WATCH LIVE: House Judiciary Committee Debates Articles of Impeachment

Please show us the law that says your free of investigation if your running from President, it certainly wasn't the case when Trump was running huh?

 

You just changed your story. And, Mueller wasn't 't looking for collusion. He explains it on page 2, of Volume I, in his report. I suggest you read it. On the obstruction charge, Mueller did not exonerate the President. On page 182, of Volume II, of his report, he states: "Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

 

Never been my (or anyone else's) argument, so I don't get why you keep demanding that someone support that claim.

Just kidding, I know you are just trying to make me defend a Strawman.

 

He's being impeached under "the high crimes and misdemeanors" charge of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, NOT for winning the last election, but for the events subsequent to the last election.

 

What, you expect Bill Barr to read the BAD parts??

 

LOL, the only other impeachment that ever used that was Andrew Johnson which is used as a way not to do it.

 

See what they are saying is is fine to recruit foreign spies to "meddle in an election" BUT having two Presidents discuss corruption that just happens to involve a candidates son is "abuse of power"..

17 mistakes is fine.. Favor is not..

Do you get it yet?

 

The way I see it, the Democrats win either way. If he's removed from office, it's best for the country. If he isn't, he'll double down and a significant number of his supporters will wish they hadn't. Then, if we can avoid a second Great Depression and nuclear war until the 2020 election, the electorate can remove him from office and a new DoJ may determine whether or not to prosecute him.

 

Trump said the word corruption in either phone call with Zelensky?

 

And that matters why?

Are you suggesting there was not an investigation into Burisma involving CORRUPTION?

 

It's not a prosecutor's job to exonerate anybody, that's for the court of law. Since the report didn't conclude that a President committed a crime, that's where the report should have ended.

 

You don't get it, that technical mumbo jumbo isn't what progs sold the people. In the end this all hinges on the people. If those clowns in the House want to keep their slight majority they need to convince the people to re-elect everyone in contested districts. Trump was exonerated because the people were told it was about 'collusion' for TWO YEARS. That whole witch hunt failed, it was such a colossal failure progs felt it necessary to attempt this 'impeachment' clown show. This silliness is the same as Hillary's email scandal. Its not that interesting, there are no smoking guns you can show anyone and they will ALL come to the same conclusion. Instead you folks push vague notions and ridiculous ideas like quid pro quo or collusion, none of which resonates with the American people. It will cost you the House in 2020 and Trump will be re-elected, and liberals will be shocked and offended, even though they were warned...

 

That will definitely make it easier to impeach the next Democrat.

Thanks Dems.

 

No for some reason all reason ended with the Mueller report. Trump was guilty and had to be proven innocent since he wasnt....

 

Actually there is a good chance that it will informally become known as the Butt Hurt Impeachment of Trump by historians actually interested in disseminating the truth within their circles. Officially? No, of course not. But unofficially? You bet!

 

Except he isn't even charged with a single high crime or misdemeanor, in fact he's only charged with imaginary notions like 'obstruction of Congress', whatever that is, and 'abuse of power' whatever that is, because neither can be found in US Code...

 

Democrats like hank Johnson is a perfect example of the kind of people Democrats elect. Total puppet. Democrats have a guy on this committee that believes islands will flip over if 5000 people show up there.



The rest of the Democrats are no better. If you take what guys like hank johnson and people like him say seriously, it makes you look extremely pathetic.

 

Really? Nixon avoided "abuse of power" by resigning. Clinton? Obviously for lying in a deposition, but I thought "abuse of power" in taking advantage of an intern as well. No? I thought he should have been impeached for looking directly at me, on camera, and stating "I did not have sex with that woman!" But, then I never voted for "Slick Willy" anyhow.
Anyhow...it happens so infrequently that each impeachment process is unique to itself and how the House (initially) defines it. Then, the Senate gets to pass judgment.

 

Charges without evidence are simply baseless partisan accusations. Think that the rest of the nation hasn't yet figured that out? Why do you think that Independents are NOT flocking leftward to support this impeachment farce? They want to know WHERE the BEEF is by way of both evidence and facts. Still . . . waiting.

 

Doesn't have to be. There was no U.S. Code when the impeachment clause was written into the Constitution. The phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" refers to political crimes by high officials in office against the State itself...not necessarily a violation of statute law.

 

Sadly none of those things are present here. You folks were sold false goods. When the clown show ends and the Senate finally puts this farce to rest, the truth will out. Wanna join the pool on how long it takes before Congress starts its next investigation into Trump after he's exonerated of these 'allegations'? I got six days...

 

Making your butt hurt certainly qualifies then

 

You want evidence? Listen to Trump at his next rally or White House lawn press conference. He'll be happy to supply you with all of the evidence you want. Do you understand that "impeachment" IS a political process? So, calling it a "partisan exercise" does nothing. So what? Will his conviction ultimately mean that no future President will be able to survive a House simple majority and a two-thirds Senate majority? Maybe. But that's why the founders put the Senate bar so high...as a guard against the "People's House." We have an intentionally conservative system. I've voted both ways over many, many elections. Unfortunately, and largely due to its own failures to control the influence of big money, I see no way forward for the country than to vote every single Republican running for the Trump Party to be voted out of office, because they've put their Party ahead of Country.

 

Thanks for admitting that this is simply yet another example of baseless partisan politics on the part of the political Left. That now makes both you and Nancy Pelosi as truth tellers in that regard, since she admitted to the same a couple of days ago.

 

It could be...but it would probably be on different grounds...maybe that's why they're holding back on the Mueller obstruction charges? Could be more to come on that prior to the Flynn and Stone sentencing. Or, something out of his tax returns? Or, campaign finance violations? Liv, Igor and Giuliani are waiting in the wings. Or, what about the Trump University Fraud? Or, the Trump Foundation Fraud?
Lots and lots more to come.