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.
It is defined. As “ high crimes and misdemeanors “ . When the Framers wrote that, was it about innuendo, gossip, perceptions and endless dialogue and opinion?
No, for as the process is designed to be for the rarest of circumstances, for only the most serious issues which call into question the ability for the Government Official to do his job as stated.
Impeachment is not only in place for the President, but for other Government Officials. The Constitution specifically says the House has the ability to impeach. That’s implies the entire structure of the House, not the Speaker. The Impeachment issue has been voted down THREE times in the House. Show me a circumstance where the Legislative body of the House’s votes were ignored , and the Speaker proceeded anyway.
Just one will do.
There isn’t any comparison to a Grand Jury. A Grand Jury is made up of average everyday citizens chosen from the population at large. It is not selected from a Partisan Group . It is not chosen from a Group that includes individuals that have boycotted the election, called to “ Impeach the Mother F’’Er “ , has filed lawsuit after lawsuit , and some of whom were involved in pulling off one of the biggest POlital With hunt/ Hoaxes in American History. “ Evidence in plain sight “ Remember that ? That liar is in charge. Shameful.
And so far, they have gotten away with it. And Americans should just sit back for the sequel ?
They will have the vote after the inquiry is done. No problem! McConnell is already getting ready for it.
It's not. But the way to do it is to make a formal request providing evidentiary material alleging criminal activity to one or more of the intelligence agencies provided for such investigations . . . .
Wait. Let me understand here. You’re asking how the DNC taking over the payment for political opposition research by a US company is different from the President using public office and American strategic funds to try to force a foreign government to gin up a baseless criminal investigation of a political rival?
That’s the question you want answered? Are you sure you wouldn’t like to ask something more difficult? Like “What’s the difference between an automobile and a turnip?”
Wait. Let me understand here. You’re asking how the DNC taking over the payment for political opposition research by a US company is different from the President using public office and American strategic funds to try to force a foreign government to gin up a baseless criminal investigation of a political rival?
Wait. Let me understand here.
You think Hillary paid for the Steele dossier, and that was it? You're pretending that there wasn't a two-year-long "baseless criminal investigation" of a political rival that followed from it?
You're pretending that the people who did that didn't use their public office and American "strategic funds" to do so?
And you're pretending that the involvement of a foreign government is somehow relevant?
Mulvaney committed the biggest sin possible in the tRump White House.
He appeared before cameras and told the truth.
"We do this all the time! Get over it!"
When he said "we" he meant the Executive Branch. Quid-pro-quo is SOP for foreign policy in every administration. It's also SOP when you go to the store to buy something. It's the most routine and unobjectionable thing in the world.
There was no legitimate investigation into Biden. There was no authority for it and it did not involve any US law enforcement or intelligence agencies. That's because there's no alleged crime. Trump sending his personal lawyer to affect foreign relations for a "favor" of digging up dirt for political purposes is illegal. That is the crime that this impeachment inquiry is looking into. THAT's a legitimate investigation being held in the open. Oh just stop with the self-righteous spew. You just called Democrats liars, you are a fine one to talk.
Nice try. That first link has NOTHING to do with obama having trump investigated over russian collusion in 2016
Wait. Let me understand here. You’re asking how the DNC taking over the payment for political opposition research by a US company is different from the President using public office and American strategic funds to try to force a foreign government to gin up a baseless criminal investigation of a political rival?
That’s the question you want answered? Are you sure you wouldn’t like to ask something more difficult? Like “What’s the difference between an automobile and a turnip?”
It's not. But the way to do it is to make a formal request providing evidentiary material alleging criminal activity to one or more of the intelligence agencies provided for such investigations that he has at his disposal, not sending in a half-baked personal attorney with no security clearance to try to cook the books.
He never did, you know, except in the fertile imaginations of reight wing media.
She worked for him as Secretary of State.
She had no knowledge that Steele even existed before Glenn Simpson gave it to her campaign.
LOL. You said "she worked for him as secretary of state" as if that was just coincidental!
Please try a rebuttal that isnt patronizingly stupid.
The fact of the matter is that Comey, Strzok and Page were reporting their findings daily to the White House. Obama initiated the investigation. Hillary was his ally and Trump was the opposition.
I dont see much difference at all.
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.