Welcome to America

[Lake View Too]

Obstruction of Justice. Now, if you think this is just a petty rule, you ain't thinking too straight. This means he personally hid some evidence that would be important to determining if a crime was committed. It basically means that there were crimes committed and no one was punished for those crimes, doesn't it? The fact that he is concealing almost everything he is doing, and prohibiting everybody that ever worked for him from testifying before Congress, pretty much tells you that if they testify before Congress, under penalty of perjury, that they will not exonerate him. If you are innocent, you don't stonewall. Is that so hard to understand?

But just the fact that he is deploying ground troops to Saudi Arabia, to defend a country that sponsored the 9/11 attack ought to make you think a little bit about treason and aiding and abetting the enemy.

 

[Leader of the Banned]

Today Nancy Pelosi sealed Trumps re-election. I can't believe she caved in to the extreme left wing. I thought she was stronger and smarter. Apparently, I gave her credit where credit wasn't due. ROFLMAO!

Impeaching Trump is an automatic decision at this point, if it wasn't a couple of months ago.

 

[Leader of the Banned]

What laws were broken?

I don't think "laws broken" are necessarily the criteria. This is an informative link. Presidential Impeachment: The Legal Standard and Procedure - FindLaw

There are several interpretations of "high crimes and misdemeanors". One view is the following:

The fourth view is that an indictable crime is not required, but that the impeachable act or acts done by the President must in some way relate to his official duties. The bad act may or may not be a crime but it would be more serious than simply "maladministration." This view is buttressed in part by an analysis of the entire phrase "high crimes or misdemeanors" which seems to be a term of art speaking to a political connection for the bad act or acts. In order to impeach it would not be necessary for the act to be a crime, but not all crimes would be impeachable offenses.

In my opinion, using the power of the president and your personal attorney (Giulanni) to investigate a political opponent without going through (or at least informing) proper channels such as FBI and other intelligence agencies is an impeachable offense. Add to that the fact that the president is using his power and his voice to make unproven allegations of wrongdoing against the opponent and his son. That alone seals it for me. Never mind the fact that he pressured a foreign administrator of a non-ally, who he later states he suspected of corruption, to find incriminating evidence against the opponent. Also never mind the fact that he most likely withheld critical aid to this country that they needed to defend themselves against a hostile nation, whose dictator Trump is madly in love with. For the Democratic house to not go through with impeachment proceedings at this point would be a display of appalling weakness.

 

[Leader of the Banned]

Even Steve Doocy...

 

[PoppaJ]

Today Nancy Pelosi sealed Trumps re-election. I can't believe she caved in to the extreme left wing. I thought she was stronger and smarter. Apparently, I gave her credit where credit wasn't due. ROFLMAO!

All he had to do was simply release the complaint as the law requires, but instead being the ahole he is he had to make it a confrontation.

 

[Bob Wells]

I have some serious questions. Does anyone believe that the Senate will find President Trump guilty and remove him from office? If he is not found guilty by the Senate, does anyone really think this hurts his reelection chances, especially with today's political climate? I was looking at the timeline of the Nixon years. I also looked at who owned the Senate during the Clinton impeachment years. Whether Speaker Pelosi truly did not want to impeach the President in the beginning, for which she seemed to take a lot of heat from her own party, or she was waiting for the right cause. I think either case is going to be difficult without a mass exodus of loyalist in the President's party. Just my opinion.

 

[Leader of the Banned]

I have some serious questions. Does anyone believe that the Senate will find President Trump guilty and remove him from office? If he is not found guilty by the Senate, does anyone really think this hurts his reelection chances, especially with today's political climate? I was looking at the timeline of the Nixon years. I also looked at who owned the Senate during the Clinton impeachment years. Whether Speaker Pelosi truly did not want to impeach the President in the beginning, for which she seemed to take a lot of heat from her own party, or she was waiting for the right cause. I think either case is going to be difficult without a mass exodus of loyalist in the President's party. Just my opinion.

I don't think it helps his reelection chances. It will be a mark against him regardless of the Senate. He will also become unhinged like we've never seen. If Biden is the nominee, this will only help Biden.

 

[L.C. Bane]

I could be wrong about Nancy since it's just an inquiry.

 

[Lake View Too]

If Pelosi didn't do it, she simply wouldn't be doing her sworn duty to defend this country from enemies both foreign and domestic. I think some Republican senators would certainly lose their seats after they voted to dismiss the charges.. Hell, some of them might be indicted as co-conspirators. Hope springs eternal! (Well, it use to, anyway.)

 

[Leader of the Banned]

I have some serious questions. Does anyone believe that the Senate will find President Trump guilty and remove him from office? If he is not found guilty by the Senate, does anyone really think this hurts his reelection chances, especially with today's political climate? I was looking at the timeline of the Nixon years. I also looked at who owned the Senate during the Clinton impeachment years. Whether Speaker Pelosi truly did not want to impeach the President in the beginning, for which she seemed to take a lot of heat from her own party, or she was waiting for the right cause. I think either case is going to be difficult without a mass exodus of loyalist in the President's party. Just my opinion.

It's going to put a lot of pressure on GOP senators who have to defend the bastard.