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.

 

Let's Make Things Clear

page: 15
13
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 07:17 PM
link   


Impeachment proceedings may be commenced in the House of Representatives by a Member declaring a charge of impeachment on his or her own initiative,by a Member presenting a memorial listing charges under oath, or by a Member depositing a resolution in the hopper, which is then referred to the appropriate committee. The impeachment process may be triggered by non-Members, such as when the Judicial Conference of the United States suggests that the House may wish to consider impeachment of a federal judge, where an independent counsel advises the House of any substantial and credible information which he or she believes might constitute grounds for impeachment, by message from the President, by a charge from a state or territorial legislature or grand jury, or by petition.


Impeachment and Removal - Congressional Research Service




posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Oraculi

First of all, you shouldn't claim others are ignorant when those like you ignore FACTS.

Fact number 1... We have direct evidence that Biden blackmailed/bribed the former Ukranian administration unless they fired the Ukranian prosecutor whom was about to interview Hunter Biden and his link to Burisma Holdings. BTW, Hunter Biden was in charge of the legal team of Burisma Holdings, so he would have first hand knowledge of the corruption in Burisma Holdings...


Watch Joe Biden Brag About Bribing Ukraine To Fire The Prosecutor Investigating His Son’s Company

Fact 2... Hunter Biden had ZERO experience and knowledge on energy exploration. Yet he was getting paid about $50,000 a month by Burisma Holding. Burisma Holdings was/is a corrupt company. Biden can claim all he wants that he FORCED Ukraine to fire the prosecutor because he was corrupt, but the FACT is Biden did FORCE the former Ukranian authorities to fire the Ukranian prosecutor because Biden's son was involved in the corruption.


Fact 3... POTUS Trump did not blackmail nor bribed the Ukranians. We have the transcript of the conversation which occurred on July 2019. We have the Ukranians testifying that they were not coerced/bribed or forced to do anything by POTUS Trump. More so since they had been trying to give evidence of this corruption to the Trump administration since 2018 FOR FREE...

The following article is from 04/07/2019, 2 months BEFORE the telephone conversation between POTUS Trump and the Ukranian President.

Ukrainian to US prosecutors: Why don't you want our evidence on Democrats?

BTW, the Ukranian authorities complained to the Trump administration because the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, whom was chosen by Obama, tried everything she could to stop giving visas to Ukranian authorities whom wanted to come to the U.S. to give the evidence of the corruption between the Obama/Biden administration and the former Ukranian administration. It's all in the link above.

Fact 4... POTUS Trump asked the Ukranians to look at the corruption that Biden was involved with with the previous Ukranian administration after he found out through the present Ukranian administration of the corruption. POTUS Trump did not coerce/bribed or forced them in any way.

Fact 5... The Obama/Biden administration used a FOREIGN AGENT, Steele, whom used LIES FROM THE RUSSIANS to investigate EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE involved with Presidential candidate Trump... It's ironic how you left-wingers ignore these facts, and instead WITHOUT PROOF you want to claim POTUS Trump is the one whom broke the law when the law was broken by the Obama/Biden/Hillary administration, and your left-wing media keeps on ignoring/dismissing facts and instead shift the blame to try to get the Trump administration from actually investigating the corruption.

You shouldn't be trying to claim that you are not ignorant, and that everyone whom disagrees with your twisted version of the truth must be ignorant when it is you, and others like you ignoring the facts.





edit on 11-10-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 07:31 PM
link   


EU diplomats working on Ukraine at the time have, however, told the FT that they were looking for ways to persuade Kiev to remove Mr Shokin well before Mr Biden entered the picture. The push for Mr Shokin’s removal was part of an international effort to bolster Ukraine’s institutions following Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the armed conflict in the eastern part of the country.

“All of us were really pushing [former Ukrainian president Petro] Poroshenko that he needs to do something, because the prosecutor was not following any of the corruption issues. He was really bad news,” said an EU diplomat involved in the discussions. “It was Biden who finally came in [and triggered it]. Biden was the most vocal, as the US usually is. But we were all literally complaining about the prosecutor.”


Financial Times



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 07:35 PM
link   


Bowing to pressure from international donors, the Ukrainian Parliament voted on Tuesday to remove a prosecutor general who had clung to power for months despite visible signs of corruption.




The United States and other Western nations had for months called for the ousting of Mr. Shokin, who was widely criticized for turning a blind eye to corrupt practices and for defending the interests of a venal and entrenched elite. He was one of several political figures in Kiev whom reformers and Western diplomats saw as a worrying indicator of a return to past corrupt practices, two years after a revolution that was supposed to put a stop to self-dealing by those in power. As the problems festered, Kiev drew increasingly sharp criticism from Western diplomats and leaders. In a visit in December, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. said corruption was eating Ukraine “like a cancer.” Christine Lagarde, the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, which props up Ukraine financially, said last month that progress was so slow in fighting corruption that “it’s hard to see how the I.M.F.-supported program can continue.”


New York Times, March 29, 2016



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Oraculi
Time and time again, on this forum and elsewhere I go and read, I see people claim complete and total ignorance of the American law and take an almost military like stance that others HAVE TO explain to them how the law works, or somehow in the absence of their understanding the law breaks down and doesn't apply. We know this is child like behavior and ignorance is no excuse, so I will do my part and list the currently known crime the president is being investigated for.

I am listing the original letter of warning from the Federal Election Commission that it is a crime to ask for anything in a US election from a foreign national, I am posting a link to the clause in our law covering what is being discussed and I will post the body of the text so it can be easily seen. I will also change my forum signature to include this quote and the code reference so anyone who sees me post can always find it easily.

This should hopefully prevent people from pretending they don't know what they're talking about and shows them exactly what law the president is being investigated for allegedly having broken. Remember, these are all allegations and everyone is innocent until proven guilty in America. An investigation is the only way to get to the bottom of it, and an investigation into a sitting president is called an impeachment inquiry. It does not mean he is getting impeached, it just means he is getting investigated for allegations of a crime.

This crime:

FEC Commissioner


It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a US election.


52 U.S. Code § 30121. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals

(a) Prohibition It shall be unlawful for—

(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make—

(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;

(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or

(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or

(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.

(b) “Foreign national” defined As used in this section, the term “foreign national” means—

(1) a foreign principal, as such term is defined by section 611(b) of title 22, except that the term “foreign national” shall not include any individual who is a citizen of the United States; or

(2) an individual who is not a citizen of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 1101(a)(22) of title 8) and who is not lawfully admitted for permanent residence, as defined by section 1101(a)(20) of title 8.


Once again, these are allegations of a crime but there is enough evidence that that president and his cabinet members may have been involved in this conspiracy to commit a crime that no options are left in our legal system but to investigate. It's literally the American way.

I hope this clears things up a little for those who have remained ignorant of the law through these proceedings and keep asking what crime has been committed.




Let's educate YOU on the law, shall we?

First, this cannot be used to insulate a criminal such as Biden from investigation. "Oh, he's running for president. We have to allow his crimes to go uninvestigated and unpunished. We even have to allow any statute of limitations to expire. Because he's running for president." The law does not contemplate such circumvention of the laws Biden broke, regularly and with the approval of Obama. Besides that, the investigation began BEFORE Biden announced his run for president.

Regardless of when Biden's criminal behavior was investigated, the president has authority to ask for cooperation with the Ukraine to investigate Biden under a treaty titled the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, enacted during Clinton's presidency. Here's the treaty. Read it and maybe your lofty arrogance will step back a bit.

www.congress.gov...



posted on Oct, 13 2019 @ 03:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Visiting ESB

Now let me Educate you on why you are wrong,

First if you want to investigate Biden and his son through a foreign country there are laws that you have to follow, there is a specific act in law that gives the rules on this, it's called the logan act, You can't just let Rudy Guiliani run riot in other countries. If you want to do an investigation you have to go through the right channels and then the person that you want to do the investigating you have to get congressional approval. So that's law 1 he broke.

second. and this is such a grey area and fall down to the what is a thing of value when it comes to campaign law. And no, no one is above the law and if they want to open an investigation into both Bidens, he can BUT the problem is, is that Biden is running for president. he has had 3 years to open an investigation and it's not like this stuff hasn't been knowledge. So that kind of gives away that he is doing it to get Dirt on Biden to take him down, I mean he literally said he would take info from another country on a political candidate. So you can't defend that he isn't jumping into the grey area, and remember Michael Cohen is in prison for this exact thing. SO the DOJ coming out and saying that what Trump has done isn't a crime is kind of laughable. re the Cohen decision

And lastly on the DOJ, Regardless of what the DOJ says, the DOJ has no say in the impeachment process. It's also clear that the president doesn't have to commit a crime per say to be impeached, basically conduct unbecoming. again it's kind of a grey area but trump has done more than enough to atleast start an inquiry to his actions. And you can scream blue murder all you like and so can Trump but that's what the process is there for.



posted on Oct, 13 2019 @ 04:31 AM
link   
Again too funny.

You want to blame trump for looking into a incredibly sketchy play for pay deal.

Its Biden who should be on trial here, not trump.

As President Trump has lots of power especially looking into pay for play.

Biden is in tape boasting about withholding money to get what he wanted.

Liberals be like, let's not investigate the crime..nothing to see here move on.

Let's investigate who brought this up...ha ha ha ha



posted on Oct, 13 2019 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Bloodworth

lol yet you dismiss that rule of law that the president needs to follow to use another country to investigate biden,

I'll let you in on a little secret, liberals don't give a # about Biden lol and if he has done something wrong Liberals don't care if he is investigated.

what a majority of people care about is that the president doesn't do illegal things while in office

you trump supports all call for Obama to be investigated for alleged spying on the Trump campaign with ZERO evidence, yet when it comes to Trump clearly abusing the powers of office and him admitting it, you turn a blind eye or say he's draining the swamp, that's called being hypocritical.



posted on Oct, 14 2019 @ 04:29 AM
link   
www.google.com...

Under Obama the IRS was ordered to single out people who had words attacked with them like tea party or patriot.

The IRS was taken to court and was found guilty of specifically targeting conservatives.

Imagine a branch of the Gov going after citzens who called themselves Patriots.

Fast and furious...Obama and holder give over guns that have now killed hundreds including a America border agent. It was a botched mission from the get go.
Just like how trump has been subpoenaed, holder was as well just like trump refused.

Obama trading like 5 high ranking Taliban generals for that 1 guy who left his post.
Those generals went right back to planning military attacks on Americans.

Obama and Clinton take out gadaffi. What was their exit strategy after taking out their leader?

Just hit and run and leave the country in anarchy?

Osama wouldn't even dare to use the words ISIS.

He would not even acknowledge them calling them the jv team. Or ISIL.

Many things Obama did many questioned whether it was for the best of the country.

Trump the citzens know he fight for what's best.

Huge difference in style.

And imagine trump smoked cigs like Obama the media would be all over that.

His health , makes him look weak, not good to be addictived to something.

But even the right had class and knew showing pictures of Obama sucking down a Newport would make the country look bad.

The way the liberal Democrats are acting towards this president has left the world In shock and dismay .

Usually you cant get away with what the dems are doing.
This is unprecedented and really Makes the dems look like spoiled, rich, out of tough cry babies.



posted on Oct, 14 2019 @ 06:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Oraculi

i have to wonder - where do you stop ??

you claim " election tampering "

but which election - EXACTLY ???



posted on Oct, 14 2019 @ 07:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: tanstaafl
I'm not incapable of anything regarding this discussion.

Objection: contradicts all evidence already entered.


You don't seem to be able to understand that because YOU BELIEVE that there is some sort of Constitutional requirement for a formal resolution of the House before impeachment can begin that there actually is such a requirement.

You don't seem to understand that it isn't based on a belief, it is based on a plain and simple reading of the words in the Constitution.


You don't have, or have not presented, any evidence for your belief.

That is a lie. I have evidenced the very words that I rest my entire case on multiple times. You simply refuse to admit they say and mean what they say and mean.


You keep droning on that your interpretation is the only one, and it's not, and you've resorted to insults which if anything weakens your case.

I have not engaged in insults, I have stated facts. You are incapable of understanding the plain language of the Constitution, That is a fact, as evidence by your persistent refusal to admit that the words say and mean what they do in fact say and mean.


All of this is absurd, frankly,

On that we agree.


We're not in the Mud Pit, you don't get to act this way.

In what way? State facts? Rotflmao.


You and others are MISLEAD in your belief which you apparently have picked up from the White House Counsel's letter.[/qoute]
? I've been saying the same thing long before the letter was publicized.


There is NO Constitutional requirement for a resolution to begin impeachment.

Repeating the same lie over and over doesn't make it the truth.


Yes, that has been done before, but it is not required, not in the COTUS,

And again, I have pointed you to the very words ion that very document that prove your claim to be false.

-snip- a bunch of yammering about nothing...


Here are all references in the COTUS to impeachment:



The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. — Article I, Section 2, Clause 5


Bingo. Thank you for at least not making me post it again.

Now all you have to do is learn to read, with comprehension.

Now, answer the Questions:

What is the Process by which the House of Representatives makes its will known?


Your tried to make a big deal about my use of the phrase "Articles of Impeachment."
-snip-
You thought this was your AHA! moment, because that is the phrasing used by practice, and your argument seems to be that a resolution is required for the same reason. You are mistaken.

That comment actually makes zero sense - none - in context with the point being raised. I was responding to the words you typed. If you want me to respond to other words, use other words.

Again...

The resolution to your dilemma as to what you are missing lies in the answer to the simple question:

What is the Process by which the House of Representatives makes its will known?

Answer that, and either the light bulb will go off, or you'll stick your head back in the sand and drown in your own tears.

Oh - I thought you were done? Maybe now?



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join