U.S. House to launch Trump impeachment inquiry over Ukraine controversy

[Becker]

1 minute ago, Rdrokit said:

Just sitting back and laughing. The Democrats just want to keep the media stirred up with negative Trump news. Just like the Russian inquiry this one will fissile out. I think some on the Left are getting tired of their "leaders" spinning their wheels trying to get dirt on Trump and not getting anything else done in Congress for the past 3 years.

No one needs to do neither stirring nor spinning for the dirt on Trump to become public. There's so much of it it just keeps erupting like big, brown geysers.

[Kelsall]

Even the Trump-hating NY Times knows nothing will come of this.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/01/us/politics/senate-trump-impeachment.html

[stevenl]

28 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Even the Trump-hating NY Times knows nothing will come of this.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/01/us/politics/senate-trump-impeachment.html

They fear, knowing as you claim would be incorrect, nothing will come of it because Republicans have lost their moral compass, not because Trump is innocent.

[Tippaporn]

3 hours ago, mtls2005 said:

 

Why would you? Have you done something illegal?

 

Making your stand on the WB Complaint seems risky....

 

"The form was changed...."

"It's second-hand..."

"The WB is a traitor..."

 

Defend the charge, not the weapon.

 

 

 

 

The transcript is the bloody knife, with the president's fingerprints on it, and Lady Liberty laying dead in a pool of blood.

 

The glove fits.

 

 

Suggest you get the new talking points.

 

And whose fingerprints might be on the weapon?

 

No capable defense attorney would ignore other facts surrounding a charge.  To think anyone else should would be unreasonable.  Now there has been a great outcry by the Dems suggesting Trump attempted to hide the transcripts.  By your logic, then, no one should be saying boo about that either, correct?  For you just stated in your own words that we should only defend the charge and that the transcript is the bloody knife.

 

Even if the transcript was the only focus allowed Trump's words must ultimately be interpreted to prove one intent or another.  For the transcript by itself is not enough to definitively show the nature of Trump's intent.  What was Trump's true intent?  The Dems are claiming that there is, and can be, no other interpretation than that of the complainant.  And of course theirs since it fits in with the intentions the Dems have had, publicly confessed to on many multiple occasions, even before Trump took the oath of office.

[Tippaporn]

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

They fear, knowing as you claim would be incorrect, nothing will come of it because Republicans have lost their moral compass, not because Trump is innocent.

No matter the outcome of this latest "gate" the Dems will never admit defeat.  They could not accept Clinton's loss, they could not accept their loss of the Russia collusion hoax, and they will not be able to accept a loss here as well.

 

I think you stated it very truthfully and perceptively, stevenl, and I thank you (no sarcasm attached to my statement or the thank you).   . . . . nothing will come of it because the Republicans have lost their moral compass.  All of the losses experienced by the Dems will forever be blamed on anything and everything other than themselves.  As if they live in a world without mirrors.

[mtls2005]

13 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Even if the transcript was the only focus allowed Trump's words must ultimately be interpreted to prove one intent or another.  For the transcript by itself is not enough to definitively show the nature of Trump's intent.  What was Trump's true intent?  The Dems are claiming that there is, and can be, no other interpretation than that of the complainant.  And of course theirs since it fits in with the intentions the Dems have had, publicly confessed to on many multiple occasions, even before Trump took the oath of office.

 

You should volunteer to be the president's attorney. I'm all dewy-eyed with your Perry Mason impression.

 

There will be plenty of evidence, including the president's own words & actions (consciousness of guilt), to support at least three Articles of Impeachment. Impeachment will be a slam-dunk.

 

A trial in the Senate, assuming it goes that far - assume the president will cut a deal, retire with a pardon - could be easy, it could be impossible. 50:50 now, but who knows. Suspect there will be a mountain of irrefutable evidence.

 

Hang in there.

 

 

It is really sad, seeing how weak the president looks now. He knew he couldn't win an election without foreign help. A truly weak, and pitiable man. I do feel sorry for his family, and the ~ 62 million folks who've been let down by The Music Man. But, we've all got a bit of the sucker built in, it's part of our national pysche.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 2, 2019 by mtls2005

[stevenl]

8 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

No matter the outcome of this latest "gate" the Dems will never admit defeat.  They could not accept Clinton's loss, they could not accept their loss of the Russia collusion hoax, and they will not be able to accept a loss here as well.

 

I think you stated it very truthfully and perceptively, stevenl, and I thank you (no sarcasm attached to my statement or the thank you).   . . . . nothing will come of it because the Republicans have lost their moral compass.  All of the losses experienced by the Dems will forever be blamed on anything and everything other than themselves.  As if they live in a world without mirrors.

It is not about losing or not, it is about morality. And here I will use that term: the republicans have lost it there.

Your post is wrong in many ways, and your twisting and turning is pathetic to see.

Edited October 2, 2019 by stevenl

[Morch]

12 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

. . . . criminally corrupt president.

 

His campaign has been investigated and he has been cleared both in the House (twice), the Senate, and the Mueller investigation.  Yet still you label him criminally corrupt, Jingthing.  Where is your evidence which has not yet been gone over with a fine toothed comb which allows you to persist in making your claim?

 

"....he has been cleared..."

 

Them alternative facts again.

[Tippaporn]

17 minutes ago, stevenl said:

It is not about losing or not, it is about morality.

 

And here I will use that term: the republicans have lost it there.

Just the republicans?  Can you honestly say that?  I think it can be said truthfully that the greater populace has lost their moral compass.

 

Samuel Adams from an essay written and published in 1748:

 

“Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.”

 

I would, myself, replace corrupt with morally bankrupt.

 

I've mentioned it before, I belong to no party, support no party, am neither left, right or center and am interested only in truth and freedom.  It is my observation that much of the country has lost their moral compass.  And that straddles all political leanings.  Society always gets the government reflective of society.  How can it be otherwise?

 

 

 

Edited October 2, 2019 by Tippaporn

[Tippaporn]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

"....he has been cleared..."

 

Them alternative facts again.

Never accept defeat.

[Morch]

Just now, Tippaporn said:

Just the republicans?  Can you honestly say that?  I think it can be said truthfully that the greater populace has lost their moral compass.

 

Samuel Adams from an essay written and published in 1748:

 

“Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.”

 

I would, myself, replace corrupt with morally bankrupt.

 

I've mentioned it before, I'm belong to no party, support no party, am neither left, right or center and am interested only in truth and freedom.  It is my observation that much of the country has lost their moral compass.  And that straddles all political leanings.  Society always gets the government reflective of society.  How can it be otherwise?

 

 

 

That "greater populace" didn't vote or support Trump.

[Morch]

Just now, Tippaporn said:

Never accept defeat.

 

Other than in Trump supporters' nonsense posts and imagination, Trump's election victory was accepted. It still doesn't change the fact that your "cleared" statement isn't accurate. Deflect away.

[stevenl]

14 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Just the republicans?  Can you honestly say that?  I think it can be said truthfully that the greater populace has lost their moral compass.

 

Samuel Adams from an essay written and published in 1748:

 

“Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.”

 

I would, myself, replace corrupt with morally bankrupt.

 

I've mentioned it before, I belong to no party, support no party, am neither left, right or center and am interested only in truth and freedom.  It is my observation that much of the country has lost their moral compass.  And that straddles all political leanings.  Society always gets the government reflective of society.  How can it be otherwise?

 

 

 

Why do you do that? I edited my post, but almost 15 minutes later you post the previous version, omitting the part where I am very clear about your posting:  "Your post is wrong in many ways, and your twisting and turning is pathetic to see". You're proving my point about dishonest posting from your side, therefor I will not react to you anymore.

And my question here is rhetorical.

Edited October 2, 2019 by stevenl

[mtls2005]

21 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Society always gets the government reflective of society.

 

Quite a universally broad statement. "Always". Really?

 

I think our society desires and deserves something much better than what we have now. Through a bit of a fluke, 77,000 votes in three states and some general malaise, we appear to have taken a flyer on someone who "would shake things up". That's fine. Experiments are good. They teach you not to do something stupid a second time.

 

That said, there are provisions for mid-term corrections (impeachment, 25th ammendment, resignation), assuming you stand by The Constitution, so it'd be a shame to let those go unused given the current situation.

 

Accusing someone of being hyper-partisan, while bragging that one is totally non-partisan, is hardly a rational argument. 

 

[canuckamuck]

Hard to know how this will end, but it seems the wheels are in motion for an impeachment.

Too bad this is going to happen over something that seems like a technicality, instead of some sort of clear crime or act of treason. Because if Trump get forced out by the senate, America is going to be even more divided than before, Sure the left will be pleased to have a chance at winning the election and getting at the levers of power. But the anger will shift to the right. If they feel that an internal coup took away their legally elected president. You are going to see some violence. And the not weak sister kind of violence we saw from Antifa, they attack only defenseless people and hide behind masks and overwhelming numbers. The right actually has the tools and the training to bring a fight.

It would be really sad to see that happen, but clearly the president has been betrayed by the alphabet agencies and patriots aren't going to get over it easily.

I hope there is another way out of this.

Edited October 2, 2019 by canuckamuck

[Peter Denis]

17 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

  1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

Leaks on the Australia and Mexico calls were leaked by those countries.

 

Whoa, whoa, whoa, mtls2005.  Where did you find that information???  You must link or retract.  That's a very heavy claim.

17 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

mtls2005, please don't go any further with me until you've cleared this up.  Do not simply ignore it.  This is a stunning claim.  Have you evidence?  Or is this just a complete and utter falsity?

> Why should this be a stunning claim?
And why would this be of relevance for the Whistle-blower case?

Yes, the messenger can give you an indication of the angle/perspective he has on the information he provides.  But ultimately it is about the FACTS in the information.

 

[bendejo]

I think there will be a flood dirty items revealed soon enough, talk about the whistleblower of this incident will have gone the way of the Scotland fuel stops by the next Sunday talk show yack-a-thon.

Eventually it'll get to how his pre-candidacy money laundering effects his presidency.

 

 

[Becker]

18 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Hard to know how this will end, but it seems the wheels are in motion for an impeachment.

Too bad this is going to happen over something that seems like a technicality, instead of some sort of clear crime or act of treason.

Is blackmail a technicality?? Using your position as president to further your own political agenda by extorting favors from foreign heads of state is a clear crime and an act of treason.

Edited October 2, 2019 by Becker

[mtls2005]

3 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Do you disagree removing Trump will increase the division in America?

I think he will resign in disgrace. He will not be "removed".

 

How disappointed some of his supporters are remains to be seen. We've been divided before  - I think I heard about this Civil War thingy in school - so we'll survive. Thank you.

 

Maybe once this experiment is dealt with we can make attempts to come together. I'm a glass half-full kind of guy.

 

6 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

One thing you have on your side is the outrage culture is usually an affliction of the left.

End with four-level insult. Very classy.

 

Go get that hug. You deserve it.

 

 

 

 

[canuckamuck]

2 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

I think he will resign in disgrace. He will not be "removed".

 

How disappointed some of his supporters are remains to be seen. We've been divided before  - I think I heard about this Civil War thingy in school - so we'll survive. Thank you.

 

Maybe once this experiment is dealt with we can make attempts to come together. I'm a glass half-full kind of guy.

 

End with four-level insult. Very classy.

 

Go get that hug. You deserve it.

 

 

 

 

There are a lot facts that are received as insults to the left. Not my problem

[Morch]

8 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Quite hard to respond to multi nested quotes.

I knew what response I would get from your side. You put in more effort then I expected though.

Do you disagree removing Trump will increase the division in America?

One thing you have on your side is the outrage culture is usually an affliction of the left.

 

You're deflecting. Trump cannot be removed without some (well, quite a few) Republican votes. Apparently, in your mind, voting to remove Trump implies they no longer represent their voters. Others may disagree.

 

Trump's ongoing presidency is a divisive factor by itself. Removing him will be divisive as far as some are concerned, but definitely not for all Americans, or even the majority of Americans.

 

"the outrage culture is usually an affliction of the left." - well if you say so, this bit of meaningless waffle must by be true.

[johnnybangkok]

51 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Hard to know how this will end, but it seems the wheels are in motion for an impeachment.

Too bad this is going to happen over something that seems like a technicality, instead of some sort of clear crime or act of treason. Because if Trump get forced out by the senate, America is going to be even more divided than before, Sure the left will be pleased to have a chance at winning the election and getting at the levers of power. But the anger will shift to the right. If they feel that an internal coup took away their legally elected president. You are going to see some violence. And the not weak sister kind of violence we saw from Antifa, they attack only defenseless people and hide behind masks and overwhelming numbers. The right actually has the tools and the training to bring a fight.

It would be really sad to see that happen, but clearly the president has been betrayed by the alphabet agencies and patriots aren't going to get over it easily.

I hope there is another way out of this.

So much nonsense here but let's focus on the 'something that seems like a technicality, instead of some sort of clear crime or act of treason'.

What Trump has done is no 'technicality'. If proven correct (and the transcript seem to back this up), he is guilty of any one or more of the following:-

 

1. CAMPAIGN FINANCE VIOLATION -  wherein it’s a crime for any American (and I don't think I have to say this includes the POTUS) to ask a foreigner for help winning a U.S. election. Whilst talking of 'favors' he explicitly asks for President Zelenskyy to look into Bidens actions in an attempt to get information that will smear Biden. Not sure how clear you can get with that one.

2. BRIBERY - Where hundreds of millions of aid is offered for help in smearing Biden - not my favorite as it's not clear there is indeed a quid pro quo and it's too easy to argue otherwise but it's possible to argue.

2. HONEST SERVICES FRAUD - Trump allows the aid to go through; Ukraine does him a favour - political representatives are not allowed to do this. It's the law.

3. WITNESS INTIMIDATION - By calling the whistle-blower 'almost a spy', and inferring capital punishment for treason, this could be seen as witness intimidation.  

4. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE - By moving records of the call into a separate system for protecting highly classified documents, obstruction of justice charges could be brought.  

6. CONSPIRACY - Reaching an agreement with others to commit any of these other crimes would set up the possibility of a conspiracy charge.

 

 

So yeah, hardly a 'technicality'.

Edited October 2, 2019 by johnnybangkok

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

There are a lot facts that are received as insults to the left. Not my problem

 

Alternative facts, let's keep things real, eh?

[canuckamuck]

18 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

So much nonsense here but let's focus on the 'something that seems like a technicality, instead of some sort of clear crime or act of treason'.

What Trump has done is no 'technicality'. If proven correct (and the transcript seem to back this up), he is guilty of any one or more of the following:-

 

1. CAMPAIGN FINANCE VIOLATION -  wherein it’s a crime for any American (and I don't think I have to say this includes the POTUS) to ask a foreigner for help winning a U.S. election. Whilst talking of 'favors' he explicitly asks for President Zelenskyy to look into Bidens actions in an attempt to get information that will smear Biden. Not sure how clear you can get with that one.

2. BRIBERY - Where hundreds of millions of aid is offered for help in smearing Biden - not my favorite as it's not clear there is indeed a quid pro quo and it's too easy to argue otherwise but it's possible to argue.

2. HONEST SERVICES FRAUD - Trump allows the aid to go through; Ukraine does him a favour - political representatives are not allowed to do this. It's the law.

3. WITNESS INTIMIDATION - By calling the whistle-blower 'almost a spy', and inferring capital punishment for treason, this could be seen as witness intimidation.  

4. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE - By moving records of the call into a separate system for protecting highly classified documents, obstruction of justice charges could be brought.  

6. CONSPIRACY - Reaching an agreement with others to commit any of these other crimes would set up the possibility of a conspiracy charge.

 

 

So yeah, hardly a 'technicality'.

So that is your angle, coming at it with maximum spin and tenuous connectivity.

This is how the other side will spin it. Trump, in a person to person phone call, brought up the subject of Biden's blackmail and interference in the government of the Ukraine. Biden, who bragged on stage about this blackmail was making a very obvious interference of a foreign countries affairs to protect his son's fake position at Burisma. Trump wanted to get some information about that. As it should be the right of a president to investigate the crimes of the former VP. No threats or blackmail were made. It was an open and understandable conversation.

Apparently the way in which this occurred was the wrong process to request information and on that technicality Trump gets impeached.

This is a far cry from Watergate, or Clinton in his rape trials and diddling Monica in the oval office. It was a procedural error. The lamest excuse ever to impeach a president. But we know the dog has its bone and it will never let it go.

[Rimmer]

A most derogatory troll post has been removed also some replies. 

Also a post with multiple quotes. Please do not quote like that it leads to confusion and empty replies when it gets quoted again

[johnnybangkok]

16 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

So that is your angle, coming at it with maximum spin and tenuous connectivity.

This is how the other side will spin it. Trump, in a person to person phone call, brought up the subject of Biden's blackmail and interference in the government of the Ukraine. Biden, who bragged on stage about this blackmail was making a very obvious interference of a foreign countries affairs to protect his son's fake position at Burisma. Trump wanted to get some information about that. As it should be the right of a president to investigate the crimes of the former VP. No threats or blackmail were made. It was an open and understandable conversation.

Apparently the way in which this occurred was the wrong process to request information and on that technicality Trump gets impeached.

This is a far cry from Watergate, or Clinton in his rape trials and diddling Monica in the oval office. It was a procedural error. The lamest excuse ever to impeach a president. But we know the dog has its bone and it will never let it go.

This has been gone over sooooo many times I really can't be bothered going into it all again with you. Just watch the news and you'll see for yourself

[canuckamuck]

Just now, johnnybangkok said:

This has been gone over sooooo many times I really can't be bothered going into it all again with you. Just watch the news and you'll see for yourself

I am not saying those are the facts, I am saying that will be how people who support Trump will see it.

[Tippaporn]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

Why do you do that? I edited my post, but almost 15 minutes later you post the previous version, omitting the part where I am very clear about your posting:  "Your post is wrong in many ways, and your twisting and turning is pathetic to see". You're proving my point about dishonest posting from your side, therefor I will not react to you anymore.

And my question here is rhetorical.

I quoted your post before you edited it.  And never saw your edit.  And that's the truth.

 

But thank you again, stevenl, for illustrating with this small example precisely what is occurring with the whistle blower complaint.  Let me lay it out very plainly, step by step.

 

FACTS

1. I quote you in a response.

2. You edit your post shortly thereafter.

3. You notice that my post does not contain the edit to your quote.

 

DRAWING A CONCLUSION

1. You believe me to be dishonest (stated in your quote above)

2. That becomes your bias.  Which prevents you from considering an innocent explanation.

3. You assume that I purposely omitted your edit for my own nefarious reasons.

4. You take the facts, mix them with your bias and assumptions, arrange them to suit, and then conclude that this is what happened beyond a shadow of a doubt.

 

CHARGES

1. You charge me with a crime (purposely omitting your edit).

2. You charge me without ever asking me for my explanation.

 

CONVICTION

1. You've convicted me of being dishonest and will no longer react to me (also from your post above).

2. You've never asked for my side of the story.

 

And the truth of it is exactly as I have stated in my opening statements.  The truth is that it was an innocent event.  Absolutely nothing there.  Now, do you believe me?

 

This is the exact process used by the Dems regarding the whistle blower complaint.

 

Trump has a conversation with a foreign leader.

The conversation includes a request for aid in solving certain corruption. 

Biden is mentioned not by Trump but by the Ukrainian president.

Trump is believed to corrupt.

The bias of that belief prevents seeking any other explanation.

The assumption is made that the conversation and request for assistance with Biden as well is for nefarious reasons; eliminating a political opponent.

The facts are mixed with the bias and generous doses of assumptions and a conclusion is drawn with absolute conviction.

A charge is levied and the impeachment process is begun without ever asking Trump for his explanation.

The Dems convict Trump by speaking about the matter as if Trump is already convicted of this "crime."

Trump is not even extended the courtesy of providing his side of the story.

 

And the people pile on not from a moral standpoint but because they hate Trump and feverishly want to believe Orange Man Bad is true.  Wake up people.  It's sooooooooo obvious as to what's truly happening.

 

And since you've now slandered my good name in public, steve, I would expect an apology.

 

Mark Twain

It's easier to fool a man than it is to convince him that he's been fooled.

 

 

Edited October 2, 2019 by Tippaporn

[Misty]

Do any US citizens posting on this thread, and some others, find some of the use of the English language a bit curious?

[Becker]

3 minutes ago, Misty said:

Do any US citizens posting on this thread, and some others, find some of the use of the English language a bit curious?

Quite a lot of it actually but it only reflects the fact that we're a diverse group of posters and as an avowed liberal I'm duty bound to applaud diversity