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

[walt1953]

Let me add a few words to my last post.

Democrats, anty-Trumpers and all haters of another human beings. There will be no impeachment. Even , even you get something in a Congress it will be stopped in Senate. 

Democrats,  you waisting your time , money and you don't do right work in Congress.

All of you dreaming, wishing and seeing Trump removed from White House suggest take a Valum, Xanax or other sedatives to help relax , make a good drink, read a book or watch a movie. It will be good for your health

Here is what McConnell said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mcconnell-fundraises-off-impeachment-says-205928480.html

End of the story.

However,  AG Barr needs to finish his investigations. Whoever will be find breaking law should be punished.

[Tippaporn]

24 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Where did i say it was written. Trump went on tv and said he did it.

I was referring to what I had written.

[johnnybangkok]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

You have to understand, GroveHillWanderer, that the Federal Election law does not apply to a legitimate request for aid in a criminal investigation from a foreign country.  It perhaps would apply if Trump was indeed requesting aid in the investigation of a political opponent for the sole purpose of causing harm to him.

 

As long as the assumption, I repeat assumption, is that this was the case then your argument might be valid.  But, as has been pointed out before, running for office does not protect one from being criminally investigated.  Remember, Hitlery was being investigated during her campaign as well.  Joe Biden is not protected simply because he is running for President.  Therefore, if the criminal investigation is legit then Trump would be within his rights, as well as within his constitutional duty, despite the fact that Biden is his political opponent.

 

You are making an unfounded assumption at this point.  So are a lot of other people, including lawyers, and especially if they're Democratic lawyers.

 

 

 

“It perhaps would apply if Trump was indeed requesting aid in the investigation of a political opponent for the sole purpose of causing harm to him.”

So, Trump was concerned about protecting Biden from those nasty conspiracy theories? He was looking out for him as a fellow presidential nominee and didn’t want some ludicrous non-problem to topple his candidacy? 
I think we can safely say “........Trump was indeed requesting aid in the investigation of a political opponent for the sole purpose of causing harm to him.”

You just added too many words. 

[Tippaporn]

28 minutes ago, Sujo said:

That says it all.

 

The problem is that its illegal. You have been told this over and over  and now just trolling.

 

It is illegal for trump to ask a foreign govt to investigate a political rival. Qed.

 

If u prefer trump supporters who said he cant do it try fox pundits tucker carlson and judge napolitano.

End of discussion, Sujo.  I'm not getting on the merry-go-round with you.  

[Tippaporn]

26 minutes ago, Becker said:

Is there no end to your deflections? I guess, if that's all you have....

Whatever you want to imagine, Becker, is thankfully not my problem.

[candide]

7 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Thanks for the link.  I will read it.

 

As to twisting anything, I never claimed that an official investigation into Biden by the U.S. exists.  So I have no idea why you would phrase it that way.

Ok, I will be more precise: as there is no official investigation into Biden, what Trump did is illegal.

[Kelsall]

The way Pelosi and Schiff have botched this (lying about what Trump said, not taking a full vote, no crime, etc.), it seems Trump has a couple of options.  He can fight this, not comply with the subpoenas, and it will end up in court.  I would guess eventually SCOTUS should they decide to hear it.  That would delay things, but he would no doubt win.  Or he can just let them go ahead and impeach, and then just take the quick "not guilty" that Mitch is indicating he will do. 

 

No doubt the Dems will want a "do over" as they did with the election where Trump beat Hillary. 

 

Pelosi and Schiff have just guaranteed Trump a 2020 win.  Sometimes I wonder if they're secretly working for him, LOL.

[AussieBob18]

9 hours ago, stevenl said:

One can disagree about what to do, but denying facts and at the same time subscribing to conspiracy theories and take Trump's words for gospel?

 

Posts like this, reasoning like this I really can not comprehend.

Enjoy the show - all will be revealed eventually - one way or the other.

[AussieBob18]

6 hours ago, stevenl said:

Thanks for making my point: denying proven facts and believing conspiracy theories.

Golf was great - especially hole 19 !!

[metisdead]

Posts containing personal insults and the replies have been removed.  Continue and a warning will be coming soon. 

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

Thanks for the link.  I will read it.

 

As to twisting anything, I never claimed that an official investigation into Biden by the U.S. exists.  So I have no idea why you would phrase it that way.

Oh gawd. If there is no official invrstigation then what trump himself said he did is illegal.

You post links you havent read that are itrelevant. You answer questions with alternative facts.

 

Its tiresome to keep correcting your conspiracy theories with facts. I suggest you go for a beer and a good ly down.

[AussieBob18]

4 hours ago, candide said:

Giuliani is not part of the DOJ. There is no official investigation on Biden, according to Barr himself. He also declared he never talked with Trump about it (ok, he may be lying).

Barr has neither confirmed or denied who is being investigated - he is refusing to speculate - but he is investigating.

There was an investigation going in Ukraine that Biden got stopped. Barr is looking into that and many other things to do with Ukraine and the Dems. Remember - the number one donater to the Clinton Foundation was Ukraine - I wonder why??

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

- Biden's son and Biden are corrupted because Trump says so

 

Biden and his son are accused of corruption because of evidence that exists which points to corruption.  And not because Trump says so.  Do you understand now?

 

- but, Trump needs Ukraine, China , UK and Australia ( maybe others..) to investigate and find proofs

 

- but Trump did not ask foreign nations to investigate a political opponent

 

If there's crime there then go for it.  I'd be all for it.

 

Ok ive cut the bits of your post so i can address these issies. Yet again with facts.

 

Biden and his son are not accused with anything. Only trump says so. There is no investigation in the ukraine. Its a closed issue and they found nothing. There is no official US investigation. There is no such evidence as u state.

 

But trump did indeed ask a foreign nation to investigate. Trump even said he did. He even said he wants china to do so.

 

So yes, there is a crime there. Thats why congress has started impeachment.

 

So im glad youre all for it.

[Tippaporn]

7 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Oh gawd. If there is no official invrstigation then what trump himself said he did is illegal.

You post links you havent read that are itrelevant. You answer questions with alternative facts.

 

Its tiresome to keep correcting your conspiracy theories with facts. I suggest you go for a beer and a good ly down.

Oh gawd. If there is no official invrstigation then what trump himself said he did is illegal.

 

Not true.  If it was that would make impeachment a slam dunk.  Then why hasn't Pelosi begun a formal impeachment inquiry?  I would say it's because Trump actions were not illegal.  And the Dems know it.

 

Don't worry, we'll all find out soon enough.

[stevenl]

12 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

Barr has neither confirmed or denied who is being investigated - he is refusing to speculate - but he is investigating.

There was an investigation going in Ukraine that Biden got stopped. Barr is looking into that and many other things to do with Ukraine and the Dems. Remember - the number one donater to the Clinton Foundation was Ukraine - I wonder why??

No. There was no investigation going on in Ukraine that biden got stopped. Your information is old, not correct, and part of the conspiracy theories doing the rounds.

 

No idea about your other 'facts'.

[candide]

11 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

Barr has neither confirmed or denied who is being investigated - he is refusing to speculate - but he is investigating.

There was an investigation going in Ukraine that Biden got stopped. Barr is looking into that and many other things to do with Ukraine and the Dems. Remember - the number one donater to the Clinton Foundation was Ukraine - I wonder why??

There is no official investigation into Biden. There is an official investigation about the origins of the Mueller probe. Those are two distinct cases.

Your allegation about Biden has been debunked long ago, in particular by Ukrainian officials. 

Any other fake news?

[AussieBob18]

11 minutes ago, stevenl said:

No. There was no investigation going on in Ukraine that biden got stopped. Your information is old, not correct, and part of the conspiracy theories doing the rounds.

 

No idea about your other 'facts'.

 

[bristolboy]

9 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

 

I don't know how many times it has to be said, apparently infinitely, but at the time Shokin was fired, he was not investigating Burisma and hadn't been for over a year. In fact, his corruption investigations were a farce.  That's the first lie in the video.

The second lie is that Biden was delivering this ultimatum on his own behalf or on befalf of his son. He was only carrying out US government policy. And it wasn't only the USA who wanted Shokin out. So did the major nations of of the EU and the IMF.

So, no, it isn't amazing that he publicly disclosed what he did. Because he did nothing wrong.

Edited October 6, 2019 by bristolboy

[AussieBob18]

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

I don't know how many times it has to be said, apparently infinitely, but at the time Shokin was fired, he was not investigating Burisma and hadn't been for over a year. In fact, his corruption investigations were a farce.  That's the first lie in the video.

The second lie is that Biden was delivering this ultimatum on his own behalf or on befalf of his son. He was only carrying out US government policy. And it wasn't only the USA who wanted Shokin out. So did the major nations of of the EU and the IMF.

The Swamp wanted the prosecuter removed for many many reasons - including the unofficial reasons I have mentioned.

But putting all that aside - dont you at least see a potential conflict of interest in Hunter Biden being recently appointed on the Board of the Gas Company being investigated (with nil knowlegde or qualifications of industry) and his father got the prosecution stopped?? Imagine Trump forcing a Prosecuter in Ireland to be removed that was investigating a company where his Son was on the Board - CNN would be screaming corruption and conflict of interest 24x7. 

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, AussieBob18 said:

The Swamp wanted the prosecuter removed for many many reasons - including the unofficial reasons I have mentioned.

But putting all that aside - dont you at least see a potential conflict of interest in Hunter Biden being recently appointed on the Board of the Gas Company being investigated (with nil knowlegde or qualifications of industry) and his father got the prosecution stopped?? Imagine Trump forcing a Prosecuter in Ireland to be removed that was investigating a company where his Son was on the Board - CNN would be screaming corruption and conflict of interest 24x7. 

The Gas company was not being investigated. And in asking for the firing of Shokin, Biden was carrying out the will of the US government which was acting in concert with major nations in the EU and the IMF. Why is this so hard to understand? 

[Chomper Higgot]

And yet still, despite all the illiberal Whataboutary, The Impeachment inquiries continue.

[AussieBob18]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Well, if your avatar name signifies your nationality, that may explain your utter ignorance of the US Constitution. It gives very wide latitude to the House and Senate. Repeatedly, the Supreme Court has acknowledged this. 

As for your predictions. they are based on no more than bias and wishful thinking. But I guess for your point of view, is that the discussions of the future aren't about facts. And facts are things you are clearly uncomfortable with.

You are ignorant of the facts.  Read the book by the last Head of SCOTUS who ran the Senate investigation of Clinton.  Note that both the Clinton and Nixon House impeachment investigations followed the precendents established when Johnson was impeached - they are called 'articles of impeachment'.  The Dems have not followed the precedents set in the articles and are stating they do not have to. The matter will go to SCOTUS because Trump is refusing to cooperate unless they vote and set the rules of the impeachment (articles) as has always been done in the past.  Facts. 

 

Yes my predictions are based on my opinions and are therefore inherently 'biased' - stop the press.

 

[stevenl]

27 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

 

Sigh.

[AussieBob18]

5 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

The Gas company was not being investigated. And in asking for the firing of Shokin, Biden was carrying out the will of the US government which was acting in concert with major nations in the EU and the IMF. Why is this so hard to understand? 

You cannot answer the question.  Yes they were.  Cant you see the potential conflict if they were? 

[Chomper Higgot]

*Deleted post edited out*

 

In so much as the clock is ticking, you are correct.

 

Regardless of claims on both sides of the political divide, the risk exists that the impeachment investigation process will further swing public opinion against Trump.

 

Moscow Mitch and GOP need to make their minds up pretty quick, the 2020 elections are drawing nearer, as Trump’s crimes are exposed the GOP needs to be in a position to both dump Trump and position themselves on the right side of public opinion.

 

Tick Tock....

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

You are ignorant of the facts.  Read the book by the last Head of SCOTUS who ran the Senate investigation of Clinton.  Note that both the Clinton and Nixon House impeachment investigations followed the precendents established when Johnson was impeached - they are called 'articles of impeachment'.  The Dems have not followed the precedents set in the articles and are stating they do not have to. The matter will go to SCOTUS because Trump is refusing to cooperate unless they vote and set the rules of the impeachment (articles) as has always been done in the past.  Facts. 

 

Yes my predictions are based on my opinions and are therefore inherently 'biased' - stop the press.

 

It would help if they were attached to reality, but that’s something that will eventually come to pass.

[Jingthing]

Pelosi, current leader of the democrats until there is a presidential nominee, took a big political risk to begin with the formal impeachment inquiry process. But she would have also taken a big political risk NOT starting it. Better to be on the right side of history on this one. When you have a president that is blatantly abusing his power with no regard for the constitution or the rule of law, exercising congressional power is indeed the right way to go. "Win" or lose.

[candide]

28 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

 

He contributed to get a corrupt prosecutor fired, same as the IMF and the EU did. Fine!

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/eu-hails-sacking-of-ukraine-s-prosecutor-viktor-shokin-1.2591190

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/10/imf-warns-ukraine-halt-40bn-bailout-corruption-christine-lagarde

 

Even Reps wanted the head of the "very good" prosecutor.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/10/03/politics/gop-senators-echoed-biden-on-ukraine-reforms-kfile/index.html

[Jingthing]

Just now, candide said:

He contributed to get a corrupt prosecutor fired, same as the IMF and the EU did. Fine!

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/eu-hails-sacking-of-ukraine-s-prosecutor-viktor-shokin-1.2591190

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/10/imf-warns-ukraine-halt-40bn-bailout-corruption-christine-lagarde

 

Even Reps wanted the head of the "very good" prosecutor.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/10/03/politics/gop-senators-echoed-biden-on-ukraine-reforms-kfile/index.html

Yes. Inconvenient truths for the 45 fans trying to deflect from the 45 Ukraine scandal.

[RideJocky]

Yes. Inconvenient truths for the 45 fans trying to deflect from the 45 Ukraine scandal.

I think most Trump supporters don’t want to deflect, I think they want Nancy to call the vote and move ahead with it.