Mega-Thread: Impeachment Proceedings & Inquiry of Trump

[Stormspellz]

Bribery and extortion. Violation of federal election laws. You gotta watch something beside Faux "News".

don't forget hatch act, emoluments clause & good old fraud

[How dare you]

Bribery and extortion. Violation of federal election laws. You gotta watch something beside Faux "News".

Where did the bribery and extortion occur? Where is the evidence? What are you talking about?

[Stormspellz]

I don't know about you guys, but i'm completely surprised the first republican to show up here is some new/alt account trolling and acting in bad faith, I mean who would of seen this coming?

[Machismo]

Where did the bribery and extortion occur? Where is the evidence? What are you talking about?

Once again, we will point to yesterday's testimony, as well as the transcripts of the previous testimony.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXlbDEATZwM

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/tru...imony-n1077676

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/1...stimony-069353

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/1...eleased-067711

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alexand...es-2019-11-08/

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/george-...es-2019-11-07/

Enjoy!!!

[cubby]

Where did the bribery and extortion occur? Where is the evidence? What are you talking about?

So you are coming from a place of ignorance. You should have told us how clueless you were about recent news. We could have started you out at the begin- oh wait, we did.

As mentioned several times to you, please start at the beginning of this thread and read forward. It will lay out the issues, evidence, and events as they have played out. You'll have to skip some pages of obvious troll deflection, but you know how these forums can be.

Once you're done if you have questions let us know and we'll be here to help you through any confusing parts.

[TigTone]

Where did the bribery and extortion occur? Where is the evidence? What are you talking about?

Watch the impeachment testimony’s?

[Shadowferal]

Where did the bribery and extortion occur? Where is the evidence? What are you talking about?

The question you should be asking is why haven't the GOP...any of them, defended Trump's actions?

[Xyonai]

I don't know about you guys, but i'm completely surprised the first republican to show up here is some new/alt account trolling and acting in bad faith, I mean who would of seen this coming?

In a weird way it's actually kinda sad. Real low effort and real low energy even for sock-puppet standards.

[Benggaul]

I don't like to say that I called it or anything, but:

Orrrr just go ahead and start the inevitable sealioning.

Yeah.

So ANYWAY, looks like Trump and co. are desperately trying to draw attention from the "totally perfect" phone call to Zelensky to an earlier call to Zelensky that has absolutely fucking nothing to do with the accusations levied under the impeachment inquiries. In other words, a smoke screen and something you'll hear his idiot supporters going on about for the next week.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartanntp

[Benggaul]

But in the end, the GOP senators, unable to ignore the evidence before them, will come out and claim that while Trump's actions were bad, they were not impeachable, and we should let the people decide in November 2020. Cowards. But I fully expect it to happen.

I think even that's being charitable. No way will they even acknowledge it being "bad". It'll either be "NO COLLUSION" all over again or "he was within his rights (but we seem to have misplaced the section of the Constitution that states that...give us a few years)".

[Captain N]

I think even that's being charitable. No way will they even acknowledge it being "bad". It'll either be "NO COLLUSION" all over again or "he was within his rights (but we seem to have misplaced the section of the Constitution that states that...give us a few years)".

The Cult is already using that within his rights thing. The narrative is that the President sets foreign policy and he can change it whenever he so chooses. This is incorrect but its the talking points that the right wing media outlets are shoveling out.

[Waniou]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effort...Trump#Timeline

Attempt to impeach him started few months after he was elected. Connect dots yourself. These impeach attempts will continue well into the year 2024 I think.

Maybe Trump should try not breaking the law if he wants people to stop trying to impeach him?

[zorkuus]

What I found most intriguing from yesterday's hearing, is that unless I missed a highlight or two, Republicans did not attack the character or motives of either Kent or Taylor. I think that speaks volumes, but maybe the more learned on here can elaborate.

As if that makes it ok to bring up their crazy conspiracy theories.

[Xeones]

What I found most intriguing from yesterday's hearing, is that unless I missed a highlight or two, Republicans did not attack the character or motives of either Kent or Taylor. I think that speaks volumes, but maybe the more learned on here can elaborate.

As I understand it they repeatedly asked if they thought trump should be impeached. It wasn't for a lack of effort.

[Benggaul]

As I understand it they repeatedly asked if they thought trump should be impeached. It wasn't for a lack of effort.

It was worse than that. They repeatedly asked nonsense questions which the witnesses could not answer--because they made no sense. Which meant a lot of "I don't know" or "I don't remember" soundbites that the GOP will use ad nauseum until the process is over.

[Breccia]

As the next wave of public testimony is about to crash over the GOP, Trump tries to have a lawsuit dismissed, specifically, one that would require one of Bolton's aides to testify.

"On what grounds?"

Although Dr. Kupperman claims that he needs this Court’s guidance as to whether he should comply with the House’s attempt to subpoena his testimony, he already knows the answer. He should follow the directive of his former employer (the President) to not testify pursuant to the President’s invocation of Dr. Kupperman’s absolute immunity from testimonial compulsion.

Leaving the President’s senior most aides open to compelled congressional testimony would allow Congress to encroach upon the independence and autonomy of the Presidency... to reveal the President’s thinking or influence his decision-making on sensitive or controversial matters.

"Um...in English?"

Trump argued that the president's direction should supersede any prospective court ruling.

"Ah. So, 'I am above the law'?"

Pretty much. We've heard of multiple similar lawsuits, as former WH members with subpoenas are looking for an excuse not to testify, but "Trump is above the law" is pretty much the angle being used here.

As a reminder: this is an impeachment inquiry. A lot of things, such as "the President is above the law" won't work here.

- - - Updated - - -

In the ongoing effort to change the narrative, Trump attacks Pelosi on twitter, which I'll briefly paraphrase

SOMEONE HELP

and also posted another, completely unrelated non-transcript of another, completely unrelated phone conversation with Ukraine.

This sounds a lot like the defendant saying "Oh yeah? What about all those days I didn't stab nuns in the face? Why don't I get credit for those?"

[Themius]

Devin is a fucking joke.

“He had a good first conversation! Therefore no other calls matter”

It’s like a mafia boss who says congratulations in marrying my daughter and next week says go get money from the laundromat or things could go very south...

[Moonstream]

Think the republican lawyer can sink any lower into his chair?

[Belize]

Think the republican lawyer can sink any lower into his chair?

Assuming he's also a mollusk, he might be able to slip under the desk, and escape.

[Moonstream]

Assuming he's also a mollusk, he might be able to slip under the desk, and escape.

One of the best examples of regret and "anywhere but here" I've seen tbh.