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

[Jingthing]

What are impeachable offenses?

 

Quote

The U.S. Constitution’s provision that federal officers are impeachable for “high crimes and misdemeanors” is notoriously unclear. That’s on purpose. The framers wanted a fairly open-ended tool for removing an officer who posed a serious and immediate threat to the constitutional order.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/05/24/so-what-exactly-counts-as-an-impeachable-offense-spoiler-its-a-trick-question/

[illiterate]

Hello, mcfly, it is 2019. Elections are in 2020. Cmon mcfly, shut your pie hole and just get in there and kick some solid ass and be proud of yourselves if you win. 

[riclag]

On 9/25/2019 at 5:20 AM, webfact said:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said his panel was communicating with an attorney representing the whistleblower and that the individual would like to testify this week.

That never happen

 

On 9/25/2019 at 5:20 AM, webfact said:

Pelosi's change of heart followed reports that Trump had pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy in a July 25 phone call to investigate Democratic presidential front-runner Joe Biden and his son.

That never happen

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/10/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-says-there-was-no-blackmail-in-trump-call.html

 

What did happen! another dem fiasco !

Edited October 22, 2019 by riclag

[JHolmesJr]

49 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Why would biden care. Hes already been cleared.

 

What makes you think he will be the dem candidate, its way to early.

 

Exactly. Not someone I would call Trump's main "political opponent" per se.

Just a face in an uninspiring line-up who needed to be put in his place since he was starting to

float his vision of "making America moral again". LOL

 

He got owned by the Don.

[gk10002000]

37 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Again, you really don't get it!

It doesn't need to be a literal crime on the books.

Impeachable offenses are whatever the house decides they are.

In 45's case, there are plenty. 

No you are being deliberately obtuse.  Read the constitution.   See the word "conction"?   Now granted, the House may vote and act in any way they want, responsible or not.  But that is not in line with impeachment just because they don't like what the guy did.  There are legal guidelines.  That is why the Clinton impeachment was a joke.  I was active duty Air Force at the time, and I held my commander in chief to a high standard.  Any normal military service man would have been subject to UCMJ rulings.  But that does not make Clinton impeachable, and he was not impeached.

 

“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”.

[gk10002000]

42 minutes ago, Sujo said:

High crimes etc is what congress decides it is. Abuse of power is top of the list of what is considered impeachable.

 

Edit. It doesnt need to be a crime.

No, read the constitution.   See the word "Conviction"?   “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”.  

[Sujo]

3 minutes ago, gk10002000 said:

No, read the constitution.   See the word "Conviction"?   “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”.  

No. You get impeached in congress. The trial is in the senate. A conviction means the senate convicts you. Its a political trial, nothing to do with criminal conviction.

 

This gets very tiring having to explain a very simple concept.

 

Clinton was indeed impeached. In congress. But he was not convicted...in the senate. If he was convicted in the senate he would have been removed.

[riclag]

3 minutes ago, gk10002000 said:

No you are being deliberately obtuse.  Read the constitution.   See the word "conction"?   Now granted, the House may vote and act in any way they want, responsible or not.  But that is not in line with impeachment just because they don't like what the guy did.  There are legal guidelines.  That is why the Clinton impeachment was a joke.  I was active duty Air Force at the time, and I held my commander in chief to a high standard.  Any normal military service man would have been subject to UCMJ rulings.  But that does not make Clinton impeachable, and he was not impeached.

 

“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”.

The sad thing is most people who follow politics know Mr. Trump hasn't even come close to any of the necessary requirements. for impeachment.

The radical dems  and their propaganda  arm has been on a campaign to derail a elected official  ever since he walked off the escalator,hoping that they can sway public opinion ! It's not working 

[heybruce]

6 hours ago, RideJocky said:

 

Yes, a lie that the campaign of his rival started.

How funny is that?

You guys all all still lying about what he says...

 

Burying lies with more lies.  You are a true Trump supporter. 

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, 4675636b596f75 said:

I like to get my news from all the places that are considered non-authorized sources here on ThaiVisa.

That explains why you are so appallingly uninformed.

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, Kelsall said:

The Republicans control the Senate.  They won't call Trump.  All this is assuming it even gets to the Senate.  If the Dems with their "impeachment inquiry" go down the Ukraine road, the Senate will subpoena Biden and he WILL have to testify, right during his primary campaign.  Trump himself will be allowed to interrogate Biden if Trump so desires.

The Senate will not call Biden to testify, because the Republicans know that Biden's actions have been investigated and nothing was found.  They have no desire to advertise this fact.

[bristolboy]

2 minutes ago, riclag said:

The sad thing is most people who follow politics know Mr. Trump hasn't even come close to any of the necessary requirements. for impeachment.

The radical dems  and their propaganda  arm has been on a campaign to derail a elected official  ever since he walked off the escalator,hoping that they can sway public opinion ! It's not working 

Actually the sad thing is your assumption that what you believe is also subscribed to by most people who follow politics. Unless of course you have evidence of this. Somehow I doubt that.

[heybruce]

4 minutes ago, riclag said:

The sad thing is most people who follow politics know Mr. Trump hasn't even come close to any of the necessary requirements. for impeachment.

The radical dems  and their propaganda  arm has been on a campaign to derail a elected official  ever since he walked off the escalator,hoping that they can sway public opinion ! It's not working 

Trump's actions regarding Ukraine and his using the office of the President for personal profit are far worse than the grounds for impeachment of Johnson, Nixon, and Clinton.

[Jingthing]

No you are being deliberately obtuse.  Read the constitution.   See the word "conction"?   Now granted, the House may vote and act in any way they want, responsible or not.  But that is not in line with impeachment just because they don't like what the guy did.  There are legal guidelines.  That is why the Clinton impeachment was a joke.  I was active duty Air Force at the time, and I held my commander in chief to a high standard.  Any normal military service man would have been subject to UCMJ rulings.  But that does not make Clinton impeachable, and he was not impeached.
 
“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”.

Clinton was impeached.

Next...

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Solinvictus]

Regarding actual impeachment. You know folks, with only 20 members in the House needed to get the impeachment done and the growing Republican Conservative's being outspoken against Trump. It's looking more like an actual possibility compared to before.

 

If more than 20 members of the House are needed please correct me.

[riclag]

Just now, Solinvictus said:

Regarding actual impeachment. You know folks, with only 20 members in the House needed to get the impeachment done and the growing Republican Conservative's being outspoken against Trump. It's looking more like an actual possibility compared to before.

 

If more than 20 members of the House are needed please correct me.

Many Americans want this to happen,Impeachment ! Transparency is the best way to expose the dems! The world get's to hear all the hyperbole on the house floor during the debate .  

[Scott]

Troll post and replies removed.  

 

[sirineou]

24 minutes ago, wayned said:

If you substitute A TRUMP for DEMOCRAT, it's spot on!

Sorry, I had not seen your post and said virtually the same thing.

Brilliant minds think alike. Not sure why we do. LOL

 

[Solinvictus]

44 minutes ago, riclag said:

Many Americans want this to happen,Impeachment ! Transparency is the best way to expose the dems! The world get's to hear all the hyperbole on the house floor during the debate .  

I'm with you on how much and hopefully we can agree, on the unfortunate circumstances that so much is focused on only Trump especially by the so called 'peoples party,' Democratic Party. Rather than real issues which I could mention but I won't now.

 

However, it seems like he has so much against him and it's growing. Also, and most importantly, there really seems to be multiple instances of not only obstruction which was downplayed in the Mueller report but issues with dealing with foreign leaders. That's not all, he has a history of not only sexual assault accusations but of shady financial practices. Presidential? I understand you can't impeach for poor character but violations and for obstruction not once but repeated times you can.

 

Come on now, this guy is crooked and he gains votes due to the terrible approach and coverage attacks from wacky neo-liberal supporting democrats not to mention divisive rhetoric that people still fall for.. Very presidential or a great 'patriotic' facade. Let me guess is supporting impeachment...antisemitic too?

 

 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, riclag said:

Many Americans want this to happen,Impeachment ! Transparency is the best way to expose the dems! The world get's to hear all the hyperbole on the house floor during the debate .  

If transparency is such a great thing, why is Trump opposing all subpoenas for testimony and documents?

[bristolboy]

7 hours ago, riclag said:

That never happen

 

That never happen

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/10/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-says-there-was-no-blackmail-in-trump-call.html

 

What did happen! another dem fiasco !

Diplomat Bill Taylor testifies Trump used Ukraine aid, White House meeting as leverage for probes

That same day, Taylor said, he sent Sondland a text message asking if security assistance and a White House meeting "are conditioned on investigations," prompting Sondland to request Taylor call him. Although those texts have previously been released, the contents of Taylor's call have been unclear.

"During that phone call, Ambassador Sondland told me that President Trump had told him that he wants President Zelenskyy to state publicly that Ukrain will investigate Burisma and alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 U.S. election," Taylor testified.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bill-taylor-testifies-trump-used-ukraine-aid-white-house-meeting-as-leverage-to-get-investigations

[RideJocky]

Correct. Impeachment is not a criminal trial. It is a political trial

Yes, a political trial, for political reasons.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 10/21/2019 at 9:30 PM, johnnybangkok said:

As usual 'IMO' in your case is ridiculously biased towards Trump, despite many posters here educating you to how impeachment works and what Trump is going to be impeached for.

So let me be the next one to also lend a helping hand regarding the 'rate of proceedings'.

Ken Starr investigated Bill Clinton for 4 years before he eventually impeached Clinton. Starr was initially appointed to investigate the suicide of deputy White House counsel Vince Foster and the Whitewater real estate investments of Bill Clinton but since they were just a bunch of the usual GOP conspiracy theories, he eventually ended up impeaching over lying about giving Monica a bit of Billy sausage during a sworn deposition. The impeachment was initiated in October 1998 with the actual trial hitting the Senate in January 1999.

My guess is that formal impeachment will happen by the end of the year for Trump and he will go on trial in the Senate some time around April/May of next year - plenty of time before the elections for him to either fall on his sword or for Republican Senators to grow a pair and get him out. 

What won't happen is for it to be dragged out 'to 2025' as you put it as it needs to be done soon and lets admit it, they've got plenty to go on even now. 

 

Only time will tell if you or I are correct. Only one of us can be.

 

They've actually had enough to impeach long ago, but they didn't. I wonder why, not.

 

FYI I use IMO to indicate that it is an OPINION. Too many on here brandishing opinions around as it they are facts.

FYI I'm not biased towards Trump, whom I always thought was only the least worst of two really bad candidates, as is born out by many of my past posts, but I am biased against the Dems, who are not governing the country properly, IMO, due to their obsession with Trump.

Edited October 23, 2019 by thaibeachlovers

[RideJocky]

Clinton was impeached.

Next...

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Yeah, he was also disbarred

[RideJocky]

If transparency is such a great thing, why is Trump opposing all subpoenas for testimony and documents?

And why are none of the dems hearings behind closed doors?

Why should trump help them?

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, Solinvictus said:

Regarding actual impeachment. You know folks, with only 20 members in the House needed to get the impeachment done and the growing Republican Conservative's being outspoken against Trump. It's looking more like an actual possibility compared to before.

 

If more than 20 members of the House are needed please correct me.

Irrelevant if the house impeaches, if the Senate dies not convict, as is likely at this point in time.

Made no difference to Clinton who went on to become a popular politician.

[thaibeachlovers]

5 minutes ago, RideJocky said:

 

And why are none of the dems hearings behind closed doors?

Why should trump help them?

 

Don't you mean why are none of the Dems hearings held in public?

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, heybruce said:

If transparency is such a great thing, why is Trump opposing all subpoenas for testimony and documents?

Why should Trump help those that want to destroy him? That's not rational.

[bristolboy]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Why should Trump help those that want to destroy him? That's not rational.

So you're saying that were those documents revealed, they wouldn't support what Trump claims to be the case?

[bristolboy]

19 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Only time will tell if you or I are correct. Only one of us can be.

 

They've actually had enough to impeach long ago, but they didn't. I wonder why, not.

 

FYI I use IMO to indicate that it is an OPINION. Too many on here brandishing opinions around as it they are facts.

FYI I'm not biased towards Trump, whom I always thought was only the least worst of two really bad candidates, as is born out by many of my past posts, but I am biased against the Dems, who are not governing the country properly, IMO, due to their obsession with Trump.

Another version of "I don't support Trump but.." Your protestations would be more believable if you actually criticized Trump's policies.