Mega-Thread: Impeachment Proceedings & Inquiry of Trump

[Nfinitii]

I believe what you are talking about is him saying they can't wait forever for the White House allowing various people to testify or waiting for the courts to tell some that are waiting "to be allowed" to be witnesses to come forward. Which is true enough, you can't wait forever when the White House is actively stopping people. Of course if the call was as perfect as Trump claims then there's no reason to stop people from doing so, but of course Trump is lying. We won't know how "perfect" the call was until we get the transcript.

I don’t think the call was perfect at all. It doesn’t look good but it wasn’t impeachment bad. I all presidents work in the grey area to do what’s best for the country. It’s all depends on what was trumps intent, and the me the democrats haven’t proven anything.

But there is a system, even if it is time consuming. Congress can subpoena, and ppl can say no. The next step is to go to the courts to get a court ruling. But democrats don’t want to do that. They said he is so dangerous that this must be done now. But then hold onto the articles of impeachment.

There r no legal charges. Obstruction of congress isn’t a real thing. And abuse of power is so generic that u could have impeached the past 3 presidents for. Including one who got caught on a hot mic asking the Russians back off until after the elections and he would give them more flexibility. Which is in the realm of what they r blaming trump for.

The question is, was this all about 2016 and corruption in general? Or was this about the 2020 election? I don’t think that has been properly answered. This could benefit the country and benefit trump, that doesn’t necessarily make it corrupt or not.

[Dontrike]

I don’t think the call was perfect at all. It doesn’t look good but it wasn’t impeachment bad. I all presidents work in the grey area to do what’s best for the country.

You'll have to explain what part of that call was for the best of the USA.

It’s all depends on what was trumps intent, and the me the democrats haven’t proven anything.

We know Trump's intent, it's all over that "transcript" he released before and he's asked other countries since the call to do it. He wants Biden looked into with no evidence of his own because Biden is a political opponent, nothing more. The intent is as clear as crystal.

But there is a system, even if it is time consuming. Congress can subpoena, and ppl can say no. The next step is to go to the courts to get a court ruling. But democrats don’t want to do that. They said he is so dangerous that this must be done now. But then hold onto the articles of impeachment.

People can't just say "no" to subpoenas, that's not how that works. As for your complaint on speed we already know that they were taking it slow, but Republicans complained, so they went faster, and then Rs complained about that. I agree it should be taken as slow as possible, it's fun watching Trump squirm.

There r no legal charges. Obstruction of congress isn’t a real thing.

Yeah, it is. Also, legal charges aren't a thing in impeachment proceedings, but obstruction is a legal charge.

And abuse of power is so generic that u could have impeached the past 3 presidents for. Including one who got caught on a hot mic asking the Russians back off until after the elections and he would give them more flexibility. Which is in the realm of what they r blaming trump for.

Got a source for that?

The question is, was this all about 2016 and corruption in general? Or was this about the 2020 election? I don’t think that has been properly answered. This could benefit the country and benefit trump, that doesn’t necessarily make it corrupt or not.

Again, you're going to have to explain how bribing Ukraine helps the USA at all. We now how it benefits Trump, it's the only reason he does anything. Anything that man is into means it benefits him.

[Levelfive]

Maybe u could if Democrats having been talking about impeachment since before trump took office. Even Pelosi said they have been working toward this for 2.5 years. And adam himself said they don’t have time to wait for all the facts.

Imagine walking into a courtroom and saying they don’t have time to present all of the facts.

Jesus, the mental gymnastics required for people to buy this nonsense is Olympic level self-deceit. You know Trump always had the option of NOT committing impeachable offenses, right, no matter how long Democrats had been talking about it? And it was Trump himself who wouldn't allow people to testify or turn over documents, that if he wanted all the facts to come out, literally all he had do was make them available?

[Twdft]

I find the entire political discussion a big gigantic farcical exercise. A waste of time that will accomplish squat. No Republican senator will destroy their hard worked for careers for the sake of some idiotic impeachment drive without a good reason to do it.

You are OK with senators closing their eyes to a president committing crimes on live TV.

You are OK with senators closing their eyes to a president committing crimes on live TV.

Just read this twice, I don't think you would understand it the first time. But I'm afraid you still block out reality the second time.

[Belize]

Maybe u could if Democrats having been talking about impeachment since before trump took office. Even Pelosi said they have been working toward this for 2.5 years. And adam himself said they don’t have time to wait for all the facts.

Imagine walking into a courtroom and saying they don’t have time to present all of the facts.

Source on any of those claims?

[Nfinitii]

There r videos of this stuff online so go look it up. Obstruction of congress isn’t a thing, obstruction of justice is. But u don’t c that.

Congress subpoenas, if they say no then they have to go to a judge to rule on if they must follow the subpoena or not. Executive privilege is a thing, and so is separation of powers. Congress can’t always tell what the senate or the president has to do.

And if trump and his son did what Biden and his son allegedly did there would be an investigation as their should be. Because of potential abuse of power. That is for the good of the United States, that doesn’t change just because Biden is running for president and his opposition is president.

Quid pro quo is a part of foreign policy. There isn’t anything wrong with it unless it’s used poorly. Calling up a bunch of hearsay witnesses doesn’t convince me of that.

Impeachment is entirely political, and that’s y u c a vote entirely down party lines minus the few democrats that defected.

[Stormspark]

Source on any of those claims?

Some people think their ass is a source. Hey, I can pull random stuff out of my butt too, sure doesn't make it true. But Trumpers will believe it.

[unfilteredJW]

There r videos of this stuff online so go look it up.

Everything after this can be summarily ignored.

[Bodakane]

There r videos of this stuff online so go look it up. Obstruction of congress isn’t a thing, obstruction of justice is. But u don’t c that.

Congress subpoenas, if they say no then they have to go to a judge to rule on if they must follow the subpoena or not. Executive privilege is a thing, and so is separation of powers. Congress can’t always tell what the senate or the president has to do.

And if trump and his son did what Biden and his son allegedly did there would be an investigation as their should be. Because of potential abuse of power. That is for the good of the United States, that doesn’t change just because Biden is running for president and his opposition is president.

Quid pro quo is a part of foreign policy. There isn’t anything wrong with it unless it’s used poorly. Calling up a bunch of hearsay witnesses doesn’t convince me of that.

Impeachment is entirely political, and that’s y u c a vote entirely down party lines minus the few democrats that defected.

When did it become obstruction of Congress and not obstruction of justice?

2 things:
1. What did Biden and his son actually do? Provide links to reputable sources.
2. On what planet do you think Trump and his kids haven't been dirty?

Quid pro quo for personal gain is the problem. Also, you don't understand the word hearsay in legal terms.

Some other things to ask yourselves:
1. Why did Trump want a corrupt foreign government to look into...corruption?
He has numerous resources at his disposal if it was for the country. The reason is, just like every play out of his playbook, all he wants is something to point to, whether true or not, like "look at Ukraine is investigating the Bidens", because he knows that's all you guys need. You don't need facts, you just need a target. Just like "butter emails". You guys literally lap it up every fucking time. You scream, cry, freak out, chant, and rally, over a soundbite with no bite. That is literally why he was very specific on the call about making the announcement. Most investigations like that, are done secretly as not to tip off the suspects.

2. If there's really nothing to this, why is he so freaked out about Pelosi holding on to the papers? Why did he cover up all of it?
So many times, people of your political ideology assign guilt by people's responses to power. Like, 'why did he run if he wasn't guilty?" But then you don't apply that same skepticism to your own guys. I would call that interesting, but it is not. It is just run of the mill boring old hypocrisy.

[zmp]

Even if you're a Trump supporter, imagine walking into a courtroom and the opposing counsel/judge tells you they're rigging the outcome. Would you be okay with that?

They most likely werent okay with it, but its not like they had a choice anyway. The outcome of the Schiff show, was already obvious ahead of time.

[Bodakane]

They most likely werent okay with it, but its not like they had a choice anyway. The outcome of the Schiff show, was already obvious ahead of time.

Being obviously guilty, tends to do that.

[Deadite]

Everyone should support Pelosi on this. McConnel and Graham openly admitted on TV that they were going to rig the trial.

Even if you're a Trump supporter, imagine walking into a courtroom and the opposing counsel/judge tells you they're rigging the outcome. Would you be okay with that? Of course not.

There was never going to be anything fair about it. The Blues would have voted for impeachment not matter what and now the Reds will vote against no matter what when it goes the the Senate. Your political system is a clown show. Did any one really expect the Democratics to vote no for impeachment or think the Republicans will vote yes? It has all been a foregone conclusion ain't it?

[zmp]

Being obviously guilty

According to Democrats, yea.

[Bodakane]

According to Democrats, yea.

Its true, facts do line up with democrats nowadays.

[Eviscero]

There r videos of this stuff online so go look it up. Obstruction of congress isn’t a thing, obstruction of justice is. But u don’t c that.

Congress subpoenas, if they say no then they have to go to a judge to rule on if they must follow the subpoena or not. Executive privilege is a thing, and so is separation of powers. Congress can’t always tell what the senate or the president has to do.

And if trump and his son did what Biden and his son allegedly did there would be an investigation as their should be. Because of potential abuse of power. That is for the good of the United States, that doesn’t change just because Biden is running for president and his opposition is president.

Quid pro quo is a part of foreign policy. There isn’t anything wrong with it unless it’s used poorly. Calling up a bunch of hearsay witnesses doesn’t convince me of that.

Impeachment is entirely political, and that’s y u c a vote entirely down party lines minus the few democrats that defected.

Executive privilege is a thing but "Absolute Immunity" is not. Trump has lost literally every court case related to his attempts to stonewall Congress' oversight and he would lose in the courts on this one too if Congress has pressed the issue. I wish they had. Trump's illegal behavior needs to continue to be crushed into oblivion by the courts if we hope to maintain a democracy (I know you don't actually want to protect democracy, but most Americans do).

As far as we know, hunter Biden did nothing more than benefit from the privileges of being a wealthy, white, connected man. It's as gross as Eric and Don Jrs entire existence and every other undeserving schmuck reaping the benefits of their elevated lot in life. But there is no credible evidence that Joe or Hunter were acting corruptly or in a way which threatened the interests of the US. So its not an abuse of power, it's a use of power, the power that comes with privilege. All that said, even if I wanted to entertain this irrelevant whataboutism distraction, the facts don't support it as an abuse of power in the same sense as Trump's.

What the fuck does "quid pro quo used poorly" even mean? Of course it doesn't mean anything, but for the sake of my own entertainment, I would looove to hear you argue that Trump's quid pro quo in this case was "used well". He got nothing of what he wanted; which is pretty much the default for your glorious master of the art of the deal! Ha!

[Breccia]

Once again, it's time for Guess the Speaker!

The reason I wouldn't is because it is all designed to deal with Trump doing what he's done his whole life. Trying to take the focus off him. Not a single person, not one single person, not even that thug Giuliani and his crony compatriots have said I did anything other than my job

"That sounds like Biden, refusing to testify in the impeachment trial."

The trial for which he is not on trial, correct.

As a reminder, even if Biden was guilty as sin (we already know this to be false, as the EU, the IMF, and Senate Republicans all did the same thing), Trump still is on trial for extorting a country. Whether or not he believed the end justified the means is irrelevant. But more importantly, there is no reasonable way that Biden should be forced to testify at a trial for which Trump is facing the music for ordering people not to testify.

- - - Updated - - -

What the fuck does "quid pro quo used poorly" even mean?

"Extortion".

[Endus]

There r videos of this stuff online so go look it up. Obstruction of congress isn’t a thing, obstruction of justice is. But u don’t c that.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34304.pdf

That PDF is from 2010, so not related to any of what's going on now.

You're flat-out wrong, here.

Congress subpoenas, if they say no then they have to go to a judge to rule on if they must follow the subpoena or not. Executive privilege is a thing, and so is separation of powers. Congress can’t always tell what the senate or the president has to do.

This is straight-up false. They do not need a judge, because these aren't judicial subpoenas, they're congressional. Different branch of government entirely.

And if trump and his son did what Biden and his son allegedly did there would be an investigation as their should be. Because of potential abuse of power. That is for the good of the United States, that doesn’t change just because Biden is running for president and his opposition is president.

Then why are Republicans blocking those investigations?

Also, the Bidens were investigated, and there was never any trace of wrongdoing by either in Ukraine. It's a conspiracy theory and there's no basis to it in fact.

Quid pro quo is a part of foreign policy. There isn’t anything wrong with it unless it’s used poorly. Calling up a bunch of hearsay witnesses doesn’t convince me of that.

Straight-up lying, here.

It's a criminal abuse of power.

Impeachment is entirely political, and that’s y u c a vote entirely down party lines minus the few democrats that defected.

Projection. Democrats went into this pursuing the facts. It's Republicans who publicly stated over and over they did not care about the facts and were going to vote the party line to defend a Republican President, no matter what he might have done.

[DarkTZeratul]

Instead it was done through corrupt methods: telling a country they'll only get money if they help dig up some dirt on Biden - while also telling them to pretend they did it all out of their own volition.

Money that he had no right not to give them in the first place, since it had already been approved by Congress.

[Deletedaccount1]

Two worrying things for Democrats the way I see. One, Trump's approval rating hasn't gone down an inch despite being formally impeached. Two, even the anti-Trump media feel the need to cover Schumer's astounding hypocrisy.

[Twdft]

Two worrying things for Democrats the way I see. One, Trump's approval rating hasn't gone down an inch despite being formally impeached. Two, even the anti-Trump media feel the need to cover Schumer's astounding hypocrisy.

None of those 2 things make it OK for a president to commit crimes.