trump Inpeachment...............

[Giantone]

double post

[Giantone]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/by-3-to-1...214725581.html

By 3 to 1, legal scholars call for Trump impeachment at first Judiciary hearing



All four of the witnesses were law scholars, three of them adamantly in favor of impeaching Trump based on evidence released by the House Intelligence Committee that Trump demanded that the Ukraine president announce investigations into a (nonexistent) plot by Ukraine to help Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election and into the business dealings in Ukraine of Joe Biden’s son Hunter. The majority report concluded that Trump used the prospect of a White House meeting and the resumption of withheld military assistance to enforce his request for a “favor.”

[mooby]

Originally Posted by Giantone

https://www.yahoo.com/news/by-3-to-1...214725581.html

By 3 to 1, legal scholars call for Trump impeachment at first Judiciary hearing



All four of the witnesses were law scholars, three of them adamantly in favor of impeaching Trump based on evidence released by the House Intelligence Committee that Trump demanded that the Ukraine president announce investigations into a (nonexistent) plot by Ukraine to help Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election and into the business dealings in Ukraine of Joe Biden’s son Hunter. The majority report concluded that Trump used the prospect of a White House meeting and the resumption of withheld military assistance to enforce his request for a “favor.”

legal scholars? or DO NOTHING DEMS?????!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

BOOM! Roasted.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by mooby

legal scholars? or DO NOTHING DEMS?????!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

BOOM! Roasted.

???

[Giantone]

LOL, very good. Don't forget to add the obligatory "Obama this or Hillary "that.

[Chico23231]

I gotta feeling Cocaine Mitch is about to pull a baller move in the Senate...per the usual

[mooby]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I gotta feeling Cocaine Mitch is about to pull a baller move in the Senate...per the usual

Yeah me too.

Something along the lines of...

"We refuse to acknowledge any evidence whatsoever as this is a sham trial. Shut this shit down boys! The Kin... I mean POTUS is allowed to do whatever he wants as it is always in the best interest of this country"

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by mooby

Yeah me too.

Something along the lines of...

"We refuse to acknowledge any evidence whatsoever as this is a sham trial. Shut this shit down boys! The Kin... I mean POTUS is allowed to do whatever he wants as it is always in the best interest of this country"

LOL,............wouldn't surprise me .Doesn't Justus Roberts preside over the trial?

[Chico23231]

Yup this is right, IG confirms Adam Schiff was full of shit:

https://thefederalist.com/2019/12/10...led-with-lies/

Of course the media embraced its lies

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Yup this is right, IG confirms Adam Schiff was full of shit:

https://thefederalist.com/2019/12/10...led-with-lies/

Of course the media embraced its lies

LOL, chico you bias is showing..................again.


Seems the report throws both parties" under the bus.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...7a1_story.html

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Giantone

LOL, chico you bias is showing..................again.


Seems the report throws both parties" under the bus.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...7a1_story.html

G1, what are you talking about? The article specifically calls out the competing narrative in the opposing memos...the narratives are OPPOSITE...look at the memos:

The Democratic minority on the committee, then led by Rep. Adam Schiff, put out a response memo with competing claims:
1.FBI and DOJ officials did not omit material information from the FISA warrant.
2.The DOJ “made only narrow use of information from Steele’s sources about Page’s specific activities in 2016.”
3.In subsequent FISA renewals, DOJ provided additional information that corroborated Steele’s reporting.
4.The Page FISA warrant allowed the FBI to collect “valuable intelligence.”
5.“Far from ‘omitting’ material facts about Steele, as the Majority claims, DOJ repeatedly informed the Court about Steele’s background, credibility, and potential bias.”
6.The FBI conducted a “rigorous process” to vet Steele’s allegations, and the Page FISA application explained the FBI’s reasonable basis for finding Steele credible.
7.Steele’s prior reporting was used in “criminal proceedings.”

Each of these claims were found by Horowitz to be false.

Horowitz found that FBI and DOJ officials did in fact omit critical material information from the FISA warrant, including several items exculpatory to Page. Material facts were not just omitted but willfully hidden through doctoring of evidence.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

G1, what are you talking about? The article specifically calls out the competing narrative in the opposing memos...the narratives are OPPOSITE...look at the memos:

The Democratic minority on the committee, then led by Rep. Adam Schiff, put out a response memo with competing claims:
1.FBI and DOJ officials did not omit material information from the FISA warrant.
2.The DOJ “made only narrow use of information from Steele’s sources about Page’s specific activities in 2016.”
3.In subsequent FISA renewals, DOJ provided additional information that corroborated Steele’s reporting.
4.The Page FISA warrant allowed the FBI to collect “valuable intelligence.”
5.“Far from ‘omitting’ material facts about Steele, as the Majority claims, DOJ repeatedly informed the Court about Steele’s background, credibility, and potential bias.”
6.The FBI conducted a “rigorous process” to vet Steele’s allegations, and the Page FISA application explained the FBI’s reasonable basis for finding Steele credible.
7.Steele’s prior reporting was used in “criminal proceedings.”

Each of these claims were found by Horowitz to be false.

Horowitz found that FBI and DOJ officials did in fact omit critical material information from the FISA warrant, including several items exculpatory to Page. Material facts were not just omitted but willfully hidden through doctoring of evidence.

Chico you're on a sinking ship.

[Giantone]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/laurence-...085137976.html


Harvard Law Professor Dismantles Key GOP Argument Against Impeachment Of Trump


Harvard constitutional law professor Laurence Tribe on Wednesday took apart a key Republican argument against the impeachment of President Donald Trump over the Ukraine scandal.

Tribe, appearing on MSNBC’s “All In with Chris Hayes” said some Republicans were “missing the point” by claiming abuse of power (one of two articles of impeachment that House Democrats have released against Trump, the other being obstruction of Congress) is “not a crime.”

“It is the highest crime against the Constitution,” said Tribe. “And in this case the impeachment articles are carefully written to show the aggregating circumstances.”

“This isn’t just using the president’s power to benefit himself,” Tribe added. “But it’s doing that in a way that endangers our national security and that corrupts the electoral process by inviting foreign involvement.”

Tribe, who advised the House Judiciary Committee on how to draft the articles of impeachment, earlier explained why the articles were “the classic high crimes and misdemeanors.”

He said:

Abuse of power is what the impeachment clause was all about. The idea of using the power of the presidency not to protect the nation but to benefit one’s self and especially one’s reelection. In fact, in the debates around the framing of the Constitution, the big question about the impeachment power was ‘do we really need it, or is it enough, because the president will have to stand for reelection if it’s going to be ahead of him?’ The answer to that was ‘what if he corrupts the election process? What if he uses his power to reframe the election so that he rigs the system? We can’t afford to wait.’ That was the whole reason not to wait for the quadrennial election to take place.

Tribe concluded by claiming that “as a historic matter, this is the clearest case we’ve ever seen in the use of the impeachment power.”

“Especially when you add the second article, which basically says that if the president will not in any way cooperate with the process” then “we really do have a president who is a dictator and if this isn’t impeachable, as many have said, then nothing is. That’s the theory of this case.”

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Chico you're on a sinking ship.

Its not about sinking ship, its about leaders of Congress overseeing this process misleading the American public with a narrative which was not biased on facts. He was wrong on every account...that's a problem, BUT the bigger issue is then the media takes this information and spreads it as fact. That's the big issue.

Now take the Nunes memo...come to find out, his assertions were found to be correct BUT the media at the time criticizes it and claims its false. These outlets include the Washington Post, NYC, Politico, and then the super garbage sites like Slate and the intercept (these don't count as new orgs...lolol..only morons would go there for news)

Read the article I posted G1.

[Chico23231]

Calm down G1, I'm sorry this is happening too you.

But we should be holding the leaders of the impeachment process accountable to lying to the American public. The media, like we saw with the Russian/Obstruction Collusion Hoax and the Kavanagh Conformation Hoax spread lies and false narratives constantly to the American people...you understand this right? You understand you were lied too?

I found it eye-opening when the articles of impeachment were drawn up....what was left out? This was the biggest tell that once again we are chasing something that didn't happen. Ive waited for the facts and it looks like impeachment is just another phony bs story...much like Russian Collusion, much like Kavanagh conformation.

Now the IG report is confirming the missteps and is showing just how corrupt the Russian Collusion hoax started. Its really sad at this point