• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fox's Napolitano says after Sondland testimony that Democrats have a case for impeachment

JacksinPA

JacksinPA

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 3, 2017
Messages
26,290
Reaction score
16,776
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Fox's Napolitano says after Sondland testimony that Democrats have a case for impeachment | TheHill

Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano said Thursday on “Fox and Friends” that Democrats have a case for impeaching President Trump after U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland’s congressional testimony.

“One would expect the president, in September, after the whistleblower's allegations came out, after the president was accused of a quid pro quo, to say ‘no quid pro quo.’ Here we go with the Latin again,” Napolitano said. “But it is clear from what Ambassador Sondland testified yesterday that there was an understanding that the president wanted some things from the Ukrainians.”
==============================================
Quid-pro-quo = bribery, which is in the Constitution is grounds for impeachment.
 
Last edited:
JacksinPA said:
Fox's Napolitano says after Sondland testimony that Democrats have a case for impeachment | TheHill

Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano said Thursday on “Fox and Friends” that Democrats have a case for impeaching President Trump after U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland’s congressional testimony.

“One would expect the president, in September, after the whistleblower's allegations came out, after the president was accused of a quid pro quo, to say ‘no quid pro quo.’ Here we go with the Latin again,” Napolitano said. “But it is clear from what Ambassador Sondland testified yesterday that there was an understanding that the president wanted some things from the Ukrainians.”
==============================================
Quid-pro-quo = bribery, which is in the Constitution as grounds for impeachment.
Click to expand...

Didn't happen, try again. And don't pretend that suddenly you're a Napolitino fan........he's libertarian and no where near your politics. Wanting unspecified things from Ukraine isn't grounds for impeachment at all. Sondland presumed a lot, and that's why he got bent over and reamed by the Republicans yesterday.
 
American said:
Didn't happen, try again. And don't pretend that suddenly you're a Napolitino fan........he's libertarian and no where near your politics. Wanting unspecified things from Ukraine isn't grounds for impeachment at all. Sondland presumed a lot, and that's why he got bent over and reamed by the Republicans yesterday.
Click to expand...

They were very specified things Trump wanted.

And, yes, everyone working for Trump just "presumed" that investigations mentioned on the call they weren't allowed to read the transcript of were hard requirements for a meeting and aid. They just made it up, and what they made up happened to agree with the call Trump people buried in the vault and didn't share with Sondland and Taylor and others. Then they told Ukraine this, Ukraine told us they understood what was required, and despite everyone involved testifying they were unanimous and desperate to get the meeting done and the aid, they FABRICATED huge requirements from Ukraine to get that done! For NO REASON! Trump didn't want those things done! All the people working for him did!!

Go with that.:roll:
 
Smart conservatives know what's up.
 
American said:
Didn't happen, try again. And don't pretend that suddenly you're a Napolitino fan........he's libertarian and no where near your politics. Wanting unspecified things from Ukraine isn't grounds for impeachment at all. Sondland presumed a lot, and that's why he got bent over and reamed by the Republicans yesterday.
Click to expand...
I can't speak for JacksinPA. But I can say Americans are happy to see cracks in Fox News, including with Chris Wallace, Shep Smith, Judge Nap, and others that refuse to espouse the WH propaganda.
 
Chomsky said:
I can't speak for JacksinPA. But I can say Americans are happy to see cracks in Fox News, including with Chris Wallace, Shep Smith, Judge Nap, and others that refuse to espouse the WH propaganda.
Click to expand...

Yeah but it's no CSPAN... Volume up!


Long live Montey in Florida!
 
JacksinPA said:
Fox's Napolitano says after Sondland testimony that Democrats have a case for impeachment | TheHill

Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano said Thursday on “Fox and Friends” that Democrats have a case for impeaching President Trump after U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland’s congressional testimony.

“One would expect the president, in September, after the whistleblower's allegations came out, after the president was accused of a quid pro quo, to say ‘no quid pro quo.’ Here we go with the Latin again,” Napolitano said. “But it is clear from what Ambassador Sondland testified yesterday that there was an understanding that the president wanted some things from the Ukrainians.”
==============================================
Quid-pro-quo = bribery, which is in the Constitution is grounds for impeachment.
Click to expand...

Napolitano has been saying the same thing for weeks.
Bribery meant something different when the founders included it in the Constitution.
 
Chomsky said:
I can't speak for JacksinPA. But I can say Americans are happy to see cracks in Fox News, including with Chris Wallace, Shep Smith, Judge Nap, and others that refuse to espouse the WH propaganda.
Click to expand...

Democrats witnesses are being picked apart for their inconsistent and factfree testimonies. Judge Ken Starr says there is nothing impeachable there. I'd say he knows more about impeachment than Napolitano.

Ken Starr on impeachment hearings so far: We'''re '''nowhere close''' to impeachable offenses | Fox News
 
Geoist said:
Smart conservatives know what's up.
Click to expand...
Yep. We see this here in DP. Good for them!

I always respected principled conservatives, because despite my liberal politics I was raised conservatively and use a fair number of conservative principles in my private & personal life. I feel good that my faith in conservatives and some of those principles was not unfounded.

I do my best to separate "conservatism" from "MAGA". They are two very different things, even if Trump kowtows to some conservatism policy in order to remain in power.
 
JasperL said:
They were very specified things Trump wanted.

And, yes, everyone working for Trump just "presumed" that investigations mentioned on the call they weren't allowed to read the transcript of were hard requirements for a meeting and aid. They just made it up, and what they made up happened to agree with the call Trump people buried in the vault and didn't share with Sondland and Taylor and others. Then they told Ukraine this, Ukraine told us they understood what was required, and despite everyone involved testifying they were unanimous and desperate to get the meeting done and the aid, they FABRICATED huge requirements from Ukraine to get that done! For NO REASON! Trump didn't want those things done! All the people working for him did!!

Go with that.:roll:
Click to expand...

He might have wanted certain things, but Sondland was clueless as to what they were. He guessed, he leaped to what he presumed Trump wanted (i.e., quid pro quo). What Trump did clearly state was that he wanted Zelensky to carry out his campaign promise to fight corruption. Sondland even said it, though he spent most of his time contradicting himself.
 
American said:
He might have wanted certain things, but Sondland was clueless as to what they were. He guessed, he leaped to what he presumed Trump wanted (i.e., quid pro quo). What Trump did clearly stated was that he wanted Zelensky to carry out his campaign promise to fight corruption. Sondland even said it, though he spent most of his time contradicting himself.
Click to expand...

yes he did. it is amazing that these people do not hear complete testimonies.
 
JacksinPA said:
Fox's Napolitano says after Sondland testimony that Democrats have a case for impeachment | TheHill

Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano said Thursday on “Fox and Friends” that Democrats have a case for impeaching President Trump after U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland’s congressional testimony.

“One would expect the president, in September, after the whistleblower's allegations came out, after the president was accused of a quid pro quo, to say ‘no quid pro quo.’ Here we go with the Latin again,” Napolitano said. “But it is clear from what Ambassador Sondland testified yesterday that there was an understanding that the president wanted some things from the Ukrainians.”
==============================================
Quid-pro-quo = bribery, which is in the Constitution is grounds for impeachment.
Click to expand...

Why would anyone give two ****s about what some talking head thinks? Maybe instead of posting every single ****ing thing that crosses your RSS feed here, you could try forming your own opinions.
 
American said:
Didn't happen, try again. And don't pretend that suddenly you're a Napolitino fan........he's libertarian and no where near your politics. Wanting unspecified things from Ukraine isn't grounds for impeachment at all. Sondland presumed a lot, and that's why he got bent over and reamed by the Republicans yesterday.
Click to expand...
This post is everything you need to know about today's politics.

"Napolotino is a libertarian and no where near your politics" ie the tribe you belong to determines what is true.

The truth of a statement and the validity of any supporting argument is generally independent of who makes it.
 
American said:
Didn't happen, try again. And don't pretend that suddenly you're a Napolitino fan........he's libertarian and no where near your politics. Wanting unspecified things from Ukraine isn't grounds for impeachment at all. Sondland presumed a lot, and that's why he got bent over and reamed by the Republicans yesterday.
Click to expand...

Right wingers have gone full Baghdad Bob :lamo
 
Chomsky said:
Matters not. Cracks forming in Fox, is bad for MAGA - and good for America. I'm happy for that.
Click to expand...

You sure you don't want to agree with American? I mean, it's Kenn Starr!!!!!!!

:lamo
 
Mithros said:
This post is everything you need to know about today's politics.

"Napolotino is a libertarian and no where near your politics" ie the tribe you belong to determines what is true.

The truth of a statement and the validity of any supporting argument is generally independent of who makes it.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Well said!

Some Republicans, along with Trump and Trump media, are trying to tell us they are the arbitrators of truth! This is a very authoritarian thing, which is why I believe it works with Trump's supporters, but not those of us who are more liberal and freer thinkers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom