Democrats to unveil 2 articles of impeachment Tuesday morning

No, it does not.

 

The articles of impeachment have everything to do with the Ukraine call, QPQ, and bribery.

You have been educated.

 

...you are legitimately claiming that democrats are akin to a country that we declared war against?

#BeBetter

 

Don't have any goggles on.

 

Nah... Pence knew, but I haven't heard that he actively pushed.... he put it right back on Trump, where it belongs...

SNIP
At the meeting, President Zelensky expressed concern that even an appearance of wavering support from the United States for Ukraine could embolden Russia. Vice President Pence reiterated U.S. support for Ukraine, but could not promise that the hold would be lifted. Vice President Pence said he would relay his support for lifting the hold to President Trump so a decision could be made on security assistance as soon as possible. Vice President Pence spoke with President Trump that evening, but the hold was not lifted.
ENDSNIP

He's bland, but smart(er)....

 

Your house is on fire?

Then get off the damn computer and call the fire department.

 

Nah...now you are just stretching.

Don't force it. It works much better if it just comes natural.

 

No they don't.

There's nothing in the articles of impeachment that talks about the Ukraine call, QPQ, or bribery.

Educate yourself.

 

That is what I am doing on the Internet.

But...the people warming their hands just don't get it.

 

Why are we Impeaching Trump? Because, if this gets out, people might realize the Ukraine was also THE SINGLE LARGEST DONOR TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION!

 

BAD timing for Dems with this article. Yermak, a top aide to Ukrainian President Zelensky, says they "never had that feeling” that US aid & investigations were connected. "We did not have the feeling that this aid was connected to any one specific issue."

Exclusive: Top Ukraine Official Andriy Yermak Casts Doubt on Key Impeachment Testimony

 

"So in order for President Trump to be impeached and removed from office, he must be convicted of treason, bribery or some other crime.

But nowhere in federal law is “abuse of power” defined as a crime. And that is a huge problem, because how can you convict someone of “abuse of power” when there is no law against it?

Ultimately, “abuse of power” is a very vague phrase that could mean just about anything. After all, is there any president in modern American history that has not abused his power at some point?

And if President Trump does get impeached by the House, that is going to set an extremely dangerous precedent. In the future, are we going to start impeaching presidents for “abuse of power” whenever an opposition party gets control of the House of Representatives?

As for the charge of “obstructing Congress”, at least there is some precedent for that. It is actually properly called “contempt of Congress”, "

I'm just not seeing this going anywhere, These articles of impeachment only use is for propaganda purposes.

All that money and time spent for a total failure, typical.

 

I heard about bribery for two weeks and now its gone. I remember asking wouldn't based on Democrats version of event be extortion not bribery and now the articles come out and bribery is scrapped all together

 

What can I tell you?? Smarter heads prevailed... a (currently) 9 page document for impeachment... It's simple to digest for the media-numb masses...

Why further confuse them with confusing legal definitions of non-legal issues??

I was a little surprised, but not jaw dropping news...

 

Yermak said no one from the congressional committees that are overseeing the impeachment inquiry have contacted him to seek his testimony, nor have any other U.S. officials.


Sounds like Crossfire..... Just leave out any information that doesnt suit your purpose.

 

As the ones wanting the information they should be the ones to initiate the court proceedings. That's how the court system and our government works. Doesn't mean that Trump is doing something that no other President in our History hasn't done. Funny how none of those other Presidents ever got charged and impeached for it huh? If you agree with the Dems on this then you are enabling setting a precedent that is very dangerous for our country. There's a reason that Executive Privilege exists and you're about to destroy that for partisan means. And it doesn't matter what Trump calls it. That is what he is using.

I wouldn't worry about that. I'd worry more about when the next Dem President is in office as this tactic will no doubt be used by the Repubs. From now on ALL Presidents had better give forth ANY and ALL information to Congress no matter the consequences or risk being impeached. Welcome to the next age of politics. Everyone had better get used to each and every President being impeached from here on out.

 

Actually, they do unless they executive privilege.

And yes, Pelosi has finally quit sitting on the presidents USMCA agreement. About time!

 

Don't be surprised if the Repubs ask him to testify in the Senate.

 

No, it doesn't. That is the funniest part about all of this.

 

Clinton and Nixon were both impeached on Obstruction charges. So Democrats are just following precedent.

And once again, Trump is not relying on executive privilege. He is relying on ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY.

If the lesson from this impeachment is that all future Presidents should make some effort to cooperate with congressional investigations instead of demanding that the investigation is a coup and that the President is absolutely immune from cooperation, then this impeachment has provided a great value to the country.

 

I'm sorry, Trump has one of these too??

Nah, this is the NEW and IMPROVED version

SNIP
“This is the day we have been waiting for,” Pelosi told reporters. “It is infinitely better than what was initially proposed by the administration.”
ENDSNIP

But I credit Trump for being a bull in a china shop if it results in newer and better china....

 

The lesson from this impeachment is pretty simple. NEVER bring impeachment charges against anyone unless you have bipartisan support and you have actual charges that can be believed outside of a small circle of Trump haters who can't get over the 2016 election.

It was a sham. It was a disaster, it was a clown car and now it's going to be slammed and dismissed in Senate. It also just cost democrats the 2020 election and with it, a whole ton of seats in the House and Senate.

 

Not going to happen, just saying.

 

Dems will say they are not "fact witnesses" you watch

 

Yermak could certainly be considered a fact witness (unlike most of the other suggestions I've seen). But I agree the chances of him testifying are slim and none... Zelensky doesn't want his country/people involved in any way in this....