It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump must be impeached. Here’s why.

page: 2
23
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2017 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Labels mean nobody gets a fair trial.




posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe


LOL! I love how he conveniently left out the only other President in history to be impeached....Bill Clinton...but there's no liberal bias with that professor right?


You might want to read the article before you comment:


To say that this does not in itself rise to the level of “obstruction of justice” is to empty that concept of all meaning. Obstruction of justice was the first count in the articles of impeachment against Nixon and, years later, a count against Bill Clinton. In Clinton’s case, the ostensible obstruction consisted solely in lying under oath about a sordid sexual affair that may have sullied the Oval Office but involved no abuse of presidential power as such.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

So clapper and comey and rogers are all liars now?

www.washingtonpost.com... /?utm_term=.04e743345085


While it's been over four months since the issuance of this assessment, as Directors Comey and Rodgers testified before the House Intelligence Committee on the 20th of March, the conclusions and confidence levels reached at the time still stand. I think that's a statement to the quality and professional of the — of the intelligence community people who produced such a compelling intelligence report during a tumultuous, controversial time, under intense scrutiny and with a very tight deadline.


Clapper can claim to be "misquoted" all he likes; he put out this statement prior to testifying in front of the Senate last week. If he wants to claim he lied under oath, no problem. I doubt comey and rogers will do the same.

www.washingtonpost.com... ction/?utm_term=.6079f960b26c
Rogers


Today, more than two months after we issued this assessment, we stand by it as issued. There is no change in our confidence level on the assessment

I can dig up quotes from nunes,schiff, and feinstein that all say the same thing; no evidence.
So are they all just lying?



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:15 PM
link   
There is only one party that worked to undermine the democratic process, influence the election through nefarious means, and duped the American public...and they lost.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: underwerks

So clapper and comey and rogers are all liars now?

www.washingtonpost.com... /?utm_term=.04e743345085


While it's been over four months since the issuance of this assessment, as Directors Comey and Rodgers testified before the House Intelligence Committee on the 20th of March, the conclusions and confidence levels reached at the time still stand. I think that's a statement to the quality and professional of the — of the intelligence community people who produced such a compelling intelligence report during a tumultuous, controversial time, under intense scrutiny and with a very tight deadline.


Clapper can claim to be "misquoted" all he likes; he put out this statement prior to testifying in front of the Senate last week. If he wants to claim he lied under oath, no problem. I doubt comey and rogers will do the same.

www.washingtonpost.com... ction/?utm_term=.6079f960b26c
Rogers


Today, more than two months after we issued this assessment, we stand by it as issued. There is no change in our confidence level on the assessment

I can dig up quotes from nunes,schiff, and feinstein that all say the same thing; no evidence.
So are they all just lying?




If they're speaking about an investigation they aren't personally involved in, then yes. They're lying. Or they've been misquoted by people with an agenda.

Take your pick.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:17 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody



Also, see my initial response. Clapper resigned on Jan 20. The only investigation he was in the loop on was undertaken in early-mid Decemeber. He admitted in his most recent testimony that he was unaware of the FBI's counterintelligence investigation — an investigation which is ongoing.

There's been a collective desperation to kill this investigation in the cradle. Presi-dunce Trumpster Fire's firing of the Comey and lying about the reason not only makes it look like he's concerned about the investigation uncovering something but his own claims about what has transpired rise to the level of obstruction of justice. And again, obstruction of justice is a separate matter, distinct from possible collusion.

I didn't see it mentioned in the article but the Nunes shenanigans could arguably form the basis for allegations of suspected obstruction of justice as well.

That's all without getting into any possibly violations of the emoluments clause. And understand that articles of impeachment can include a host of suspected offenses. Take for instance the Bill Clinton articles of impeachment:

Articles I and III were alleged perjury while giving testimony at different times. Article II alleged obstruction of justice and Article IV pertained to a failure to produce documents which was taken as an abuse of power to cover up for the perjury.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Liberals, instead of getting over their frustration at losing, seem to be getting crazier by the day. They are going to have to be committed to mental institutions en masse at this rate.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:19 PM
link   
I dont like Trump. I strongly disagree with about half of his policies. However, he hasnt done anything outside of the lawful boundaries of president of the US. Hes kind of a dick at times. Didnt know that was an impeachable offense though. He certainly hasnt done anything more than Obama ever did. If folks are pissed about the scope of power of the president now, then they should look no further than Obama.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian




Impeachment is analogous to an indictment so your statement doesn't make much sense in this context.

I believe the house has to actually take a vote to begin the process; the house would not put forward someone for impeachment they were not SURE were guilty would they?
You pretend to not know how the process works tho, it is better for your ridiculous argument that way.



There's an ongoing investigation.

Yes there is.
Wouldn't want to jump to conclusions like "impeachment" until it is done would you?
That cuts both ways.
When the Former DNI, Head of the NSA, and Head of the fbi sign off on a report that shows something worthy of charging trump; and make statements to that effect your argument may have some actual weight. Till then no it does not.



Yes. Neither Trump nor his associates need be guilty or proven guilty of collusion with the Russians during the election in order for his behavior to warrant impeachment. It's called obstruction of justice.

One would still need that elusive thing called evidence and a majority voote from the house. Trump was smart enough to get the AG and deputy AG to sign off on firing comey. No matter trumps motive his hands are clean, unless you think the AG and deputy AG are in on it.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: shooterbrody



Also, see my initial response. Clapper resigned on Jan 20. The only investigation he was in the loop on was undertaken in early-mid Decemeber. He admitted in his most recent testimony that he was unaware of the FBI's counterintelligence investigation — an investigation which is ongoing.

There's been a collective desperation to kill this investigation in the cradle. Presi-dunce Trumpster Fire's firing of the Comey and lying about the reason not only makes it look like he's concerned about the investigation uncovering something but his own claims about what has transpired rise to the level of obstruction of justice. And again, obstruction of justice is a separate matter, distinct from possible collusion.

I didn't see it mentioned in the article but the Nunes shenanigans could arguably form the basis for allegations of suspected obstruction of justice as well.

That's all without getting into any possibly violations of the emoluments clause. And understand that articles of impeachment can include a host of suspected offenses. Take for instance the Bill Clinton articles of impeachment:

Articles I and III were alleged perjury while giving testimony at different times. Article II alleged obstruction of justice and Article IV pertained to a failure to produce documents which was taken as an abuse of power to cover up for the perjury.


Nonsense. The investigations started in July 2016. Clapper is asking us to believe that as head of the DNI, he was unaware of an investigation for 7 months???? Get real. You'll believe anything as long as it shifts attention away from reality - i.e. there is no evidence of ANY crime. By the way, collusion with Russia is also NOT A CRIME.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Vasa Croe


LOL! I love how he conveniently left out the only other President in history to be impeached....Bill Clinton...but there's no liberal bias with that professor right?


You might want to read the article before you comment:


To say that this does not in itself rise to the level of “obstruction of justice” is to empty that concept of all meaning. Obstruction of justice was the first count in the articles of impeachment against Nixon and, years later, a count against Bill Clinton. In Clinton’s case, the ostensible obstruction consisted solely in lying under oath about a sordid sexual affair that may have sullied the Oval Office but involved no abuse of presidential power as such.


Oh...I did...he just conveniently left it out in his initial statement about those being impeached....and included one that wasn't. Shouldn't be that hard to get right....there have only been 2 in history. But I do like how he goes on to defend Clintons....no big deal...just sexual misconduct and cheating on your wife as a President...go feminism! Sort of shocked Hillary had so many female supporters after sticking with Bill through his many women issues....



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

There's a reason this article is in the "Opinion" section of the Washington Post...

It wont be the last 'call for impeachment' from the AsshoIe section of WaPo.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Advantage

The more important question is, when have they ever thought about the consequences? Liberals seem to live only in the now, and for the past 8 years, they act like they're living in 1964 again. None of their decisions are ever thought out ahead. Perfect example is Harry Reid and the nuclear option. He was even warned by McConnell that the tides may turn but Reid ignored it.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

That's right. There is no law that says a private citizen Trump cannot collude with a foreign power against another private citizen Hillary in 2016.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

They should also take all their white privilege and white racism seminars and fire those professors that teach them and hire professors that teach something more useful like survival, or what types of plants you encounter in the wild that you can eat or use for medicine. Nobody prepares today's kids for the real world.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: UKTruth

That's right. There is no law that says a private citizen Trump cannot collude with a foreign power against another private citizen Hillary in 2016.


Correct... he could have been having a strategy session with Putin every morning and there is no crime. He could even have been aware of what wikileaks had - no crime. Now if he helped steal the information from the DNC, that is a different matter, but given there is not even any evidence that the DNC were hacked, that would be a massive stretch.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:31 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian




Also, see my initial response. Clapper resigned on Jan 20. The only investigation he was in the loop on was undertaken in early-mid Decemeber. He admitted in his most recent testimony that he was unaware of the FBI's counterintelligence investigation — an investigation which is ongoing.

Yes.
The fbi did sign off on that report, counterintelligence investigation ongoing and all.
The Rogers and Clapper both brag at how great of a job they did as the report still stands as of last week.



There's been a collective desperation to kill this investigation in the cradle.

Really
Then why was this info shared by obama with trump?
Is obama in on all of this as well?
No there is desperation as this investigation is not turning up anything on trump.



Presi-dunce Trumpster Fire's firing of the Comey and lying about the reason not only makes it look like he's concerned about the investigation uncovering something but his own claims about what has transpired rise to the level of obstruction of justice.

Please post proof he lied.

As to the actual impeachment process each is different and the house and senate will take that up if and when called on. The will actually have to have a debate and a vote to see if the charges merit "high crimes and misdemeanors".
Not quite the impeach now as called for in the story, is it?



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: LSU0408

No evidence is needed per this harvard schooled constitutional law professor
crazy


One ATS liberal just told me on another thread that Congress can damn well impeach for anything they want to and that if democrats win in 2018, Trump will be impeached.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: shooterbrody

No one except the people investigating Trump know whether there is evidence or not. Clapper just said yesterday that people are misquoting him saying there is no evidence.


Clapper and Yates both claimed to have seen evidence of collusion but when asked to produce said evidence, they both said they cannot produce it. Very convincing.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: LSU0408

Impeachment does not lead to removal. 2 presidents have been impeached. 0 have been removed. 1 has resigned.




top topics



 
23
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join