It's official, Trump has been Acquitted

[KG1]

So I heard a snipit of what I believe was part of the Presidents official case where the issue of the balance between for the good of the country vs the good of the Presidents campaign, was brought up. He talked about a hypothetical Senator weighing does he believe it was 48%-52% that it was for the good of the country or 48%-52% for the good of the campaign. That is not the question, the question is is it possible the President did it for the good of the country and if so it is neither illegal nor impeachable. To do otherwise is to impeach for thoughts...

Here’s another one. Did VP Biden threaten to withhold a billion in aid from Ukraine to benefit the country or could he also have done it for the benefit of his son?

 

[Ingomike]

Here’s another one. Did VP Biden threaten to withhold a billion in aid from Ukraine to benefit the country or could he also have done it for the benefit of his son?

All I know is from the video of Biden himself bragging he got a prosecutor fired, the unqualified jobs his son had in that country, sounds like that would warrant an investigation. Quite a difference from asking for an investigation, even if it was being tied to aid...

Democrats have flipped that, asking for an investigation is "high crimes and misdemeanors" while bragging he got a prosecutor fired and the unqualified jobs his son had in that country is nothing to see here...

 

[Dead Duck]

So what I want to know....

How did the dems know about all these things that were going to happen in the future when they actually started their impeachment investigations back when Trump came down that escalator?

That's when this all this started.
People just need to be reminded of this from time to time. Remember? They took the word impeachment and stuck it to the wall a long time ago THEN they started looking for things to attach to it. When they couldn't find anything, they started making **** up and then having the fake media report on it because if you say something over and over, the morons out there will actually start to believe it.

 

[Ingomike]

So what I want to know....

How did the dems know about all these things that were going to happen in the future when they actually started their impeachment investigations back when Trump came down that escalator?

That's when this all this started.
People just need to be reminded of this all the time. Remember? They took the word impeachment and stuck it to the wall a long time ago THEN they started looking for things to attach to it. When they couldn't find anything, they started making **** up and then having the fake media report on it because if you say something over and over, the morons out there will actually start to believe it.

Fixed it for you...

 

[Alpo]

So what I want to know....

How did the dems know about all these things that were going to happen in the future when they actually started their impeachment investigations back when Trump came down that escalator?

That's when this all this started.
People just need to be reminded of this from time to time. Remember? They took the word impeachment and stuck it to the wall a long time ago THEN they started looking for things to attach to it. When they couldn't find anything, they started making **** up and then having the fake media report on it because if you say something over and over, the morons out there will actually start to believe it.

This "started" back as far as Burr v. Hamilton. The idea of parties and separation of power result in a system of conflict. Darwinian to some degree.

It's human nature. There is always someone out there who may not like what you say or the "cut of your jib". Ever been in a high school sports program? Or the military?

Trump is not naive enough to believe that everyone likes him. Where he is in error is his belief that he can do anything he wants without consequences. Doesn't work that way.

 

[KG1]

This "started" back as far as Burr v. Hamilton. The idea of parties and separation of power result in a system of conflict. Darwinian to some degree.

It's human nature. There is always someone out there who may not like what you say or the "cut of your jib". Ever been in a high school sports program? Or the military?

Trump is not naive enough to believe that everyone likes him. Where he is in error is his belief that he can do anything he wants without consequences. Doesn't work that way.

The question of consequences then becomes an issue of proportionality.

There were other avenues available to remedy the issue of withholding aid in the Ukraine situation.

The Democrats chose the political route instead because they have wanted to do so ever since Trump took office.

 

[Alpo]

Never one to know what is in Pelosi's mind, but perhaps she went ahead with the impeachment knowing Trump would clear the Senate. But, it would serve as a warning to him that there are limitations on executive power.

It's always been my view that you don't reason with a bully. You beat the crap out of him.

 

[nonobaddog]

A warning? That would be the stupidest, most inappropriate use of impeachment imaginable.

 

[Vigilant]

A warning? That would be the stupidest, most inappropriate use of impeachment imaginable.

They’re the only ones who ever said they were smart?

 

[KG1]

Apparently there has been a video of an interview with Bolton where he categorized the Trump/Zelenskiy phone call as “warm and cordial”

Didn’t seem like he had any concerns at the time.

https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/u...rumps-call-with-ukraine-was-warm-and-cordial/

 

[Doug]

Oh please.

The only reasons for the impeachment are because the Democrats promised to impeach the m*****f***** and they want to interfere with the 2020 election.

 

[churchmouse]

Oh please.

The only reasons for the impeachment are because the Democrats promised to impeach the m*****f***** and they want to interfere with the 2020 election.

​"WINNER"

 

[KG1]

Never one to know what is in Pelosi's mind, but perhaps she went ahead with the impeachment knowing Trump would clear the Senate. But, it would serve as a warning to him that there are limitations on executive power.

It's always been my view that you don't reason with a bully. You beat the crap out of him.

My point is there was another avenue to exert Congressional authority and show the Executive that there are limitations besides going the impeachment route.

For example they could’ve filed suit against the administration if they felt there was a violation of the Impoundment Control Act when Trump withheld apportioned aid for whatever reason.

The whole 2016 election interference, Burisma/Biden inquiry motivation is a subjective grounds for impeachment issue.

So in the end I think it would be improper of Pelosi to go the political route just to teach Trump a lesson knowing that he would clear the Senate.

That’s not what the impeachment process is for.

 

[nonobaddog]

Do you think pelosi, schumer, schiff etc actually believe there was ever anything actually done by Trump to warrant impeachment? I know they say there was and they want it to be true really bad and many of their dumocrap lemmings believe it but I wonder if they themselves actually believe their own words or if they are just playing their part. I mean schumer and schiff are lawyers and all of them are Washington insiders so they should have knowledge of what it takes. I am having trouble believing they actually believe their own words.

 

[Doug]

They have no concern whatsoever whether or not Trump did anything wrong.
Their only concern is what they can get people to believe.
Truth doesn't matter.

 

[jamil]

You should never get tired of hearing those words. You should only get tired about whatever they reference.

They seem to reference stuff that ends up being not really much. Look at all the “bombshells” reported on MSNBC during the Mueller investigation. “Trump will be indicted any day now.”

 

[OakRiver]

They seem to reference stuff that ends up being not really much. Look at all the “bombshells” reported on MSNBC during the Mueller investigation. “Trump will be indicted any day now.”

"The walls are closing in."

 

[Alpo]

My point is there was another avenue to exert Congressional authority and show the Executive that there are limitations besides going the impeachment route.

For example they could’ve filed suit against the administration if they felt there was a violation of the Impoundment Control Act when Trump withheld apportioned aid for whatever reason.

The whole 2016 election interference, Burisma/Biden inquiry motivation is a subjective grounds for impeachment issue.

So in the end I think it would be improper of Pelosi to go the political route just to teach Trump a lesson knowing that he would clear the Senate.

That’s not what the impeachment process is for.

Had they known about it, perhaps that would have happened. But there was a whistleblower. And Trump had done more than just withold funds, right?

 

[Vigilant]

Had they known about it, perhaps that would have happened. But there was a whistleblower. And Trump had done more than just withold funds, right?

Was there a whistle blower?

 

[nonobaddog]

Probably the best whistle blower around back then in October was busy reffing the Redskins games.