The Impeachment Trial of President Donald J. Trump

[TakeYouToTasker]

5 minutes ago, Margarita said:

I think the Biden connection was worthy of examination but in the view of the Democrats the way Trump went about it (himself and not by the Justice dept) AND his extraneous ulterior motives for doing what he did other than to rout out corruption  is the crux of the matter at hand

The President is not only empowered, but rather required, to set and conduct foreign policy.

 

Pursuant to that, the President followed, to the letter and spirit of the law, the authority permitted to him by the Ukraine treaty signed by President Clinton empowering the executive to work with the Ukraine to ferret out international corruption between the two nations.

 

There is no Constitutional provision requiring this matter be handled/managed by the DOJ; and besides, the DOJ is part of the Executive Branch, which the President is the head of. There is no firewall of any sort between the DOJ and the President.

 

Your argument is that the President does not have the right to conduct foreign policy, and that the President serves under the oversight of Congress.  It is a bad argument.

[GG]

1 minute ago, Bob in Mich said:

Is it possible that JoeB didn't want Hunter in that job?  Is it possible that Hunter took it over Joe's objections?  I don't know but I am just pointing out that surmising evil intentions by JoeB may not be correct. 

 

Under the standing anti-corruption laws for mere mortals, intent does not matter one bit.   

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

You may disagree with my posts but I am not disingenuous.  If so, where, what post?

 

Yes you are. Look through all your posts I highlighted just this morning. There's multiple posts of you being disingenuous and failing to see the bigger picture. 

 

You still believe Trump/Russia was real -- and, without irony, you are accusing others of not being interested in truth because of partisan reasons. 

 

You're a hypocrite, Bob. An uninformed one at that.

[CoudyBills]

9 minutes ago, Margarita said:

can you prove this? ….otherwise to state this as fact when clearly conjecture isn't fair IMO

Fair?  Someone fell down and bumped her head this morning.  

[Bob in Mich]

53 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

I know you didn't direct this at me, but here's a snarky answer:

Don't worry, Trump is a one hit wonder. No other politician would ever do this.

 

Who knows if he gets re-elected at this point.  I do not.know.  If he does however, I don't want it to be because he tilted the election playing field through illegal actions.

 

Will others do this?  If it is deemed OK going forward then, yes they will, I predict.

[3rdnlng]

3 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

Foxx, I find it more and more difficult to ignore your repeated insults.  If they continue, I will stop engaging and just put you on ignore with DR and Tom.  I don't need it.

 

I have taken more time than I have to have a conversation here.  You may disagree with my posts but I am not disingenuous.  If so, where, what post?

 

Notice that there are about a dozen or so folks that jump on my replies.  Your side does not get flooded over like that so maybe you missed it.  I stated earlier that I can't possibly give detailed replies to everyone.  I noted that if I missed something to bring it up again. 

 

I watched about a half hour of Bondi off Youtube.  She made a good case for not voting for Hunter for anything.  She made a very strong case that he displayed pretty poor judgement.  His board position looked bad and she made that point.  She also threw a lot of suspicion on JoeB but from the part I saw, not proof of anything other than the prosecutor firing.  Since that was our nation's policy I don't see any equivalence to Trump's affair.

 

Is it possible that JoeB didn't want Hunter in that job?  Is it possible that Hunter took it over Joe's objections?  I don't know but I am just pointing out that surmising evil intentions by JoeB may not be correct. 

What do you think of Joe Biden's judgement in all of this, including his idiotic taped bragging about getting the prosecutor fired? 

[Nanker]

8 minutes ago, Margarita said:

can you prove this? ….otherwise to state this as fact when clearly conjecture isn't fair IMO

 

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Bob in Mich said:

Will others do this?  If it is deemed OK going forward then, yes they will, I predict.

 

Will other presidents conduct legitimate foreign policy? Yes. Yes they will. 

 

You're very underinformed.

[Tiberius]

Dear Partisan Hack boy, Maybe if team Trump wasn't hosting meetings with Russians in Trump Tower there wouldn't be a need to investigate. 

 

Or hiring Paul (Putin's Boy) Manafort to run the campaign. 

 

Or openly calling on Russia to hack emails

 

Or, when knowing Wikkileaks was the conduit for the stolen hacks having Trump run around saying "I love Wikkileaks...later he said he knew nothing about Wikkileaks 

 

Or praising the murderous dictator Putin at every opportunity. 

 

You clowns should know better but you don't care about Trump cuddling up to the autocrats because you are so blindly partisan. 

 

Or trying to build a Trump Tower Moscow during the F'in campaign! Hello idiots! 

 

Hello! 

 

[Bob in Mich]

55 minutes ago, Foxx said:

and that is exactly why he moved the goal posts. it is a common tactic amongst liberals. when you back them into a corner they scream, 'look, squirrel!'  @Tiberius is famous for this. 

 

I saw no corners.  You are the one that at least as far as I have read, ignored my questions.  Perhaps when I catch up you will have answers.  Let's hope

[muppy]

1 minute ago, CoudyBills said:

Fair?  Someone fell down and bumped her head this morning.  

yeah I figured that word would get jumped on..I think what is good for one side is equally good for the other. I know the consensus is that Trump has been treated unfairly in this impeachment process I get it.

[CoudyBills]

4 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Dear Partisan Hack boy, Maybe if team Trump wasn't hosting meetings with Russians in Trump Tower there wouldn't be a need to investigate. 

 

Or hiring Paul (Putin's Boy) Manafort to run the campaign. 

 

Or openly calling on Russia to hack emails

 

Or, when knowing Wikkileaks was the conduit for the stolen hacks having Trump run around saying "I love Wikkileaks...later he said he knew nothing about Wikkileaks 

 

Or praising the murderous dictator Putin at every opportunity. 

 

You clowns should know better but you don't care about Trump cuddling up to the autocrats because you are so blindly partisan. 

 

Or trying to build a Trump Tower Moscow during the F'in campaign! Hello idiots! 

 

Hello! 

 

Bro, not helpful.  Think of the service to the people.  Perhaps there is a dem with a campaign platform that we should consider?

Edited January 29, 2020 by CoudyBills

[Deranged Rhino]

This is a big part of it, without a doubt: 

 

[CoudyBills]

1 minute ago, Margarita said:

yeah I figured that word would get jumped on..I think what is good for one side is equally good for the other. I know the consensus is that Trump has been treated unfairly in this impeachment process I get it.

On that we agree.  Fairness be damned.  Brass knuckle boxing...love it.  

[Tiberius]

2 minutes ago, CoudyBills said:

Bro, not helpful.  Think of the service to the people.  Perhaps there is a dem with a campaign platform that we should consider?

You can't dispute those facts, honestly. He is conspiring with Putin, obviously 

[Foxx]

3 minutes ago, Margarita said:

yeah I figured that word would get jumped on..I think what is good for one side is equally good for the other. I know the consensus is that Trump has been treated unfairly in this impeachment process I get it.

no you don't.

[Bray Wyatt]

Just now, Foxx said:

no you don't.

 

Her name makes me thirsty

[IDBillzFan]

19 minutes ago, Margarita said:

can you prove this? ….otherwise to state this as fact when clearly conjecture isn't fair IMO

 

Have you not seen the video?

[Bob in Mich]

56 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

There has been no proof of anything, just how you and others "feel". Under our justice system the speculation by the dems would not have even made it to a grand jury. Don't expect paragraph after paragraph of response by me to your horseshit speculation and hidden rabbit holes. 

 

I asked you a very simple question but it takes some integrity to reply in this forum.  I notice you didn't reply.  Coincidence?

[Nanker]

1 minute ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

Have you not seen the video?

It's in two posts above her last post. 

Probably too busy to click it, you know how arduous clicking a link and watching a video can be.