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

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

At least we can agree outside the political realm

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Just to add , I like your new staff very much . NFC East definitely has improved.

[sdskinsfan2001]

Our division is so open the Skins and Giants could finish 1 and 2. That would be hilarious. I don't hate the Giants in the same realm as Dallas/Philly.

[Chico23231]

Hey shitheads, no fucking football talk in the politics thread...take that shit over to the football threads.

This thread here is simply for your destruction and your continued skullfucking by Trump

[sdskinsfan2001]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Hey shitheads, no fucking football talk in the politics thread...take that shit over to the football threads.

This thread here is simply for your destruction and your continued skullfucking by Trump

We need to BUILD THAT WALL between political and football threads.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

My preview tldr: an impartial juror who presumes innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt would by all merits acquit trump

It is ok to lump me in with Chico and sdskins, I said I won't have a melt down if the Senate voted to strip Trump, not that I agree that all these trumped up claims have anything close to what the founders had in mind for impeachment of a duly elcted President. It isn't mental gymnastics to read posts like that of G1, who started an impeachment thread("when is enough enough") in the first few months of Trump's term, or punch's tirades, to understand that the dems (and faux republicans) have been wanting some way to get Trump out of office, and that they will blow out of proportion any action in order to make that happen.

On the other hand if Reagan was the teflon president, because nothing the dems threw at him stuck (iran contra would have been impeachment fodder nowadays) Trump is the static cling president because whatever he rubs up against is sure to leaves him looking dirty. He hasn't done anything togive people reason to presume he is innocent even that is where all our justice is supposed to stem from.

You said that any court in the land would convict him because of the 8 witness testimonials and some circumstantial funds management. BUT I say that in a real court, a competent defense attorney would get the 8 witnesses testimony thrown out as hearsay, the gao report would be refuted by the equally valid finding of the omb report and if the presumption of innocence is applied, non-biased jurors would find that there is reasonable doubt and acquit.

The senate is likely going to acquit, or not strip, him because you aren't going to get 20 republican senators to change. And the framers chose to set it at 2/3s because removing a sitting president isnt supposed to be easy, it should be based on strong national consensus. If there is one thing this country does NOT have, it is a strong national consensus on anything in the political realm.



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

I completely agree that impeachment is impossible because there will never be a strong national consensus. But just so I'm reading this right, it's ok to lump you in with the other Trumpers here who think it's acceptable to solicit foreign help to win a domestic presidential election? I'd like to get it on the record so I can use this as a defense when the next democratic president does it.

The evidence that would take this from "hearsay" to "no doubter" territory in my mind would be the actual word-for-word transcript Trump has hidden behind the top secret clearance level, not the one released to the public. If it matched exactly what the 8 witnesses said under penalty of perjury, I'm not really sure how you could keep denying it any more.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by mooby

I completely agree that impeachment is impossible because there will never be a strong national consensus. But just so I'm reading this right, it's ok to lump you in with the other Trumpers here who think it's acceptable to solicit foreign help to win a domestic presidential election? I'd like to get it on the record so I can use this as a defense when the next democratic president does it.



The evidence that would take this from "hearsay" to "no doubter" territory in my mind would be the actual word-for-word transcript Trump has hidden behind the top secret clearance level, not the one released to the public. If it matched exactly what the 8 witnesses said under penalty of perjury, I'm not really sure how you could keep denying it any more.

Do you discount the Ukraine's president's denials? And if so why?

You can put it down that Lincoln sought foreign aid to force the south to capitualte, Jefferson used his French ties during his election, Barack Obama asked Putin on tape to wait till after an election so he could give them more favorable terms. And that Trump used his influence to have Ukraine expose nepotistic corruption by a senior american official.


Tldr: yes but mostly i doubt that the way the dems present it is the reality of it

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by mooby

I completely agree that impeachment is impossible because there will never be a strong national consensus. But just so I'm reading this right, it's ok to lump you in with the other Trumpers here who think it's acceptable to solicit foreign help to win a domestic presidential election? I'd like to get it on the record so I can use this as a defense when the next democratic president does it.

The evidence that would take this from "hearsay" to "no doubter" territory in my mind would be the actual word-for-word transcript Trump has hidden behind the top secret clearance level, not the one released to the public. If it matched exactly what the 8 witnesses said under penalty of perjury, I'm not really sure how you could keep denying it any more.

It has nothing to do with strong national consensus. High crime and misdemeanors threshold could not be met.

When the articles failed to include bribery, the impeachment lost all credibility. Everyone realized this was complete bullshit...this is when they pushed bullshit like “you don’t need a crime to impeach”

What you really need to be concerned about is this lays a foundation impeachment simply based on one side hating the president. Because this is exactly what’s happened.

Look up dems talking impeachment immediately after trump won...you don’t have a problem with this?

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

It has nothing to do with strong national consensus. High crime and misdemeanors threshold could not be met.

When the articles failed to include bribery, the impeachment lost all credibility. Everyone realized this was complete bullshit...this is when they pushed bullshit like “you don’t need a crime to impeach”

What you really need to be concerned about is this lays a foundation impeachment simply based on one side hating the president. Because this is exactly what’s happened.

Look up dems talking impeachment immediately after trump won...you don’t have a problem with this?

LOL, chico even for you that is some BS.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by mooby

I completely agree that impeachment is impossible because there will never be a strong national consensus. But just so I'm reading this right, it's ok to lump you in with the other Trumpers here who think it's acceptable to solicit foreign help to win a domestic presidential election? I'd like to get it on the record so I can use this as a defense when the next democratic president does it.

The evidence that would take this from "hearsay" to "no doubter" territory in my mind would be the actual word-for-word transcript Trump has hidden behind the top secret clearance level, not the one released to the public. If it matched exactly what the 8 witnesses said under penalty of perjury, I'm not really sure how you could keep denying it any more.

I said it before he will walk away screaming set up and claiming he is innocent but he will always bare the scare of being an "Impeached president" convicted or not. The result has been predetermined and will fall on the political side of the republicans. It will scar the republicans for a long time.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Giantone

I said it before he will walk away screaming set up and claiming he is innocent but he will always bare the scare of being an "Impeached president" convicted or not. The result has been predetermined and will fall on the political side of the republicans. It will scar the republicans for a long time.

I doubt that republicans will be scarred. Truthfully if they put up a decent candidate that took trumps policy without his personal negatives they would mop up the current crop of democratic candidates. Ideally, Trump would pass the torch at this year's convention "for the good of the country" to a candidate that would deflate the whole democratic gameplan for this election. But he won't.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Giantone

I said it before he will walk away screaming set up and claiming he is innocent but he will always bare the scare of being an "Impeached president" convicted or not. The result has been predetermined and will fall on the political side of the republicans. It will scar the republicans for a long time.

How did the scar of impeachment hurt Clinton or the Dems? It is not going to have any effect on the republican party except maybe increase campaign donations based on marketing it as the partisan hack job it was.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[sdskinsfan2001]

Mooby, If I'm a Trumpster then you're a Bidenite and/or a Clintoner and/or a Schumerer and/or a Pelosiate, etc. etc. Yeah those are amazing human beings to follow.

[sdskinsfan2001]

Originally Posted by mooby

I completely agree that impeachment is impossible because there will never be a strong national consensus. But just so I'm reading this right, it's ok to lump you in with the other Trumpers here who think it's acceptable to solicit foreign help to win a domestic presidential election? I'd like to get it on the record so I can use this as a defense when the next democratic president does it.

The evidence that would take this from "hearsay" to "no doubter" territory in my mind would be the actual word-for-word transcript Trump has hidden behind the top secret clearance level, not the one released to the public. If it matched exactly what the 8 witnesses said under penalty of perjury, I'm not really sure how you could keep denying it any more.

And so after 2+ years of the investigation that proved absolutely nothing, it's still a fact that it happened anyways. Sadly, not surprised. He was innocent until proven guilty, unless it didn't go your way, then he still did it. I hope you're never on a jury.

[sdskinsfan2001]

I joined this site in 2010 so I was here for the last 6 years of Obama's presidency. I never saw the prolonged outrage for:

Attacking Libya without congressional approval
Benghazi
Fast and Furious
Spying on James Rosen and the AP
Using IRS to target specific groups
Hiding info from FOIA requests with people using an underground and under secured security system
Etc.

Where was the fucking outrage then??? Americans actually died during 2 of those.

But yeah let's impeach trump for "withholding" money from an obvious corrupt country and business.

Its Orange Man Bad that's what it is and will be for the next 4+ years.

Good racket for the Dems. Biden and his son clearly use Joe's position to make his son rich, Joe literally admits it on camera, and a Republican asks a country to look into it and he's the bad guy. It's a joke.

[sdskinsfan2001]

The Dems strategy is to whine, cry try to impeach for 4 to 8 years. And run candidates like Pocahontas and Creepy Joe.