Impeachment does NOT require a crime

It's an impeachable offense.

 

You are right! Impeachment doesn't have to be ANYTHING but what a majority of House members VOTE for it to be! They can impeach for "bribery, high crimes, misdemeanors", blah, blah -- AND -- anything else that occurs them them! Whatever a majority decides they want to impeach a president for, they CAN DO IT! I've been posting this for months!

They can impeach a president if they don't like his haircut, if they don't like the clothes he wears, if he spits on a sidewalk (actually a 'misdemeanor' in several cities in the U. S.), or any other thing they want! There doesn't HAVE TO BE ANY REASON, other than what that majority of House members want to impeach a president for.

And THAT is a thing that will come back to haunt these giddy, unjust, half-witted Democrats at some point in the future... and maybe sooner than they imagine! Schiff and his buddies in the big House Democrat 'circle-jerk' got to have their big orgasm in December -- now we'll see how much they like what comes AFTERWARDS....

. "Something's wrong! I can't make it HARD again...."

 

they cannot impeach the President for a bad hair cut, it would be like impeaching bill clinton for having a sugar baby in the White House.

both are offensive to one's sensibilities, but neither is impeachable according to George Washington's will.

 

No plausible reply from Trump's supporters. It is what I expected. They like to pretend there is no evidence. They are no different from Trump's lawyers in the Trump's impeachment trial. They largely ignore the evidence, too, and tell lies to the Senate.

 

Republicans should closely examine what they are doing. They have lost key elections in 2018 and 2019 because of Trump. A record number of Republicans quit before the 2018 election. Already 30 have quit for this year's election with ten more months to go.

 

Why not, when Clinton committed perjury in that case. Seems he committed enough crimes to get himself disbarred also, was that a GOP plot too? Plenty of other charges of actual crimes in his impeachment.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/icreport/icreport.htm

 

Just think of how embarrassed the DNC candidate will be losing an election to an impeached president. That might be enough to destroy the entire party.

 

The due process Trump rejected when he decided not to defend himself.

President Donald Trump and his lawyers will not participate in a congressional impeachment hearing this week, the White House has said, citing a lack of “fundamental fairness”.


Trump’s aides responded defiantly on Sunday to the first of two crucial deadlines he faces in Congress this week as Democrats prepare to shift the focus of their impeachment inquiry from fact-finding to the consideration of possible charges of misconduct over his dealings with Ukraine.

White House counsel Pat Cipollone wrote to committee chairman Jerrold Nadler, according to a copy of a letter seen by Reuters: “We cannot fairly be expected to participate in a hearing while the witnesses are yet to be named and while it remains unclear whether the judiciary committee will afford the president a fair process through additional hearings.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...d-his-lawyers-refuse-to-attend-unfair-hearing

Cipollone's letter makes no sense. He says "it remains unclear whether the judiciary committee will afford the president a fair process" as he is rejecting Trump's fair process.

 

You think telling yourself that makes you any more credible??

 

good luck with that

 

Trumpers are demanding an indictable crime.

Newsflash...when the Constitution was written there WERE no Federal statutes. Impeachment does not require them

Abuse of Power was a clear and compelling reason for removal from office

 

That is correct, but Trump was not asking to rescind the allocation. You likely know that presidents put a temporary hold on foreign aid quite often.

 

Relying on a Politifact fabrication and misrepresentation by responding to a Limbaugh charge that wasn't made, i.e. making up Rush's words -- you know like Schiff's made up transcript of the Ukraine call, is laughable. Some people buy into lipstick on a pig; others don't.

 

Like a

Like a Congressional Ethics Trial.? usually PBS or some Government
channel will cover it.I believe when the state of Georgia served Obama
with a Presidential Eligibilty subpoena to appear in court with the
necessary documents proving his Eligibility to be POTUS,Obama's
Lawyers pulled a few fast ones.They pressured and finally got to the
Attorney General of Georgia to quash that subpoena.The Trial date
was set however and the Presiding Judge expected Obama or at least his
Lawyers to appear.Never happened.I remember there was reporting on that
day about how Obama snuck off from his scheduled appointments to
watch Court TV and his Trial,where he never appeared.
Sounds about right.
Yesterday Trump took questions at Davos from a fleet of reporters and
made the statement he wouldn't mind showing up at his Impeachment Trial.
That he's actually considering it.
Imagine how Obama would act if Impeached.He'd probably run off to
Hollywood and act like he's too busy with a casting call.Some small
part in another Oprah Winfrey tearjerker Titled - The Butler -.
Where the part Obama was after has him serving Coffee to some
Senators on an Amtrack Train.Replete with the Porter attire.And the
Yes'm and No SIr !.

 

I simply misspoke. I meant after the trial begins.

 

Just curious, did your expert say anything about the House following bogus procedures?
What does your response have to do with my post???

 

No, because they didn't. Anything else?

 

Andrew Breitbart { about the best friend a Conservative ever had }
still has his YouTube up where he explains some important stuff.
Like how Politics on the left is Played.Like why Protestors never seem to
have anyone out Protesting them.It's all one-sided.Ask a Protestor who's
out Protesting them.That usually shuts them up.
Andrew explained that right as Obama took office there was a huge
effort to quash Rush Limbaugh.Way before Limbaugh ever said a nasty word
about Obama.This was planned.To use the MSM to quash Limbaugh right
off the bat.Knowing how important and In Demand his voice and mindset.
That was also the approach used on Trump,almost as soon as he announced
his candidacy.Guys Like George Soros are using sites he funds like
Media Matters and MoveOn.org to quash any and all attempts by conservatives
to express their POV.Obama took it one step further by targeting Conservatives
and their groups from having 501{c}{3} tax exempt status with the IRS.
W/o that status Conservatives have a very difficult time fundraising.

 

That is correct except you are comparing apples with planets. Clinton did cooperate a lot with Starr -- though not so much with the House -- including showing off his macho stupidity by agreeing to appear before Starr's grand jury. Trump's cooperation with Mueller was unprecedented because Mueller at least had a reasonable facade of legitimacy and the president has some obligation to respond to a justice department investigation, but very little -- meaning only if the court rules as such -- obligation to respond to demands from the legislative branch of government.

 

In other words you can't factually refute a single word in PolitiFact's article.

 

That is another in a long line of factually inaccurate statements you've made that you can not prove. A consistent habit of your's.

 

If I have to describe due process there is no hope. The long standing House Rules are very clear about hearing processes, for example other than for explicit exceptions there are to be no secret hearings..... in the locked up basement no less!

 

He has to provide the cause only if he wants the allocation rescinded.

 

Frankly,My Dear I don't give a fig.
Ever notice Posters with their uber short and authoritarian replys.
Such a giveaway.Imagine if only bug-eyed Pencil-neck Schiff gave
only short,terse,quickie widdle arguments as to why Trump needs to be
Removed from Office.Oh ! he did.That Trump :
CHEATS !

 

The separation of the three independent powers is axiomatic and self-evident in the Constitution. The framers believed there was no need to spell it out for the uninitiated. If the executive branch has to succumb to political demands of the congress then the executive branch is not an independent power and the fundamental foundation of the Constitution and our constitutional republic is over. As I have said many times -- but one more time for the drill -- the sole power to impeach means only that nobody else can impeach. It does not grant the House complete plenary power to do whatever it wants in any shape or form.