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The evidence does not support the Democrats’ allegations. Instead, the findings outlined below are based on the evidence presented and information available in the public realm.

• President Trump has a deep-seated, genuine, and reasonable skepticism of Ukraine due to its history of pervasive corruption.
• President Trump has a long-held skepticism of U.S. foreign assistance and believes that Europe should pay its fair share for mutual defense.
• President Trump’s concerns about Hunter Biden’s role on Burisma’s board are valid. The Obama State Department noted concerns about Hunter Biden’s relationship with Burisma in 2015 and 2016.
• There is indisputable evidence that senior Ukrainian government officials opposed President Trump’s candidacy in the 2016 election and did so publicly. It has been publicly reported that a Democratic National Committee operative worked with Ukrainian officials, including the Ukrainian Embassy, to dig up dirt on then-candidate Trump.
• The evidence does not establish that President Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election for the purpose of benefiting him in the 2020 election.
• The evidence does not establish that President Trump withheld a meeting with President Zelensky for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election.
• The evidence does not support that President Trump withheld U.S. security assistance to Ukraine for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election.
• The evidence does not support that President Trump orchestrated a shadow foreign policy apparatus for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election.
• The evidence does not support that President Trump covered up the substance of his telephone conversation with President Zelensky by restricting access to the call summary.
• President Trump’s assertion of longstanding claims of executive privilege is a legitimate response to an unfair, abusive, and partisan process, and does not constitute obstruction of a legitimate impeachment inquiry.

these are almost all baseless bs talking points, generic rhetoric twisted to defend dear leader.

its summed up with "you can't hold us accountable to our actions that is unfair!!!"

[Machismo]

Here's a portion of the GOP's 123 page draft rebuttal to the impeachment clown show.

FINDINGS

Democrats allege that President Trump pressured Ukraine to initiate investigations into his political rival, former Vice President Biden, for the purpose of benefiting the President in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The evidence does not support the Democrats’ allegations. Instead, the findings outlined below are based on the evidence presented and information available in the public realm.

• President Trump has a deep-seated, genuine, and reasonable skepticism of Ukraine due to its history of pervasive corruption.
• President Trump has a long-held skepticism of U.S. foreign assistance and believes that Europe should pay its fair share for mutual defense.
• President Trump’s concerns about Hunter Biden’s role on Burisma’s board are valid. The Obama State Department noted concerns about Hunter Biden’s relationship with Burisma in 2015 and 2016.
• There is indisputable evidence that senior Ukrainian government officials opposed President Trump’s candidacy in the 2016 election and did so publicly. It has been publicly reported that a Democratic National Committee operative worked with Ukrainian officials, including the Ukrainian Embassy, to dig up dirt on then-candidate Trump.
• The evidence does not establish that President Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election for the purpose of benefiting him in the 2020 election.
• The evidence does not establish that President Trump withheld a meeting with President Zelensky for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election.
• The evidence does not support that President Trump withheld U.S. security assistance to Ukraine for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election.
• The evidence does not support that President Trump orchestrated a shadow foreign policy apparatus for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election.
• The evidence does not support that President Trump covered up the substance of his telephone conversation with President Zelensky by restricting access to the call summary.
• President Trump’s assertion of longstanding claims of executive privilege is a legitimate response to an unfair, abusive, and partisan process, and does not constitute obstruction of a legitimate impeachment inquiry.

And yet, those same people sent the "rebuttal" out before the report. It's odd that they sought to rebut something that hadn't even been released.

They call that damage control and misdirection. Of course, that goes with what you were saying earlier, about the federal GOP politicians clearly being morally bankrupt, and not caring about what Trump did.

The witnesses disagree with these statements. It's rather pathetic that these congressmen feel compelled to lie and deflect for a corrupt racist like Trump.