Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am not writing this post lightly and it is with serious thought and actual concern for fellow Americans that I say:
If I were you, I'd try to be more aware of who is actually trying to deprive you of your rights and privileges. Donald Trump is attempting to disenfranchise all of us: you know, we the people.
The President of the United States has decided that our national sovereignty is less significant than his own political performance. Congressional oversight of the executive branch by a co-equal branch of government is not a coup. And it is so wholly wrong for this man to tell you otherwise. Being held accountable for his lawlessness and un-American activities and personal corruption is not a coup. It is your Constitution working for you.
I agree entirely, with the caveat that I think "rear end" should be substituted for "political performance".
Of course, in tRump's case, it is often hard to distinguish the two...
You and Trump apparently fell for the lure that the various committees dangled in front of Trump and Sondland
Because they fell into the trap and have taken action to prevent the EU Rep Sondland from testifying initially—when we have his emails and his tweets—and now are requiring a subpoena to testify—which will likely be ignored/refused—
He and Trump have just shown there is something more to hide
By not responding in a “friendly” fashion to the initial request, Trump (and the WH) and Sondland have proved they are in an adversarial position to the House Committees....
This is same thing Nixon did and it was one of the complaints lodged in the impeachment record that wasn’t actually voted on by the House—just the Impeachment Committee—since Nixon resigned before the vote...
ARTICLE III, DEFIANCE OF SUBPOENAS. (Approved 21-17)
In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, contrary to his oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has failed without lawful cause or excuse to produce papers and things as directed by duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives on April 11, 1974, May 15, 1974, May 30, 1974, and June 24, 1974, and willfully disobeyed such subpoenas. ...
So Trump and his dumb WH counsel and his AG are just digging themselves a deeper pit they won’t be able to climb out of...
Was there not a crime with nixon that started the entire process?
What is the crime trump committed, to start this process?
For those who are having difficulty understanding why no vote is required at this point, I would suggest you hunt up a pre-Trump presidency print source that explains the impeachment process. An old encyclopedia would be good, as would a book about civics and American government, perhaps an old textbook or a book from the children's department of your local public library - not implying that anyone who doesn't understand what's going on is childish, it's just that children's non-fiction books are generally written very clearly and are great sources for a quick brush-up on any number of topics. If you turn up your nose at learning this way, fine, try the adult department for older books on the same subject.
Books about Watergate and the Clinton impeachment might also be relevant about what to expect in terms of prior investigation, hearings, subpoenas, and so on.
It appears many posters who are having difficulty understanding the process and who are therefore questioning it were too young to remember Watergate or the Clinton impeachment. I am not, and remember both well. Rest assured that the current situation is similar in terms of what's happening in Congress, the House specifically, and that things are moving with remarkable speed, especially in comparison with Watergate. The Clinton impeachment was much simpler than the current very complex and detailed situation - which is also more complicated than was Watergate.
Previously, though both Nixon and Clinton had their opponents and supporters, as does Trump, I don't think anyone feared for our nation and the future of our democratic republic had Nixon remained in office or if Clinton had been forced out of office. This time - many do fear for our future, if Trump remains in the Oval Office.
Trump's disgraceful, dishonest, self-centered, bullying behavior of the last two or three weeks is only going to escalate as the pressure on him increases. Right now, he is endangering the lives of our allies, the Kurds. Next time, who will it be?
Was there not a crime with nixon that started the entire process?
What is the crime trump committed, to start this process?
The solicitation of a foreign government to help a campaign IS a crime. All you have to do is ASK and it is a crime. The law is that foreign nationals are not allowed to participate in our elections and that includes campaigns.
For impeachment no quid pro quo is required. This kind of corruption that sullies the interest of the United States based on the President's own political campaign is a classic high crime and misdemeanor and exactly the kind of abuse of office that the framers had in mind when they gave the House the power to impeach and the Senate the power to remove.
The only question is, are there going to be 20 Republican Senators who are concerned enough about national security to do the right thing for this country
I figured you would continue to double down on playing stupid, here ya go:
§30121. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
(a) Prohibition
It shall be unlawful for-
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make-
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or
(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
So now that this has been linked to you, we should never again see you asking for it to be linked to you. Right? Right?
Was there not a crime with nixon that started the entire process?
What is the crime trump committed, to start this process?
Nixon's "crime" was the cover-up. He was not originally involved in or even aware of the break-in at the Democratic headquarters in the Watergate building. But once he WAS aware, he and many of his cabinet tried their best to deny and hide it, which led to their eventual downfall. It took years to play out, as the break-in took place prior to the 1972 election, and Nixon resigned during late summer of 1974.
Trump's case is different. He has admitted to personally attempting to involve two foreign countries, Ukraine and China, in our election process for his own benefit, threatening Ukraine with withholding authorized funding and equipment, thus endangering Ukraine's independence from Russia, which illegally occupies Crimea and eastern Ukraine against the will of the Ukrainian people and government. This is extortion, though he is not charged with that or any crime as of yet. The extremely unconstitutional attempt to involve foreign countries in our election is impeachable and that is likely to be the first and most serious charge against Trump.
Again I suggest learning more about impeachment from a neutral source, such as an old encyclopedia (if you can find one). If you don't remember Watergate or the Clinton impeachment well, learn more about them, too, again from a print source which was written closer to the time each took place.
I am recommending public library books because they are juried - selected by professional librarians who read reviews in journals specializing in new books and other materials, and who then consider the need for specific book to improve the collection, public demand, quality of the book, sometimes status of the author, and so on.
Not every new book appears on the library shelf - there is no budget and no room. So the best are selected with these things in mind. As for older books, they are retained if they are still in demand, and if they have not become outdated due to new information emerging.
Location: Foothills of Maryland Blue Ridge mountains
993 posts, read 767,353 times
Reputation: 3163
No one prevents a witness who can exonerate them from testifying.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
