View Full Version : trump impeachment watch thread
No, she's running an impeachment inquiry. Which is treated differently than a congressional investigation. That's Nixon and the Hasting decision I quoted. That's why Watkins and Quinn are inapplicable.
But I'm actually glad you recognize DJT's lawyer is quoting bad law for a rejected premise. At least we're getting somewhere.
Are you claiming the Speaker of the House can open an official impeachment inquiry on her own?
Are you claiming the Speaker of the House can open an official impeachment inquiry on her own?
Yes.
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 11:19 AM
:lol TSA believes literally everything he is told to believe by every right winger with a protect Dennison agenda.
RandomGuy
10-09-2019, 11:22 AM
you ignored my question
:cry
:lmao
RandomGuy
10-09-2019, 11:23 AM
Are you claiming the Speaker of the House can open an official impeachment inquiry on her own?
Feel free to cite the constitution where it says the Speaker cannot. We'll wait. :rollin
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield) asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) in a letter last week to put the impeachment inquiry on hold “until transparent and equitable rules and procedures are established.” His staff argues it’s about making sure the party in the minority has some power during the impeachment process.
Pelosi shot that down in a letter of her own hours later, saying that House committees already have the power needed to conduct the inquiry under current House rules and no vote is necessary. That’s true. At the time of the Clinton impeachment, committee chairs needed a formal vote to give them subpoena power. Since then the rules have changed and their regular powers have been expanded, so they don’t need the vote — though Republicans, as the minority, still would.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-10-07/subpoena-power-republicans-want-house-vote-impeachment-inquiry-pelosi-doesnt
[There was no] House resolution authorizing this Committee to consider whether or not Justice William O. Douglas had committed any impeachable offenses. The matter died in committee but only after some initial, brief deliberation and investigation were done. Nor was there a House resolution authorizing three separate hearings held by this Committee in 2016, on whether John Koskinen, then the head of the Internal Revenue Service, had committed any impeachable offenses. Nor was there one, in the late 1980s, authorizing this Committee to explore whether to impeach three federal district judges. All three judges were eventually impeached, convicted, and removed from office. The lawsuit filed challenging the procedures held in the Senate was dismissed because, the Court found, it raised nonjusticiable questions left to the final discretion of the Senate.
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/09/no-clear-requirement-that-house-approve-impeachment-inquiry.html
Ok.
Now, do you agree or disagree with the statements made in the letter from WH counsel that you posted?
I can give you specific statements if you'd like TSA
RandomGuy
10-09-2019, 11:35 AM
=5th time
Should Trump be impeached if he starts threatening countries for dirt on his political opponents, TSA? Simple yes or no question.
Sure [denial that denial that a threat was made for dirt]
Well, we have a standard we can both agree on [threatening another country for dirt on a political rival is an impeachable offense]. A step forward.
Is Ukraine dependent on US security guarantees and military aid to protect itself from Russia? yes or no.
The US contributes a lot to the protection of Ukraine. [denial that a threat was made for dirt]
Another yes.
We are indeed getting somewhere. 1st time
Was this aid suspended at any time? If so, when?
You might find this link helpful:
https://www.apnews.com/94fdeaddc6b34c02b97278674b87541e
[repeats denial that denial that a threat was made for dirt]
Not really an answer. We are attempting to establish facts concerning what you yourself admit should be impeachable. Hard to do when you fail to offer any.
The question remains.
Ukraine is dependent on the US for military and economic support. 2nd time
Was this aid suspended at any time? If so, when?
[repeats denial that denial that a threat was made for dirt]
Not really an answer.
We are attempting to establish facts concerning what you yourself admit should be impeachable.
Hard to do when you fail to offer any.
The question remains.
Ukraine is dependent on the US for military and economic support. 3rd time
Was this aid suspended at any time? If so, when?
[repeats denial that a threat was made for dirt]
Not really an answer.
We are attempting to establish facts concerning what you yourself admit should be impeachable.
Hard to do when you fail to offer any.
The question remains.
Ukraine is dependent on the US for military and economic support. 4th time
Was this aid suspended at any time? If so, when?
Not really an answer.
We are attempting to establish facts concerning what you yourself admit should be impeachable.
Hard to do when you fail to offer any.
The question remains.
Ukraine is dependent on the US for military and economic support. 5th time
Was this aid suspended at any time? If so, when?
[ignores question, posts tweets deflecting from central question of impeachment]
Not really an answer to my question.
We are attempting to establish facts concerning what you yourself admit should be impeachable. Hard to do when you fail to offer any.
The question remains.
Ukraine is dependent on the US for military and economic support. [6th time
Was this aid suspended at any time? If so, when?
[ignores question, answers other posts]
People who cannot answer honest, fair questions are dishonest sophists.
TSA cannot answer answer honest, fair questions.
TSA is a dishonest sophist.
QED
sophist[ sof-ist ]SHOW IPA
EXAMPLES|WORD ORIGINSEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR sophist ON THESAURUS.COM
noun
(often initial capital letter) Greek History.
any of a class of professional teachers in ancient Greece who gave instruction in various fields, as in general culture, rhetoric, politics, or disputation.
a person belonging to this class at a later period who, while professing to teach skill in reasoning, concerned himself with ingenuity and specious effectiveness rather than soundness of argument.
a person who reasons adroitly and speciously rather than soundly.
The early manifestation of Dunning-Kruger.
Why are you dishonest here?
I already told you I’m not interested in playing your game of hypotheticals just to circle back to your original false claim.
I haven't made any claims yet in the course of this back and forth, dishonest sophist.
I have merely agreed with you:
Trump [should] be impeached if he starts threatening countries for dirt on his political opponents
I am attempting to determine if that happened based on the facts we can both agree on.
You have not answered any questions that might establish facts relevant to that statement, because you are dishonest.
I am merely curious as to why you are dishonest here. Repeating your refusal to answer questions doesn't really tell me why you are dishonest.
[i]Why are you dishonest here?
Now, do you agree or disagree with the statements made in the letter from WH counsel that you posted?
I still agree with the overall theme, what Pelosi is attempting to do against the President is unprecedented. It’s nothing more than desperate political theater and a last gasp after Russiagate failed to deliver the death blow they hoped for.
I still agree with the overall theme, what Pelosi is attempting to do against the President is unprecedented. It’s nothing more than desperate political theater and a last gasp after Russiagate failed to deliver the death blow they hoped for.
So you agree that there's nothing illegal or unconstitutional or otherwise improper that Pelosi is doing. You agree that Pelosi is not violating "appropriate procedures" that would include "at a minimum-the right to see all evidence, to present evidence, to call witnesses, to have counsel present at all hearings, to cross-examine all witnesses, to make objections relating to the examination of witnesses or the admissibility of testimony and evidence, and to respond to evidence and testimony."
You also agree that the committee has no obligation and is not required to dislcose all evidence favorable to the President.
You just don't like the theme of what Pelosi is doing because, as I garner it, it's political theatre and not grounded in the reality of anything the President has done?
boutons_deux
10-09-2019, 11:47 AM
This is a stupid position to take.
... besides a lot of shitty contents, it's not fully enforced. therefore, like any law not enforced, it's irrelevant.
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 11:48 AM
I agree all the facts they presented are wrong, BUT I STILL BELIEVE THEY ARE COMPLETELY RIGHT!
I haven't made any claims yet in the course of this back and forth, dishonest sophist.
I have merely agreed with you:
Trump [should] be impeached if he starts threatening countries for dirt on his political opponents
I am attempting to determine if that happened based on the facts we can both agree on.
You have not answered any questions that might establish facts relevant to that statement, because you are dishonest.
I am merely curious as to why you are dishonest here. Repeating your refusal to answer questions doesn't really tell me why you are dishonest.
Why are you dishonest here?
You aren’t trying to determine anything based on facts. You’ve already made your mind up.
Is it acceptable for a president to ask for assistance from foreign governments to make up dirt on political rivals?
Again, no one wants to play a game of hypotheticals with you.
So you agree that there's nothing illegal or unconstitutional or otherwise improper that Pelosi is doing. You agree that Pelosi is not violating "appropriate procedures" that would include "at a minimum-the right to see all evidence, to present evidence, to call witnesses, to have counsel present at all hearings, to cross-examine all witnesses, to make objections relating to the examination of witnesses or the admissibility of testimony and evidence, and to respond to evidence and testimony."
You also agree that the committee has no obligation and is not required to dislcose all evidence favorable to the President.
You just don't like the theme of what Pelosi is doing because, as I garner it, it's political theatre and not grounded in the reality of anything the President has done?
I do like the theme of what Pelosi is doing because it’s just political theater.
I do like the theme of what Pelosi’s because it’s just political theater.
Right, and you're entitled to that opinion. But Trump's lawyer is wrong on several statements contained in that letter. You'd agree with that, right?
RandomGuy
10-09-2019, 12:06 PM
[long thread showing TSA unwilling to answer a simple question, despite agreeing on circumstances of when impeachment should happen]
People who cannot answer honest, fair questions are dishonest sophists.
TSA cannot answer answer honest, fair questions.
TSA is a dishonest sophist.
QED
The early manifestation of Dunning-Kruger.
Why are you dishonest here?
I already told you I’m not interested in playing your game of hypotheticals just to circle back to your original false claim.
I haven't made any claims yet in the course of this back and forth, dishonest sophist.
I have merely agreed with you:
Trump [should] be impeached if he starts threatening countries for dirt on his political opponents
I am attempting to determine if that happened based on the facts we can both agree on.
You have not answered any questions that might establish facts relevant to that statement, because you are dishonest.
I am merely curious as to why you are dishonest here. Repeating your refusal to answer questions doesn't really tell me why you are dishonest.
Why are you dishonest here?
You aren’t trying to determine anything based on facts. You’ve already made your mind up.
Again, no one wants to play a game of hypotheticals with you.
You aren't trying to determine anything based on facts, which is why you repeatedly won't answer questions about facts. You've already made up your mind up.
You don't want to deal with reality, because you know that Trump did, by your own definition, commit something you yourself admit is impeachable.
That is why you will not answer the honest questions.
You are inherently dishonest, and on some level know that. I already know this.
I am not asking you now anything hypothetical.
I am asking you why you cannot be honest. Your dishonesty is established fact based on your inability to answer.
Why do you think you are dishonest?
Alternately: Do you think you are honest?
You aren't trying to determine anything based on facts, which is why you repeatedly won't answer questions about facts. You've already made up your mind up.
You don't want to deal with reality, because you know that Trump did, by your own definition, commit something you yourself admit is impeachable.
That is why you will not answer the honest questions.
You are inherently dishonest, and on some level know that. I already know this.
I am not asking you now anything hypothetical.
I am asking you why you cannot be honest. Your dishonesty is established fact based on your inability to answer.
Why do you think you are dishonest?
Alternately: Do you think you are honest?
:lol All your whining about honesty and in the exact same post you just outright lie. Never once did I say Trump threatened other countries for dirt on his political opponents. You’re a pathetic liar and there is no point in continuing this discussion with someone who tries to pull that type of shit.
Right, and you're entitled to that opinion. But Trump's lawyer is wrong on several statements contained in that letter. You'd agree with that, right?
My opinion really doesn’t matter as I assume his claims will be tested in court.
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 12:27 PM
My opinion really doesn’t matter as I assume his claims will be tested in court.That's the thing -- all his claims have been tested in the Supreme Court.
And all his claims were roundly denied by that court.
Impeachment is the House's bailiwick and no one else's. The Senate has the final say after impeachment happens, so relax.
https://mobile.twitter.com/thebradfordfile/status/1181665087792267265
The RakeWhen political theater blows up in your face :lol
Whistleblower complaint of Trump threatening Zelensky for political dirt sparks Pelosi’s “impeachment inquiry”
Trump releases actual call from Whistleblower complaint, no threat made, no quid pro quo.
Whistleblower found to have met with Schiff/Schiff staff before meeting with ICIG.
Schiff lied about it.
Whistleblower withheld meeting from ICIG form.
ICIG found to have conveniently modified form to allow second hand info allowed on whistleblower complaint form.
ICIG reveals whistleblower has professional ties to a Dem presidential candidate.
Burisma case re-opened before Zelensky even elected
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulsperry_/status/1181789585904488448
hater
10-09-2019, 01:07 PM
:lmao :lmao this shit show is gonna end the same way 2016 election night ended
With snowflakes, manginas and shillarytards crying their eyes off :lmao
:lol
This will be beautiful to watch
Will make the Kavanaughty asskicking like a walk in the park :lol
Called it on page 1 weeks ago :tu
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 01:10 PM
When political theater blows up in your face :lol
Whistleblower complaint of Trump threatening Zelensky for political dirt sparks Pelosi’s “impeachment inquiry”
Trump releases actual call from Whistleblower complaint, no threat made, no quid pro quo.
Whistleblower found to have met with Schiff/Schiff staff before meeting with ICIG.
Schiff lied about it.
Whistleblower withheld meeting from ICIG form.
ICIG found to have conveniently modified form to allow second hand info allowed on whistleblower complaint form.
ICIG reveals whistleblower has professional ties to a Dem presidential candidate.
Burisma case re-opened before Zelensky even elected
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulsperry_/status/1181789585904488448:lol life in the bubble
My opinion really doesn’t matter as I assume his claims will be tested in court.
You're shrinking away because you know that letter is filled with discredited bullshit. Be honest and admit as much.
When political theater blows up in your face :lol
Whistleblower complaint of Trump threatening Zelensky for political dirt sparks Pelosi’s “impeachment inquiry”
Trump releases actual call from Whistleblower complaint, no threat made, no quid pro quo.
Whistleblower found to have met with Schiff/Schiff staff before meeting with ICIG.
Schiff lied about it.
Whistleblower withheld meeting from ICIG form.
ICIG found to have conveniently modified form to allow second hand info allowed on whistleblower complaint form.
ICIG reveals whistleblower has professional ties to a Dem presidential candidate.
Burisma case re-opened before Zelensky even elected
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulsperry_/status/1181789585904488448
This is pure partisan hackery. No threat/quid pro quo/bribe is needed for an impeachable defense. The quid pro quo thing is being made out of whole cloth to distract from what's plainly stated on the transcript the White House released. When you stop speaking in punditry and look beyond the tag lines, you'll see a pretty clear, straightforward, and compelling case for impeachment.
This is pure partisan hackery. No threat/quid pro quo/bribe is needed for an impeachable defense. The quid pro quo thing is being made out of whole cloth to distract from what's plainly stated on the transcript the White House released. When you stop speaking in punditry and look beyond the tag lines, you'll see a pretty clear, straightforward, and compelling case for impeachment.
Which is?
This is pure partisan hackery. No threat/quid pro quo/bribe is needed for an impeachable defense. The quid pro quo thing is being made out of whole cloth to distract from what's plainly stated on the transcript the White House released. When you stop speaking in punditry and look beyond the tag lines, you'll see a pretty clear, straightforward, and compelling case for impeachment.
And LOL at you calling that out as partisan hackery while ignoring all the partisan hackery revolving around the “whistleblower”
Which is?
Misread this post. I thought you were responding to the below but I should have known you're avoiding it like the plague. Can you answer?
So you agree that there's nothing illegal or unconstitutional or otherwise improper that Pelosi is doing. You agree that Pelosi is not violating "appropriate procedures" that would include "at a minimum-the right to see all evidence, to present evidence, to call witnesses, to have counsel present at all hearings, to cross-examine all witnesses, to make objections relating to the examination of witnesses or the admissibility of testimony and evidence, and to respond to evidence and testimony."
You also agree that the committee has no obligation and is not required to dislcose all evidence favorable to the President.
You just don't like the theme of what Pelosi is doing because, as I garner it, it's political theatre and not grounded in the reality of anything the President has done?
This is pure partisan hackery. No threat/quid pro quo/bribe is needed for an impeachable defense. The quid pro quo thing is being made out of whole cloth to distract from what's plainly stated on the transcript the White House released. When you stop speaking in punditry and look beyond the tag lines, you'll see a pretty clear, straightforward, and compelling case for impeachment.
What happened first, Pelosi’s announcement or the release of the call transcript?
And LOL at you calling that out as partisan hackery while ignoring all the partisan hackery revolving around the “whistleblower”
You're doing it again. I didn't mention the whistleblower - I cabined my comment to the transcript released by the white house. I know you want to wave your hands and obfuscate, but stay on topic.
This is pure partisan hackery. No threat/quid pro quo/bribe is needed for an impeachable defense. The quid pro quo thing is being made out of whole cloth to distract from what's plainly stated on the transcript the White House released. When you stop speaking in punditry and look beyond the tag lines, you'll see a pretty clear, straightforward, and compelling case for impeachment.
You said there is clear, straightforward, and compelling case for impeachment. State your case.
hater
10-09-2019, 01:28 PM
Which is?
There is no compelling case. That's why this thread is 70 pages and congress still has not voted on it :lmao
The daily drip drip drip leaks by intelligence agencies parroted by media will never amount to a case but just there to sway public opinion
All the so called law experts were certain they had a case with Russia gate, but they were wrong
The same experts were certain they had a case against Kavanaughty boy they were wrong
This case is even weaker than those 2 :lol
What happened first, Pelosi’s announcement or the release of the call transcript?
Why does that matter? The white house stood by the call transcript, right? They didn't claim it was doctored or altered, did they?
You're doing it again. I didn't mention the whistleblower - I cabined my comment to the transcript released by the white house. I know you want to wave your hands and obfuscate, but stay on topic.
Oh so you now don’t think it’s important to discuss the whistleblower complaint that launched Pelosi’s “impeachment inquiry”? :lol
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 01:30 PM
Oh so you now don’t think it’s important to discuss the whistleblower complaint that launched Pelosi’s “impeachment inquiry”? :lolNot terribly important anymore since the memo provides the damning evidence the whistleblower was talking about.
The whistleblower was right saying something was wrong. Dennison proved it for him.
You said there is clear, straightforward, and compelling case for impeachment. State your case.
Oh so you now don’t think it’s important to discuss the whistleblower complaint that launched Pelosi’s “impeachment inquiry”? :lol
I never mentioned the whistleblower. I said that Trump's statements, according to the transcript the White House released, are sufficient for impeachment. Those comments are:
The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you're surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible.
and
The President: Good because I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that's really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me.
I'm not going to do the RandomGuy thing TSA. I'm just going to say that you're refusing to answer my question about the White House letter so you agree with me that it's straight up wrong.
Not terribly important anymore since the memo provides the damning evidence the whistleblower was talking about.
The whistleblower was right saying something was wrong. Dennison proved it for him.
That's why, you know, the Prez made shit worse this time around ... Hard to believe some people don't understand DJT provided more, not less, evidence for impeachment, regardless of any whistleblower(s)
hater
10-09-2019, 01:35 PM
I never mentioned the whistleblower. I said that Trump's statements, according to the transcript the White House released, are sufficient for impeachment. Those comments are:
The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you're surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible.
and
The President: Good because I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that's really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me.
Nothing burger
Nothing burger
Solid analysis.
I'm not going to do the RandomGuy thing TSA. I'm just going to say that you're refusing to answer my question about the White House letter so you agree with me that it's straight up wrong.
No, I don’t agree. I think the letter served its purpose in challenging Pelosi and will tie it up in court.
hater
10-09-2019, 01:37 PM
Solid analysis.
Yet it's an analysis.
Where's your analysis?
No, I don’t agree. I think the letter served its purpose in challenging Pelosi and will tie it up in court.
Not the question I asked. I asked whether the statements regarding due process, confrontation of witnesses, disclosure of evidence are or are not correct. Try again.
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 01:38 PM
That's why, you know, the Prez made shit worse this time around ... Hard to believe some people don't understand DJT provided more, not less, evidence for impeachment, regardless of any whistleblower(s)Hiding the actual transcript on the super secret server didn't help.
And now every time he ignores or blocks a subpoena he just adds obstruction to the articles of impeachment that will come to a vote....
I never mentioned the whistleblower. I said that Trump's statements, according to the transcript the White House released, are sufficient for impeachment. Those comments are:
The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you're surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible.
and
The President: Good because I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that's really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me.
I’m not going to do the RandomGuy thing either. I’ll just assume you have no case when you refuse to answer. You said there is clear, straightforward, and compelling case for impeachment. What specifically did Trump say that is sufficient for impeachment. State your case.
Not the question I asked. I asked whether the statements regarding due process, confrontation of witnesses, disclosure of evidence are or are not correct. Try again.
Already answered. Court will decide.
Yet it's an analysis.
Where's your analysis?
A president facing re-election should not engage his private attorney to facilitate an investigation into the likely candidate he will face in said election. It's an improper use of presidential power and is an affront on the democratic system. If there is a concern about the Biden's it should not be politicized - but handed off to a neutral law enforcement agency.
Already answered. Court will decide.
Nope. They decided 27 years ago. I'm asking you whether, based on that decision, Trump's lawyer is correct or incorrect. Stop dodging.
I’m not going to do the RandomGuy thing either. I’ll just assume you have no case when you refuse to answer. You said there is clear, straightforward, and compelling case for impeachment. What specifically did Trump say that is sufficient for impeachment. State your case.
A president facing re-election should not engage his private attorney to facilitate an investigation into the likely candidate he will face in said election. It's an improper use of presidential power and is an affront on the democratic system. If there is a concern about the Biden's it should not be politicized - but handed off to a neutral law enforcement agency.
And that brings us back to the word "other." What distinguishes certain offenses as "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" must be not the fact that serious crimes are involved but the fact that those offenses are similar, in ways relevant to what the devices of impeachment and removal are for, to treason and bribery. But that in tum means that, like treason and bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors, as terms of art, must refer to major offenses against our very system of government, or serious abuses of the governmental power with which a public official has been entrusted ( as in the case of a public official who accepts a bribe in order to tum his official powers to per#sonal or otherwise corrupt ends), or grave wrongs in pursuit of governmental power ( as in the case of someone who subverts democracy by using bribery or other nefarious means in order to secure government office and its powers, or in order to hold onto such office once attained). And, sure enough, even a cursory examination of the precise history of the phrase "high Crimes and Misdemeanors," and of the path that phrase took as it found its way from fourteenth-century England into the Constitution of the United States in the summer of 1787, confirms that understanding of what the words meant.
Defining High Crimes and Misdeameanors: Basic Principles
Lawrence H. Tribe, Tyler Professor of Constitutional Law, Harvard Law School
https://heinonline.org/HOL/PDFsearch...n&from=dropbox
hater
10-09-2019, 01:44 PM
A president facing re-election should not engage his private attorney to facilitate an investigation into the likely candidate he will face in said election. It's an improper use of presidential power and is an affront on the democratic system. If there is a concern about the Biden's it should not be politicized - but handed off to a neutral law enforcement agency.
Where did you copy that from? Link?
Where did you copy that from? Link?
I copied it from my brain and from law school
Nope. They decided 27 years ago. I'm asking you whether, based on that decision, Trump's lawyer is correct or incorrect. Stop dodging.
Court will decide if he’s correct or incorrect.
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 01:46 PM
Where did you copy that from? Link?
I copied it from my brain and from law school:lmao
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 01:47 PM
Court will decide if he’s correct or incorrect.:lol sure. I guess a court will get to immediately dismiss any suit Trump tries to bring on those grounds if he's stupid enough to go that route.
And you agree he is that stupid.
The SCOTUS explicitly ruled that courts have no say in how impeachments are run. Period.
Court will decide if he’s correct or incorrect.
Sweet, so you're refusing to answer and deflecting with an inane comment. Since you can't give me an answer, I'll pencil you in as agreeing with me that the letter is incorrect. Feel free to come forward with any case law that says otherwise.
hater
10-09-2019, 01:52 PM
I copied it from my brain and from law school
OK then
First of all, likely candidate is a problematic term. How likely? How likely is Biden to be Trump's opponent? 50%? 60%? 30%? Where do you stop? IMO it's way too early to tell if Biden is likely as Bernie and Warren are pretty much caught up
And next, even if let's say Biden was likely, a personal attorney cannot investigate. He can talk to investigator and officers but he himself cannot investigate, much less in a foreign country. So that is problematic as well
Next, even if Biden is likely and an attorney could investigate, are you saying a potential presidential contender is off limits to any investigation? If Bidden be heads someone on a DC street, and Trump was made aware is he not allowed to push for investigation? Since when are likely presidential contenders off limits?
See, your analysis is an analysis as much as mine. And it's got lots of weaknesses. Thus why IMO this is still a nothing hurger
Nothing will come out of it as I predicted in page 1
A president facing re-election should not engage his private attorney to facilitate an investigation into the likely candidate he will face in said election. It's an improper use of presidential power and is an affront on the democratic system. If there is a concern about the Biden's it should not be politicized - but handed off to a neutral law enforcement agency.
So it’s only bad for a President to ask for corruption of a likely candidate to be investigated if facing re-election? The current President dealt with much worse while he was the likely candidate—CIA, FBI, NSA, spies, foreign assistance from intelligence agencies in Australia, Italy, UK. Were you okay with the government wielding that power against him based off paid for claims from his rival candidate?
:lol sure. I guess a court will get to immediately dismiss any suit Trump tries to bring on those grounds if he's stupid enough to go that route.
And you agree he is that stupid.
The SCOTUS explicitly ruled that courts have no say in how impeachments are run. Period.
Curious to hear what TSA and other conservative legal pundits think has changed since 1993 that would suddenly make impeachment not a political question.
So it’s only bad for a President to ask for corruption of a likely candidate to be investigated if facing re-election? The current President dealt with much worse while he was the likely candidate—CIA, FBI, NSA, spies, foreign assistance from intelligence agencies in Australia, Italy, UK. Were you okay with the government wielding that power against him based off paid for claims from his rival candidate?
nuh uh ... mine first. I've gone along with you plenty already
Sweet, so you're refusing to answer and deflecting with an inane comment. Since you can't give me an answer, I'll pencil you in as agreeing with me that the letter is incorrect. Feel free to come forward with any case law that says otherwise.
You just don’t like the answer. You don’t think it will go to court?
nuh uh ... mine first. I've gone along with you plenty already
As I’ve done with you.
You’re up Sparky. So it’s only bad for a President to ask for corruption of a likely candidate to be investigated if facing re-election? The current President dealt with much worse while he was the likely candidate—CIA, FBI, NSA, spies, foreign assistance from intelligence agencies in Australia, Italy, UK. Were you okay with the government wielding that power against him based off paid for claims from his rival candidate?
OK then
First of all, likely candidate is a problematic term. How likely? How likely is Biden to be Trump's opponent? 50%? 60%? 30%? Where do you stop? IMO it's way too early to tell if Biden is likely as Bernie and Warren are pretty much caught up
Why does that matter? It's an abuse of office no matter how realistic or not the opponent is. In this case, Biden is the frontrunner.
And next, even if let's say Biden was likely, a personal attorney cannot investigate. He can talk to investigator and officers but he himself cannot investigate, much less in a foreign country. So that is problematic as well
You might want to tell DJT this since he's having his personal lawyer involved in the investigation. To, you know, investigate Biden.
But even if you disagree with that - which you shouldn't because its plainly there in the transcript - it's nevertheless an abuse of office to have a personal attorney involved, at all.
Next, even if Biden is likely and an attorney could investigate, are you saying a potential presidential contender is off limits to any investigation? If Bidden be heads someone on a DC street, and Trump was made aware is he not allowed to push for investigation? Since when are likely presidential contenders off limits?
It is off limits to have the president involve his personal attorney in requesting a foreign power to investigate a political rival. You're asking these questions as though there's some distinction you're making, but you're not.
If Biden commits murder, then we have non-politicized organizations (D.C. police, the FBI, the U.S. Marshalls, etc...) to investigate. None of what you're saying is support for a president to politicize the issue.
See, your analysis is an analysis as much as mine. And it's got lots of weaknesses. Thus why IMO this is still a nothing hurger
Nothing will come out of it as I predicted in page 1
No.
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 01:58 PM
You just don’t like the answer. You don’t think it will go to court?Only as a stalling tactic. Even the most Trump friendly judge would immediately dismiss. There is no getting around Nixon.
OK then
First of all, likely candidate is a problematic term. How likely? How likely is Biden to be Trump's opponent? 50%? 60%? 30%? Where do you stop? IMO it's way too early to tell if Biden is likely as Bernie and Warren are pretty much caught up
And next, even if let's say Biden was likely, a personal attorney cannot investigate. He can talk to investigator and officers but he himself cannot investigate, much less in a foreign country. So that is problematic as well
Next, even if Biden is likely and an attorney could investigate, are you saying a potential presidential contender is off limits to any investigation? If Bidden be heads someone on a DC street, and Trump was made aware is he not allowed to push for investigation? Since when are likely presidential contenders off limits?
See, your analysis is an analysis as much as mine. And it's got lots of weaknesses. Thus why IMO this is still a nothing hurger
Nothing will come out of it as I predicted in page 1
2020 candidates are off limits.
https://mobile.twitter.com/thehill/status/1180951110087053317
You just don’t like the answer. You don’t think it will go to court?
It going to court or not doesn't answer the question - which is whether Trump's lawyer got it right. You know he didn't, admitted to it partially, and are no obfuscating. So I'm putting you down as a "VY is right on this one." Thanks.
koriwhat
10-09-2019, 02:00 PM
2020 candidates are off limits.
https://mobile.twitter.com/thehill/status/1180951110087053317
she is such a 2face horse face... what an ugly ass cunt inside and out!
As I’ve done with you.
You’re up Sparky. So it’s only bad for a President to ask for corruption of a likely candidate to be investigated if facing re-election? The current President dealt with much worse while he was the likely candidate—CIA, FBI, NSA, spies, foreign assistance from intelligence agencies in Australia, Italy, UK. Were you okay with the government wielding that power against him based off paid for claims from his rival candidate?
I don't do whataboutism. If DJT experienced the same thing - which I'm agnostic on - that's bad and should be investigated. That doesn't get DJT off the hook. Two wrongs and all that
You just don’t like the answer. You don’t think it will go to court?
What's changed since Nixon? Has Congress voluntarily ceded its impeachment power? Did we amend the constitution? Is there a circuit split?
Why do you think it will go to SCOTUS? Do you know how often the Court grants cert? Especially in a case that's more or less already decided?
I don't do whataboutism. If DJT experienced the same thing - which I'm agnostic on - that's bad and should be investigated. That doesn't get DJT off the hook. Two wrongs and all that
Do you think the two situations are comparable?
Chris
10-09-2019, 02:04 PM
just own it. not a big deal tbh
Nothing to own, just a statement of fact : )
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 02:05 PM
Do you think the two situations are comparable?You know they aren't.
spurraider21
10-09-2019, 02:05 PM
Nothing to own, just a statement of fact : )
:jack disappointed
Do you think the two situations are comparable?
I don't know. Maybe, maybe not. I don't think what happened 3 years ago is particularly relevant to whether DJT committed an impeachable offense. Because it's, you know, irrelevant.
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 02:07 PM
https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1181703167639089157?s=19The notion that you can withhold information and documents from Congress no matter whether you are the party in power or not in power is wrong. Respect for the rule of law must mean something, irrespective of the vicissitudes of political cycles.
-- Trey Gowdy
So to keep track:
1) somehow SCOTUS is going to reverse Nixon because TSA doesn't want to answer on whether White House counsel is wrong on the nature of impeachment and whether due process applies.
2) DJT didn't commit an impeachable offense because Obama.
RandomGuy
10-09-2019, 02:08 PM
Fact:
Threats do not have to be explicit to be real. They can be implied.
Fact:
Donald Trump held up Ukranian aid, and any official state visit.
Fact:
When the Ukranian president mentioned this aid, Trumps response was "do us a favor", in a heavily populated call.
The threat here was implicit. The aid did not get cleared until the day before Ukraine announced a "review" of the corruption prosecutions of the company Biden was a boardmember for, presumedly after discussions with the white house.
This is like Watergate, but with morons.
hater
10-09-2019, 02:09 PM
Why does that matter? It's an abuse of office no matter how realistic or not the opponent is. In this case, Biden is the frontrunner.
Now you are changing your own analysis. You said likely candidate not frontrunner. And at this point it's not clear Biden is either
You might want to tell DJT this since he's having his personal lawyer involved in the investigation. To, you know, investigate Biden.
Trump never said Rudy is investigating. You made that up
But even if you disagree with that - which you shouldn't because its plainly there in the transcript - it's nevertheless an abuse of office to have a personal attorney involved, at all.
according to which law?
It is off limits to have the president involve his personal attorney in requesting a foreign power to investigate a political rival. You're asking these questions as though there's some distinction you're making, but you're not.
If Biden commits murder, then we have non-politicized organizations (D.C. police, the FBI, the U.S. Marshalls, etc...) to investigate. None of what you're saying is support for a president to politicize the issue.
No.
You keep saying Rudy is investigating, but you just made that up
Truth is no law was broken. Impeachment is a political process. At best for democrats it will go along political lines and die at the senate. At worst it will be an utter failure for democrats that will bring down many of them
In other words the case is a nothing burger
Chris
10-09-2019, 02:10 PM
https://twitter.com/RyanAFournier/status/1182001205247139840?s=19
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 02:10 PM
So to keep track:
1) somehow SCOTUS is going to reverse Nixon because TSA doesn't want to answer on whether White House counsel is wrong on the nature of impeachment and whether due process applies.
2) DJT didn't commit an impeachable offense because Obama.I may actually buy a diminished capacity kind of defense for 2). Black President did a lot of permanent mental damage to white men all over the US as this thread proves.
RandomGuy
10-09-2019, 02:11 PM
You don't want to deal with reality, because you know that Trump did, by your own definition, commit something you yourself admit is impeachable.
:lol All your whining about honesty and in the exact same post you just outright lie. Never once did I say Trump threatened other countries for dirt on his political opponents. You’re a pathetic liar and there is no point in continuing this discussion with someone who tries to pull that type of shit.
That's not what I said. I say that Trump's actions met YOUR definition of what is impeachable.
Which is why you are so pissy. You know it too.
I don't know. Maybe, maybe not. I don't think what happened 3 years ago is particularly relevant to whether DJT committed an impeachable offense. Because it's, you know, irrelevant.
:lol asking for a country to investigate actual corruption is an impeachable offense
Agree to disagree on that one VY :bobo
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 02:13 PM
:lol asking for a country to investigate actual corruption is an impeachable offense
Agree to disagree on that one VY :boboWhat crime are you saying Hunter Biden committed?
Be specific.
Now you are changing your own analysis. You said likely candidate not frontrunner. And at this point it's not clear Biden is either
No I'm not. Either is an abuse of office. That's the Larry Tribe law review article I quoted.
Trump never said Rudy is investigating. You made that up
Trump asked the Ukranian President to have his people get in contact with Rudy about the Biden investigation.
according to which law?
https://heinonline.org/HOL/PDFsearch...n&from=dropbox[/QUOTE]
You keep saying Rudy is investigating, but you just made that up
Truth is no law was broken. Impeachment is a political process. At best for democrats it will go along political lines and die at the senate. At worst it will be an utter failure for democrats that will bring down many of them
The transcript speaks for itself. Feel free to show me those portions that back you up.
Whether or not DJT is convicted is irrelevant to whether he's committed an impeachable offense. Unless you think the Senate GOP don't prioritize reelection or party affiliation.
In other words the case is a nothing burger[/QUOTE]
Chris
10-09-2019, 02:15 PM
:jack disappointed
Disappointed you couldn't goalpost? Just keep at it slugger.
:lol asking for a country to investigate actual corruption is an impeachable offense
Agree to disagree on that one VY :bobo
Yeah, you're free to misstate the situation and be wrong. Can't help you there buddy.
Still waiting on your comments as to why Nixon is gonna be overturned.
spurraider21
10-09-2019, 02:18 PM
Disappointed you couldn't goalpost? Just keep at it slugger.
you posed gowdy's being a prosecutor as an excuse for why he reportedly wasn't going to take on the role as trump's outside counsel, even though it never made sense as an excuse, because prosecutors can become defense attorneys without issue (as rudy has been doing for some time now)
then gowdy took on the role, further confirming the excuse as bullshit.
you haven't owned it. SAD!
That's not what I said. I say that Trump's actions met YOUR definition of what is impeachable.
Which is why you are so pissy. You know it too.
I have merely agreed with you:
Trump [should] be impeached if he starts threatening countries for dirt on his political opponents
I am attempting to determine if that happened based on the facts we can both agree on.
An hour ago you said you were attempting to establish the facts. Now, again, you’ve made your mind up. You’re a dishonest hack RG...it’s sad to see what’s become of you after your TDS. Poor fella.
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 02:20 PM
The non-lawyers bowing up ITT:
https://media1.tenor.com/images/3b9474b4dd06abf219a493e3ce40a02a/tenor.gif
RandomGuy
10-09-2019, 02:22 PM
An hour ago you said you were attempting to establish the facts. Now, again, you’ve made your mind up. You’re a dishonest hack RG...it’s sad to see what’s become of you after your TDS. Poor fella.
I have reviewed the facts and made my conclusion.
I was attempting to establish mutually agreed on facts to see if we could reach an agreement on a conclusion.
We got to:
1) Trump should be impeached if he threatened another country to investigate his political rivals
and
2)Ukraine is dependent on the US for military and financial aid.
Once you realized that you painted yourself into a corner and would have to admit that, in fact, the moron you idolize is a moron and should be impeached by your own standards, you clammed up and stopped answering questions.
You stopped being honest.
I merely wondered why you think you stopped being honest.
you posed gowdy's being a prosecutor as an excuse for why he reportedly wasn't going to take on the role as trump's outside counsel, even though it never made sense as an excuse, because prosecutors can become defense attorneys without issue (as rudy has been doing for some time now)
then gowdy took on the role, further confirming the excuse as bullshit.
you haven't owned it. SAD!
KaiserDillon PLLC has extensive experience representing clients in white-collar criminal matters.
Two of our partners, Matt Kaiser and Jon Jeffress, are former Assistant Federal Public Defenders. Another, Justin Dillon, is a former Assistant United States Attorney.
Described as “a haven for clients in trouble,” by The American Lawyer, Zuckerman Spaeder consistently ranks among the top firms in the United States for white collar criminal defense. In fact, our reputation was built on defending clients in high-stakes white collar litigation.
We defend individual and institutional clients in all manner of white collar prosecutions, government investigations, and other criminal matters. With a team assembled from former prosecutors and public defenders, we are trial-ready litigators with decades of experience in court. Because our teams come from both the prosecution and defense side, we understand prosecutors and regulators, giving our clients a better perspective on the case.
Over the past three decades, our lawyers have been involved in every significant Department of Justice (DOJ) white collar enforcement initiative, including the Enron and AOL accounting fraud matters — securing an acquittal for an AOL executive in the federal criminal trial and a repudiation of the SEC’s allegations in the companion civil trial; investigations of the major banks for LIBOR and Foreign Exchange rate fixing; Volkswagen for circumventing emission controls, BP for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill; the Japanese auto parts supply and auto shipping industries on criminal antitrust claims, and the Petrobras foreign bribery inquiry. One of our partners successfully defended former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell at trial and before the U.S. Supreme Court in one of the most high profile cases in the past decade; other partners successfully defended individuals at trial in the DOJ’s largest prosecution of individuals under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and the largest environmental criminal prosecution; and more recently, defeated the government in a federal prosecution of corruption and fraud in awarding government contracts.
hater
10-09-2019, 02:25 PM
No I'm not. Either is an abuse of office. That's the Larry Tribe law review article I quoted.
Larry tribe is a rabid anti trumptard lol
Trump asked the Ukranian President to have his people get in contact with Rudy about the Biden investigation.
Exactly. He never said Rudy is investigating. Glad we agree here.
and your link don't work
The transcript speaks for itself. Feel free to show me those portions that back you up.
LOL you are the one saying it's a compelling case, you tell me which portions back you up. What you quoted 9bviously doesnt
Yeah, you're free to misstate the situation and be wrong. Can't help you there buddy.
Still waiting on your comments as to why Nixon is gonna be overturned.
Speaa as king of misstating, never said it would be.
RandomGuy
10-09-2019, 02:28 PM
Speaa as king of misstating, never said it would be.
You are the sofa king, we tar dead.
I have reviewed the facts and made my conclusion.
I was attempting to establish mutually agreed on facts to see if we could reach an agreement on a conclusion.
We got to:
1) Trump should be impeached if he threatened another country to investigate his political rivals
and
2)Ukraine is dependent on the US for military and financial aid.
Once you realized that you painted yourself into a corner and would have to admit that, in fact, the moron you idolize is a moron and should be impeached by your own standards, you clammed up and stopped answering questions.
You stopped being honest.
I merely wondered why you think you stopped being honest.
The only thing you’ve done is lie and put words in my mouth in an attempt to get me to discuss a conclusion you’ve already reached without evidence. You’re a dishonest hack.
Larry tribe is a rabid anti trumptard lol
The article is from 1998 :lmao
Exactly. He never said Rudy is investigating. Glad we agree here.
We don't agree. Trump asked Ukraine to contact Rudy because Rudy knows a lot and would assist in the investigation.
https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/gwlr67&div=31&id=&page=
LOL you are the one saying it's a compelling case, you tell me which portions back you up. What you quoted 9bviously doesnt
It is. That's why I quoted from it. At length. All you've said is "nuh uh."
Speaa as king of misstating, never said it would be.
Then you agree that white house counsel got it wrong, since there'll be no reason for SCOTUS to take up Nixon again. Glad we could finally agree on something :tu
Chris
10-09-2019, 02:47 PM
you posed gowdy's being a prosecutor as an excuse for why he reportedly wasn't going to take on the role as trump's outside counsel, even though it never made sense as an excuse, because prosecutors can become defense attorneys without issue (as rudy has been doing for some time now)
then gowdy took on the role, further confirming the excuse as bullshit.
you haven't owned it. SAD!
Negative. We've already established it was a ststement of fact which is evident. Nothing to own; you're just spinning your wheels with no tread.
spurraider21
10-09-2019, 02:54 PM
Negative. We've already established it was a ststement of fact which is evident. Nothing to own; you're just spinning your wheels with no tread.
cant own it
Sad!
hater
10-09-2019, 03:01 PM
The article is from 1998 :lmao
Post it then
We don't agree. Trump asked Ukraine to contact Rudy because Rudy knows a lot and would assist in the investigation.
Which does not = Rudy is investigating. Do you agree Trump didn't say the words Rudy is investigating?
It is. That's why I quoted from it. At length. All you've said is "nuh uh."
What you quoted does not back up your claims. So yeah. Nuh uh
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 03:06 PM
Which does not = Rudy is investigating. Do you agree Trump didn't say the words Rudy is investigating? What are you claiming Rudy has been doing in Ukraine?
benefactor
10-09-2019, 03:07 PM
1181690727635542017
:lol
Post it then
I have, multiple times.
https://heinonline.org/HOL/PDFsearchable?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/gwlr67&div=31§ion=31&print=section&from=dropbox
If not, do a google search for: 67 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 712 (1998-1999). Second hit
and lol 1998
Which does not = Rudy is investigating. Do you agree Trump didn't say the words Rudy is investigating?
Yes it does. Being involved in an investigation is investigating.
Really cutting words with a semantic laser here aren't we?
What you quoted does not back up your claims. So yeah. Nuh uh
Sure it does. It backs up the claim that Trump asked a foreign leader to, with the assistance of his personal attorney, conduct a (criminal) investigation into a political opponent.
But your "nuh uh" is super compelling tho
boutons_deux
10-09-2019, 03:12 PM
Echoes of The Old Lesbian's early panic that "ISIS and Ebola are coming to destroy us all"
Lindsey Graham demands GOPers sign Trump loyalty oath because
impeachment ‘is about to destroy this nation’
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/lindsey-graham-demands-gopers-sign-trump-loyalty-oath-because-impeachment-is-about-to-destroy-this-nation/
hater
10-09-2019, 03:16 PM
I have, multiple times.
https://heinonline.org/HOL/PDFsearchable?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/gwlr67&div=31§ion=31&print=section&from=dropbox
If not, do a google search for: 67 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 712 (1998-1999). Second hit
and lol 1998
Yes it does. Being involved in an investigation is investigating.
Really cutting words with a semantic laser here aren't we?
Sure it does. It backs up the claim that Trump asked a foreign leader to, with the assistance of his personal attorney, conduct a (criminal) investigation into a political opponent.
But your "nuh uh" is super compelling tho
Yeah you keep reposting broken links :lol
And of course semantics and words matter in law LOL being involved in an investigation does not = being an investigator. Not in this planet
koriwhat
10-09-2019, 03:17 PM
1181690727635542017
:lol
you should FaceBook Stalk DJT into participating tbh
boutons_deux
10-09-2019, 03:18 PM
Why Trump is too arrogant to be impeached and will probably resign
“He’s in too much legal jeopardy in too many places,
including NY, and
all those civil suits,
including the NY AG suing the Trump Foundation for self-dealing and cheating the charity,” Kanefield argued.
“Nixon’s legal jeopardy, in contrast, was narrow.”
Rangappa said she would “respectfully disagree.”
“I think we underestimate the narcissistic injury that the stain of impeachment would leave on Trump’s psyche.
He can’t tolerate it….he’d rather ‘quit,'”
believes that the details could be worked out for
Trump to resign from office in return for a “Get Out of Jail Free” card.
“As Teri notes, though, the costs of resigning are high: He faces certain prosecution in state, if not federal, courts,” she noted.
“Is there a way to “make a deal”?
He, himself, can pardon his kids.
And he can get an assurance that VP Pence will pardon him, a la Nixon.
Getting NY to get on board is trickier (neither he nor Pence can’t pardon state crimes), but [in my opinion], worth it.”
“This dude poses an existential threat to our democracy.
He endangers our national security.
He will burn the whole place down if he continues.
This is the trade off for the pipe dream that somehow he and the Traitor Tots are going to be led off in orange jumpsuits,” she continued.
“Get him out.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/why-trump-is-too-arrogant-to-be-impeached-and-will-probably-resign/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1679 (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/why-trump-is-too-arrogant-to-be-impeached-and-will-probably-resign/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1679)
Yeah you keep reposting broken links :lol
And of course semantics and words matter in law LOL being involved in an investigation does not = being an investigator. Not in this planet
Use your google.
What the transcript says and what Rudy is doing is not a question of law.
Asking to have your personal lawyer involved in a foreign country's investigation of a political opponent is an abuse of power. LOL
hater
10-09-2019, 03:27 PM
Use your google.
What the transcript says and what Rudy is doing is not a question of law.
Asking to have your personal lawyer involved in a foreign country's investigation of a political opponent is an abuse of power. LOL
Just post the text you are referring to tbqh
So now the transcript is not question of law, Rudy is not investigating and we went from likely presidential opponent to political opponent
:lol your premise is changing faster than Joe Bidens poll numbers :lol
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 03:28 PM
Yeah you keep reposting broken links :lolThe first one he posted works.
https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/gwlr67&div=31&id=&page=
And of course semantics and words matter in law LOL being involved in an investigation does not = being an investigator. Not in this planetWhat are you saying Rudy has been doing in Ukraine?
Chris
10-09-2019, 03:40 PM
Use your google.
This is a common tactic used by the Left to end the conversation or debate.
boutons_deux
10-09-2019, 03:46 PM
Watch Rudy Giuliani completely lose it on Fox while shouting that his fake scandal implicates Obama
https://www.rawstory.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Rudy-Giuliani.png
President Donald Trump’s defense attorney loudly argued that former President Barack Obama may be implicated in the widely-debunked conspiracy theory about Joe Biden and Ukraine.
Fox Business host Trish Regan asked Rudy Giuliani why Trump was involved in any way with attempting to get multiple foreign countries to dig up dirt on Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.
“Because if he doesn’t do it, who is going to vindicate the laws of the United States of America?” Giuliani replied. :lol
a new twist in his conspiracy theory, that Obama was involved.
“The reason the Democrats are fighting so hard is because it’s going further than Joe Biden,”
“Do you think Obama just turned his back on this?
If he turned his back on this, what else did he turn his back on?
It’s almost impossible to turn your back on this,” Giuliani argued.
“Now, I don’t know how far it goes, but I know it goes further than Joe Biden,” Giuliani said.
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/watch-rudy-giuliani-completely-lose-it-on-fox-while-shouting-that-his-fake-scandal-implicates-obama/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29 (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/watch-rudy-giuliani-completely-lose-it-on-fox-while-shouting-that-his-fake-scandal-implicates-obama/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29)
yes, further and right up to Julie Annie who was also trying score some $Ms in Ukraine.
============================
Profit, not politics: Trash allies sought Ukraine gas deal
a group of individuals with ties to the president and his personal lawyer were also active in the former Soviet republic.
This circle of businessmen and Republican donors touted connections to Giuliani and Trump while trying to install new management at the top of Ukraine’s massive state gas company.
Their plan was to then steer lucrative contracts to companies controlled by Trump allies,
The Trump and Giuliani allies driving the attempt to change the senior management at Naftogaz, however, appear to have had inside knowledge of the U.S. government’s plans in Ukraine.
For example, they told people that Trump would replace the U.S. ambassador (done!) there months before she was actually recalled to Washington,
One of the individuals said he was so concerned by the whole affair that
he reported it to a U.S. Embassy official in Ukraine months ago.
etc ...
(https://apnews.com/d7440cffba4940f5b85cd3dfa3500fb2)https://apnews.com/d7440cffba4940f5b85cd3dfa3500fb2
This is a common tactic used by the Left to end the conversation or debate.
Giving a link that works several times and then saying how to find a document on google is a leftist tactic to end debate?
Burisma paid Joe Biden $900,000 for lobbying – Ukrainian MP
17:43, 09.10.2019 4 min read
KYIV. Oct 9 (Interfax-Ukraine) – Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden received $900,000 for lobbying activities from Burisma Group, Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada member Andriy Derkach said citing investigation materials.
Derkach publicized documents which, as he said, "describe the mechanism of getting money by Biden Sr." at a press conference at Interfax-Ukraine's press center in Kyiv on Wednesday.
"This was the transfer of Burisma Group's funds for lobbying activities, as investigators believe, personally to Joe Biden through a lobbying company. Funds in the amount of $900,000 were transferred to the U.S.-based company Rosemont Seneca Partners, which according to open sources, in particular, the New York Times, is affiliated with Biden. The payment reference was payment for consultative services," Derkach said.
He also publicized sums that were transferred to Burisma Group representatives, in particular Hunter Biden, a son of the former U.S. vice president.
"According to the documents, Burisma paid no less than $16.5 million to [former Polish President, who became an independent director at Burisma Holdings in 2014] Aleksander Kwasniewski, [chairman of the Burisma board of independent directors] Alan Apter, [Burisma independent director] Devon Archer and Hunter Biden [who joined the Burisma board of directors in 2014]," Derkach said.
"Using political and economic levelers of influencing Ukrainian authorities and manipulating the issue of providing financial aid to Ukraine, Joe Biden actively assisted closing criminal cases into the activity of former Ukrainian Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, who is the founder and owner of Burisma Group," he said.
"Biden's fifth visit to Kyiv on December 7-8, 2015 was devoted to making a decision on the resignation of [then Ukrainian Prosecutor General] Viktor Shokin over the case of Zlochevsky and Burisma. Loan guarantees worth $1 billion that the United States was to give to Ukraine was the point of pressure. Biden himself admitted exerting pressure in his speech at the Council of Foreign Relations in January 2018, calling Shokin 'son of a bitch who was fired'," Derkach said.
The timeline of events proves that the U.S. linked the Zlochevsky case to loan guarantees, he said.
After the decree dismissing Shokin was published on April 3, 2016, the governments of the United States and Ukraine signed a loan guarantee agreement worth $1 billion, several months later, on June 3, he said.
"In this case, there are facts should be subject to investigation. There is an agency that has powers to investigate them; the U.S. Department of Justice. If the Ukrainian Prosecutor General signs documents and send them to U.S. Department of Justice without any requests, he will accomplish his mission," he said, adding that the Ukrainian Prosecutor General has such powers.
"Considering international corruption in public is a way-out for President Zelensky. I am certain that he is not involved in international corruption," Derkach said.
It was reported earlier that Derkach publicized correspondence between the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and officers of the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv. According to publicized correspondence, starting from July 14, 2017, the lists of criminal proceedings undertaken by NABU officers were sent from the electronic mailbox of Polina Chyzh, an assistant to NABU first deputy head Gizo Uglava, to the electronic mailbox of Hanna Yemelianova, a legal specialist of the anti-corruption program of the U.S. Justice Department at U.S. Embassy in Ukraine.
Derkach also said that NABU-leak materials will be published on his Facebook account and materials that he got from investigating journalists have already been passed to Ukraine's State Bureau of Investigations and the Prosecutor's General Office.
He also said he will initiate the creation of an ad hoc parliamentary investigative commission and has already requested launching a criminal case against Ukrainian officials into interference into U.S. elections. The court session is scheduled for October 21, he said.
Burisma Holdings is a Cyprus-registered gas producing company holding assets in Ukraine. It is one of Ukraine's top-three independent gas producers headquartered in Kyiv. Zlochevsky is the founder and the ultimate beneficiary owner of the company.
https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/press-conference/617936-amp.html?__twitter_impression=true
:lol
RandomGuy
10-09-2019, 05:42 PM
Why Trump is too arrogant to be impeached and will probably resign
“He’s in too much legal jeopardy in too many places,
including NY, and
all those civil suits,
including the NY AG suing the Trump Foundation for self-dealing and cheating the charity,” Kanefield argued.
“Nixon’s legal jeopardy, in contrast, was narrow.”
Rangappa said she would “respectfully disagree.”
“I think we underestimate the narcissistic injury that the stain of impeachment would leave on Trump’s psyche.
He can’t tolerate it….he’d rather ‘quit,'”
believes that the details could be worked out for
Trump to resign from office in return for a “Get Out of Jail Free” card.
“As Teri notes, though, the costs of resigning are high: He faces certain prosecution in state, if not federal, courts,” she noted.
“Is there a way to “make a deal”?
He, himself, can pardon his kids.
And he can get an assurance that VP Pence will pardon him, a la Nixon.
Getting NY to get on board is trickier (neither he nor Pence can’t pardon state crimes), but [in my opinion], worth it.”
“This dude poses an existential threat to our democracy.
He endangers our national security.
He will burn the whole place down if he continues.
This is the trade off for the pipe dream that somehow he and the Traitor Tots are going to be led off in orange jumpsuits,” she continued.
“Get him out.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/why-trump-is-too-arrogant-to-be-impeached-and-will-probably-resign/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1679 (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/why-trump-is-too-arrogant-to-be-impeached-and-will-probably-resign/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1679)
As soon as he resigns, he will face criminal charges from the Mueller report. That should be fun to watch.
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 05:48 PM
Burisma paid Joe Biden $900,000 for lobbying – Ukrainian MP
17:43, 09.10.2019 4 min read
KYIV. Oct 9 (Interfax-Ukraine) – Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden received $900,000 for lobbying activities from Burisma Group, Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada member Andriy Derkach said citing investigation materials.
Derkach publicized documents which, as he said, "describe the mechanism of getting money by Biden Sr." at a press conference at Interfax-Ukraine's press center in Kyiv on Wednesday.
"This was the transfer of Burisma Group's funds for lobbying activities, as investigators believe, personally to Joe Biden through a lobbying company. Funds in the amount of $900,000 were transferred to the U.S.-based company Rosemont Seneca Partners, which according to open sources, in particular, the New York Times, is affiliated with Biden. The payment reference was payment for consultative services," Derkach said.
He also publicized sums that were transferred to Burisma Group representatives, in particular Hunter Biden, a son of the former U.S. vice president.
"According to the documents, Burisma paid no less than $16.5 million to [former Polish President, who became an independent director at Burisma Holdings in 2014] Aleksander Kwasniewski, [chairman of the Burisma board of independent directors] Alan Apter, [Burisma independent director] Devon Archer and Hunter Biden [who joined the Burisma board of directors in 2014]," Derkach said.
"Using political and economic levelers of influencing Ukrainian authorities and manipulating the issue of providing financial aid to Ukraine, Joe Biden actively assisted closing criminal cases into the activity of former Ukrainian Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, who is the founder and owner of Burisma Group," he said.
"Biden's fifth visit to Kyiv on December 7-8, 2015 was devoted to making a decision on the resignation of [then Ukrainian Prosecutor General] Viktor Shokin over the case of Zlochevsky and Burisma. Loan guarantees worth $1 billion that the United States was to give to Ukraine was the point of pressure. Biden himself admitted exerting pressure in his speech at the Council of Foreign Relations in January 2018, calling Shokin 'son of a bitch who was fired'," Derkach said.
The timeline of events proves that the U.S. linked the Zlochevsky case to loan guarantees, he said.
After the decree dismissing Shokin was published on April 3, 2016, the governments of the United States and Ukraine signed a loan guarantee agreement worth $1 billion, several months later, on June 3, he said.
"In this case, there are facts should be subject to investigation. There is an agency that has powers to investigate them; the U.S. Department of Justice. If the Ukrainian Prosecutor General signs documents and send them to U.S. Department of Justice without any requests, he will accomplish his mission," he said, adding that the Ukrainian Prosecutor General has such powers.
"Considering international corruption in public is a way-out for President Zelensky. I am certain that he is not involved in international corruption," Derkach said.
It was reported earlier that Derkach publicized correspondence between the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and officers of the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv. According to publicized correspondence, starting from July 14, 2017, the lists of criminal proceedings undertaken by NABU officers were sent from the electronic mailbox of Polina Chyzh, an assistant to NABU first deputy head Gizo Uglava, to the electronic mailbox of Hanna Yemelianova, a legal specialist of the anti-corruption program of the U.S. Justice Department at U.S. Embassy in Ukraine.
Derkach also said that NABU-leak materials will be published on his Facebook account and materials that he got from investigating journalists have already been passed to Ukraine's State Bureau of Investigations and the Prosecutor's General Office.
He also said he will initiate the creation of an ad hoc parliamentary investigative commission and has already requested launching a criminal case against Ukrainian officials into interference into U.S. elections. The court session is scheduled for October 21, he said.
Burisma Holdings is a Cyprus-registered gas producing company holding assets in Ukraine. It is one of Ukraine's top-three independent gas producers headquartered in Kyiv. Zlochevsky is the founder and the ultimate beneficiary owner of the company.
https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/press-conference/617936-amp.html?__twitter_impression=true
:lolLet me guess -- a former Party of Regions member?
I'm going to :lol in advance because I know you fall for literally everything shoved down your gullible gullet.
:lmao "affiliated with"
RandomGuy
10-09-2019, 05:52 PM
I have reviewed the facts and made my conclusion.
I was attempting to establish mutually agreed on facts to see if we could reach an agreement on a conclusion.
We got to:
1) Trump should be impeached if he threatened another country to investigate his political rivals
and
2)Ukraine is dependent on the US for military and financial aid.
Once you realized that you painted yourself into a corner and would have to admit that, in fact, the moron you idolize is a moron and should be impeached by your own standards, you clammed up and stopped answering questions.
You stopped being honest.
I merely wondered why you think you stopped being honest.
The only thing you’ve done is lie and put words in my mouth in an attempt to get me to discuss a conclusion you’ve already reached without evidence. You’re a dishonest hack.
I asked you plain questions and you answered right up to the point where we started establishing facts around Trumps actual conduct, and posted the links to those answers repeatedly.
The only thing you are doing here is simply accusing me of what you yourself are guilty, a common propaganda trick.
I doubt I will ever get to why you feel the need to lie about things like this.
It is a bit funny that you think I have to lie about what you said. You shoot yourself in the dick without any help from my part. :lol
Feel free to actually show how specifically I lied. I have already proven you are dishonest, once you stopped answering simple good faith questions, just like Cosmored does when clinging to his theories.
RandomGuy
10-09-2019, 05:55 PM
But your "nuh uh" is super compelling tho
but... hypotheticals!!!!
Hillary's emails!!!
LOOK OVER THERE IT IS A SQUIRREL!!!
IF THE SUBPEONA DOES NOT REACH YOU CAN'T IMPEACH!!!
I am thoroughly enjoying watching these people shit themselves.
TeyshaBlue
10-09-2019, 07:05 PM
Daily dose of irony achieved.
Use your google.
What the transcript says and what Rudy is doing is not a question of law.
Asking to have your personal lawyer involved in a foreign country's investigation of a political opponent is an abuse of power. LOL
Seems he was only asked to find out why the investigation stopped not to conduct an investigation on Hunter Biden. It could have just as easily been to exonerate Joe Biden from the claims although we both know that's not the case.
Seems he was only asked to find out why the investigation stopped not to conduct an investigation on Hunter Biden. It could have just as easily been to exonerate Joe Biden from the claims although we both know that's not the case.
Why is the president’s personal lawyer, who is not a government employee and therefore not involved in any official investigation, being included in an official investigation?
ElNono
10-09-2019, 08:45 PM
I see vy65 straightened out the legal question(s), thanks... Hopefully some of the ignorants here that kept repeating stuff out of their asses thank him too for taking the time.
This is a political process, as has been said over and over. Congress has ultimate authority in this process, and while I'm sure the executive will try to force things into the judicial (perhaps finding a friendly judge here or there), they should be short-lived, as there's a separation of powers issue at play here, and Congress is most definitely constitutionally allowed to check on the executive.
Furthermore, as this involved a matter of national security, Totten likely applies and very likely overrides other privileges like attorney-client.
ElNono
10-09-2019, 09:09 PM
No way he matches dubya legendary stupidity.
Recklessness and unlikeable yes probably tops but Trump is sneaky smart but yes prone to making huge mistake once in a while
They're different kind of stupid, tbh. Dubya was the "you can talk him into anything" kind of stupid. Trump is the prototypical ignorant moron.
I won't nitpick on how you rank them, tbh, I just really dislike the latter kind.
spurraider21
10-09-2019, 09:18 PM
https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2019/10/1862/1048/8ff3ab71-1.png?ve=1&tl=1
DarrinS
10-09-2019, 09:19 PM
Why NOT have a vote in the house?
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 09:21 PM
Why NOT have a vote in the house?Don't need one tbh. Haven't for awhile.
Spurminator
10-09-2019, 09:22 PM
I see vy65 straightened out the legal question(s), thanks... Hopefully some of the ignorants here that kept repeating stuff out of their asses thank him too for taking the time.
It's amazing watching deranged partisans try to debate law on the level of someone like vy65 with complete obliviousness to how stupid he's making them look. But I am glad he took the time, because I learned some things too.
DarrinS
10-09-2019, 09:26 PM
Don't need one tbh. Haven't for awhile.
But, WHY would you NOT?
Spurs Homer
10-09-2019, 09:26 PM
Why NOT have a vote in the house?
they can have it right after trump releases his taxes
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 09:27 PM
But, WHY would you NOT?BECAUSE they don't NEED to.
Also makes it easy to troll Trump into multiple obstruction articles of impeachment.
But stamp your feet about a nonissue. It's really all you got.
Spurminator
10-09-2019, 09:32 PM
I kind of wish they would just to call his bluff. But he'll still refuse and obstruct.
spurraider21
10-09-2019, 09:44 PM
I see vy65 straightened out the legal question(s), thanks... Hopefully some of the ignorants here that kept repeating stuff out of their asses thank him too for taking the time.
This is a political process, as has been said over and over. Congress has ultimate authority in this process, and while I'm sure the executive will try to force things into the judicial (perhaps finding a friendly judge here or there), they should be short-lived, as there's a separation of powers issue at play here, and Congress is most definitely constitutionally allowed to check on the executive.
Furthermore, as this involved a matter of national security, Totten likely applies and very likely overrides other privileges like attorney-client.
vy drives the team 98 yards down the field, elnono comes in and vultures the 1 yard touchdown tbh...
DarrinS
10-09-2019, 09:54 PM
Why NOT have a vote in the house?
No real answer yet
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 09:57 PM
No real answer yet
Why have a vote when the rules don't call for one?
Real answers only, please.
ducks
10-09-2019, 10:12 PM
Pence aiming to release records of his own Ukraine calls
https://apnews.com/e48c28cf0625430fa829431df3872ead
ducks
10-09-2019, 10:16 PM
Exclusive poll: Most think Trump will be impeached and win 2020 reelection
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/exclusive-poll-most-think-trump-will-be-impeached-and-win-2020-reelection
I took a bunch of con law from some really preeminent guys. It’s frustrating seeing the level of thought and intellect that they put into their work and then seeing what passes as legal scholarship in the mainstream. I’m sure SR21 can relate.
It’s like that Wittgenstein quote
pgardn
10-09-2019, 10:32 PM
Exclusive poll: Most think Trump will be impeached and win 2020 reelection
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/exclusive-poll-most-think-trump-will-be-impeached-and-win-2020-reelection
We have an exclusive poll that only we can produce because we did not want to include anyone but special people.
Not just anyone can poll like we can because we can exclude better than anyone else. Furthermore, you can’t get numbers like these just anywhere.
Cool.
.... titles for fun.
spurraider21
10-09-2019, 10:35 PM
I took a bunch of con law from some really preeminent guys. It’s frustrating seeing the level of thought and intellect that they put into their work and then seeing what passes as legal scholarship in the mainstream. I’m sure SR21 can relate.
It’s like that Wittgenstein quote
pepperdine is a pretty right leaning institution, but my profs did a pretty good job of just sticking to the case law when teaching it. for whatever reason, pepperdine broke up con law such that the first amendment was its own course, so we spent a full semester on that. i had the same prof for both, and he couldnt go a few days without reminding the class of back when he clerked for justice rehnquist
but that emphasis on the first amendment is prob why i get so frustrated when i read all these articles about freedom of speech in the private sector
i think one of the misconceptions is that in law school you just spend your time memorizing laws/statutes/codes
boutons_deux
10-09-2019, 10:36 PM
Trump is freaking out so much about impeachment he’s calling Mitch McConnell 3 times a day
President Donald Trump and his team of White House advisers are starting to panic about whether Republicans will falter when it comes to impeachment.
Trump has claimed that he welcomes impeachment,
but his Twitter account shows another story.
With his tweets and retweets more than doubling since the inquiry was announced,
Trump appears to be spiraling into a meltdown with each new revelation.
Trump has been lashing out at Republicans senators he thinks might be disloyal, something he’s done since the beginning of taking office. Now, however, he needs them.
“Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner is seen by many aides as leading the impeachment strategy efforts. :lol
, though other officials said much of the response will be left to
‘Jay and Trey,’ a reference to Gowdy and Jay Sekulow, members of the outside legal team.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/trump-is-freaking-out-so-much-about-impeachment-hes-calling-mitch-mcconnell-3-times-a-day/ (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/trump-is-freaking-out-so-much-about-impeachment-hes-calling-mitch-mcconnell-3-times-a-day/)
pgardn
10-09-2019, 10:45 PM
Trump is freaking out so much about impeachment he’s calling Mitch McConnell 3 times a day
President Donald Trump and his team of White House advisers are starting to panic about whether Republicans will falter when it comes to impeachment.
Trump has claimed that he welcomes impeachment,
but his Twitter account shows another story.
With his tweets and retweets more than doubling since the inquiry was announced,
Trump appears to be spiraling into a meltdown with each new revelation.
Trump has been lashing out at Republicans senators he thinks might be disloyal, something he’s done since the beginning of taking office. Now, however, he needs them.
“Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner is seen by many aides as leading the impeachment strategy efforts. :lol
, though other officials said much of the response will be left to
‘Jay and Trey,’ a reference to Gowdy and Jay Sekulow, members of the outside legal team.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/trump-is-freaking-out-so-much-about-impeachment-hes-calling-mitch-mcconnell-3-times-a-day/ (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/trump-is-freaking-out-so-much-about-impeachment-hes-calling-mitch-mcconnell-3-times-a-day/)
He freaks out and melts down daily pretty well for a 70 something yo child.
I wish he would just leave, but I really want the red team members backing this lunatic held to accounting for wtf they were thinking while backing him.
DarrinS
10-09-2019, 10:55 PM
No real answer yet
Why have a vote when the rules don't call for one?
Real answers only, please.
Let me rephrase. Why would it be advantageous for Pelosi to NOT have a vote?
ElNono
10-09-2019, 10:56 PM
vy drives the team 98 yards down the field, elnono comes in and vultures the 1 yard touchdown tbh...
tbh, what vy did is educational and appreciated, and can be a thankless job here.
ElNono
10-09-2019, 11:01 PM
Let me rephrase. Why would it be advantageous for Pelosi to NOT have a vote?
There's a number of political downsides to having the vote (chief among them the distraction once this gets approved along party lines), but more importantly, there's just simply nothing to gain for Pelosi by having it.
spurraider21
10-09-2019, 11:02 PM
tbh, what vy did is educational and appreciated, and can be a thankless job here.
reminds me of the post-2013 finals upstairs tbh, with bruno/chinook calmly talking about the salary cap situation, etc, while the trolls like greatyacht and skull-1 were just running around flinging shit everywhere
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 11:03 PM
Let me rephrase. Why would it be advantageous for Pelosi to NOT have a vote?I just said it allows them to pile on the obstruction articles.
Also since you guys have been told to stamp your little feet about it, a delay can provide cover for moderate Democrats. They can be the loudest about wanting a vote and take credit when it finally happens.
ElNono
10-09-2019, 11:04 PM
I took a bunch of con law from some really preeminent guys. It’s frustrating seeing the level of thought and intellect that they put into their work and then seeing what passes as legal scholarship in the mainstream. I’m sure SR21 can relate.
It’s like that Wittgenstein quote
Arguably, there's nothing more contemptuous to the Constitution than the arguments in that letter. It should probably go down in history as how you royally take a shit on the Constitution.
DarrinS
10-09-2019, 11:06 PM
tbh, what vy did is educational and appreciated, and can be a thankless job here.
What did he do? Post some legal argument in tortured english?
ElNono
10-09-2019, 11:09 PM
What did he do? Post some legal argument in tortured english?
He patiently explained how impeachment works, what precedent is there for it, dispelled myths, and backed it up with case law.
Taking the time to educate people is commendable, IMO.
DarrinS
10-09-2019, 11:14 PM
I just said it allows them to pile on the obstruction articles.
Also since you guys have been told to stamp your little feet about it, a delay can provide cover for moderate Democrats. They can be the loudest about wanting a vote and take credit when it finally happens.
Under these circumstances, can Republicans subpoena their own witnesses?
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 11:20 PM
Under these circumstances, can Republicans subpoena their own witnesses?The Senate is considering calling up Rudy as we speak.
I don't know about how much say House Republicans have in issuing subpoenas. Elections have consequences, you know.
Whom do the House Republicans want to subpoena for this completely illegal wirch hunt inquiry?
ElNono
10-09-2019, 11:28 PM
The Senate is considering calling up Rudy as we speak.
I don't know about how much say House Republicans have in issuing subpoenas. Elections have consequences, you know.
Whom do the House Republicans want to subpoena for this completely illegal wirch hunt inquiry?
Biden, obviously, which would be a giant distraction, as Biden isn't the subject of the investigation.
Pavlov
10-09-2019, 11:31 PM
Biden, obviously, which would be a giant distraction, as Biden isn't the subject of the investigation.But even that would legitimize the inquiry.
Why is the president’s personal lawyer, who is not a government employee and therefore not involved in any official investigation, being included in an official investigation?
That has nothing to do with what I said. It's a different matter. You can speculate as to why, but what does the transcript say? That's of course if I could even afford your opinion.
ElNono
10-09-2019, 11:59 PM
That has nothing to do with what I said. It's a different matter. You can speculate as to why, but what does the transcript say? That's of course if I could even afford your opinion.
The transcript says to talk to his personal lawyer about the Bidens. Look, it doesn't have to be illegal, it just has to be improper. His personal lawyer should be looking after him, not his political opponents.
The optics are bad even if we pretend Rudy has gone rogue and was doing this on his own (but, it would make impeachment more difficult, since there's plausible deniability).
tbh, his lawyer should be the guy telling him not to do this kind of stuff and the risks involved.
hater
10-10-2019, 12:00 AM
They're different kind of stupid, tbh. Dubya was the "you can talk him into anything" kind of stupid. Trump is the prototypical ignorant moron.
I won't nitpick on how you rank them, tbh, I just really dislike the latter kind.
nothing wrong with admitting you get real triggered by him tbqh
hater
10-10-2019, 12:02 AM
The transcript says to talk to his personal lawyer about the Bidens. Look, it doesn't have to be illegal, it just has to be improper. His personal lawyer should be looking after him, not his political opponents.
The optics are bad even if we pretend Rudy has gone rogue and was doing this on his own (but, it would make impeachment more difficult, since there's plausible deniability).
tbh, his lawyer should be the guy telling him not to do this kind of stuff and the risks involved.
"the optics are bad"
"it doesnt have to be illegal"
yup nothing burger
called it on page 1
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 12:06 AM
"the optics are bad"
"it doesnt have to be illegal"
yup nothing burger
called it on page 1:lol you didn't even read the memo.
I called it.
Yup.
Any updates on your Biden investigation?
yup nothing burger
I called it.
ElNono
10-10-2019, 12:07 AM
But even that would legitimize the inquiry.
I don't think the perception is that this is an illegitimate inquiry (for now anyways), except for the Trump fanboys, which would likely still think it's illegitimate after a vote.
Ultimately, there will be a vote on the articles of impeachment, if it gets to that.
Also, as the WH counsel pointed out in his letter, the investigation into Nixon started without a vote, which came later on. So this isn't 'unprecedented' or 'unconstitutional', nor it precludes having a vote later on if the initial investigation warrants it.
BTW, this one is for Darrin: having a vote doesn't automatically give minority representatives subpoena power. While it historically has been negotiated that they do, there's no rule of law or constitutional requirement for it.
ElNono
10-10-2019, 12:11 AM
nothing wrong with admitting you get real triggered by him tbqh
Look at boutons or Qhris for triggered. I don't spend inordinate amounts of time discussing him, or rooting for his ass to be impeached a la djohn.
I just call it as I see it.
The transcript says to talk to his personal lawyer about the Bidens. Look, it doesn't have to be illegal, it just has to be improper. His personal lawyer should be looking after him, not his political opponents.
The optics are bad even if we pretend Rudy has gone rogue and was doing this on his own (but, it would make impeachment more difficult, since there's plausible deniability).
tbh, his lawyer should be the guy telling him not to do this kind of stuff and the risks involved.
Differentiate illegal from improper.
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 12:14 AM
I don't think the perception is that this is an illegitimate inquiry (for now anyways), except for the Trump fanboys, which would likely still think it's illegitimate after a vote.It just sounds like the party line, but it's all moot anyway. Like you said there is no reason to have the vote anytime soon. Might as well just wait for Trump to mistakenly give them more evidence.
Interesting that Graham is toying with the idea of letting Rudy vent his conspiracy spleen in the Senate with like three Democratic presidential candidates ready to question him.
ElNono
10-10-2019, 12:14 AM
Differentiate illegal from improper.
Dishonest behavior might not be illegal, but can certainly be improper.
Dishonest behavior might not be illegal, but can certainly be improper.
But politicians are almost always dishonest to some degree.
Aren't the two parties ALWAYS investigating each other? Why does an investigation into yet another improper thing change any of that? If they aren't willing to call a vote on it, then they are basically just playing politics again in an election year (it will drag into next year easily).
Hell, Bill was impeached and went on to have a presidential library afterward. Is this really an issue? Is this going to be what gets the Dems back into the WH?
ElNono
10-10-2019, 12:17 AM
Let's say TheGreatYatch is the new ambassador to Israel, and he espoused his ideas about zionism and the like. It's not illegal, but in the context of his position, it's certainly improper.
That's why this isn't a process about laws (much like the Kavanaugh confirmation wasn't either), but a political process.
ElNono
10-10-2019, 12:20 AM
But politicians are almost always dishonest to some degree.
Sure. The question is where the line is, and it's not entirely clear, although we do have some guidance from previous impeachment processes.
For example, in the case of Nixon, political corruption was over the line.
ElNono
10-10-2019, 01:05 AM
And for the record, I don't think he's going to be removed from office. At least, not with what we know so far.
Not because it's not enough to remove him, but because you need the accuser to also be somebody with the authority to lay out convincingly how this is terrible and dangerous to our democracy.
Pelosi is definitely not it.
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 04:43 AM
Stupid Watergate just got a lot more Watergatey.
1182204544194924545
TLDR: This Iranian/Turkish dude was laundering money in his stated effort to wage "economic jihad" on behalf of Iran.
Dude was arrested by the FBI and held without bail.
Giuliani wanted him freed.
Trump tried to get his Secretary of State to pressure the DoJ into dropping the case against Iranian/Turkish dude.
I'll give board Trumpistas a few hours to receive their orders on how to spin this.
Chris
10-10-2019, 04:56 AM
cool story bro
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 05:05 AM
It was cool when Tillerson referred to it last year.
Time for another subpoena.:lol
hater
10-10-2019, 06:06 AM
Called it on page 1
:lmao demoshits
https://twitter.com/Channel__One_/status/1182250232492564480?s=19
boutons_deux
10-10-2019, 06:57 AM
The Senate is considering calling up Rudy as we speak.
I don't know about how much say House Republicans have in issuing subpoenas. Elections have consequences, you know.
Whom do the House Republicans want to subpoena for this completely illegal wirch hunt inquiry?
If IIRC, the traditional convention was that all committee members voted on a subpoena, but the Repugs as committee heads issued subpoenas without even telling the Dems, and hid documentation from the Dems. Completely legal, just "Constitutional hardball" and anti-Constitutional authoritarianism.
boutons_deux
10-10-2019, 07:42 AM
Here's Pelosi in an interview
TWO DAYS IN THE LIFE OF NANCY PELOSI, POLITICAL GRANDMASTER
Interviewer: Many of your members, especially after the Mueller report, were eager to impeach, but you resisted. Why?
Pelosi: There is plenty of grist for the mill in the Mueller report. But not the actual,
“What was the obstruction of justice about?” :lol
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/10/in-the-life-of-nancy-pelosi?mbid=nl_th_5d9e608a0fa2040008f2845d&CNDID=43758549&utm_source=nl&utm_brand=vf&utm_mailing=VF_Hive_101019&utm_medium=email&bxid=5bd6795524c17c1048022fcc&cndid=43758549&hasha=992d608214b505003aa04bf10a595031&hashb=542eb31d958e85ddd5a4c3ccf3faae18526a77bd&hashc=54b3612ab970ce13a64a16665b1987080ca5b72e2ee7 62b722fbba6ab378f2f5&esrc=bounceX&utm_campaign=VF_Hive_101019&utm_term=VYF_Hive
WTF?
Dear Nancy, Trash's gristy obstruction was "about" hiding the investigation of his, and his mafiya's, collusion with the Russians.
It sounds like Mueller's 9? gristy instances of Trash obstruction won't be in the A of I
Spurminator
10-10-2019, 08:36 AM
Called it on page 1
:lmao demoshits
https://twitter.com/Channel__One_/status/1182250232492564480?s=19
At this point it's hard to tell if you're joking or if you're unironically posting a fake headline from a "news" channel with 159 followers.
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 08:39 AM
1182287284714065923
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 08:54 AM
1182290795862331392
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 08:56 AM
1182292801511464962
benefactor
10-10-2019, 08:59 AM
Having another woman suck your dick while you are married isn't illegal either.
hater
10-10-2019, 09:01 AM
Having another woman suck your dick while you are married isn't illegal either.
:tu
But lying to a grand jury is
At this point it's hard to tell if you're joking or if you're unironically posting a fake headline from a "news" channel with 159 followers.
:lol
Bob's News
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 09:48 AM
1182306104870617088
boutons_deux
10-10-2019, 09:49 AM
Trump rails against Fox News after brutal poll:
'Whoever their pollster is, they suck' (https://theweek.com/speedreads/870871/trump-rails-against-fox-news-after-brutal-poll-whoever-pollster-suck) :lol
a brutal Fox News poll (https://theweek.com/speedreads/870807/majority-voters-new-fox-news-poll-back-impeaching-trump-removing-from-office) showed a majority of voters,
51 percent, support impeaching the president
and !!!!
removing him from office.
That's up nine percentage points since a Fox News poll conducted in July.
renewing his attacks on Fox News personalities who have criticized him
like anchor Shepard Smith and
legal analyst Andrew Napolitano, who recently
blasted (https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/judge-andrew-napolitano-trump-attacks-presidency) the president for "reckless, constitutionally destructive behavior."
Trump provided himself some solace, though, by capping off his complaint with,
"Oh well, I'm President!" :lol
https://theweek.com/speedreads/870871/trump-rails-against-fox-news-after-brutal-poll-whoever-pollster-suck (https://theweek.com/speedreads/870871/trump-rails-against-fox-news-after-brutal-poll-whoever-pollster-suck)
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 09:50 AM
1182306646703390721
boutons_deux
10-10-2019, 09:50 AM
Insanely red state news:
Utah anti-impeachment rally hilariously backfires
as Trump critics vastly outnumber supporters
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/utah-anti-impeachment-rally-hilariously-backfires-as-trump-critics-vastly-outnumber-supporters/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1690
Spurminator
10-10-2019, 09:51 AM
:lol
Bob's News
@ Bobs___News_____725243648
Trill Clinton
10-10-2019, 09:55 AM
https://i.imgur.com/EDy4Ipe.gif
LkrFan
10-10-2019, 10:51 AM
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1182322151686381569?s=19
Cool :tu
LkrFan
10-10-2019, 10:57 AM
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1182323792355348481?s=19
boutons_deux
10-10-2019, 11:38 AM
https://i.imgur.com/EDy4Ipe.gif
not thought out animation,
Tom Hagen/DoJ is NOT playing against Trash, but with/for Trash
shoulda been Pelosi or Schiff
boutons_deux
10-10-2019, 11:58 AM
Having another woman suck your dick while you are married isn't illegal either.
The Clintons were witch-hunted and slandered all through the 1990s by Repugs and VRWC, but no witches, until Linda Tripp fell into witch-less Ken Starr's lap.
Clinton abused and harassed by the Repugs was a bigger crime than his lie to he GJ.
Compare Clinton's lie to 1000s of Trash's lies, including the many dishonest "I forgots" of his written responses to Mueller
boutons_deux
10-10-2019, 12:09 PM
Trump is openly telling us he’s above the law. Here’s his next move.
It’s worth stepping back and stating in plain language just
how profoundly President Trump is corrupting our political system right now.
Trump’s total defiance of oversight poses a
massive challenge to our constitutional order.
Trump is not merely staking out an absolute refusal to cooperate with any and all lawful subpoenas, on the deeply absurd grounds that the House’s impeachment inquiry is illegitimate, as the White House counsel has argued.
Rather, Trump is adopting that stance
while simultaneously claiming the absolute right
to bend large swaths of the government
toward his goal of rigging the next election on his own behalf.
Thus,
Trump is declaring absolute authority to use extraordinarily corrupt means to avoid facing a fair election next year,
while also declaring total immunity to any and all congressional efforts to prevent him from rigging that election,
or even to hold him accountable for it.
Trump’s effort to corrupt the election, and
his placement of himself beyond all congressional oversight,
are part of the same story:
the attempted destruction of any and all mechanisms of accountability.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/10/trump-is-openly-telling-us-hes-above-law-heres-his-next-move/?wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/10/trump-is-openly-telling-us-hes-above-law-heres-his-next-move/?wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1)
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 12:34 PM
1182334887552061442
Hmm Russians funding the GOP seems like someone called this years ago
Burisma paid Joe Biden $900,000 for lobbying – Ukrainian MP
17:43, 09.10.2019 4 min read
KYIV. Oct 9 (Interfax-Ukraine) – Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden received $900,000 for lobbying activities from Burisma Group, Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada member Andriy Derkach said citing investigation materials.
Derkach publicized documents which, as he said, "describe the mechanism of getting money by Biden Sr." at a press conference at Interfax-Ukraine's press center in Kyiv on Wednesday.
"This was the transfer of Burisma Group's funds for lobbying activities, as investigators believe, personally to Joe Biden through a lobbying company. Funds in the amount of $900,000 were transferred to the U.S.-based company Rosemont Seneca Partners, which according to open sources, in particular, the New York Times, is affiliated with Biden. The payment reference was payment for consultative services," Derkach said.
He also publicized sums that were transferred to Burisma Group representatives, in particular Hunter Biden, a son of the former U.S. vice president.
"According to the documents, Burisma paid no less than $16.5 million to [former Polish President, who became an independent director at Burisma Holdings in 2014] Aleksander Kwasniewski, [chairman of the Burisma board of independent directors] Alan Apter, [Burisma independent director] Devon Archer and Hunter Biden [who joined the Burisma board of directors in 2014]," Derkach said.
"Using political and economic levelers of influencing Ukrainian authorities and manipulating the issue of providing financial aid to Ukraine, Joe Biden actively assisted closing criminal cases into the activity of former Ukrainian Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, who is the founder and owner of Burisma Group," he said.
"Biden's fifth visit to Kyiv on December 7-8, 2015 was devoted to making a decision on the resignation of [then Ukrainian Prosecutor General] Viktor Shokin over the case of Zlochevsky and Burisma. Loan guarantees worth $1 billion that the United States was to give to Ukraine was the point of pressure. Biden himself admitted exerting pressure in his speech at the Council of Foreign Relations in January 2018, calling Shokin 'son of a bitch who was fired'," Derkach said.
The timeline of events proves that the U.S. linked the Zlochevsky case to loan guarantees, he said.
After the decree dismissing Shokin was published on April 3, 2016, the governments of the United States and Ukraine signed a loan guarantee agreement worth $1 billion, several months later, on June 3, he said.
"In this case, there are facts should be subject to investigation. There is an agency that has powers to investigate them; the U.S. Department of Justice. If the Ukrainian Prosecutor General signs documents and send them to U.S. Department of Justice without any requests, he will accomplish his mission," he said, adding that the Ukrainian Prosecutor General has such powers.
"Considering international corruption in public is a way-out for President Zelensky. I am certain that he is not involved in international corruption," Derkach said.
It was reported earlier that Derkach publicized correspondence between the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and officers of the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv. According to publicized correspondence, starting from July 14, 2017, the lists of criminal proceedings undertaken by NABU officers were sent from the electronic mailbox of Polina Chyzh, an assistant to NABU first deputy head Gizo Uglava, to the electronic mailbox of Hanna Yemelianova, a legal specialist of the anti-corruption program of the U.S. Justice Department at U.S. Embassy in Ukraine.
Derkach also said that NABU-leak materials will be published on his Facebook account and materials that he got from investigating journalists have already been passed to Ukraine's State Bureau of Investigations and the Prosecutor's General Office.
He also said he will initiate the creation of an ad hoc parliamentary investigative commission and has already requested launching a criminal case against Ukrainian officials into interference into U.S. elections. The court session is scheduled for October 21, he said.
Burisma Holdings is a Cyprus-registered gas producing company holding assets in Ukraine. It is one of Ukraine's top-three independent gas producers headquartered in Kyiv. Zlochevsky is the founder and the ultimate beneficiary owner of the company.
https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/press-conference/617936-amp.html?__twitter_impression=true
:lol
Second Ukranian publication saying Joe Biden was paid for lobbying from Burisma, and this publication has copies of the Guliani memos the IG sent to congress.
================================================== ================================================== ================================================== ============
https://thebabel.com.ua/texts/36625-v-im-ya-batka-i-sina-kongres-ssha-otrimav-sekretni-memorandumi-rudolfa-dzhuliani-u-spravi-dzho-i-hantera-baydeniv-ce-perekaz-yogo-rozmov-z-shokinim-i-lucenkom-i-os-shcho-v-nih-mistitsya
https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=en&nv=1&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=uk&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://thebabel.com.ua/texts/36625-v-im-ya-batka-i-sina-kongres-ssha-otrimav-sekretni-memorandumi-rudolfa-dzhuliani-u-spravi-dzho-i-hantera-baydeniv-ce-perekaz-yogo-rozmov-z-shokinim-i-lucenkom-i-os-shcho-v-nih-mistitsya&xid=17259,15700021,15700186,15700191,15700256,1570 0259,15700262,15700265,15700271
The US House of Representatives is still investigating the Democratic Party. They find out whether Donald Trump wanted to use Ukrainian officials to find compromise on Joe Biden, his main contender in the upcoming presidential election. At the end of the week, the focus of the investigation shifted to the substance of the allegations against Biden. The Inspector General (Auditor) of the US State Department has forwarded to the Senate and the House of Representatives two memoranda describing these allegations. The memorandums contain a retelling of Rudolf Giuliani's conversations with two heads of the Ukrainian Prosecutor General's Office: Viktor Shokin and Yuriy Lutsenko. Earlier this year, Rudolf Giuliani transmitted these memoranda to the White House. Apparently, they were relied on by President Donald Trump in a telephone conversation with President Vladimir Zelensky. Both memorandums were available to the correspondents of theBabel Maria Zhartovskaya and Oksana Kovalenko. We briefly convey their content.
In late January 2019, US Presidential Counsel Rudolph Giuliani spoke with two heads of the Ukrainian Attorney General's Office. He spoke with the Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin on the phone, and with the then Attorney General Yuriy Lutsenko held a personal meeting. Following the results of the telephone conversation and the meeting, two memorandums were drawn up - they mentioned the participants and summarized the content of the conversations.
Later, Rudolf Giuliani transmitted these two memoranda to the White House, from there to Secretary of State Michael Pompeo, from him to the Attorney General of the State Department, and from him in May 2019 to the Office of the Inspector General. The Inspector General's office is an independent unit of the State Department and ensures that State Department employees do not violate the law.
On October 2, the Inspector General transmitted these memoranda to members of the House of Representatives and the US Senate to the committees on international affairs, intelligence and others. Committees will hold hearings on the subject this week. The committee members are going to interview five US officials who oversaw Ukraine.
4 6
Другий меморандум описує зустріч з генпрокурором Юрієм Луценком.
Другий меморандум описує зустріч з генпрокурором Юрієм Луценком.
Rudolf Giuliani had a telephone conversation and a meeting with Ukrainian prosecutors at the office of his consulting firm . During the conversation with Shokin, apart from Giuliani himself, there were Igor Fruman, Lev Parnassus and George Boyle, director of investigations of the firm. They also attended Rudolf Giuliani's meeting with Yuri Lutsenko. Lutsenko was also accompanied by MP of the Petro Poroshenko Bloc Gleb Zagoriy and Crimean Prosecutor Gunduz Mammadov.
The main topic of conversation and meeting was Donald Trump's main contender in the upcoming presidential election, Joe Biden and his relationship with the Burisma Holdings
Вертикально інтегрований холдинг, який розвідує, видобуває і продає вуглеводні. Холдинг називає себе найбільшим в країні за обсягом доведених запасів. Газодобувна компанія «Еско-Північ», яка входить до BG, — четверта в Україні за обсягом видобутку та восьма за прибутковістю.
gas company. The owner of the company
Микола Злочевський — великий український промисловець. У бізнесі з 1991 року: разом з однокурсником заснував компанію, яка займалася експортом металу, потім торгувала нафтою і нафтопродуктами. У 2002 році заснував Burisma Group. Двічі обирався до парламенту за списком Партії регіонів. З кінця 2003 року, за премʼєра і президента Януковича, обіймав посади в державних відомствах, які відали ліцензіями на розвідку і розробку нафтогазових родовищ.
appeared in five criminal cases conducted by the GPU. Until recently, Hunter Biden, Joe Biden's son, served on the company's board of directors.
According to Victor Shokin, he was pressured to "freeze" the investigation: first, US Ambassador Jeffrey Piett, and then President Petro Poroshenko - and they did so in the interests of Joe Biden. For his part, Yuriy Lutsenko spoke about bank payments from Burisma Holdings in favor of Hunter Biden personally and in favor of consulting firm Rosemont Seneca Bohai (RSB), in which Hunter Biden was a partner for some time. According to Yuriy Lutsenko, payments to RSB were made for the lobbying services of Joe Biden himself, not his son.
1 2
Довідка про платежі Burisma Holdings на користь компанії Rosemont Seneca. Зазначені дата та призначення платежу, платник і отримувач, банк платника і банк отримувача.
Довідка про платежі Burisma Holdings на користь компанії Rosemont Seneca. Зазначені дата та призначення платежу, платник і отримувач, банк платника і банк отримувача.
It is important to note that neither Victor Shokin nor Yuriy Lutsenko provided direct evidence that Joe Biden or Hunter Biden did anything wrong . Victor Shokin describes Joe Biden's interests in the words of Petro Poroshenko, and in a special way interprets Jeffrey Payett's words that the investigation should be carried out with extreme care, "in white gloves." Yuriy Lutsenko told about the company's payments in favor of a member of the board of directors of the company - that is, in essence, ordinary compensation for work. The fact that the payments were made for lobbying services was Joe Biden, not his son Hunter, Lutsenko argued without giving evidence. (Later, after the Biden story hit the press, Yuriy Lutsenko repeatedly stated that Joe Biden and Hunter Biden did not violate Ukrainian laws.)
Here are the main points of Giuliani's memorandum following the conversation with ex-prosecutor Viktor Shokin
Participants in the conversation: US President Rudolf Giuliani's lawyer, ex-prosecutor Victor Shokin, mediators Igor Fruman and Lev Parnas. And Director of Investigation George Boyle.
theBabel
Shokin served as Attorney General from 2015 to April 2016, "he was fired at the request of Joseph Biden, Vice President of the United States."
Another Deputy Prosecutor General Shokin was involved in the investigation of the case of former Minister of Ecology Mykola Zlochevsky. Zlochevsky was found to be owned by Burisma Holdings, a company incorporated in Cyprus. There were at least five criminal proceedings mentioning Zlochevsky's last name. The main thing is the illegal licensing of gas and oil.
The investigations were conducted on the following facts: 1) money laundering; 2) obtaining assets through corruption bribe; 3) withdrawing from Ukraine about $ 23 million; 4) Zlochevsky's two companies were granted permits to develop gas fields when Zlochevsky was in power; 5) Zlochevsky hid that he was the owner of two companies.
In 2014, Zlochevsky appointed Hunter Biden, son of Vice President Joseph Biden, to the board of directors of Burisma; Joseph Blade, a former CIA officer who worked in the anti-terrorism department; Oleksandr Kwasniewski - Former President of Poland; Devon Archer is Christopher Heinz's roommate, stepson of Secretary of State (then) John Kerry.
The investigation was halted because Ukrainian authorities feared the United States. Shokin continued to investigate, but in June-July 2015, US Ambassador Jeffrey Piett told him that the investigation should be as accurate as possible, which, in Shokin's opinion, meant "doing nothing." Sometime in September 2015, Payett, in his speech in Odessa, stated that these cases were not properly investigated and that Shokin could be corrupt.
In 2014, Zlochevsky was in the UK, which froze $ 23 million in a BNP bank that belonged to him. Shokin said he thawed the money through "counterfeit documents"
Шокін мав на увазі, що сторона Злочевського надала суду підроблені документи.
before he became Attorney General. This made Shokin study the case. There have been several press releases stating that they tried to close the case with bribes. In April 2016, Shokin was dismissed as Attorney General. And in November 2016, the case was closed by prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko.
In February 2016, the GPU made inquiries about many people in Ukraine. The GPU also asked about Hunter Biden, but never received any response. The GPU assumed that Hunter Biden received a salary, commissions and an additional $ 1 million.
President Petro Poroshenko has told Shokin to stop investigating Burisma because it is not in Joe and Hunter Biden's interests. Shokin was summoned to Poroshenko's office, where he was told that because of this investigation, Joe Biden had withheld $ 1 billion in US aid to Ukraine. And in April 2016, Poroshenko summoned Shokin and stated that he should be released. According to Shokin, Biden told Poroshenko that he had evidence of Shokin's corruption. Shokin was released in April 2016, and a month and a half later, Ukraine received US assistance.
Shokin also believes that US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Jovanovic has denied him an American visa. He claims that she is close to Biden. He also said that MP Sergei Leshchenko had
В оригінальному документі міститься помилка: Сергій Лещенко названий Reshenko.
published a leak from the SBU about Manafort
Шокін має на увазі «чорну бухгалтерію» Партії регіонів. У ній згадувалося імʼя Пола Манафорта — керівника виборчої кампанії Дональда Трампа у 2016 році.
's "black accounting"
Шокін має на увазі «чорну бухгалтерію» Партії регіонів. У ній згадувалося імʼя Пола Манафорта — керівника виборчої кампанії Дональда Трампа у 2016 році.
.
Here are the main points of the Giuliani memorandum following a meeting with then Attorney General Yuriy Lutsenko
Participants in the meeting: US President's lawyer Rudolf Giuliani, ex-prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko, mediators Igor Fruman and Lev Parnas. Also, Director of Investigation George Boyle, BPP MP Gleb Zagoriy, Crimean Prosecutor Gunduz Mammadov.
theBabel
The meeting took place on January 25 and 26, 2019. Lutsenko spoke about corruption in Ukraine. He was accompanied by Gleb Zagoriy, Gunduz Mammadov, Lev Parnassus and Igor Fruman. Also present were Rudolf Giuliani and George Boyle.
From 2007 to 2010, Lutsenko headed the Interior Ministry, he was imprisoned for two and a half years - and this was a political persecution. The GPU oversees the affairs of the National Police, the State Fiscal Service, the SBU, and can investigate cases.
The Prosecutor General's Office returned several billion dollars to the budget of Ukraine and received 2,657 court sentences in corruption cases. There is a Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAA) in Ukraine, which oversees the affairs of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU). NABU is investigating corruption of "public figures" - from mayors and above.
Acting US Ambassador Jeffrey Piett defends the SAP and NABU. These are good organizations, but they have terrible leaders. The SAP and NABU are under the control of the GPU purely formally, and Lutsenko has no right to ask what they are working on.
Former Attorney General of Ukraine Viktor Shokin is an honest man.
Lutsenko studied the criminal cases that Shokin spoke of and which featured Burisma Holdings. Hunter Biden received millions of dollars of compensation from her. According to Lutsenko, of these, 900,000 Rosemont Seneca received Joe Biden for lobbying services.
US Ambassador to Ukraine Jeffrey Piett recommended that a special body be set up to investigate the cases of top corruption officials. On September 25, 2015, he criticized the GPU at a business forum in Odessa. The NABU concept was developed by George Kent - the then Deputy US Ambassador, the current Deputy Assistant Secretary of State. Tentatively, the SAP and NABU were formed in October 2014.
In 2010, a system of 500 companies was created to withdraw money from Ukraine, launder it and transfer it to beneficiary accounts. All these companies were headed by one CFO. 20-40 of these companies were figureheads. 23 companies were registered offshore. Two of them received seven billion dollars and placed them in the US investment fund Templeton Fund. Some of the money that went through this system was returned
Юрій Луценко має на увазі 1,5 мільярда доларів, які конфіскували за спеціальним рішенням Краматорського суду.
.
Near the house of the former deputy head of the Security Service of Ukraine
Йдеться про Віктора Трепака, який подав заяву до НАБУ.
found a "black bookkeeping" of the Party of Regions with a list of people who received payments, a total of 10-12 sheets of records. Lutsenko gave an example of payment - three million dollars for voting for the draft state budget of the deputy of the Ukrainian parliament.
Paul Manafort's name is included in the "black accounting", said BPP People's Deputy Sergei Leshchenko. Leshchenko spoke closely with US Ambassador Marie Jovanovich. A few weeks after the "black bookkeeping" was made public, NABU began its investigation.
In the first week of her work, Attorney General Lutsenko met with US Ambassador Marie Jovanovic, and she asked him to close three criminal proceedings, including those against Leshchenko.
The head of NABU confirmed that Manafort's name is in the "black bookkeeping", but he does not have a signature in the column where he was supposed to sign. Black bookkeeping lists a bank transfer from Kyrgyzstan named after Manafort. NABU confirmed to the press that Manafort's name was mentioned in the "black accounting".
Sap chairman Nazar Kholodnitsky and NABU chairman Artem Sytnyk do not like each other. During an anti-corruption seminar in Panama, Kholodnitsky asked Sytnyk why he believed that the Party of Regions' black bookkeeping did not have Manafort's signature. Sytnik replied that he wants Hillary [Clinton] to win.
boutons_deux
10-10-2019, 12:44 PM
private citizens, if registered as foreign lobbyists, being paid by foreigners to lobby American pols is not illegal. Ask Michael Flynn
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 12:47 PM
1182316973276971009
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 12:56 PM
Participants in the meeting: US President's lawyer Rudolf Giuliani, ex-prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko, mediators Igor Fruman and Lev Parnas. Also, Director of Investigation George Boyle, BPP MP Gleb Zagoriy, Crimean Prosecutor Gunduz Mammadov.
Honey, have you even noticed that two of those guys listed in your little meeting were just arrested by Trump's DOJ?
boutons_deux
10-10-2019, 12:59 PM
Will Barr shutdown SDNY again?
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 01:06 PM
Honey, have you even noticed that two of those guys listed in your little meeting were just arrested by Trump's DOJ?
:lmao
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 01:07 PM
1182355623775744000
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 01:08 PM
Participants in the meeting: US President's lawyer Rudolf Giuliani, ex-prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko, mediators Igor Fruman and Lev Parnas. Also, Director of Investigation George Boyle, BPP MP Gleb Zagoriy, Crimean Prosecutor Gunduz Mammadov.
https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2019/10/10/USAT/1dbb5a3e-a00b-454d-97a1-5cbf8707b888-Igor_Fruman_and_Lev_Parnas.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EFLuMKHU0AAk_0g.jpg
Geoffrey Berman just took a wet shit on you, TSA.
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 01:13 PM
1182356775590354945
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 01:15 PM
1182357336943419392
Will Barr shutdown SDNY again?
https://twitter.com/JakeBGibson/status/1182306488091590657
:lol
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 01:21 PM
1182355758379393024
LOL Rudy
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 01:22 PM
https://twitter.com/JakeBGibson/status/1182306488091590657
:lolArresting Giuliani's associates to pwn the Dems!
Push for marijuana retail licenses
Part of the alleged scheme revolved around an effort to curry favor with politicians who could help them win licenses for a retail marijuana business they hoped to establish. The business venture and the ensuing lobbying effort was largely funded by a Russian national, running afoul of campaign finance violations that prohibit political donations from foreigners, the indictment states.
:cry war on drugs :cry
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 01:28 PM
Arresting Giuliani's associates to pwn the Dems!
:lol
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 01:29 PM
Push for marijuana retail licenses
Part of the alleged scheme revolved around an effort to curry favor with politicians who could help them win licenses for a retail marijuana business they hoped to establish. The business venture and the ensuing lobbying effort was largely funded by a Russian national, running afoul of campaign finance violations that prohibit political donations from foreigners, the indictment states.
:cry war on drugs :cryYep, that's the important part.
:lmao TSA
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 01:31 PM
It was going to happen sooner or later....
1182282349003841536
I've got to admit the arrest for LOL campaign finance laws sure was timed perfectly to try and bury the stories coming out of Joe Biden receiving $900,000 for lobbying for Burisma.
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 01:37 PM
I've got to admit the arrest for LOL campaign finance laws sure was timed perfectly to try and bury the stories coming out of Joe Biden receiving $900,000 for lobbying for Burisma.So Trump's DOJ is now in on your conspiracy.
Have you ever considered the possibility that the story you're trying to push about Biden is complete bullshit and you've been fooled again like you've been so many times before?
Two of the guys you're relying on are sitting in jail right.
Does that give you no pause?
At all?
I've got to admit the arrest for LOL campaign finance laws sure was timed perfectly to try and bury the stories coming out of Joe Biden receiving $900,000 for lobbying for Burisma.
Yep, that's the important part.
:lmao TSA
boutons_deux
10-10-2019, 01:49 PM
Study: Millions of Taxpayer Dollars Could Be Saved by Impeaching Pence at Same Time
https://media.newyorker.com/photos/5d9f5494b12fd50008dde047/master/w_727,c_limit/Borowitz--PenceImpeachment.jpg
MINNEAPOLIS —A nonpartisan study published by the University of Minnesota has found that the nation could save “untold millions” of taxpayer dollars by impeaching Mike Pence (https://www.newyorker.com/tag/mike-pence) at the same time as Donald J. Trump (https://www.newyorker.com/tag/donald-trump).
The study, entitled “Operation bogo,” makes a compelling case for commencing an impeachment inquiry into Pence “as soon as possible,” its author, Davis Logsdon, said on Thursday.
“The cost of impeaching Trump alone or Trump and Pence together is virtually identical,”
Logsdon, an economics professor, said.
“This is all about economy of scale.”
“Taxpayers are already paying Adam Schiff to investigate Trump,” he added. “I’m fairly sure
Schiff could be persuaded to throw in Pence for free.”
When it comes time to publish articles of impeachment against Trump, Logsdon noted,
“It would cost almost nothing in terms of paper or ink cartridges to add the words ‘and Pence, too.’ ”
In the eventuality that Trump and Pence are removed from office simultaneously, additional cost savings could be achieved, Logsdon added.
“They could share the same moving van,” he said.
In conclusion, the University of Minnesota study proposed that
the millions saved by impeaching Pence at the same time as Trump
could be spent on schools, roads, and paying down the national debt.
“The question is no longer ‘Should we impeach Mike Pence?’ ” Logsdon said.
“The question is ‘How can we afford not to?’ ”
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/study-millions-of-taxpayer-dollars-could-be-saved-by-impeaching-mike-pence-at-same-time-as-donald-trump (https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/study-millions-of-taxpayer-dollars-could-be-saved-by-impeaching-mike-pence-at-same-time-as-donald-trump)
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 01:56 PM
1182365785106370561
:lmao
RandomGuy
10-10-2019, 02:05 PM
Watergate... but with morons.
RandomGuy
10-10-2019, 02:06 PM
:tu
But lying to a grand jury is
So is obstruction of justice. Mueller report listed about a dozen counts, and Trump has probably racked up a few more after the investigation wrapped.
RandomGuy
10-10-2019, 02:06 PM
It's amazing watching deranged partisans try to debate law on the level of someone like vy65 with complete obliviousness to how stupid he's making them look. But I am glad he took the time, because I learned some things too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 02:08 PM
So many dream teams...it's hard to keep track
1182339713715363840
RandomGuy
10-10-2019, 02:09 PM
Lindsey Graham is ‘ready to throw Rudy Giuliani under the bus’: GOP strategist
the latest move by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to let Trump’s television lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, air his conspiracy theories before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
they’re setting him up.
If he has to testify under oath, he’s not just going to be answering Lindsey Graham’s questions,
he’s going to be answering democratic senators, three of which are presidential candidates, so it will be a complete show,”
“I’m not sure why they’re doing this, but again, it could be part of that
deflection and process instead of focusing on what the president is being charged with or investigated for,”
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/lindsey-graham-is-ready-to-throw-rudy-giuliani-under-the-bus-gop-strategist/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1679 (https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/lindsey-graham-is-ready-to-throw-rudy-giuliani-under-the-bus-gop-strategist/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1679)
This ought to be good. I think Graham may finally have realized, like Ricky Perry, that Trump will throw ANYONE under the bus if he thinks he can benefit.
TSA always trying to flip an L when he gets shit on. :lol embarrassing
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 02:14 PM
This ought to be good. I think Graham may finally have realized, like Ricky Perry, that Trump will throw ANYONE under the bus if he thinks he can benefit.Betraying the Kurds gives them one pretext to turn on him without admitting the Democrats are right about anything.
You can bet they're hoping for more. They can only hope they didn't take money from Parnas and Fruman now.
boutons_deux
10-10-2019, 02:15 PM
Giuliani says he won't testify before House investigators
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/464869-giuliani-says-he-wont-testify-before-house-investigators (https://thehill.com/homenews/house/464869-giuliani-says-he-wont-testify-before-house-investigators)
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 02:16 PM
TSA always trying to flip an L when he gets shit on. :lol embarrassingPoor fella didn't read his own wall of text to find out two of his heroes were getting arraigned at the same time he was pressing CTRL+V.
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 02:18 PM
Giuliani says he won't testify before House investigators
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/464869-giuliani-says-he-wont-testify-before-house-investigators (https://thehill.com/homenews/house/464869-giuliani-says-he-wont-testify-before-house-investigators)
Probably a good idea since he'd be asked what he was talking about with this guy during lunch at the Trump International yesterday.
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/10/10/us/politics/10dc-giuliani/10dc-giuliani-articleLarge-v3.jpg
TSA always trying to flip an L when he gets shit on. :lol embarrassing
Two Ukrainian prosecutors and a Ukrainian MP all saying Joe Biden received $900,000 from Burisma for lobbying and you think some campaign finance arrests are some big W, Ok :lol
Chris
10-10-2019, 02:25 PM
Having another woman suck your dick while you are married isn't illegal either.
:cry #StillWithHim :cry
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 02:28 PM
Two Ukrainian prosecutors and a Ukrainian MP all saying Joe Biden received $900,000 from Burisma for lobbying and you think some campaign finance arrests are some big W, Ok :lolYou didn't read your own wall of text.
You don't understand the people you are believing unquestioningly.
You've done all this before.
It always ends in your tears.
Cat Stevens mind control.
boutons_deux
10-10-2019, 02:28 PM
Two Ukrainian prosecutors and a Ukrainian MP all saying Joe Biden received $900,000 from Burisma for lobbying and you think some campaign finance arrests are some big W, Ok :lol
was Biden registered as lobbyist? When did he recieve $900K
ElNono
10-10-2019, 02:28 PM
At which point you take off the rose colored glasses and start noticing everybody surrounding Trump is in shady, if not outright illegal situations? You really have to be a moron to keep glossing over that.
And sure, almost every politician has a shady guy or two or three, but this guy is like fucking everybody he trusts. It’s hard to believe this guy is completely unaware (in which case he’s an absolute idiot)
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 02:30 PM
1182375793822982144
fucking wow
RandomGuy
10-10-2019, 02:33 PM
Trey is a joke among us': Gowdy is a divisive addition to Trump's legal team
https://news.yahoo.com/trey-gowdy-joke-victoria-toensing-180836829.html
Trey Gowdy doesn’t know s***
:lmao
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 02:37 PM
Man Trey was free and clear. Could've just picked his battles popping up on a FNC panel every other day or so, become president of Baylor after the next rape/murder scandal....dude had options.
hater
10-10-2019, 02:43 PM
At which point you take off the rose colored glasses and start noticing everybody surrounding Trump is in shady, if not outright illegal situations? You really have to be a moron to keep glossing over that.
And sure, almost every politician has a shady guy or two or three, but this guy is like fucking everybody he trusts. It’s hard to believe this guy is completely unaware (in which case he’s an absolute idiot)
Kinda sound like the Clinton's and Epstein, weiner, and all the recent Clintonites that have been jailed huh? Didn't some guy had 3 gay sex workers die at his home just days ago?
Funny how that works
Man Trey was free and clear. Could've just picked his battles popping up on a FNC panel every other day or so, become president of Baylor after the next rape/murder scandal....dude had options.
Could've kept getting more borderline gay haircuts and be happy with himself like back in the day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3K1dmPdeVGQ
boutons_deux
10-10-2019, 02:46 PM
Man Trey was free and clear. Could've just picked his battles popping up on a FNC panel every other day or so, become president of Baylor after the next rape/murder scandal....dude had options.
Trey screwed up HIS Benghazi hearing? :lol
what about the other 7 Repug Benghazi hearings? :lol
https://politicalmurder.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/gettyimages-493806412.jpg
ducks
10-10-2019, 02:47 PM
The Wall Street Journal.
White House Shifted Authority Over Ukraine Aid Amid Legal Concerns
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/white-house-shifted-authority-over-ukraine-aid-amid-legal-concerns/ar-AAIAg24?
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 02:50 PM
Kinda sound like the Clinton's and Epstein, weiner, and all the recent Clintonites that have been jailed huh? Didn't some guy had 3 gay sex workers die at his home just days ago?
Funny how that worksDamn hater, could you swerve any harder?
Funny how that works.
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 02:52 PM
The Wall Street Journal.
White House Shifted Authority Over Ukraine Aid Amid Legal Concerns
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/white-house-shifted-authority-over-ukraine-aid-amid-legal-concerns/ar-AAIAg24?This is not a good news story for Trump.
Seriously, do any of you actually read anything you post?
Well, I know hater does because he omits the things that shit on his conspiracy theories.
lol hater
hater
10-10-2019, 02:52 PM
Kinda sound like the Clinton's and Epstein, weiner, and all the recent Clintonites that have been jailed huh? Didn't some guy had 3 gay sex workers die at his home just days ago?
Funny how that works
Ed buck
That's that fucks name
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 03:02 PM
Also named in the indictment:
1182329326756401152
:lol
djohn2oo8
10-10-2019, 03:07 PM
1182386583380602883
in2deep
10-10-2019, 03:16 PM
Kinda sound like the Clinton's and Epstein, weiner, and all the recent Clintonites that have been jailed huh? Didn't some guy had 3 gay sex workers die at his home just days ago?
Funny how that works
Talk about rose colored glasses :lol
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 03:37 PM
Holy shit -- this Fischer dude was onto Giuliani's buddies over a year ago. Who knows what else is going to come out?
1153446304766447617
CLC filed a complaint last July calling for an investigation, since it appeared to be yet another example of shell corporations being used to funnel money to super PACs while evading any donor disclosure or accountability.
CLC’s complaint noted that the individuals connected to GEP, the Ukrainian-born Igor Fruman and Russian-born Lev Parnas, met personally with President Trump at a small closed-door meeting in Washington just weeks before the $325,000 contribution.
In the year since the contribution and CLC’s complaint, Fruman and Parnas have become major players in Trumpworld. According to the New York Times, the two have teamed up with President Trump’s attorney, Rudy Giulani, to solicit information from Ukraine about Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, and his ethically-questionable deals in that country. Parnas also connected Giulani with Ukraine’s top prosecutor.
Pizza kid sex dungeon was more plausible tho.
Spurs Homer
10-10-2019, 03:37 PM
Criminals doing things criminals do for 3-4 years running now
trump jizz garglers -gargling jizz for 3-4 years now
at some point all of them either get caught and prosecuted and/or get sick of swallowing all that jizz
no other outcome is possible - but comrade TSA is giving it the old college try til the disgusting bitter end...
LkrFan
10-10-2019, 03:39 PM
https://twitter.com/TeaPainUSA/status/1182393619233284097?s=19
LkrFan
10-10-2019, 03:40 PM
Criminals doing things criminals do for 3-4 years running now
trump jizz garglers -gargling jizz for 3-4 years now
at some point all of them either get caught and prosecuted and/or get sick of swallowing all that jizz
no other outcome is possible - but comrade TSA is giving it the old college try til the disgusting bitter end...
:lmao
Chris
10-10-2019, 03:42 PM
At which point you take off the rose colored glasses and start noticing everybody surrounding Hillary and Obama is in shady, if not outright illegal situations? You really have to be a moron to keep glossing over that.
And sure, almost every politician has a shady guy or two or three, but these people are fucking everybody. It’s hard to believe these people are completely unaware (in which case they are idiots)
fify : )
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 03:43 PM
https://twitter.com/TeaPainUSA/status/1182393619233284097?s=19Yeah, these dudes have probably been wiretapped for months by Trump's DOJ. Rudy's gonna be all over these tapes for whatever that is worth.
Pavlov
10-10-2019, 03:43 PM
fify : )classic whataboutism
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.