Pelosi Impeachment Inquiry

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Big AAPL, Sep 24, 2019.

  1. LacesOut

    LacesOut

    Pretend like you are listening to what Chucky has to say....
    Aha mmmm oh yeah aha mmmhmmm...
     
    #2111     Dec 27, 2019
    Buy1Sell2 likes this.
  2. The question for McConnell is whether to dismiss the articles as an obvious joke and not worthy of wasting time on, or give them a full hearing to demonstrate their absurdity and how corrupt and traitorous the witnesses against Trump are.

    The former course will allow the dems to cry foul and say they were cheated. The problem with a full trial is it will be reported on dishonestly by the lying media and when have the republicans ever successfully stage-managed any investigation?
     
    #2112     Dec 27, 2019
    LacesOut, traderob and Buy1Sell2 like this.
  3. Buy1Sell2

    Buy1Sell2

    I think the best course of action would be to declare a trial date and force their hand. If they don't send managers, The Senate can dismiss or they could pick the managers. Pelosi must be forced to act.
     
    #2113     Dec 27, 2019
    AAAintheBeltway likes this.
  4. UsualName

    UsualName

    I know you’re a constitutional scholar but are you sure the senate holding a trial before the managers notify the secretary of the senate they are “ready to present the articles” is allowable under the senate rules?

    You might want to brush up on the senate rules.
     
    #2114     Dec 27, 2019
  5. LacesOut

    LacesOut

    Part me wants to see Trumpy up there...destroying all the allegations and the people making them. This is the moment he’s been preparing for his entire life. The things he will say. My god. Will be amazing to watch.

    The other part of me says : finish this bullshit before it starts. It’s ludicrous and sets a horrible precedent. Nip it in the bud. Everyone knows this is an unconstitutional sham.
     
    #2115     Dec 28, 2019
  6. exGOPer

    exGOPer

    Impeached and not acquitted

    Must suck for the pedotards
     
    #2116     Dec 28, 2019
  7. smallfil

    smallfil

    Personally, I would want some witnesses called by Senator Mitch McConnell and that would be the whistleblower, Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, Adam Schiff. Democrats will try to spin it but, if it is on national TV like the House hearings, it will expose all the lies of the Democrats for tens of millions of Americans to see. That should be enough to finish off the campaign of Joe Biden and taint all Democrats of his corruption. Just in time for the November 3, 2020 election cycle. Republicans can call other witnesses too including, providing evidence for the public to see.
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2019
    #2117     Dec 28, 2019
  8. exGOPer

    exGOPer

    Lets not forget 11 hours of Trump testifying under oath, now that would ensure your win in 2020. So make sure that happens.
     
    #2118     Dec 28, 2019
  9. traderob

    traderob

    A Horowitz Report Reveals Bias, but What Kind?
    The FBI gave Mrs. Clinton a pass while pursuing Mr. Trump even after the evidence fell apart.


    [​IMG]
    By
    Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.
    Dec. 27, 2019 5:06 pm ET


    , Dec. 18. PHOTO: SAMUEL CORUM/G
    The Justice Department’s Inspector General Michael Horowitz testified that only two things might explain FBI behavior in the 2016 campaign: gross incompetence or intentional bias. Of course, the choice is no choice given a record of errors all in the same direction. But the bias at work wasn’t Republican vs. Democrat bias, or conservative vs. liberal bias. It was insider vs. outsider bias.

    Frame the question as it deserves to be framed: Did the FBI grant the benefit of the doubt to a vetted member of the establishment dragging along a lot of seamy and controversial associations while refusing the benefit of the doubt to an unvetted outsider dragging a load of seamy and controversial associations? The answer is yes.

    Implausible now is any argument that the FBI didn’t exercise its authority in every way to give Hillary Clinton a pass in the email server matter. The agency focused on an issue that Mrs. Clinton could skate on, whether she intended to harm national security, never mind that the actual legal standard is negligence. It ignored clear leads pointing to obstruction and evidence tampering.

    The same presumptions did not apply to Donald Trump. Unobjectionable was the FBI’s original openness to worries about certain members of the Trump campaign, but what the Horowitz report underlines is its persistence after the evidence unraveled. The FBI persisted in its Carter Page surveillance after it knew its evidence was fabricated and tainted by partisan politics. Its chief sought appointment of a special counsel after he knew the full might of the U.S. establishment had already failed to surface anything on Mr. Trump.

    Former intelligence chiefs John Brennan and James Clapper took to the airwaves to denounce Mr. Trump after they knew credible evidence didn’t exist to support their charges. Mr. Brennan gave CNN and MSNBC a “bombshell” they touted for days when he testified early in Mr. Trump’s presidency that the CIA had handed over details of unsavory Trump-Russia connections to the FBI. The FBI later told Mr. Horowitz it never received anything of relevance from Mr. Brennan.


    Now let’s recognize some paradoxes. Contrary to what you’ve been led to believe, the FBI helped Mr. Trump and Russia helped Mrs. Clinton, not the other way around. Mr. Trump might not be president if not for the FBI’s meddling in the Clinton case. Meanwhile, the media and Democrats’ constant assault on him during the campaign as a Russian stooge inevitably would have cost him many more votes than Russia’s low-budget internet activity could have gained him. As Clinton campaign manager John Podesta wrote in December 2016 while trying to lobby the Electoral College to block Mr. Trump’s formal ascent, the Clinton campaign spent “each day” in the month of October hammering at Mr. Trump’s apocryphal Russia ties.

    A drop of water was Russia’s hacking and trolling in the 2016 election. A drop of water within a drop of water was Ukraine’s tiny riposte, a recent Trump focus. An ocean has been the opportunistic exploitation of “foreign meddling” by U.S. partisans and media types in their own power vendettas.

    Who did this to us? It wasn’t Vladimir Putin. It was us. In this sense, the most malignant actor in U.S. politics is Rep. Adam Schiff —though second place belongs to a U.S. media whose reporting was corrupted by groupthink, lack of historical imagination, personal shallowness and a cowardly weakness for virtue signaling.


    Finally, imagine how much the country might have been spared given an FBI leader without James Comey’s craving for the spotlight. The FBI would have stood back, as it properly should have, and let the Obama Justice Department own the decision to clear Mrs. Clinton and accept accountability for its action. Early in Mr. Trump’s presidency, the FBI would have striven to keep itself out of the political scrum rather than the opposite.

    Every president is an imperfect vehicle, but Mr. Trump was the most known person ever to run for president, with a clear message of disdain for America’s bipartisan leadership class. Open your eyes and it’s easy to see how his ill-advised Ukrainian actions grew out of the battle for his own legitimacy forced on him by dishonest domestic enemies—a battle he and his voters have every right to consider more important than Ukraine’s problems.

    Finally, I can think of several ways the eventual 2020 Democratic nominee, whoever he or she might be, could do the country a favor and reduce the near-apocalyptic bitterness of the coming election. Disown Adam Schiff just a little. Acknowledge the oafish or worse impact of the U.S. intelligence establishment on the 2016 race and its aftermath. Concede the exaggeration of Mr. Trump’s Russia ties.

    All this would still leave complaints about Mr. Trump’s policies, his demeanor, his disdain for allies, his transactional politics, and much else for Democrats to prosecute.






    .
     
    #2119     Dec 28, 2019
    AAAintheBeltway and WeToddDid2 like this.
  10. WeToddDid2

    WeToddDid2

     
    #2120     Dec 28, 2019
    traderob likes this.