Is this supposed to make Schiff look like he knows what he is doing? Maybe he does -- doing the best he can with a bust hand.
I love it that so many, (most not American) are worried about the reasoning behind anyone being let go by the POTUS, when they serve at his pleasure.
Cool. I am willing to discuss the Entire Episode the Day AFTER the Nov. 2020 Election. As far as "hearsay", etc.? Impeachment IS NOT a per se "Court of Law"... THUS, the acceptance (or not acceptance) of "hearsay" is.entirely up to those who ascertain the "credibility" of the witness. Since Trump (and his cronies) are 24/7 Pathological LIARS, one should not be surprised if the "Default Position" (of "who to believe") goes against the Delusional Trump "Narrative". Carry on. PS--Thanks for the "mention".
Nope. ... I don't think you understand how instrumental the United States is in controlling internal issues within almost every country within the world. I agree, Biden is a schmuck.
The shadow diplomatic campaign though operates outside the purview of congressional oversight and they are answerable to no one except the President. And here, in this instance, those shadow diplomatic operatives were almost exclusively focused on exerting pressure against a foreign government in order to obtain a personal political benefit for trump. But allow me to ask you to take your logic to the next step. What are the limits that should be imposed? Is a Presidents authority to seek non-accountable and potentially non-authorized (and I mean that in the sense that they have not been authorized to receive classified materials) subject to any limits? Should a president be free to engage whomever he wants to pursue whatever personal interests he might have? To target any political enemies he might have?
Sure. It is an impeachable offense for a President to remove an ambassador because such was requested by associates that funnelled money illegally into the Presidents political campaign. Remember what Matthew Whitaker said, "Abuse of power is not a crime."
I realize that you are a (relatively) New Member. But, using terms of that nature (to insult another member and being "dismissive" of their "opinions") ISN'T a Good Look. Of course, if you don't care about having the privilege of being able to continue posting, Flame Away. :smh: ^Nothing personal. Just some friendly advice. Anyway, back to the Actual Topic, there is Absolutely NO NEED for the WB to testify. None. Carry on, and have a nice day.
no, but makes it look like Trump knows he is guilty of trying to get Ukraine to go after his political rival Trump got busted red handed, and he is such a dumb criminal he handed over the partial transcript which shows him doing it
Well if Mark Levin said it with no discernible rationale, then it is a ****ing piece of dumpster fire garbage.
Nobody should be disturbed by it. It's nobody's business. The president can dismiss an ambassador at any time and for any reason he wants. People who try to make it an impeachable offense just display their total ignorance or their complete partizan antagonism.
Congress has no purview or constitutional oversight when it comes to diplomatic relations. The president can do pretty much what he wants with anybody he chooses. The only hypothetical deviation from this might be the fairy tale you guys shout about.
I guess I missed the part in the rules where it said I couldn't form opinions about posters who are afraid to answer questions and dodge them at every turn. I guess I missed the part in the rules where it said I had to accept your opinions and and give them every due consideration. I guess I missed the part in the rules where it said you and your opinions had to matter to me. And, I looked, and you're still not on the moderators list... And that's exactly the type of compelling argument I would expect from someone who's paralyzed with fear at the very thought of entering into an actual debate about something...
Then your theory is that the President should be an absolute dictator when it comes to international decisions?
Is it your position that a President cannot remove an ambassador whenever he wants, for whatever reason he wants?