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 used to have terrific respect for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, but this episode has been an abject travesty. She's crapped on the US Constitution and dumbed-down the impeachment process, which was intended for only the most grave of situations.
So basically you're saying you approve of the US being run like La Cosa Nostra.
1. The aid arrived before the deadline, thus no violation of the law....and there's not even an accusation otherwise.
2. This is unproven spin, and there's not even an accusation that he violated any law.
3. This accusation isn't even being made.
1. WRONG. The money had been appropriated by congress was approved to be sent by OMB. If there was an issue that required further oversight into why it should be withheld, then it was congress and OMB's job to withhold it which would have required a valid reason. Not POTUS. Congress controls money. So spare me before you tell me about corruption. This money was appropriated in at least two budget bills that this president signed, even when Ukraine was led by Poroshenko, a known corrupt politician.
2. Read the transcript of the "PERFECT" call. Why the interest in the Bidens now? If the Bidens did something wrong, why didn't congress investigate? I believe republicans controlled either the house, senate or both during trumps 3 years in office. Biden becomes the leading dem in the polls and trump starts looking for dirt. ANd instead of asking our agencies to look into it he goes to a foreign leader. Very patriotic.
hillary's House led the investigations and came to the conclusion they did. They claim a "slam dunk", NO MORE witness's are needed.
The senate trial should be based on the investigation the house did, just as in any criminal case.
IF more are needed, why didn't SHE get them?
You raise good points. More witnesses were needed but were denied trump. I agree with your premise. I believe Pelosi made an error here that she is now counting on the senate for to bail her out. I still don't know why she rushed into approving articles. She should have gone to court to get the witnesses she felt were needed. No doubt.
Because witnesses and documents were blocked by the administration. Now some of those witnesses and documents are available. Making a less-informed decision when an opportunity to make a more-informed decision is available is stupid unless you are just looking justify a partisan, pre-determined outcome rather than engage in any type of truth-seeking or government oversight.
Anyone paying attention has to conclude that trump's base has no interest in finding the truth. They will march right behind him right over the lip of the volcano.
Unless she decides to amend the articles by subpoenaing Bolton to the House, getting his testimony on record, and then submit that to the Senate. That is entirely legal to do.
She could, but what do you think Bolton will say?
I highly doubt that Bolton is the smoking gun all you dems think he is.
In fact, I'd bet he's about as much of a smoking gun as....
I thought this was all about national security and we have to do the impeachment NOWWWWWWWWWW!
Guess that was just a bunch of BS....
You CAN see why with the evidence against trump and you believe he is guilty, it wouldn't make sense to just let it go to the senate to be voted down. Then you open yourself up to similar behavior which makes us less safe.
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.