Look its not like everything they accuse him of isn't true, because it is . The Democrats, are such a clown car , they could easily mess this up . Am I right?
Will impeachment help or hurt the Democrats?
Posts
Total:
94
Is this another Billbatard alt that I see?
They accuse him of asking for a thing of value that would help him in an election. His released memo (it was not a full transcript) confirms that he did that. So he has already proven he is guilty.
He is now outright refusing to in any way participate in the impeachment inquiry. Impeding the investigation is also an impeachable offense. His letter is basically a confession of that.
There is also a very good chance that there is evidence that his team, or trump himself, made it clear to Ukraine they needed to dig up dirt on biden in exchange for US support. This would be a 3rd impeachable offense.
Given that we have 2 confirmed impeachable offenses and 1 very likely, I would say the dems are on good grounds to impeach him.
That being said, the dems have a good chance of screwing it up. But recent polls show the majority of americans now support impeachment and removal from office.
The support for impeachment has multiplied in the last few weeks, including from republicans. When 51% of the country already wants you gone, saying you will do everything in your power to block any investigation of yourself is not a good look.
-->
@HistoryBuff
The support for impeachment has multiplied in the last few weeks, including from republicans. When 51% of the country already wants you gone, saying you will do everything in your power to block any investigation of yourself is not a good look.
51% is a good cushion of 16% considering you need 67% to impeach.
I can't wait for these chickenheads to call a vote.
-->
@Greyparrot
imagine what it will do to the stock market and China trade or even jobs. They seem to be really trying hard to judge this in the court of public opinion rather than any formal fact finding. No surprise there.
-->
@Greyparrot
51% is a good cushion of 16% considering you need 67% to impeach. I can't wait for these chickenheads to call a vote.
No popular vote is needed to impeach. A simple majority in congress is all that is needed to impeach Trump. They already have that.
You need 67% in the senate to convict him and remove him from office. We will see if they decide to turn on trump. But that is unlikely. They are too afraid of Trump's base to do their jobs.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
imagine what it will do to the stock market and China trade or even jobs.
There is already a recession coming. Trump's trade wars have seen to that.
They seem to be really trying hard to judge this in the court of public opinion rather than any formal fact finding. No surprise there.
The impeachment inquiry is like a week old and the white house is ordering people not to testify and to refuse to provide documents. How exactly are they supposed to base it on formal fact finding when the white house wont allow them to get any facts?
-->
@HistoryBuff
There's plenty of TDS Democrats that don't know that though. They are being promised the removal of Trump. Imagine the brain explosions when they find out the media lied to them...again...
-->
@HistoryBuff
The Right to Remain Silent
The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects people from being compelled to give testimony that could incriminate them.
much like the police, what good can come from talking to authorities, their purpose is to convict, you don't have to prove your innocence they have to prove your guilt, in the U.S. anyway.
-->
@Greyparrot
There's plenty of TDS Democrats that don't know that though. They are being promised the removal of Trump.
Impeachment is not a commonly used power of congress. Many people are unfamiliar with how it works. The rules around how it should work in congress are also intentionally vague to allow congress to use this power in any case it sees fit. So this also adds some confusion.
Pretty much every media outlet I have seen has made it clear that removal from office is highly unlikely because the republican puppets in the senate are too afraid to uphold the constitution. However trump will still be impeached, he just won't be removed from office.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects people from being compelled to give testimony that could incriminate them.
In order to invoke that right you have to show up. That right does not allow you to refuse to be questioned. It gives you the right to refuse to answer them. It also acknowledges that you have committed criminal acts. If members of trump's government want to go to congress and refuse to answer because they are criminals, they have that right.
much like the police, what good can come from talking to authorities, their purpose is to convict, you don't have to prove your innocence they have to prove your guilt, in the U.S. anyway.
Perhaps you do not understand. An impeachment inquiry is not a trial. You do not have the same rights in an impeachment inquiry as you have in a court. Additionally, you have the refuse to answer questions from the police, but you do not have the right to refuse to hear the questions. The police have the power to question people. So does congress. Refusing to show up for questioning is contempt of congress and is punishable by fines or jail.
-->
@HistoryBuff
It also acknowledges that you have committed criminal acts.
lol no it doesn't wow that statement is just way way out there.
You do not have the same rights in an impeachment inquiry as you have in a court.
rights are not conditional or subjective in the U.S. in the context you have laid out.
Refusing to show up for questioning is contempt of congress and is punishable by fines or jail.
are they refusing or challenging the subpoenas? Huge difference isn't it?
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
lol no it doesn't wow that statement is just way way out there.
You refuse to answer a question because you may incriminate yourself. You can't incriminate yourself if haven't committed any crimes. Completely innocent people do not use that defense.
rights are not conditional or subjective in the U.S. in the context you have laid out.
Of course they are. You have the right not to answer the police. You refuse to answer a judge and you sit in jail for contempt of court. You refuse to answer the IRS and you go to jail. You don't have a blanket right to not answer people. You have a right to not answer questions in a criminal investigation.
are they refusing or challenging the subpoenas? Huge difference isn't it?
They subpoenaed a diplomat. He flew back the US and wanted to appear. The state department, under orders from the white house, ordered him not to show up. The witness wanted to testify but the white house is refusing to allow him or anyone else to testify. That is impeding an investigation. It is also impeachable.
-->
@HistoryBuff
You refuse to answer a question because you may incriminate yourself. You can't incriminate yourself if haven't committed any crimes. Completely innocent people do not use that defense.
you are entitled to your opinion even if factually wrong, that's not how things work in the U.S.
even you have to admit innocent people go to jail and have even been executed via death penalty.
You refuse to answer a judge and you sit in jail for contempt of court. You refuse to answer the IRS and you go to jail.
again that is wrong, they can enter a judgement against you based on the information they have, but you are NOT required to say a word, nor can you be forced to via threat of penalty.
These are rights that are confusing to people who don't have them, but that is how it is.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
you are entitled to your opinion even if factually wrong, that's not how things work in the U.S. even you have to admit innocent people go to jail and have even been executed via death penalty.
The 5th is used because what you would say to answer a question would incriminate yourself. If you didn't do anything wrong, then how would your answer incriminate yourself? I can imagine that there could be rare cases where for complicated reasons innocent people could need to do this. But the vast majority of people who use this are guilty of a crime.
again that is wrong, they can enter a judgement against you based on the information they have, but you are NOT required to say a word, nor can you be forced to via threat of penalty.
You may want to look up contempt of court. Judges can hold people in contempt for refusing to answer them. Please note this is only the judge, not the prosecutor.
But again, you are only allowed to plead the 5th when asked a question. Which means you have to show up to the questioning. The 5th does not mean you can refuse to show up. The white house ordering people to refuse to obey a subpoena is impeding a congressional impeachment inquiry, which is an impeachable offense.
i hope dems decide to use the full power at their disposal. They are legally allowed to lock people up in jail if they refuse to appear when subpoenaed. This administration's contempt for the constitution requires a stronger response.
-->
@HistoryBuff
If you didn't do anything wrong, then how would your answer incriminate yourself?
seriously? lawyers don't bend or twist the truth, take things out of context, ask leading questions? you are being idealistic about this.
But the vast majority of people who use this are guilty of a crime.
I understand your opinion, no need to keep repeating it because it doesn't apply to the reality of U.S. law and rights.
The 5th does not mean you can refuse to show up.
correct
The white house ordering people to refuse to obey a subpoena is impeding a congressional impeachment inquiry, which is an impeachable offense.
not if the subpoenas are without merit or illegal which I believe is the reason they are being told not to comply with them.
They are legally allowed to lock people up in jail if they refuse to appear when subpoenaed.
and yet they haven't, maybe cause they know it's b.s.? that the subpoenas aren't valid? I guess we'll find out.
If the White House stonewalls, Congress can seek enforcement of the subpoena in court.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
If they call a vote, GOP will uncover a lot of dirt and bring people to the mic to speak in public (especially Ukrainian officials who obviously have an axe to grind with the Dems) during the evidence findings.
If they do not call a vote, TDS base will stay home on election night.
Dems are so screwed right now.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I understand your opinion, no need to keep repeating it because it doesn't apply to the reality of U.S. law and rights.
It is literally what they are saying. I can't answer the question without revealing information that would incriminate me. Therefore, there is grounds for charges against you.
not if the subpoenas are without merit or illegal which I believe is the reason they are being told not to comply with them.
That is not a valid argument. A subpoena is not something the person being subpoenaed gets to decide the merits of. Congress has the right to oversee the executive branch. They have the constitutionally protected right to perform an impeachment inquiry. There is no valid way to say that is illegal.
and yet they haven't, maybe cause they know it's b.s.? that the subpoenas aren't valid? I guess we'll find out.
They don't do so because no one has used those powers in a long time. For a long time governments complied with subpoena's because to not do so would be politically damaging. In the age of trump where the more trump undermines the political norms the louder his base cheers, that is obviously not the case. The political norm is to obey the subpoenas of congress and also to not lock people up. Since trump has torn that norm to shreds I hope dems use the full force of their powers.
If the White House stonewalls, Congress can seek enforcement of the subpoena in court.
That is exactly what the white house wants. They want to abuse their powers by making the dems fight in court to get access to every single witness and every single document. They want the information of trump's crimes to drip out slowly over months so that people get used to it and no longer care. if it all came out rapidly then trump would be destroyed by it. They are hoping to drag this out as long as possible until people lose interest in the scandal.
I hope the dems use the full force of their powers. they can levy massive fines and imprison people for non-compliance. That is what it is going to take to get people to co-operate.
-->
@Greyparrot
If they call a vote, GOP will uncover a lot of dirt and bring people to the mic to speak in public (especially Ukrainian officials who obviously have an axe to grind with the Dems) during the evidence findings.
Dirt on who? Biden is the only one with any history at all with Ukraine. Warren and Sanders have no connections there. So if the impeachment finishes off Biden's candidacy so much the better.
But since we already know trump has committed 2 crimes related to this and there is a very good chance of a 3rd. Not to mention that the majority of Americans are now supporting impeachment, I would say it is trump who is screwed.
-->
@HistoryBuff
The prize Trump is after isn't Biden.
-->
@Greyparrot
The prize Trump is after isn't Biden.
Again, who is he possibly going to be able to smear? If he can't get Biden, Warren and Sanders, he is so screwed.
-->
@HistoryBuff
I can't answer the question without revealing information that would incriminate me. Therefore, there is grounds for charges against you.
again that's NOT how the U.S. laws and rights work, I don't have time to give you a basic civics or legal education. You need to learn it on your own.
There is no valid way to say that is illegal.
again you are lost in the woods, Trump has challenged subpoenas asking for his tax returns etc, some of the subpoenas have been dismissed, you are woefully uninformed about these matters it seems, please read up on them more.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
again that's NOT how the U.S. laws and rights work, I don't have time to give you a basic civics or legal education. You need to learn it on your own
The right is specifically the right to not incriminate yourself. If answering the question would not show evidence you have participated in a crime, then you would not be incriminating yourself.
again you are lost in the woods, Trump has challenged subpoenas asking for his tax returns etc, some of the subpoenas have been dismissed, you are woefully uninformed about these matters it seems, please read up on them more.
The subpoena's you are talking about are not part of an impeachment inquiry. The game has changed. Impeachment gives the house more power. Refusing to comply with subpoena's in an impeachment inquiry is a serious problem.
-->
@HistoryBuff
The right is specifically the right to not incriminate yourself. If answering the question would not show evidence you have participated in a crime, then you would not be incriminating yourself.
I'm just repeating myself at this point, it's not within my skill to explain it in such a way as you can understand it would seem.
look up some videos and do searches for things like "should I talk to cops" "should I answer questions from cops (lawyers)" things of that nature. Many attorneys have videos on the subject and explain their reasoning.
The subpoena's you are talking about are not part of an impeachment inquiry.
doesn't matter they can still make legal challenges to them, that is how it's always been and always will be, both parties do it, don't you think challenges were issued when Clinton was impeached? Nixon tried to challenge the subpoena for the tapes, he lost but that just shows you can try. Subpoenas are not all powerful in the U.S.
I think it makes it look like they are cheating. Ever since he has been elected, they have literally been trying to impeach him by throwing as much crap against the wall as possible and hoping something will stick.
-->
@Mopac
I think it makes it look like they are cheating. Ever since he has been elected, they have literally been trying to impeach him by throwing as much crap against the wall as possible and hoping something will stick.
Another way of phrasing that is "ever since he was elected he has been doing unethical and illegal things but has managed to get away with it so far".
-->
@HistoryBuff
Another way of phrasing that is "ever since he was elected he has been doing unethical and illegal things but has managed to get away with it so far".
like coming down the escalator.
-->
@HistoryBuff
I don't believe most of what I hear about Trump, because it is really obvious that no one is being honest about the guy. It is also obvious they got it out for him. How many 24/7 Trump "news" networks do we need?
And I did not vote for him, nor do I plan on voting for him.
-->
@Greyparrot
Another way of phrasing that is "ever since he was elected he has been doing unethical and illegal things but has managed to get away with it so far".like coming down the escalator.
Really tho
-->
@Mopac
If it looks like a cow, sounds like a cow and shits like a cow, it's probably a cow and not some other farm animal