General Impeachment inquiry launched

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up
M

member 3289

Guest
Genuine question because I really don't know. What is the point of impeachment if he remains president?
It's like charging someone with a crime even if you might not get a conviction. Legally speaking, a sitting President is immune from normal prosecution, so impeachment is the way he is charged with a crime.

But to answer your question, there's an election in 11 months and this is mostly political.

He committed a crime, but in most circumstances it wouldn't go to impeachment.
 

FINGERS

Banned
Nov 14, 2019
17,004
19,805
It's like charging someone with a crime even if you might not get a conviction. Legally speaking, a sitting President is immune from normal prosecution, so impeachment is the way he is charged with a crime.

But to answer your question, there's an election in 11 months and this is mostly political.

He committed a crime, but in most circumstances it wouldn't go to impeachment.

Mu understanding is he committed a presidential level crime 10 times higher than Nixon. Nixon used Americans to spy on the Democrats and dig dirt.

Trump wanted foreign governments to do his dirty work.

Completely different scale. It’s arguably the worst crime you can commit as a sitting president. It’s basically treason.
 
M

member 3289

Guest
Mu understanding is he committed a presidential level crime 10 times higher than Nixon. Nixon used Americans to spy on the Democrats and dig dirt.

Trump wanted foreign governments to do his dirty work.

Completely different scale. It’s arguably the worst crime you can commit as a sitting president. It’s basically treason.
He committed a crime without a doubt.

But this entire process is at least 50% political.
 

jason73

Auslander Raus
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
74,591
137,005
Mu understanding is he committed a presidential level crime 10 times higher than Nixon. Nixon used Americans to spy on the Democrats and dig dirt.

Trump wanted foreign governments to do his dirty work.

Completely different scale. It’s arguably the worst crime you can commit as a sitting president. It’s basically treason.
you obviously didnt pay attention to a second of the hearings
 

FINGERS

Banned
Nov 14, 2019
17,004
19,805
you obviously didnt pay attention to a second of the hearings

Sorry sir. My dog was sick and I had to go to my nans funeral.

Also I’ve been getting lots of texts of someone’s taint and ball sac.

It’s taking me ages to delete them. I’m hoping to find the culprit soon.
 

FINGERS

Banned
Nov 14, 2019
17,004
19,805
How are they framing him?

He has admitted the crime. His lawyer admitted the crime. His spokesman admitted the crime. His ambassador admitted the crime.... I could go on.

No one has framed him.

He is going to get off because his party is happy for him to break the law and they have enough votes to save the idiot.

It’s ironic because he would throw every single one of them under the bus to save his orange skin at the flush of a chain.
 

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,507
29,641
you obviously didnt pay attention to a second of the hearings
what i've taken from the hearings so far is that the Executive usurped the Congressional power over spending.
He violated the Constitution, which is a law.

However, because of the hasty push to get this in before an election, the Democrats have left giant holes that Trump's supporters can wriggle a rationalization or two through...
 

jason73

Auslander Raus
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
74,591
137,005
How are they framing him?

He has admitted the crime. His lawyer admitted the crime. His spokesman admitted the crime. His ambassador admitted the crime.... I could go on.

No one has framed him.

He is going to get off because his party is happy for him to break the law and they have enough votes to save the idiot.

It’s ironic because he would throw every single one of them under the bus to save his orange skin at the flush of a chain.
None of this is remotely true. How is brexit coming along for you.is corbyn still openly hating jews
 

jason73

Auslander Raus
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
74,591
137,005
what i've taken from the hearings so far is that the Executive usurped the Congressional power over spending.
He violated the Constitution, which is a law.

However, because of the hasty push to get this in before an election, the Democrats have left giant holes that Trump's supporters can wriggle a rationalization or two through...
No witness has had a single fact or first hand knowledge of a fact
 

FINGERS

Banned
Nov 14, 2019
17,004
19,805
None of this is remotely true. How is brexit coming along for you.is corbyn still openly hating jews

So you are saying that Trump didn’t ask Ukraine for help on tv and recorded in a phone call? Guiliani didn’t admit it? Mulvaney didn’t admit it? The EU ambassador didn’t admit it. All live on TV.

Are you really saying that?

Seriously.

Are you really saying that those facts that I witnessed and heard I made up along with everyone else?

Am I just a construct of your imagination who only exists when you think about me?

Is that what you are saying?

That would make more sense.
 

jason73

Auslander Raus
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
74,591
137,005
So you are saying that Trump didn’t ask Ukraine for help on tv and recorded in a phone call? Guiliani didn’t admit it? Mulvaney didn’t admit it? The EU ambassador didn’t admit it. All live on TV.

Are you really saying that?

Seriously.

Are you really saying that those facts that I witnessed and heard I made up along with everyone else?

Am I just a construct of your imagination who only exists when you think about me?

Is that what you are saying?

That would make more sense.
If you are too stupid to know the dif of trump joking on tv and him actually asking ukraine to interfere in something i dont know what to tellvyou
 

jason73

Auslander Raus
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
74,591
137,005
Quid pro quo isnt even an article of impeachment .try to keep up
 

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,507
29,641
Was ukraine aware aid was with held? Dont act like intent isnt important here
actually, intent is not important. The power to disburse funds is a power of Congress. If he acted in opposition of that, then his motive or intent are irrelevant. He violated the Constitution.
 

FINGERS

Banned
Nov 14, 2019
17,004
19,805
If you are too stupid to know the dif of trump joking on tv and him actually asking ukraine to interfere in something i dont know what to tellvyou

You can use any trick in the book to try and distract me.

Insults, Brexit, dead cats, he was joking, he didn’t say it, Obama did it, it was Hilary and all sorts of whataboutary.

But the facts remain.

I’m sorry you are so brain washed. I’m sorry for what this means for politics in the future. I’m sorry that this means the end of any forward change for the better for the foreseeable future.

But you cannot change the fact that Trump broke the law. Not just his usual lies this was a biggie.

It wasn’t cheating at golf or cheating charities or even cheating on his wife.

He threatened a foreign country to help him dig dirt on an American citizen.

It’s as big as the right to bear arms in the US constitution stakes.

Sorry you can’t see that. History will show you as being on the wrong side.
 

MMAHAWK

Real Gs come from California.America Muthafucker
Feb 5, 2015
15,230
33,205
You can use any trick in the book to try and distract me.

Insults, Brexit, dead cats, he was joking, he didn’t say it, Obama did it, it was Hilary and all sorts of whataboutary.

But the facts remain.

I’m sorry you are so brain washed. I’m sorry for what this means for politics in the future. I’m sorry that this means the end of any forward change for the better for the foreseeable future.

But you cannot change the fact that Trump broke the law. Not just his usual lies this was a biggie.

It wasn’t cheating at golf or cheating charities or even cheating on his wife.

He threatened a foreign country to help him dig dirt on an American citizen.

It’s as big as the right to bear arms in the US constitution stakes.

Sorry you can’t see that. History will show you as being on the wrong side.
Does it not matter that the person he supposedly threatened said multiple times he wasn’t threatened?