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.
The lawsuit is only relevant in terms of the impeachment, which is not the topic of this discussion. I’m talking about the function of government, which goes back to the initial question that begets the lawsuit question: why were the requests for information blocked in the first instance? Did the Executive Branch not have an obligation to the people to be transparent and promote oversight?
This isn’t even a Trump-specific problem, because I think it started long before him although, like many things, he brought it to an extreme.
Really, you don’t the fast and furious case is the exact same scenario.
This has been going on forever, stop your sham liberal outrage.
If all politicians were held to the same standard the resistance is attempting to hold Trump to half of them would be in prison and the other half would be on probation.
Really, you don’t the fast and furious case is the exact same scenario.
This has been going on forever, stop your sham liberal outrage.
I not only criticized Holder for withholding documents, but I said Congress would have been justified if they impeached him.
Oh, and by the way, neither am I a liberal, nor is advocating for government transparency and oversight a “liberal” policy. So take your personal attacks and accusations of hypocrisy and shove them.
The answer to your question is that Democrats saw Trump’s obvious plan was to run out the clock in the Courts and made the tactical decision to move ahead with impeachment without waiting for the Courts.
But why were they put in that position in the first instance? The blanket refusal to allow transparency and oversight. So while the House may not have done it’s job to further impeachment, they were only forced to face a Morton’s Fork because the Executive refused to do theirs first. So why did the Executive refuse to do its job (or do you disagree that it was its job)?
The House Managers proved their case according to a Majority of the Senate. One GOP Senator voted to remove and 4 others said it was wrong what the impeached white collar criminal did.
So that is 52 members who believe that the Dem. House Managers proved their case.
So, you are really saying that the senate removed trump?
The answer to your question is that Democrats saw Trump’s obvious plan was to run out the clock in the Courts and made the tactical decision to move ahead with impeachment without waiting for the Courts.
When witnesses who have that proof are not allowed to testify and put that proof into the record, the whole "innocent until proven guilty" argument is bogus.
Democrats had 17 witnesses in the House.
We listened as the witnesses testified to their OPINIONS.
Then we listened as one Democrat after another stood up before voting to impeach and proclaim that the evidence provided by these 17 witnesses was irrefutable and undeniable proof of Trump's guilt.
If Democrats were so overwhelmingly sure of Trump's guilt based on the case they presented, why did Nancy stall and wait before sending it to the Senate?
Why did they demand more witnesses if the testimony already on record was "irrefutable and undeniable"?
Blanket refusal to respond —> court —> assert claim of need to review for privilege —> court —> claim privilege —> court. Factor in appeals, we are at somewhere around 2022-2026 or later. McGahn is at the first level of appeals and that’s been, what, 18 months? The Holder case took 6+ years.
Meanwhile the election was less than a year away. Get serious please. And stop deflecting and distracting from my question, which you are apparently incapable of addressing.
With that said... is he really THAT bad.. The economy is doing great!
Trump is a compulsive daily liar. He has no ethics, no morals and no integrity. He is completely unfit for office. I don't care how good the economy is, we have to have minimum standards of conduct for president. Maybe you and the other Trump supporters are willing to compromise standards for presidential conduct, I am not.
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.
