Impeachment
- Thread starter truby20
- Start date
No, because there's direct evidence of her criminality. Same with Quid Pro Joe - he flat admitted blackmailing Ukraine on video. Democrats only get excited over rumors.
WingsOfGold
Well-Known Member
"All the time" you watchin Perry Mason reruns or parroting Rachael Madcow????
Yooper
Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
Speaking of George Kent, at the end of his long, generally anti-Trump Twitter thread, Kenneth Vogel (NYT journo) mentions this (the tweet at the bottom of the link):
From my perspective, pretty much undermines whatever hopes the Majority had, re: Kent's testimony. Be prepared to watch the goal posts move again.
--- End of line (MCP)
From my perspective, pretty much undermines whatever hopes the Majority had, re: Kent's testimony. Be prepared to watch the goal posts move again.
--- End of line (MCP)
Hearsay is defined as "information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.
There are 4 hearsay risks associated w/ out-of-court statements.
- 1) Risk of Misperception: Risk not only a function of sensory capacity but of physical circumstance and of mental capacity and psychological condition.
- 2) Risk of fault memory: ...
- 3) Risk of Mistatement: ...
- 4) Risk of Distortion:
There are exceptions to the rule, but in this case none of those would apply, because the "witness" wasn't present to report what they heard.
The witness is repeating what someone told them, that was likely what that person was told. See 3&4 above. It's like a game of whisper down the line,
In this case the person giving testimony has never met the president and has never spoken to the president. He heard about the conversation from "someone" who was reporting what they were told. Just like the "anonymous" whistle blower", someone who wasn't on the call, told me and I didn't like what I thought I heard that they heard him say.
What is admitted is circumstantial evidence, and people are convicted of serious crimes, based on circumstantial evidence.
Hillary and her buddy are not even being investigated for mishandling classified information because (a) the public has been misled by the democratic talking heads and heir media lapdogs - let;'s just call it Pravda and (b) the heads of the federal agencies that should have investigated it predetermined there was no crime, last but not least, the didn't even confiscate the evidence until aver her IT people were able to wipe the drives.
The talking point from Pravda was the Clinton didn't do anything her predecessors and other cabinet level officials hadn't done in regards to a server in their home office. But that's not true, the government (and the agency will go unnamed) provides a palletized secure mail server for senior officials to use on the road or in their home office. Clinton choose to have her own system installed, not the approved secure system.
Someone will be along shortly to say, "Nuh uh."
... Or a long ridiculous rant made up of conjecture, conspiracy and imagination.
The only conspiracy theory I want to call debunked is the notion of a "Shadow Government" or "Deep State".
We have actual first hand evidence it exists. Provided by the democrats and their allies in and outside the official government.
Text messages from the FBI love birds, Tweets from Whistle Blowjob #1's lawyer, the number of family members and outside lawyers linked to WB#2, the connection between Schiff's staff and WB#1, along with the documented timeline of how and when the "complaint" was filed.
Not that there should have ever been a doubt, it's a well known secret that the level right below the cabinet level officials are the real power brokers in the government. These are technically political appointees that aren't asked to resign at the change of each administration.
Which apparently the Democrats wanted extended to Sally Yates, "Acting" Attorney General.
She should have tendered her resignation, as is the custom. It should not have taken the President to fire her ass in order to appoint his own AG.
But Sally "Tarmac" Yates wanted to stay on to oversee the investigation into "Russian Collusion"
As did James Comey.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
Trump's State Dept just finished a 3 year investigation into just that. Not sure if Trump tweeted the results of it out or not though.
https://apnews.com/14b14afc5d8647858489a2cf5385c28d
And everyone who handles classified information knows if they had done this, we would be walked out in handcuffs.
Of course they won;t be charged, the worlds smartest people didn't know what they were doing was wrong, even though the intentionally used an unapproved server.
I think if you check, the IG at State is not a Trump appointee nor is his staff. Guarantee the staff has been there for years, lifers.
Right now federal employees working in DC and NoVA are not Trump supporters.
Have you heard the whining from the BLM employees about the "30 day notice". Unrelated to impeachment (for now) but the Interior Dept has decided to relocate the Bureau of Land Management to Grand Junction Colorado. Employees just were handed the offer and given 30 days to accept. That's different than 30 days notice as the move has been socialized for some time.. It also doesn't mean they are out in 30 days. Just that they have 30 days to respond. But that's not the report in the media. Interior and the BLM think they should be where the land is as well as the people who's lives depend on the use of that land live. They think it would be more efficient to have people in the field, where the areas they mange are located. Not sitting in an office in DC. But they don't want to move, and they don't want to change jobs, so they go to the congress and the media and whine. Try doing that in private industry. Ask the people who were BRAC's to cry for you. Most of them weren't high grade employees,
Just a point of reference for how our government works. It self protects its own.
Of course they won;t be charged, the worlds smartest people didn't know what they were doing was wrong, even though the intentionally used an unapproved server.
I think if you check, the IG at State is not a Trump appointee nor is his staff. Guarantee the staff has been there for years, lifers.
Right now federal employees working in DC and NoVA are not Trump supporters.
Have you heard the whining from the BLM employees about the "30 day notice". Unrelated to impeachment (for now) but the Interior Dept has decided to relocate the Bureau of Land Management to Grand Junction Colorado. Employees just were handed the offer and given 30 days to accept. That's different than 30 days notice as the move has been socialized for some time.. It also doesn't mean they are out in 30 days. Just that they have 30 days to respond. But that's not the report in the media. Interior and the BLM think they should be where the land is as well as the people who's lives depend on the use of that land live. They think it would be more efficient to have people in the field, where the areas they mange are located. Not sitting in an office in DC. But they don't want to move, and they don't want to change jobs, so they go to the congress and the media and whine. Try doing that in private industry. Ask the people who were BRAC's to cry for you. Most of them weren't high grade employees,
Just a point of reference for how our government works. It self protects its own.
I believe they know this is all a kangaroo court. I don't believe they have officially charged him with anything, just made a lot of accusations.
As we would say they are just pulling stuff out of their fat ass.
It's not about impeachment, it's about resistance, no legislation is getting passed while this show goes on and it will go on for many more months to come. They were just granted access under their "investigatory powers" to eight years of his tax returns.
They aren't looking for a crime, they are looking for information that will look bad when they leak it to the press.
That's why they had to vote on the impeachment inquiry, unlike Nixon and Clinton there was no indictment handed down from a real investigation.
In both cases a prosecutor felt there was more than sufficient evidence to go to court. The only thing that stopped them was they aren't allowed to charge a sitting president under the constitution. Hence why those reports were delivered to the house to review, call witnesses and then vote on articles of impeachment. Not vote on hold an impeachment inquiry. Schiff and Nadler are both on record as saying they wanted this so they could get to Trumps tax records. They felt of impeachment was in the request to the judge they would grant them the subpoena.
Again, what do they hope to find in those eight years that the IRS did not. Nothing, but it will give details on his life they would spread around the media to just make him look bad in the court of public opinion.
BTW, not only is this democrats using the power of their office to influence the next election, it's also to keep their die hard troops happy.
The resistance has to be fed.
When people started with the #resist and #resistance hashtag stuff right after the election you should have known where it was going.
The MSM calls Trumps request to have the Ukraine look into interference allegations - debunked. But they keep playing the Russian collusion, he's a Russian agent, blah blah blah - in spite of the Mueller report. It's like they read the report, it didn't say what they wanted, so they just make it up and repeat it long enough for people to believe it's the truth.
I believe a posted the quote from their friend Adolph?
Which is not a bad analogy, since one of their biggest benefactors is so anti-semetic he's supports abolishing Israel.
As we would say they are just pulling stuff out of their fat ass.
It's not about impeachment, it's about resistance, no legislation is getting passed while this show goes on and it will go on for many more months to come. They were just granted access under their "investigatory powers" to eight years of his tax returns.
They aren't looking for a crime, they are looking for information that will look bad when they leak it to the press.
That's why they had to vote on the impeachment inquiry, unlike Nixon and Clinton there was no indictment handed down from a real investigation.
In both cases a prosecutor felt there was more than sufficient evidence to go to court. The only thing that stopped them was they aren't allowed to charge a sitting president under the constitution. Hence why those reports were delivered to the house to review, call witnesses and then vote on articles of impeachment. Not vote on hold an impeachment inquiry. Schiff and Nadler are both on record as saying they wanted this so they could get to Trumps tax records. They felt of impeachment was in the request to the judge they would grant them the subpoena.
Again, what do they hope to find in those eight years that the IRS did not. Nothing, but it will give details on his life they would spread around the media to just make him look bad in the court of public opinion.
BTW, not only is this democrats using the power of their office to influence the next election, it's also to keep their die hard troops happy.
The resistance has to be fed.
When people started with the #resist and #resistance hashtag stuff right after the election you should have known where it was going.
The MSM calls Trumps request to have the Ukraine look into interference allegations - debunked. But they keep playing the Russian collusion, he's a Russian agent, blah blah blah - in spite of the Mueller report. It's like they read the report, it didn't say what they wanted, so they just make it up and repeat it long enough for people to believe it's the truth.
I believe a posted the quote from their friend Adolph?
Which is not a bad analogy, since one of their biggest benefactors is so anti-semetic he's supports abolishing Israel.
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
I said in here a couple of months ago that the IG investigation was just more BS.
What I do know for sure is that if the House spent as much time gathering evidence against the child molesters and pedophiles that visited Epsteins Island and gave us the names of those in the Congress that used our tax money to pay off their whores, there would be a lot less of them to bitch about Trump and make up these BS impeachment charges.
What I do know for sure is that if the House spent as much time gathering evidence against the child molesters and pedophiles that visited Epsteins Island and gave us the names of those in the Congress that used our tax money to pay off their whores, there would be a lot less of them to bitch about Trump and make up these BS impeachment charges.
Serious. During his testimony I was like, "How the hell is THIS their star witness???"
Now Chris Wallace et al are trying to pretend Taylor was a GREAT witness. "He took notes!" "He went to West Point!" "He has a wonderful voice!"
How much of my money is being spent on this bullshit?
LOL, Thank you,............this gave me a good laugh .
I was just looking for clarity on your previous post .
I'm looking forward to all the laughing you'll be doing when Trump is still your President in 2020...2021..2022....
