You want evidence? Bolton book outlines Trump is guilty

[Luckyone]

Why is your major question.

There is the long standing system that when Presidents talk officially to other governments, none of that is made public. Trump made an exception when he explained what he said to Zelensky. You do not convert them to witnesses merely to please Democrats.

This is not about pleasing Democrats.

It is written in the Constitution that the House has the right to investigate the president if they see a reason to do so and request documents as well as get witnesses to testify and in then impeaching the president if the majority of the House votes for impeachment.

There is nothing about pleasuring anyone here. It is all about following what the Constitution says and I have to again remind you that the Constitution has lead our country well for 245 years.

This is not whim, it is law. Are you against what the Constitution says needs to be done?

 

[Luckyone]

It is not appropriate to call the Senate names.

You mean to tell me that talking common sense is not "appropriate"? Why am I not surprised you said that?

 

[KLATTU]

Yet you are not concerned that the republican Senators have made up their mind in advance of all the relevant evidence being produced.

Some might call that hypocrisy.

Well- given the despicable performance by Dems and their false accusations (Trump Russia , Kavanaugh eg ) It's hard to blame Republicans for being dismissive of them.

 

[iguanaman]

Why is your major question.

There is the long standing system that when Presidents talk officially to other governments, none of that is made public. Trump made an exception when he explained what he said to Zelensky. You do not convert them to witnesses merely to please Democrats.

Actually the Whitehouse was given a copy of the manuscript on Jan. 1st as part of an agreement Bolton signed. They have 30 days to review it for national security risks only before it can be released. It's a done deal. It also explains why Mitch was in such a rush to get the trial over with.

 

[ludin]

Your opinion isn't yours alone; however, this ^^^ is Trump's Defense, and it is comical. Having a trial without witnesses or documents relevant to the issue (the impeachment articles) is necessary. And Moscow Mitch needs to be removed as leader of the Senate, sense his continuous irreverent behavior violates American Jurisprudence - removed by the Senators, or removed from the Senate by the good people of Kentucky.

That is the job of the house. The house's job is to collect the information and all of the evidence.
The senate is under 0 obligation to do the house's job for them.

Schiff and pelosi jumped the gun and fast tracked this just so they could say they impeached the president before an election year started.
Mitch McConnell has no obligation to help them in their failed efforts to impeach a president.

It doesn't violate anything if this thing actually had to follow any kind of legal doctrine schiff would have been laughed out of the courtroom from the beginning.
Trumps lawyers would have petitioned to dismiss the case and it would have been over before it started.

Remember as you people keep telling everyone this is POLITICAL not legal. you seem to forget that when it doesn't suit your argument.

 

[iguanaman]

Well- given the despicable performance by Dems and their false accusations (Trump Russia , Kavanaugh eg ) It's hard to blame Republicans for being dismissive of them.

Russia did meddle extensively in our election to help Trump and he welcomed the help and expected to benefit from it. That is what "Trump Russia" was about. What did you think Muller said?

 

[humbolt]

It should not be hard to prove that Bolton is lying. All Trump needs to do is release the documents that can prove it. :lol:

I don't know that Bolton is lying at all. I don't know that Bolton actually said what's being claimed in his book. Heck, the NYT doesn't know. It's an anonymous rumor.

 

[iguanaman]

That is the job of the house. The house's job is to collect the information and all of the evidence.
The senate is under 0 obligation to do the house's job for them.

Schiff and pelosi jumped the gun and fast tracked this just so they could say they impeached the president before an election year started.
Mitch McConnell has no obligation to help them in their failed efforts to impeach a president.

It doesn't violate anything if this thing actually had to follow any kind of legal doctrine schiff would have been laughed out of the courtroom from the beginning.
Trumps lawyers would have petitioned to dismiss the case and it would have been over before it started.

Remember as you people keep telling everyone this is POLITICAL not legal. you seem to forget that when it doesn't suit your argument.

Yet the GAO said Trump broke the law by withholding the aid. The reason for the crime is even more serious. Is that what you mean by "political"? Mitch does have a Constitutional obligation to conduct a fair trial also. I guess you forgot.

Senate Urged to Convict Trump After GAO Says White House Broke Law by Freezing Ukraine Aid | Common Dreams News

 

[RealityNow]

Come on. How funny is it that the very people who support Donald Trump the most are trashing, yet again, one of Trump's hires.

Trump had them pegged from the beginning, he knew what type of serf mentality they are... its why he said: He could shoot someone of 5th Avenue, and these clown cultist would still back him. He grew up knowing these types and he has spent his life... knowing they worship the wealthy and anyone who claims wealth that promotes bigotry and dissension, conflict and contention, and promotes the mentality of "attack something"... These types have always submitted themselves to the wealthy as the dedicated serf's they have long historical lineage of coming from. It's no different than the early arrivals to America who could not read and did not comprehend well, who have always done exactly as the wealthy have told them.

That's why they stand behind things that are detrimental to themselves, because the wealthy dictated to them as to what to think and what to stand behind, even when it steam rolls over them and strip them clean.

These are the same types that LBJ identified 56 yrs ago, when he said:

President Lyndon B. Johnson once said, "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."

LBJ, knew them well... he spend decades working among them and he learned all their buzz words, tactical games and knew exactly what their agenda was, which is how he was able to expertly, dismantle the "segregationist madness" they supported.... He also was aware that .. the law could hold them accountable, but the law would not and could not change their hearts and minds.... So... they continue to demonstrate what's in their hearts and minds... and they back a bigot whom they think can change the law and give them a remake of white nationalist vile... What they don't get is... LBJ knew that Passing the Civil Rights Act, would be something, these bigots and biased types could never un-do... regardless of how much of the segregationist lusting they held and hold in their hearts and minds.
Their desperation of vain hopes that their "Imperial Wizard" Trump and his Cult Groomed Republican Politicians and the Cult Groomed Republican Constituency, will remake America to become the "bigoted, racist, and gender bias, mad lust filled greed mongers" which these types hope Trump can recreate for them.

It's NOT going to happen

No matter how much Trump thinks his devotion unto being owned by Putin and his Oligarch's...will help him...

It won't help him turn America back to the vile systems of the past.

The system of "white nationalism, of wealthy white male dominance".... IS OVER!!!

America is and will continue to be a Multi-Cultural and Multi-Ethnic Society which embraces being a member of the Global Society of This Worlds Nations... and America WILL Restore and Rebuild, the Diplomacy that Trump and Republican have tried again to destroy.

 

[TomFitz]

Yeah, this is downright rotten now. If the republicans enable this, it's going to supercharge the office of the presidency. If any time there was a merit for removal it is now.

Bolton must be called. If he isn't called, the republic no longer exists. Trump will be acquitted, and presidents will be able to bend the might of the most powerful office in the land to endlessly investigate political rivals - something you only see in authoritarian regimes.

This is the pinnacle. Will the republicans jump off, for some temporary power, or will they uphold the vision of the founders?

Sad to say, but I believe they're poised to jump. They have convinced their audience nothing but cartoon like evidence of Trump ordering it and admitting "I am bribing you, this is how the bribe works, I mean to do this with corrupt intent" will prove his guilt.

This is beyond, beyond acceptable; they know it, but they don't give a damn. To them, keeping democrats out of power is more important than shattering the constitutional restraints on the office of the president.

This is literally a constitutional crisis if ever there was one. If the senate acquits the democrats must immediately order new subpoena for Bolton, Mulveney, etc, and ram this through the courts as fast as possible. This precedent cannot be allowed to stand if you value freedom.

It also speaks directly to the recklessness of the Trump team, and the degree to which this White House is dominated by office politics, cat fighting, and gossip.

No one should really be surprised. This is the pattern in Trump’s businessses.

 

[iguanaman]

I don't know that Bolton is lying at all. I don't know that Bolton actually said what's being claimed in his book. Heck, the NYT doesn't know. It's an anonymous rumor.

The book has been in Whitehouse hands since Jan 1. They have 30 days to examine it for national security risks only before it is released according to the deal Bolton signed with them. In 3 days the entire manuscript will be entered into evidence and there is nothing Trump can do about it. Anyway that is the reason for all the secrecy.

 

[humbolt]

Although it isn’t possible for emotion driven people like yourself, it is entirely possible for most of us to put aside our personal opinions and judge conduct strictly based on available evidence.

Like your last post.

You are definitely trying to recycling this ^^ one that has, no doubt, been said to you. It’s the kinda thing someone would say to a screechy little peckerwood who can’t put up an intelligent argument. Own it. It’s you. :lamo

Oh, it's original. I'm a screechy little peckerwood with a master's in comparative literature from UVA. Here. Lemme show ya my buck teefe.

 

[ataraxia]

As long as we get Schiff, the WB, and the IC IG under oath, I don't care. Anything less, and It's no deal. And we get to use thumb screws, and you don't.

You put a known crook and mobster in the whitehouse. You don't get to negotiate anymore. The American people have had it with your silly games.

 

[humbolt]

The book has been in Whitehouse hands since Jan 1. They have 30 days to examine it for national security risks only before it is released according to the deal Bolton signed with them. In 3 days the entire manuscript will be entered into evidence and there is nothing Trump can do about it. Anyway that is the reason for all the secrecy.

Uh huh.

 

[humbolt]

You put a known crook and mobster in the whitehouse. You don't get to negotiate anymore. The American people have had it with your silly games.

They have? You mean you've had it. You don't speak for the American people. Have you noticed that your phone isn't constantly ringing with 120 million voters calling to give you their opinion? I think you might have noticed that. Just to be safe though, you aren't catatonic 23 hours a day, are ya?

 

[iguanaman]

They have? You mean you've had it. You don't speak for the American people. Have you noticed that your phone isn't constantly ringing with 120 million voters calling to give you their opinion? I think you might have noticed that. Just to be safe though, you aren't catatonic 23 hours a day, are ya?

No one expects that you will admit your mistakes. Trump has taught you well. But you might as well face it, Trump has been caught with his pants down and you can blow him if you want but he still is without his pants.:lamo

 

[Luckyone]

Well- given the despicable performance by Dems and their false accusations (Trump Russia , Kavanaugh eg ) It's hard to blame Republicans for being dismissive of them.

Need I remind that even though with Russia and with Kavanaugh not enough evidence was found to prove guilt, in neither case were they exonerated.

"Not enough evidence" is no reason to take innocence as fact.

In both cases, there was plenty of reason to open those investigations. There is an old saying that states "where there is smoke, there usually is a fire"

Not finding evidence does not mean further investigation is not allowed.

By the way, my statements are not "opinion" but simple common sense that is part of the law.

In simple words and on the chance of being crass "get off your high horse, and come down where we all live. Snobbishness does not suit you"

 

[humbolt]

No one expects that you will admit your mistakes. Trump has taught you well. But you might as well face it, Trump has been caught with his pants down and you can blow him if you want but he still is without his pants.:lamo

I see. And here's one of these.....:2razz:

 

[KLATTU]

Russia did meddle extensively in our election to help Trump and he welcomed the help and expected to benefit from it. That is what "Trump Russia" was about. What did you think Muller said?

This
“did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple efforts from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”

 

[vesper]

Direct evidence of what? If Trump was asking for Ukranian assistance with regard to 2016 it's evidence of something we already know and was announced to the public back in April. If it's evidence of something tied SPECIFICALLY to 2020 then we have yet to see ANYTHING that supports that accusation, including the well timed Bolton leak.

Are you watching Ken Starr? This man's speech will be one that many in the future to follow will reference. Outstanding lesson on Constitutional history of impeachment and pointing the House managers' case in the most eloquent way how they abused their impeachment powers. Outstanding!

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Like your last post.

Yes.

Oh, it's original. I'm a screechy little peckerwood with a master's in comparative literature from UVA. Here. Lemme show ya my buck teefe.

Sorry, not buying. First, the comment you posted wasn’t impressive. If that’s the best you (the one who doesn’t know the difference between imply and infer) can do with your masters in comparative literature, you got gypped by UVA. Second, and more to the point, the comment was a perfect fit for you.

 

[ataraxia]

They have? You mean you've had it. You don't speak for the American people. Have you noticed that your phone isn't constantly ringing with 120 million voters calling to give you their opinion? I think you might have noticed that. Just to be safe though, you aren't catatonic 23 hours a day, are ya?

They will let you know soon enough. Just keep trying to obstruct all that evidence and you will see. Don’t look now, but there is a tidal wave coming at you.

 

[ludin]

Yet the GAO said Trump broke the law by withholding the aid. The reason for the crime is even more serious. Is that what you mean by "political"? Mitch does have a Constitutional obligation to conduct a fair trial also. I guess you forgot.

Senate Urged to Convict Trump After GAO Says White House Broke Law by Freezing Ukraine Aid | Common Dreams News

FLASHBACK: Seven Times the GAO Said the Obama Administration Broke Federal Law | Dan Bongino
*yawn*

if holding funds was impeachable then obama should have been done a long time ago.
you didn't complain when he held up funds against the law so this shouldn't be an issue for you.

 

[KLATTU]

Ne.

In both cases, there was plenty of reason to open those investigations.
"

A wiftbag who said 4 people could back her story and none could is not reason to open an investigation. To normal people.

I's been proven ad nauseum there was never any legitimate case that Russia colluded with Trump .
Ever.

Stop lying about those things.

 

[OscarLevant]

Are you watching Ken Starr? This man's speech will be one that many in the future to follow will reference. Outstanding lesson on Constitutional history of impeachment and pointing the House managers' case in the most eloquent way how they abused their impeachment powers. Outstanding!

Categorically, abuse of impeachment power is impossible, given the simple fact that, per the Constitution, impeachment is not subject to judicial review. In other words, articles of impeachment are anything Congress says they are. For more detail, we have the federalist papers for the thinking of the framers.

Of course, there is the concept of "good faith", and all democrats and sensible republicans agree that the impeachment is legit. Whether or not Trump should be removed based on those articles, that has yet to be determined.