It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Wrong again Phage.
Since impeachment is the only process by which a person can be barred from holding office in the future, it's conceivably possible that Congress could pursue impeachment if they felt this was a necessary punishment. If this ever happened, the courts might have to decide whether it was legal.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Lumenari
I'm not sure why Hillary isn't in jail ... Mr. Twump pwomised and all ... and we all know he always delivers, MAGA.
You really should get your facts straight ... the FEC has no jurisdiction in 52 USC § 30121. I realize all this must be confusing.
Point to me on the website where information is considered a thing of value.
You show me the law you are talking about.
§30121. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
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.
originally posted by: Liquesence
It's not "freely given" if it's coerced. Or if it's implicit or explicit that there are conditions or consequences to receiving it.
Or if it's conditioned on money.
By John Solomon, opinion contributor — 04/07/19 07:30 AM EDT
Ukrainian law enforcement officials believe they have evidence of wrongdoing by American Democrats and their allies in Kiev, ranging from 2016 election interference to obstructing criminal probes. But, they say, they’ve been thwarted in trying to get the Trump Justice Department to act.
Kostiantyn Kulyk, deputy head of the Prosecutor General’s International Legal Cooperation Department, told me he and other senior law enforcement officials tried unsuccessfully since last year to get visas from the U.S. Embassy in Kiev to deliver their evidence to Washington.
“We were supposed to share this information during a working trip to the United States,” Kulyk told me in a wide-ranging interview. “However, the [U.S.] ambassador blocked us from obtaining a visa. She didn’t explicitly deny our visa, but also didn’t give it to us.”
originally posted by: Phage
Your source doesn't say anyone, including the president can be impeached after leaving office. Each of the answers is quite vague on the matter. Mostly saying, "what's the point?"
Humm, so again... You are claiming that in July 2019 the POTUS bribed the Ukranians
even though we have the transcript of the call and nowhere does he coerced, or forced them for that information
originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: ElectricUniverse
Campaign Finance Violations are not a big deal. A "civil" infraction vs. criminal.
Barack Hussein Obama paid a $375,000 fine and nobody noticed or cared.
Obama Paid Biggest C.V. Fine Ever: www.politico.com...
BTW Phage, the thread is about the FACT that the left-wing media have already ruled that Giuliani and POTUS Trump are once again guilty BEFORE the evidence was even presented in a non-biased court.