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’s Stonewalling of Impeachment Inquiry Is an Impeachable Offense

page: 8
13
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 04:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Lumenari

You can't twist documentary evidence like text messages from the people involved.


You are literally sick.

What in the hell are you seeing in those text messages that are bad????

That someone questioned if Trump was trying a quid pro quo?

A question is proof to you?

I question if you are human? So I guess I just proved you are not using your logic.




posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Except it isn't the House doing the oversight, just Nancy Pelosi, Adam schiff and some other Democrats. They won't allow Republicans to take part.

It's not a House investigation since the House contains both parties, and it's not a Committee investigation since each Committee contains both parties too, but this kangaroo court only contains members of one and is being carried out behind closed doors.



posted on Oct, 10 2019 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Sookie admitted they can bring this to the courts, as that is the way this works .. and they haven't .. but won't answer why and simply ignores it. It's hilarious how warped the thinking is.



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

This just in...

A Court Ruled, Again, That Trump's Accounting Firm Must Turn Over Financial Documents To House Democrats www.buzzfeednews.com...


The DC Circuit rejected President Donald Trump's argument that the House Oversight Committee didn't have authority to issue a subpoena to his accounting firm.

The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit rejected Trump's argument that the House Oversight Committee lacked authority to issue a subpoena to the president's longtime accounting firm, Mazars USA LLP.


Next stop...Supreme Court.

It's going to be hard, from here on out, for Trump to continue to stonewall House subpoenas.


edit on 11-10-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
I found and interesting article on evidence against Trump and why he should be impeached. It's from an extremely left wing source but it's quoting text messages and what people said so you can be the judge:


"On September 9, U.S. Charges D’affaires in Ukraine William B. “Bill” Taylor texted Sondland, “As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign.” Taylor complained that the decision to withhold congressionally approved military assistance to Ukraine had already led to a “nightmare scenario.”

“Impeachable misconduct entails a president’s serious abuse of power and a serious abuse of public trust,” University of North Carolina Law professor Michael Gerhardt told the Los Angeles Times. “President Trump’s call did both of those things. It was an abuse of power because he used his position to benefit himself and not the country. It was a breach of trust because Americans trust their president not to engage in self-dealing, either through steering businesses to line their own pockets or through conspiring with or coordinating with foreign powers to intervene in American elections.”


Trump’s Stonewalling of Impeachment Inquiry Is an Impeachable Offense

The very 1st hour after Drunk Nancy announced her nonvotered for "impeachment inquiry", shifty Schiff was on MSNBC proclaiming that Trumps effort to stop the "impeachment inquiry" would be how he would personally "impeach" him.

I didnt bother reading any responses past the op because this is the biggest joke of an "impeachment" ever....

Lolz🤪



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I think he could be well and truly in the # over this.

At first I was like "meh not even Trump's that stupid", I think it could be the cover up that's the problem, he is going to run into a lo too problems with this, he could have just kept his mouth shut, gave a brief statement denying any wrong doing and being open and transparent in saying that he will cooperate fully. The problem is when he starts acting the way he is it makes him look guilty.

Impeachment is a political move and looking guilty even if your innocent is just as bad in my view as actually being guilty. I think that Congress will impeach him, I think that its going to be very close in the Senate but that ultimately they will not move to prosecute.

Will be interesting though to see what, if any, implication this could have for the 2020 election, having a president who has been impeached by congress running.....the optics of that politically could be very damaging.

Time will tell but Trump needs to stop acting like a spoilt child.

If this does go all the way to full impeachment that would be insane but he really only has himself to blame with the way he has been behaving over this scandal.



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Hebahouldbrespond in thebsame cracking up and, "what does it matter!?!?" that his opponent showed congress. A woman whose crimes outdo anythung Trump has ever even seen in a Tom Clancy novel. Oh and let's not forget about att the blowimg raspberries, judging, puffing, eye rolling etc.

Imho he should obey the subpoenas since he can be criminally prosecuted for not doing so. But once the actual congressional trial for impeachment begins he should ignore them. Oddlly enough at that point there is no law ojtlining any pumishment. All that can happen is his not showing for his impeachment trial ends up adding ankther and another reason to impeach. But he is immune to any charges of contempt or not showing up at that point. It's actually an alarming loophole in our impeachment lrocess and if a criminal were up for impeachment I'd actually care but Trump has proved he cares more about the uS than aany of the last 5 or 6 presidents at LEAST. I ain't anything near a republican but I am mature enough to qfknowledge that. To think Trump is the one using the presidency to line his pockets and please cronies....not bush not obama not clinton haha its just a goood measure of IQ and maturity.



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 07:52 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

They have the transcript. Where's the charge. If he is in the wrong they have all the evidence they will ever need.



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 07:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

This just in...

A Court Ruled, Again, That Trump's Accounting Firm Must Turn Over Financial Documents To House Democrats www.buzzfeednews.com...


The DC Circuit rejected President Donald Trump's argument that the House Oversight Committee didn't have authority to issue a subpoena to his accounting firm.

The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit rejected Trump's argument that the House Oversight Committee lacked authority to issue a subpoena to the president's longtime accounting firm, Mazars USA LLP.


Next stop...Supreme Court.

It's going to be hard, from here on out, for Trump to continue to stonewall House subpoenas.


His tax returns are not executive privileged. So the two have literally nothing to do with one another. So far when lower courts rule against Trump his record of winning in the end is pretty good.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld President Trump’s controversial travel ban

www.foxnews.com...


Democrats reacted with disappointment to Friday's Supreme Court ruling allowing the Trump administration to divert $2.5 billion in Pentagon funds for border wall construction.

www.foxnews.com...

Obama lost his stonewalling, but it took 3 years for the subpoena to get the information.



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04



His tax returns are not executive privileged.


That wasn't the argument. The argument was, and still is, that the committees don't have the authority to issue and enforce subpoenas. The court ruled the subpoena was valid.


The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit rejected Trump's argument that the House Oversight Committee lacked authority to issue a subpoena to the president's longtime accounting firm, Mazars USA LLP.
ADVERTISEMENT

"Contrary to the President's arguments, the Committee possess authority under both the House Rules and the Constitution to issue the subpoena, and Mazars must comply," Judge David Tatel wrote in the 2–1 opinion.

edit on 11-10-2019 by Sookiechacha because: www.buzzfeednews.com...



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

That is not and never was the argument. Your own source says that is not the argument. The argument is not they can't issue any subpoenas, it was that they can't issue any subpoena they want for any reason, and his tax returns do not fall under a valid reason.

What does that have to do with executive privilege?



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:24 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04




That is not and never was the argument.


Yes, that was the argument.


The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit rejected Trump's argument that the House Oversight Committee lacked authority to issue a subpoena to the president's longtime accounting firm, Mazars USA LLP.




The argument is not they can't issue any subpoenas, it was that they can't issue any subpoena they want for any reason


Like an impeachment inquiry?

At any rate, now, the White House arguing that impeachment (for political reasons) is unconstitutional. LOL



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

I am sorry you are unable to understand what you are reading. The argument is not that they do not have subpoena power, it's that particular subpoena was outside their scope.

I keep asking what that has to do with Executive privilege, I wonder why you don't respond.

I guess it's like before when you implied they can't file a brief with the courts to get Trump to turn over information and then ran away as soon as I sourced it happening with Nixon.

You should study more before you post, it would serve you well.



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 12:02 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

First of all, POTUS Trump was not withholding any aid to Ukraine... The Ukranians were BUYING missiles from us, and they weren't even aware that we had to extend to when they could buy those missiles. Not to mention that nowhere in the phone call transcript does POTUS Trump use any language that would be seen as "forceful, or bribery/coercion or blackmail..."

Why is it that so many of you in the left ignore what Biden does say from his own mouth, which was/is illegal, and instead you use all your energy to try to imply the POTUS said something he NEVER said and was not in the transcript?



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 12:07 AM
link   
The Democrat argument is moot.

Nothing with Trump's or any Republicans' Ukraine dealings is about campaigns, it's all about national security and policy.

Period.😃



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 12:44 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Ukraine William B. “Bill” Taylor CLAIMING that the POTUS withheld aid to Ukraine for information they wanted to FREELY give in 2018 makes no sense whatsoever...

Seriously, get your evidence and facts straight, and stop believing the deep state actor's CLAIMS...

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

The Ukrainian authorities wanted to give this info FREE about the corruption of the DNC/Obama/Biden administration in 2018, and the phone call occurred in July 2019...

How in the world does it makes sense that the POTUS would try to bribe/coerce the Ukrainians in July 2019 when they wanted to FREELY give that information to the Trump administration since 2018?...

Get your blindfolds off...



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 12:48 AM
link   
But is .....

Trump’s Stonewalling of Impeachment Inquiry Is an Impeachable Offense or is it an impeachable offense that Trump is Stonewalling? Or is he .....


Trump’s Stonewalling of Impeachment Inquiry Is an Impeachable Offense or is it an impeachable offense that Trump is Stonewalling? Or is he .....

Trump’s Stonewalling of Impeachment Inquiry Is an Impeachable Offense or is it an impeachable offense that Trump is Stonewalling? Or is he .....


Trump’s Stonewalling of Impeachment Inquiry Is an Impeachable Offense or is it an impeachable offense that Trump is Stonewalling? Or is he .....



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 01:30 AM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

An impeachment inquiry only starts when the speaker of the House, Pelosi, asks for a vote on whether to impeach or not...
She hasn't done this, so this is no "impeachment inquiry..." It is a partisan witch hunt in which the POTUS is denied all rights, and instead is branded a criminal over false claims from socialists simply because he is not part of the establishment, and is a political opponent...



edit on 12-10-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 01:35 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Indications that lots of "aid" to Ukraine in those days (Days of the Democrats) was funneled back to U.S. Democrat political campaigns. 😃



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Seriously you Trumptards (1) don't know how to use google (2) don't know the law (3) have a short memory of history

straight from Impeachment law, the house can start an impeachment inquiry through House Committees (anyone), it doesn't need to be voted on by the house, And to prove the point, Clinton was impeached off the back of the Starr investigation which was totally INDEPENDANT of the house or senate. Which ever committee runs the inquiry has the right to subpoena whom ever it likes and I would say ignoring those subpoenas would be an obstruction of justice, that yes can be enforced outside of the DOJ, the sergeant at arms has arresting powers that are outside of the DOJ.

once the house investigates and finds it has enough evidence it will bring an impeachment vote on the floor and only needs a simple majority to impeach. If it's voted too impeach then an impeachment trail begins in the house. then if found guilty in the house, the articles of impeachment are drawn up and are taken to the senate....

If they don't find enough evidence in the inquiry, they don't take it to the floor. I am not sure where this idea that Repubs aren't involved in the inquiry comes from but I have a funny feeling that a majority of them disagree and don't want to be involved. The committees have both Dems and repubs in them. If they chose to not be involved they can't call partisanship, that's their own fault

So stop with the BS about inquiries needing a vote THEY DON'T get over it. even if you think it's partisan move, that's irrelevant. because it is eventually overseen by the head of the SC in the senate. Jesus do some research before you sprout such BS




top topics



 
13
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join