Impeachment hearings

You're deflecting. I started reading your link but there wasn't much if any citations so I stopped. Nonetheless the Republicans held Congress. Why did they do nothing?

You've jumped the shark. start another new account.

Obama was never impeached. stay on topic and Stop having a meltdown.

I feel like that's a pretty worthwhile question to ask. Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell were both in charge at the same time. What gives?

The Democrats can't even decide what impeachable crime the President committed. The have been using focus groups to determine what sounds best.

The witness have proven nothing and when ask to name the impeachable offence the President committed in his telephone call the remained silent or stated he had not committed an impeachable crime. The witness blower (who is not a whistle blower) has to testify and be questioned about his statements on a call he never heard. In fact the theme song for the hearings should be Marvin Gay's I Heard it on the Grapevine.

The evil that men do live after them and we are still living with their actions.

@JimB: "The Democrats can't even decide what impeachable crime the President committed. The have been using focus groups to determine what sounds best."

Impeachment is a political decision. It makes sense to go about it with politics in mind.

For impeachment you need a to have evidence of a crime there is not one in this case. The New York Posts headline said it best

A picture of Trump, Guilty, Now for the Trial.

As soon as they would have started an investigation the Race card would have been played. Every time some one disagreed with Obama the race card was played.

It has everything to do with the current issues, which is why Adam Shiff won't let the so called whistle blower testify.

Why should the whistleblower have to testify public, when Trump could get away with a written testimony during the Mueller investigation? Why doesn't Trump himself come in and testify?

Ok so I am a little more busy than I would like to regarding this topic.

If anyone has links to summaries of the impeachment hearings so far, I will gladly update the first post with them.

You're destroying this thread lolol

What is this? Trump consider testifying. Part of the article below.

Donald Trump has claimed he will “strongly consider” testifying to Congress in the ongoing impeachment inquiry to remove him.

He tweeted: “Our Crazy, Do Nothing (where’s USMCA, infrastructure, lower drug pricing & much more?) Speaker of the House, Nervous Nancy Pelosi, who is petrified by her Radical Left knowing she will soon be gone (they & Fake News Media are her BOSS), suggested on Sunday’s DEFACE THE NATION....

“....that I testify about the phony Impeachment Witch Hunt. She also said I could do it in writing. Even though I did nothing wrong, and don’t like giving credibility to this No Due Process Hoax, I like the idea & will, in order to get Congress focused again, strongly consider it!”

On Saturday Ms Pelosi, the Democratic House Speaker who launched the impeachment inquiry against Mr Trump in September, rejected his repeated claims that he is not being given due process and said he had “every opportunity” to present his case.

She told CBS’s Face the Nation: “The president could come right before the committee and talk, speak all the truth that he wants if he wants.”

Ms Pelosi said the accusation faced by Mr Trump were worse than those levelled at Richard Nixon over the Watergate scandal in the early 1970s. Mr Nixon resigned as president when it became clear he would face an impeachment inquiry.

He also considered releasing his tax returns and we all know how that went. If Trump actually goes under oath for an impeachment hearing I will eat a shoe.

A little difference. Pelosi could play on his personality to get him to testify.

This person is trying to take down a sitting president. The presidents phone calls are exempt from the whistle blower act. What this means in the future if not corrected now at any time in the future an unknown person could make a comment against a sitting President and trigger an impeachment. This is not legal and right in so many ways excerpt in third world socialists countries.

If the president has done nothing wrong, the impeachment process won't lead to him being impeached. Is that so difficult to understand?

That Trump tried to use your taxpayer money(Congress approved) for personal political gain(and not US, but him) isn't something you should worry about?

If this was a fair and lawful impeachment hearing, it is not. This nothing like the impeachment hearings of President Nixon and President Bill Clinton. I n those two impeachments there was documented evidence of a crimes that needed to be investigated. This one is to overturn an election that the Democrats in congress and the bureaucracy never got over.

Fair against Clinton? Anyhow great whataboutism.

Trump could come forward and show evidence of innocence.

How is it whataboutism when he's establishing a standard for how things should be run?

Is this impeachment process breaking any laws? The only things I've heard Republicans whine about is Democrats making use of laws Republicans made. Republicans even got their wish about the voting.

The impeachment was voted on by the House when they didn't even need to, and the constitution specifically says they have broad authority to run impeachment investigations as they like through their available, legal options. Additionally, Republican made house rules in 2015 gave them extra capabilities in issuing subpoenas that they are using. Please explain to me how any of this is not lawful or fair.

Also stop lying about evidence, we now have a dozen sworn depositions from both directly and indirectly involved individuals, a memorandum, dated notations and timelines, and admission from the culprit and his closest staff. Gaslighting trolling won't save you.

Impeachment was not voted on, lets get that straight. A vote was taken to have an inquiry. When Nixon and Clinton occurred they were permitted to have their attorneys present to ask questions, challenge testimony, and call witness. The minority party was permitted to ask questions and call witnesses. Any questions as to witness was referred to the whole committee by the way which was the Judicial committee not the intelligence committee not subject to one person calling all the shots. The depositions you talk about were all taken in secret and cherry picked and leaked to the press by Adam Shiff. He was caught in another lie today. Shiff is also testifying for the witness and asking leading questions. This whole affair is a sham and the American people can see that.

Tomato Tomahto on Impeachment, an inquiry was voted on and passed. Both Clinton and Nixon did have personal lawyers present during the initial inquiry period, but so will Trump. Per 538 that is a made up argument, because both had lawyers present as it made it's way to the judiciary committee, which our current resolution has also allowed.

"As was the case in both Nixon and Clinton’s impeachment proceedings, when the process moves to the Judiciary Committee, Trump’s lawyers will be able to cross-examine and suggest witnesses and present a formal defense."

The only break is from offering during oversight committee's investigations, but a president is not entitled to such protections during an impeachment inquiry anyway.

Additionally, Republicans have access to all depositions held, for an equal level of time to ask questions relative to their representation. They are capable of requesting witnesses. The reality is, the minority party is desperate for an argument so they've made a shitshow out of a non-argument that they have no agency in any hearings, when they in fact have a lot.

And it was Republicans, might I repeat myself, who voted to offer House rules giving the minority less privilege in hearings.

And latest polling from ABC said 70% of Americans agree the phone call was wrong too, so no actually the American people aren't seeing this as a sham, it's clear there is agreement what happened was wrong among those polled. The majority in that poll also agreed, within the margin of error granted, that the president should be impeached and removed.

You speak as if Trump has already been impeached Jim. Scared?

Polls aren't facts, or they'd be called polls. LOL at ABC, and saying tomato Tomahto for laws of the removal of a sitting president is pretty negligent.

What a dumb post.

A poll IS a fact shitposter. The only thing that isn't a fact is the interpretation of the data, but it's fairly clear that if 70% of people state one thing in a poll, an interpretation that that applies to a majority of Americans is far more valid than the interpretation gathered from your alternative information (aka, nothing).

Also, all I had to clarify is a vote of inquiry vs the actual impeachment. Which, by the way, is all but guaranteed to pass the house. Everything else I stated was already correct.

What a dumb post.

Jesus christ the GOP is so shit.

This is all fake/conspiracy:

@zaryia: Well he's correct. He's in the army and that is his rank. Plus he's clearly wearing the uniform. It's a sad day when the GOP defends indefensible acts by attacking the messengers.

ugh he's actually citing John Solomon, we're in crazytown.

@Vaasman: what mental gymnastics, the only thing factual is that a slanted poll took place. Polls aren’t in themselves facts.

The first thing you learn in statistics is you can make them say what you want.

What are they teaching in liberal run colleges these days?

You ignored most of my post as well.

What the **** are you on about, your prior post had 3 sentences and 2 1/2 points, all of which were shit. There's nothing to ignore.

A poll is a fact. If n number of people of x demographic answer y, to z question, that is an objective statement equivalent to 2+2=4. You're coming off pathetically desperate for saying otherwise. Moreover, you have yet to give any information that actually contradicted the conclusions made from the poll.

Also, here is a free textbook for introductory statistics. Please demonstrate for me where they state "The first thing you learn in statistics is you can make them say what you want."

n64dd what did you think of Nunes fictional conspiracy tirade?

Why is he telling us to read fake stories from fake news John Solomon during a congressional hearing? That seems irresponsible.

If this was an online discussion I think Nunes would be moderated for trolling...

Even if the call is wrong it is not illegal nor is it an impeachable offence, which all the witness have testified.

Just like Adam Shiff I don't know the identity of the whistle blower.

When this get to the senate hearsay evidence will not be admissible which will eliminate a number of the star witness that have testified so far. The whistle blower will be forced to testify as well as possibility Adam Shiff.

The people are seeing this a a sham to the point the major networks are no longer going to cover it because viewer numbers keep dropping. Also in the latest poll on impeachment have moved in favor of the president because of these hearings.

This whole impeachment hearing is being based on a phone call that Trump made to the newly elected president of the Ukraine being implied that Trump was holding up military aid unless an investigation was started into the Biden's. I have come across an article that sheds a light on some facts involving the military aid.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/11/president_trump_never_impounded_even_one_dollar_from_ukraine_aid.html

It seems like President Trump has zero respect for our democratic process. He tried to strong-arm Ukraine into interfering with our elections, and colluded with Putin and the Russian government to do the same. If he gets away with nothing more than a slap on the wrist for this, you can be sure he'll continue in trying to get foreign governments to interfere in our elections for his own political gain. If he does this, why should Americans continue to have faith in our democracy?

Heard his opening speech today. He's terrible and not a representative of the American people.....just a trump fanboy. Heard him mention George Washington......I think he needs to read Washington's speech about being partisan and putting party over country.

@JimB: You need to pay attention to the witnesses and not American Thinker.

Amen.

@LJS9502_basic:He can’t hammer the facts in this case. Trying to paint the witnesses in an anti Trump light. oh and getting those Fox News phrases in.

Sondland IS the smoking-gun. What will GOP try now,

*Human scum Never Trump- Gave Trump $1MM

*Deep state sabotaging Trump- He’s a Trump appointee

*Hearsay. No 1st hand knowledge- Oh, wait

*Born in Ukraine, dual loyalty- Nope

*Coffee Boy, hardly knew him- Has Trump on speed-dial

Really? Is that why I'm watching it on both Fox and CNN?

Is there a ringing in your ears? Are you seeing flashing lights or hearing voices?

Castor is fumbling this pretty bad lol. Nunes was consistently chopping in the same narrative, but Castor is basically probing and failing to get narratives going.

I almost feel sorry for Castor.....almost.

Trump just pulled the whole "This is not a man I know well...seems like a nice guy, though" maneuver in regards to Ambassador Sondland.

This guy is such a joke.