Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-11-2019, 07:26 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,811,747 times
Reputation: 10789

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
This is the thing. Both House and Senate get to run the process as they see fit, per the Constitution.

If the House pursues a skewed process, using selective leaks, fabricated dialogue, etc., the Senate can be expected to react in kind.

They could just summarily dismiss if they want, but my guess is that McConnell will not do that. There will be too much opportunity for him to make House Dems look bad for him to pass up.
So you are expecting that McConnell will pursue a skewed process, using selective leaks, fabricated dialogue, etc.,
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-11-2019, 07:27 AM
 
Location: East Lansing, MI
28,353 posts, read 16,379,218 times
Reputation: 10467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuke64 View Post
Why can't the whistle blower come before the Senate? The House has no say in that.
I'm certain the Senate will subpoena the "whistleblower" if it gets to the point of a Senate trial.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2019, 07:27 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,811,747 times
Reputation: 10789
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbythegreat View Post
Trump asked Ukrainians to prove their commitment to fighting corruption by looking into a few high profile instances of likely corruption. That's something that is completely normal and there's nothing wrong with it, but then Democrats that were unfortunately placed in a position of trust freaked out, worried that if the Ukrainians investigated corruption it might hurt their party and they picked party over country by starting this whole mess.

Protecting the false reputation of Joe Biden was more important to them than the strategic interest of their country.
Oh you poor dear! Trump totally has you wrapped around his finger, doesn't he?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2019, 07:29 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,811,747 times
Reputation: 10789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakin View Post
So a corrupt Politician who's done a crime in a Foreign country or in the US should escape Investigation because they decide to run for President ?
No, that was why a special counsel was appointed to investigate trump's campaign's collusion with Russia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2019, 07:30 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartacus713 View Post
Senator Graham has made it clear that any so-called "Impeachment" vote will be "Dead on arrival" in the Senate, if the House bars the testimony and cross-examination of the Eric Ciaramella - "The Whistleblower" - during the House hearings.

Of course Senator Graham is right and any fair, justice minded Senator will agree, as the failure to included the testimony of the "Whistleblower" will establish this whole process as the illegitimate kangagroo court partisan lynch mob style process that it is increasingly clear that it has become.

Well said, Senator Graham.

The only things Lindsey Graham has made clear is that he's too damn stupid to understand the purpose of the Whistle Blower Protection Act and that he has no respect for the laws passed by Congress.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2019, 07:31 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
Since there is already a transcript of the call what is the need for the whistleblower testimony?

The Trump shills can't argue the law or the facts so resorting to nonsense has become their strategy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2019, 07:33 AM
 
21,430 posts, read 7,455,334 times
Reputation: 13233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuke64 View Post
Why can't the whistle blower come before the Senate? The House has no say in that.
You may ask Senator Grassely that question, we are all interested in what he has to say. He was a prime mover and chief sponsor of whistleblower legislation, and also improvements to the acts. He is, BTW, a well known longstanding Republican, the most senior Republican in the senate.

“It’s not always easy to figure out how to disclose waste, fraud or abuse in government when there are so many different rules governing different agencies. Empowering coordinators across the federal government will give whistleblowers a clear, confidential resource to make sure they are informed and equipped to lawfully carry out their patriotic duty to shine a light on inefficiencies or misconduct in government,” Grassley said. “This law represents an important step for keeping faith with the American people, but there is always more to do to protect whistleblowers.”

Senator Grassely did previously say "This person appears to have followed the whistleblower protection laws and ought to be heard out and protected. We should always work to respect whistleblowers’ requests for confidentiality ..."

And ... “When it comes to whether someone qualifies as a whistleblower, the distinctions being drawn between first- and second-hand knowledge aren’t legal ones. It’s just not part of whistleblower protection law or any agency policy. Complaints based on second-hand information should not be rejected out of hand, but they do require additional leg work to get at the facts and evaluate the claim’s credibility"

Will the Senate follow Senator Grassely's opinion, or not? Inquiring minds want to know.

Last edited by Hesychios; 11-11-2019 at 07:41 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2019, 07:35 AM
 
996 posts, read 379,013 times
Reputation: 453
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
By using congress appropriated funding as leverage to get dirt on a political opponent, it would be an impeachable offense.
Incorrect. The POTUS is within the chain of custody regarding the release of the funds. Congress does not have the authority in this case to just send them the money. That being said, the reason it goes through POTUS is part of the checks and balances of Government. There isn't any evidence of any " leverage " being applied. In fact, we hear " No pressure at all " from the Ukraine President.

As an American taxpayer I support any President that looks long and hard about sending $ 400 million to a long standing corrupt environment. Another reason he was elected.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2019, 07:37 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,811,747 times
Reputation: 10789
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbdwihdh378y9 View Post
The allegation that there was something wrong with the call depends ENTIRELY on the Bidens being completely free of wrongdoing. Without testimony from Hunter Biden, it is close to impossible to prove your case.
You clearly do not understand the issue here.

Trump had all possible resources to conduct a proper investigation into any alleged wrongdoing of Hunter Biden.

Instead, trump sent a private citizen and attempted to bribe the Ukraine president to make a public statement that Ukraine was investigating Biden. Furthermore, trump used congress appropriated funding to bribe this president.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2019, 07:40 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuele View Post
Incorrect. The POTUS is within the chain of custody regarding the release of the funds. Congress does not have the authority in this case to just send them the money. That being said, the reason it goes through POTUS is part of the checks and balances of Government. There isn't any evidence of any " leverage " being applied. In fact, we hear " No pressure at all " from the Ukraine President.

As an American taxpayer I support any President that looks long and hard about sending $ 400 million to a long standing corrupt environment. Another reason he was elected.



I just can't wait to see Dear Leaders' followers giving their 'If the glove don't fir you must acquit' Dog & Pony Show during the impeachment trial.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:28 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top