Nadler Gives Republicans One Week To ‘Participate’ In Impeachment Inquiry

This_person

Well-Known Member
Do you often ask that of the police when they discover crime?

Do you ask the firemen who called them after they put out the fire?

why are you more concerned with why a crime was Investigated than the actual crime?
Have you read the fifth amendment yet?

This is not a fire - that's a clear and present danger to society around it - a situation that clearly exists, or it doesn't.

Now, if there IS no fire, yes, who called the fire (that doesn't exist) in is a valid question.

As we've seen from people getting damaged by police who lie, whether or not there is sufficient justification for a warrant or for an investigation absolutely is a question for the police.

Why I am concerned with why a crime is investigated - especially when the evidence points to no crime - is because I believe in the constitution and a citizen's freedom from harassment from the government.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
Do you really not understand that Quid Pro Quo and extortion/bribery are the same thing?
The only people with any "knowledge" of a quid pro quo said they assumed it, or heard it from someone who assumed it, or heard it from someone who heard it from someone who assumed it.

Point to the testimony where someone said, "I heard the president say..." that leads to a bribery or quid pro quo. You can't do it, because it ain't there. But, I can point to every witness who said they thought it was true, heard it was true from someone else, or presumed it.
 

Stjohns3269

Active Member
Have you read the fifth amendment yet?

This is not a fire - that's a clear and present danger to society around it - a situation that clearly exists, or it doesn't.

Now, if there IS no fire, yes, who called the fire (that doesn't exist) in is a valid question.

As we've seen from people getting damaged by police who lie, whether or not there is sufficient justification for a warrant or for an investigation absolutely is a question for the police.

Why I am concerned with why a crime is investigated - especially when the evidence points to no crime - is because I believe in the constitution and a citizen's freedom from harassment from the government.
So let’s assume there was no crime however the whistelblower has come forward and made a report that there was.

How exactly would you like Schiff to go about investigating it other than the manner in which he has to get to the bottom of whether a crime was committed or not? Wouldn’t it be just as biased using your example to assume no crime was committed and not investigate?

This is not a criminal trial. This is an investigation. You can’t blame the Dems for investigating something that was reported to them that was of concern as possibly an abuse of presidential power unless you have a vested interest in seeing Trump be innocent.
 

Stjohns3269

Active Member
The only people with any "knowledge" of a quid pro quo said they assumed it, or heard it from someone who assumed it, or heard it from someone who heard it from someone who assumed it.

Point to the testimony where someone said, "I heard the president say..." that leads to a bribery or quid pro quo. You can't do it, because it ain't there. But, I can point to every witness who said they thought it was true, heard it was true from someone else, or presumed it.
You are forgetting Sondlands testimony which I have shown you repeatedly.

We also have Vindman’s testimony of the call in question.

We also know the call was moved to a secure server which was highly unusual. ( We know how you feel about server irregularity if you want to be ethically consistent)

We also know Trump refuses to release the transcript of the call

We also know he refuses to let 4 other people testify
We also know he specifically told Sondland “ no Quid pro Quo the day after he was made aware of the WB complaint and released the aid.

All of those things show a pattern of guilt and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see exactly what happened.

If you are honest with yourself it’s clear.
You can say “I like Trump still, I don’t care” but that means you are no longer for the rule of law but for one man
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
We also know the call was moved to a secure server which was highly unusual. ( We know how you feel about server irregularity if you want to be ethically consistent)

Liar ... No it is not an usual move considering the leaks from the White House


You are forgetting Sondlands testimony which I have shown you repeatedly.

We also have Vindman’s testimony of the call in question.

yeah all presumption, feelings and assumptions
 

Bird Dog

Bird Dog
PREMO Member
The bottom line is the Dems have been trying to impeach Trump for 3 1/2 years.
This is just round 8 of the impeachment process and the American people are getting very tired of it.
It's going to hurt them in 2020 and they deserve it. They have done nothing to improve the lives of American citizens and while Trump can point to many accomplishments, all the can say is "orange man bad". Its a great campaign slogan.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
So let’s assume there was no crime however the whistelblower has come forward and made a report that there was.

How exactly would you like Schiff to go about investigating it other than the manner in which he has to get to the bottom of whether a crime was committed or not? Wouldn’t it be just as biased using your example to assume no crime was committed and not investigate?

This is not a criminal trial. This is an investigation. You can’t blame the Dems for investigating something that was reported to them that was of concern as possibly an abuse of presidential power unless you have a vested interest in seeing Trump be innocent.
Well, it's a good assumption there is no crime because there's zero evidence of a crime.

The whistleblower reported someone else thought maybe something happened with which they disagreed. The whistleblower had no firsthand experience with anything.

Imagine if I reported that I heard someone else say Schiff did something I didn't like. Would you expect the ethics committee to open a full-fledged investigation? Then, let's further imagine that every single person interviewed said that they had no firsthand knowledge that Schiff did something wrong, but they presumed he did or heard someone else who presumed he did. Would you expect the investigation to continue with people saying Schiff clearly should be expelled from the House?

Because that's exactly what is happening.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
You are forgetting Sondlands testimony which I have shown you repeatedly.

We also have Vindman’s testimony of the call in question.

We also know the call was moved to a secure server which was highly unusual. ( We know how you feel about server irregularity if you want to be ethically consistent)

We also know Trump refuses to release the transcript of the call

We also know he refuses to let 4 other people testify
We also know he specifically told Sondland “ no Quid pro Quo the day after he was made aware of the WB complaint and released the aid.

All of those things show a pattern of guilt and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see exactly what happened.

If you are honest with yourself it’s clear.
You can say “I like Trump still, I don’t care” but that means you are no longer for the rule of law but for one man
I've seen or read Sondland's and Vindman's testimony. Sondland clearly said he had no firsthand knowledge of a connection between aid and anything else, that he presumed it. Vindman said he disagreed with Trump's policy positions but has no direct knowledge of any connection between aid and anything at all.

If those are the strongest testimonies, they state no evidence of anything.

The rest is conjecture clouded by a presumption of guilt.

You've got nothing.
 

Stjohns3269

Active Member
Well, it's a good assumption there is no crime because there's zero evidence of a crime.

The whistleblower reported someone else thought maybe something happened with which they disagreed. The whistleblower had no firsthand experience with anything.

Imagine if I reported that I heard someone else say Schiff did something I didn't like. Would you expect the ethics committee to open a full-fledged investigation? Then, let's further imagine that every single person interviewed said that they had no firsthand knowledge that Schiff did something wrong, but they presumed he did or heard someone else who presumed he did. Would you expect the investigation to continue with people saying Schiff clearly should be expelled from the House?

Because that's exactly what is happening.
That’s not at all what’s happening but even if it were Who cares?

why are so scared of Trump being investigated if he has nothing to hide?

When an anonymous tipster, a whistle blower or informant tells the police they believe a crime is being commited the police then investigate. That is what the impeachment process is. An investigation. We have now heard from multiple people a crime was committed.

me em Trumps latest defense admits he withhold Ukraine funding to fight “corruption”

jisnactions alone since the investigation started warrant it to be further investigated.

why do you continue to make excuse after excuse for a man we have seen lie about almost everything, attack private citizens, lawmakers, politicians, and break almost all conventions and norms of governance?

Do you really think he is better than extorting a foreign country to sway an election? We now know he did it in 2016. Why not now?
 

Stjohns3269

Active Member
I've seen or read Sondland's and Vindman's testimony. Sondland clearly said he had no firsthand knowledge of a connection between aid and anything else, that he presumed it. Vindman said he disagreed with Trump's policy positions but has no direct knowledge of any connection between aid and anything at all.

If those are the strongest testimonies, they state no evidence of anything.

The rest is conjecture clouded by a presumption of guilt.

You've got nothing.
Both are more than enough to spur an investigation, which is exactly what is happening. Why are you so scared of the rules of our country being put to use playing out?
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
That’s not at all what’s happening but even if it were Who cares?

why are so scared of Trump being investigated if he has nothing to hide?

When an anonymous tipster, a whistle blower or informant tells the police they believe a crime is being commited the police then investigate. That is what the impeachment process is. An investigation. We have now heard from multiple people a crime was committed.

me em Trumps latest defense admits he withhold Ukraine funding to fight “corruption”

jisnactions alone since the investigation started warrant it to be further investigated.

why do you continue to make excuse after excuse for a man we have seen lie about almost everything, attack private citizens, lawmakers, politicians, and break almost all conventions and norms of governance?

Do you really think he is better than extorting a foreign country to sway an election? We now know he did it in 2016. Why not now?
I would keep telling you the truth, but you continue to ignore it. You've gone from a worthwhile way to express the truth against your lying to just a repetitive bore, wasting my time.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
That’s not at all what’s happening but even if it were Who cares?

Yeah who cares, as long as YOU hate Trump Resistance by any means, Lies, Innuendo, False Narratives .... Anything to make Trump Look Bad

yeah cannot give the guy credit from visiting Afghanistan, ya cannot give he credit for the death of the ISIS Leader .......


Do you really think he is better than extorting a foreign country to sway an election?
Be Specific how was Trump Extorting Ukraine, Explain how Biden gets a pass on UKRAINE investigating Birsma Corruption and Hunter Biden's Crony Political JOB, because is running for President

Hunter Biden NO Experience in Gas and OIL - more familiar with smoking crack in a strip club - gets a 50k a month job - and you claim Trump is corrupt


Ukraine's Own President says once again - no Quid Pro Quo



Why are you so scared of the rules of our country being put to use playing out?



Liar there is nothing to investigate ... this is a report based on 4th hand innuendo
 

itsbob

I bowl overhand
After Trump and the GOP spent weeks crying about how they weren't allowed to participate in the process and now they say they won't participate in the process once they are invited formally.

Such a bunch of whiners.
Bullshit.. they are trying to force the PRESIDENT to bend to their every whim, and when he doesn't they all have little fits.. like standing, pointing fingers and walking out of meetings. They threaten him with impeachment if he doesn't do what they say, he calls them on it, DOESN'T do what they say, so they had to save face and actually go through the motions of impeachment.. and he's STILL not doing what they tell him to do.

After weeks of testimony they have NOTHING, but they are all in now.. they can't back down and lose face.. they'll let the House and Country burn to the ground before they back off now.

And STILL Trump isn't letting them have their way, or boss him around. He has a schedule, planned a year if not more in advance, he has things he still wants to get done, and they are trying to force him to change all of his plans, knowing he can't or won't, for the sole purpose to try to make him look bad.. and for the idiots (present company not excluded) to fall for it.
 

itsbob

I bowl overhand
Do you really not understand that Quid Pro Quo and extortion/bribery are the same thing?

Why are you complaining about an investigation the point of which is to get to the truth? How else would they go about doing that other than calling witnesses and investigating.
Isn't this entire hubaloo about a President trying to do JUST that??

Didn't Biden brag about doing what Trump is being accused of?? Don't you agree, before they complain about what Trump did (or didn't do) they should investigate Biden to see if Trump was right??

What's the point of ANY of this if Trump was right in the first place? And there has been NO investigation to prove if he was or wasn't, only democrats saying.. "Biden did nothing wrong, it's been investigated!!" By WHO, who investigated what Biden did??
 

PrchJrkr

It'll be Fine...
PREMO Member
What's truly disturbing is that there are others out there that are as brain washed as sappy, that believe that anything Trump did, is a basis to remove him from office. There have always been conditions attached to aid to other countries to ensure the aid isn't deposited into a proverbial Swiss bank account and nothing is given in return. The Ukraine aid isn't any different. It shouldn't matter one little bit if that corruption is tied to one running against the president. I believe it's better to get it out in the open for all to see. Can anyone honestly say that they would want a president like Biden who is blatantly breaking the law to enrich himself and his son?

When this is all over, the Biden's had better lawyer up, and lawyer up good. They definitely have a tiger by the tail when ****ing with Trump. I have a feeling that they're all trying to deflect from the graft and cronyism that defines what our political system has devolved into. I've said it before, but it's worth repeating, we need term limits on ALL elected positions and now we've also been made aware of the need to clean house of appointed officials, as well. If not, you get corrupt appointees like Vindman breaking military protocol because of his political beliefs. He is a disgrace to his uniform and I hope that his firing opens some eyes.
 

PrchJrkr

It'll be Fine...
PREMO Member
The shits gonna hit the fan for the Bidens, and old Uncle Joe is out there showing the world what dementia looks like in it's early stages.
 
Top