“You are turning a policy disagreement between two branches of government into an impeachable offence – it is no more legitimate than the Executive Branch charging members of Congress with crimes for lawful exercise of legislative power.”
Everything but tech support.
The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Well said, Mr. President.
Yes, he will be impeached. No, he wont be kicked out of office. Yes, he will be be reelected in a landslide. Yes, the Dems will have a disastrous 2020 election.
History repeats itself.
The Dems are too stupid to realize this.
Wow! That bit of presidential correspondence will make the history books.
As someone put it on the Twitters, “With one simple move, Trump could wipe out both impeachment articles. By allowing Mulvaney, Pompeo and Bolton to testify, there would be no obstruction of Congress. And presumably, they could disprove abuse of power. So if he’s truly innocent, ask yourself why he’s not doing that.”
“ Yes, the Dems will have a disastrous 2020 election.”
That’s the genius of Trump. He could clear himself in a blink of an eye. But he knows taking the impeachment bullet to help the Republican Party in 2020 is what true leadership looks like.
Exactly. If he is truly innocent, and his call to the Ukraine was “perfect”, why doesn’t he act very innocent? His story is ever evolving, he blames others rather than clear himself, and doesn’t allow the folks that can clear him to testify.
My opinion: This is the first time in his life he has ever been held accountable for anything. In the past he has used $$, bully, bluster, and fabrication to get out of jams. Maybe at some point he will realize that folks have been on to him for a long time… But I doubt it.
You are so dishonest.
Here is Joe Biden’s comments from last year, where he clearly abused his power to fire Ukraine prosecutor looking into his Hunter’s criminal activity.
If Trump looking into the disgusting liberal corruption is impeachable, why is Biden and Obama excused from their, far more obvious, disgusting acts.
Your answer will truly determine how much of a dishonest liberal hack you are.
Nepotism! Imagine! Giving your kids jobs they don’t deserve!
Testimony from Bolton, Mulvaney, and Pompeo would prove what you say as correct and absolve Trump innocent and the Dems full of BS. But for strange reason, only known to him, Trump is obstructing them from freeing him from the witch hunt.
It has to be because he is a stable genius and has a master plan for the obstruction of their testimony. He’s winning again!
Wow, Le Roi and jjf stoop to new levels of ignorance.
The House could have gone to court to compel the witnesses to appear and the House choose not to.
Even if they testified, you think that would stop the uneducated Democrats (I’ve been watching and the Dems reading comprehension and listening skills are horrible) the Dems have been planning for this day for at least 2 1/2 years, according to senile Pelosi.
And jjf, so you have no problems with Trump kids working for their dad? At least the Trump kids they earned whatever money they earned.
But Trump did not peddle foreign aide conditions for stopping prosecutors from investigating his criminal Son!
Liberals stink, impeaching a Republican for criminal crap liberals have done.
We are past tipping point of a civil society.
Nepotism! Unqualified nepotism, can you imagine that? Let’s root it out! Can you see any? Meddling and peddling! Trademarks!
Jiffy struts: ” As someone put it on the Twitters….”
Gee, Jiffy, why did you skip identifying that “someone” ? Since you quoted in full you know who it is, yet you chose to hide the identity.
Afraid of something?
Afraid to admit that it just might be stupid for Trump to take the advice of a former Obama administration official?
Typical dishonesty jjf is known for.
Democrats want Trump to give Biden the same pass on public corruption that Obama was willing to give Hillary Clinton. What they’re really arguing about is an agreed upon level of acceptable public corruption they can all profit from. Sickening, eh?
The family/charitable foundation scam has been popular and incredibly lucrative for both parties for quite some time. The Clintons elevated the scam to include not just pay-for-play from domestic sources, but expanded it to international sources as well. Comey’s FBI actually initiated a public corruption probe directed at the Clinton foundations that was quickly quashed by Lynch’s DoJ when objections were raised about State Department “disaster relief” funds having been filtered through Clinton foundations with less than stellar accounting of funding disbursements. The Clintons were directly pocketing taxpayer dollars and it was deemed acceptable at the highest level of federal government. The notion that it crossed a line somewhere was quietly considered and rejected.
Hunter Biden’s sweet employment deal is amusing, but not exactly worthy of an investigator’s time. What is worth their time is uncovering the source of the $900,000 consulting fee China Joe received from a U.S. lobbying firm working on behalf of Burisma (while Joe was VP) shortly after Joe withheld U.S. foreign aid to Ukraine until a prosecutor investigating Burisma was fired. Russian Burisma money or U.S. foreign aid to Ukraine money? Either way it all falls within Durham’s purview and it’s not likely to withstand grand jury scrutiny. Not unless Biden gets a Hillary-style sweet deal from Trump.
MjM, I’m so sneaky, aren’t I?
Go ahead, take your political advice from the fellow down the bar. That’s where the real truth and experience is, right?
Do you think there’s something incorrect about Lu’s advice? Or you just discounting the suggestion because of his past work?
But let me guess… you’re all just as concerned about nepotism and patronage and political favors when it comes to Trump as you are about Obama, right?
Teenagers propose that Trump drop Exec Privilege, against all precedent both (D) and (R), and more injurious to the constitutional order than a dozen Nattering Nancies.
Mature people, like Trump, Cocaine Mitch, and even Obama–commie though he is–think before spouting stupidities.
Jiffy preens: I’m so sneaky, aren’t I
No, you’re just an imbecile.
Noted: You didn’t explain why you intentionally hid the identity of the person you quoted.
Go ahead, take your political advice from the fellow down the bar.
Why would I take your advice?
Do you think there’s something incorrect about Lu’s advice?
Why, yes. Explain exactly how Lu knows what Bolton, Mulvaney, and Pompeo know. Has he personally discussed this with them?
Explain how Lu knows exactly what questions would be asked.
Explain how Lu knows A2 was concocted because of refusal of just these three (which, of course, should be only two since Bolton was never subpoenaed).
Explain why Lu believes Trump should take his advice against that of the DOJ-OLC.
Or you just discounting the suggestion because of his past work?
Well, as he is a middle-road lawyerman, a partisan Maoist, and was mostly just an Obama political advisor/azz smoocher, I don’t take his commentary any more seriously than any other partisan Maoist. But, sure, discounting certainly applies to most every past Obama crony. See: Eric Holder, Hildabeast Clinton, Loretta Lynch, John Brennen, et., al..
Here’s another “on the Twitters” quote from your favorite mystery man:
“On our side, we have Captain America, Hulk, War Machine and Nick Fury. Who else am I missing”
A serious, serious man, that.
You assume too much. Frankly, I didn’t even check the credentials of the person who posted the suggestion. Didn’t even look.
Obviously no one knows what B, M and P would say. That’s why the Dems wanted them on the stand. Why did Trump prevent this? And that’s half of the impeachment right there, isn’t it?
Um, jjf, you do what executive privilege is, right? Something Obama used numerous times to prevent his thugs from testifying before Congress.
But, with your long term memory deficit, you probably forgot about this.
Headline says “Trump Impeached.”
All I see is: liberals blinding, disgusting, spiteful, contemptable, hatred of Trump.
This is a horrible day for our democracy.
The abuse of power by liberals is reprehensible…and you side with it.
Or as Bush staffer put it:
I see why you like Trump.
So you openly side with the ruthless and cruel liberals?
Link please, jjf
Kevin – the liberals are separating children from their parents?
Jiffy displays his hypocrisy in two easy steps :
1) “Frankly, I didn’t even check the credentials…. Didn’t even look.“
2j “Or as Bush staffer put it:..”
Of course, some might just think you are lying about #1. You wouldn’t do that, would you?
Ok, jjf, you found a conservative turned liberal never Trumper.
MjM, why not both? I didn’t look at Lu, I did look up Gerson.
I’ll predict Dad29 will chime in about mental health. It’s what Jesus would do!
Look on the bright side, maybe the Senate will decide they can have a secret vote and the secret never-Trumpers can hide but vote to remove.
Well,jjf, your side won today and elections have consequences. I’m not cry about, unlike liberals/snowflakes who still not handle that Trump won in 2016.
You can post all the Never Trumpers you want but it change minds and in the Senate, in a public, Trump will kick butt.
Yes, it’s called abortion…as a serial killing advocate…you are probably blind to it.
the liberals are separating children from their parents?
Liberals like jjf never let truth get in their way to their insanity.
The sad truth is that had Hillary Clinton won the electoral vote and became President, America would be in the exact same place it is today.
There would have been nonstop investigations looking for a reason to impeach her, and I’m positive Republicans would have made sure it happened.
Republicans openly discussed impeachment should Hillary won.
Difference is: she committed actual crimes!
So let’s stop with the dishonesty. Trump’s phone call, while clumsy, was not a crime. Democrats were saying “impeach the M-f’r” far before the July phone call. Another NY rep said she had a conversation with her son in June that Trump had to be impeached…this genius said this on the floor yesterday.
Same people should have voted no based on that liberal criminal undermining of Constitution right there.
It was a liberal hate lynching you should join me in denouncing.
You’ll need to state what her actual crime was please.
He’s just like Christ, isn’t he, Kevin!
Compromising classified info on her private email server.
People get jail for that!
Have you been asleep, or blind?
Trump is not Christ.
Just a good president exposing how corrupt and evil the liberal Democrat deep state really is!
You show nothing but sympathy for the corruption and the DC swamp.
I guess I’ve been wide awake with clear vision.
This past October the yearslong State Department investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server found that while the use of the system for official business increased the risk of compromising classified information, there was no systemic or deliberate mishandling of classified information.
Investigators also took statements from hundreds of past and present department officials, and interviewed dozens more, according to the report.
The focus of the investigation, according to the report, was to determine if any of the emails “represented a failure to properly safeguard classified information,” and if so, if any specific individuals could be determined to bear responsibility.
The report was released this week Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, who began investigating Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server in 2017, when he served as the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
38 people were disciplined, with some facing possible criminal charges over this!
Clinton got off free because the deep state is in bag for evil liberals. You are a whitewash artist. If military people did this, they would be jailed and dishonorably discharged!
There’s a big difference between wishing for a crime, and there actually being a crime.
There is certainly a lot more there than anything in Trump phone call.
These Democrats were bent on impeaching since the day Trump was elected.
That in and of itself is disgusting and should be denounced by you.
But you seem content to roll in the disgust.
Because you wish it would be so, doesn’t make it so. It’s just wishful thinking.
Since that is far more substantive than this Trump impeachment, you can join me in saying this impeachment is complete crap….
Courage, or not?
There seemed to be a lot there. I wish Trump would have put up a defense and had Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo testify so we could be certain that he was innocent of the allegation. Instead he chose to obstruct, which is one of the articles of impeachment.
Hopefully he’ll stop the obstruction and insist that they testify during the Senate trial. Getting everything out in the open would prove the Democrats wrong.
Please join me in calling for Trump to stop the obstruction. Courage or not?
You are a total partisan hack.
He released the entire transcript of phone call.
He did not stop any subpoena or commit any crime.
What was the crime here besides being hated by disgusting, evil, liberals?
(and he should get a award for that!)
I realize that that’s your partisan opinion. But why are you afraid to join me in calling for Bolton, Mulvaney, and Pompeo to testify at the Senate trial? Why are you openly praising the obstruction of justice.
Awful. Just awful.
It is not obstruction if there is no crime.
what was the crime?
Which subpeona was violated? ….oh that’s right, Pelosi did not issue any!
I should join you in welcoming evil partisan hacks,like Pelosi on a fishing expedition?
Awful. Just awful.
“It is not obstruction if there is no crime.”
No necessarily true. The purpose of any criminal investigation is to determine the facts. If you intentionally hinder, obstruct, or lie, that is obstruction, crime or no crime.
If you were innocent, why would you refuse to allow witnesses to testify that could prove your innocence? That makes no sense at a lot of levels.
“He released the entire transcript of phone call” Not yet.
You want an example of awful, “”Maybe he’s looking up”, trump referring to the late Rep. Dingell being in hell.
You are so dishonest….
“Which subpeona was violated? ….oh that’s right, Pelosi did not issue any!”
“Nancy Pelosi… hands out subpoenas like they’re cookies,” President Trump said during a news conference on Wednesday.
Looks like some major cog dis from our conservative friends.
Read more here: https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/congress/article235720987.html#storylink=cpy
Since you do not believe in hell, why would you not believe he is referring to his grave plot?
He was exaggerating. Settle down. that is what Trump does.
Trump had no obligation to help prosecute himself.
If the Democrats really wanted the witnesses, they could have gone to court, but they chose not to.
So, there was no obstruction unless you a Democrat who refused to call witnesses the GOP wanted. That’s true obstruction.
“ Trump had no obligation to help prosecute himself.”
No, but you would think he’d have the courage to defend himself. But, he chose not to.
Lack of defending against evil partisan vultures is not obstruction.
Still waiting for you to produce a crime here….
I guess you have no civility in siding with liberals ripping our democracy apart.
Obstruction of Justice.
In federal law, crimes constituting obstruction of justice are defined primarily in Chapter 73 of Title 18 of the United States Code. This chapter contains provisions covering various specific crimes such as witness tampering and retaliation, jury tampering, destruction of evidence, assault on a process server, and theft of court records. It also includes more general sections covering obstruction of proceedings in federal courts, Congress, and federal executive agencies. One of the broadest provisions in the chapter, known as the Omnibus Clause, states that anyone who “corruptly… endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice” in connection with a pending court proceeding is subject to punishment.
Great, where did Trump do any of that?
I guess you’ve either been asleep or in denial.
Unlike you, I don’t assume to know that folks mean something other than what they say. Words still have meaning to me, obviously they don’t to you. Or are you just always applying kevin’s New World Dictionary to get your answer?
Explain it to me, what crime was he instructing investigation on?
You are arrogant like Nord, claiming to know answer but not willing to articulate such a simple question.
Is it “Merry Impeachment” or “Happy Impeachment”? I’d hate to offend.
Obviously you aren’t up to speed on what the obstruction article is about. It would be a waste of time to try to educate you until you become familiar with the impeachment article, what the words in that article mean, and how it was applied. Until you have at least a rudimentary understanding you will just continue to exhibit your ignorance on the subject.
New knowledge never hurt anyone.
Both are applicable.
You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make an idiot know shit from shinola.
And even more cog dis from the right.
All I asked is what did Trump did that was obstruction…and all I get is disgusting sanctimony.
You guys got nothing and it is disgusting.
Celebrating thr liberal Democrat treason is the ultimate disgust.
And heads explode!
When it comes to unrepentant treasonous evil…of course.
You stand by and let this great country be torn apart by disgusting liberals?
That says a lot about you.
Have someone read the obstruction article to you. The answer is in there. If no one wants to associate with you, call me and I’ll read it to you. I’ll even assist you on to use a dictionary.
Why can’t you articulate the question yourself?
You need a biased liberal journalist to torture facts for you?
You are sad excuse for a liberal.
Pat: We tried, but some folks can’t be helped.
k: Are you intentionally acting foolish, or is it your pathology?
I can’t help it that you, or Pat, can’t answer a simple question.
Your question was answered. You just don’t like it, or lack comprehension.
I suggest you study Federalist 65. But you probably can’t, or won’t, understand what it says.
Enlighten us, what was the answer?
What was the crime?
Asked, and answered.
“ To the many evangelicals who continue to support Mr. Trump in spite of his blackened moral record, we might say this: Remember who you are and whom you serve. Consider how your justification of Mr. Trump influences your witness to your Lord and Savior. Consider what an unbelieving world will say if you continue to brush off Mr. Trump’s immoral words and behavior in the cause of political expediency. If we don’t reverse course now, will anyone take anything we say about justice and righteousness with any seriousness for decades to come? Can we say with a straight face that abortion is a great evil that cannot be tolerated and, with the same straight face, say that the bent and broken character of our nation’s leader doesn’t really matter in the end?”
Pat there is no crime committed until you are convicted.
Character is destiny. It was for Bill Clinton, and it is for Donald Trump.
Obstruction of JUSTICE is one thing. Obstruction of CONGRESS????
Sorry, but refusing to give up Executive Privilege is not “obstruction.” However, Trump is willing to have the case tried in a legitimate court, not the KangaCrazyCourt of the press and Botox Nancy.
Mar: I quibble. In the ordinary case (black-letter laws), someone may commit a crime–but they are NOT guilty until proven so.
Here, we have a case where the revolutionary seditionists are making up “crimes” and their running dog press agrees.
Re-read Owen’s excerpt at top.
Nothing you have presented rises above simple policy and style disagreement.
I knew you dishonest libs have nothing, when pinned on it, you look utterly foolish with no answer.
When faced with utter, demonic, blasphemous, evil, liberal filth like this, Trump is an easy choice for Evangelicals…
Anti-Trump Comedian Michelle Wolf Says Having Her Unborn Baby Killed Made Her Feel ‘Powerful’ Like ‘God’
Mar says, “ Pat there is no crime committed until you are convicted.”
Bill Clinton wasn’t convicted. So no crime was committed, right?
In the impeachment, you are correct.
But he was convicted in other courts and had to pay fines and lost his law license.
“To keep a president in office, whose gross misconduct and criminal actions are a well-established fact, will weaken the authority of the presidency, undermine the rule of law, and cheapen those words, which have made America different from most other nations in the earth; ‘equal justice under law,’” he said. US Rep from WI.
dud: Thanks for straightening out mar on criminal behavior/conviction.
Pat: We tried to make k smarter. It isn’t our fault that he repels knowledge like water off a ducks back. Keep up the good work.
Trump committed fraud in regards to Trump University, and his Charity paying very heavy fines.
Could you provide some details on Clinton’s convictions?
Do you know the difference between a criminal and civil action?
Clinton was found guilty of civil contempt of court and plea bargained to avoid a conviction.
So Clinton wasn’t convicted of a crime?
He was not impeached over Trump U.
He was impeached over ukraine phone call, which was just a policy/style disagreement.
Try to stay on topic.
Your embarrassment to not having an answer is your own.
Your defense of this impeachment makes society far less civil. Now we can throw impeachment around for policy disagreements, that is sad and pathetic.
Clinton plead guilty to the crime in plea bargain.
You say to stay on topic after you post something from The Daily Wire. Pot meet kettle.
It would appear that WC did not plead guilty to a crime, but rather signed a “Agreed Order of Discipline”, and surrendered his law license in AR for a period of time.
We note that LeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRoy is unable to respond to the truth regarding the “obstruction” crapola.
Case decided. Match goes to Trump, of course.
You were the one that started flapping about Evangelicals and Trump.
Democrats hate Christians, and things Christians believe.
Trump at least does not hate Evangelicals like liberals do.
Don’t bring up junk to take the focus off the embarrassment of your lack of answer to impeachment debate….you get embarrassed twice instead of once…I hate seeing that.
That is an effectual guilty plea.
No, it isn’t. It is what it is. No more, no less.
Based on your legal expertise you should be working for trump and giuliani.
But your post was a straw man. It doesn’t even mention evangelicals. It talks about a stupid joke a bad comedian made.
Evangelicals are staunchly against baby killing. It shows how far liberals have now gone in their evil.
No longer is it “safe,legal and rare”, disgusting liberals glory in their baby killing and the evil liberal audience cheers!
How can any Christian support that kind of heinous evil?
How can any human being?
…but it seems you can.
She is not joking….
At best it is a “no contest” plea which finds you guilty.
Why is one punished if you are not pleading no contest or guilty?
How stupid are you?
Settle down and and take a breath. I’m sure Pence will be as good as Trump at being President. But less of a thug.
In your hippie dreams Pat.
No it isn’t. Perhaps you could offer your legal services to Moscow Mitch for trumps defense. I can’t wait to see that show.
When you act like Evangelicals cannot support Trump when faced with the super hateful liberal alternative…its like you are purposely stirring the pot on the painfully obvious.
Still waiting for you, and your cohorts, to define what was the impeachable crime here?
Don’t feel bad, even Pelosi cannot answer that.
If one is not accepting of punishment by no contest plea to charges, which is effect of guilty, then one pleads “not guilty” and has a hearing.
Are you a special kind of dumb today?
Asked and answered.
Kevin said, “ When you act like Evangelicals cannot support Trump when faced with the super hateful liberal alternative”
But the alternative would be a President Pence. Unless you agree with Mar that that would be a “hippie dream”.