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.

 

Three articles of impeachment currently being considered

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 09:59 PM
link   
If the entire issue was based on Trump pushing to investigate Burisma then I would say it is total BS and the Dems are crazy.

If it was also shown that he withheld congressionally approved funds to pressure Ukraine to investigate then I would be a little concerned but not by much.

If it was shown that the Trump administration didn't notify Congress of holding funds with good reason I would be even more concerned.

If it was shown that the Trump administration also wanted Zalenski to publicly announce there was an investigation into Burisma I would be questioning the motives of the Trump administration.

If it was shown the Trump administration was insistent that Zelenski publicly go on microphone and say ‘investigations, Biden, and Clinton’ then I would be sure that Trump was abusing the power of his office for political gain.


At the very least all those things would need to be substantiated for me to think he was deserving of impeachment.




posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: visitedbythem

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: dfnj2015
So foreign aid can never be contingent on anything ever again.
The retarded pants-pissing attempts to impeach over "quid pro quo" just goes to show the utter lack of anything that the leftist assholes have.


Quid pro quo to server American interests is not the same thing as a quid pro quo for a politician's own personal benefit.



Oh Bull spit!

If a foreign policy is successful, then it serves in the politicians own personal benefit because they can use that to campaign.



I can see your point. But I'm not 100% convinced. But I do see your point.


We really do like your perseverance, and we like you too.
Don't go away after Trump smokes the left. We will miss you!


I have never said Trump is guilty by definition. But based on the quotes from people's testimonies it sure looks like a quid-pro-quo type corruption.

I don't know much about the second article about the server thing.

But the article I referenced in the OP is interesting in itself:

Trump’s Order to Defy Subpoenas Is Itself Grounds for Impeachment

The article makes a pretty good argument Trump telling people not to testify is a form of obstruction of justice.



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

When HASN'T a president used foreign aid to influence a foreign country?



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Every time you start an anti-Trump deep fantasy thread , he gets another 50,000 votes.
And , his approval ratings go up.
Keep up the good work....

edit on 11/9/19 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

Best post of the thread!



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: visitedbythem
a reply to: dfnj2015
Can you say Dunham report?


I'm not familiar with the Dunham report.


You will be soon



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: dfnj2015
When HASN'T a president used foreign aid to influence a foreign country?


This question has nothing to do with the article of impeachment under consideration. Yes, of course what you are saying is true. But that's not why people are going after Trump. You just presume nothing Trump did nothing wrong. So you have a strong personal bias to be dismissive of any opinion different than yours.

It's pretty clear you believe Trump is innocent no matter and there are no laws Trump would ever break. And if Trump did break any laws it's purely political for Democrats to hold him accountable and the only proper action is to just let Trump be above the law. This is your view. Trump is above the law no matter what.



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: visitedbythem

Can you stop being so cryptic and maybe give a link. Thanks.



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog
Every time you start an anti-Trump deep fantasy thread , he gets another 50,000 votes.
And , his approval ratings go up.
Keep up the good work....


Don't care about Trump getting more votes. I thought this article made a very interesting point:

Trump’s Order to Defy Subpoenas Is Itself Grounds for Impeachment

The idea of Trump giving an order to someone in his administration NOT to testify before Congress is clearly against our Constitution a document Trump took an oath to support.


edit on 9-11-2019 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:11 PM
link   
The coastal elites are driving this crap... and, it is crap.

Those of us in "flyover country"... we aren't stupid. If you want to see what most Americans think about the President, you need look no further than today's Alabama/LSU game. Tuscaloosa rocked, when he and the First Lady were introduced. 100,000 people, gave them a standing ovation.

The Democrats protested the game... all 10 that showed up.



Young Socialists and Democrats held a protest against President Trump’s appearance at the Alabama-LSU game on Saturday. Ten people turned out.


Source

The President picked the game of the year to attend, and it did not disappoint.
edit on 9-11-2019 by madmac5150 because: LSU won 46-41, best game of the year... for those who missed it.



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:13 PM
link   
Have they actually had anyone say it was a quid pro quo?

Honestly, I only follow the story when I'm driving; I listen to NPR--I trust them to do their level best to turn back time like this was Watergate in 1972.

But have any of the witness said anything more than "It looked like a quid pro quo to me."???

"speaking as a liberal deep-stater who lost hir job because hir loyalty was suspect, I can say that this definitely what a republican quid-pro looks like. Orange man bad."
edit on 9-11-2019 by Graysen because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: madmac5150
The coastal elites are driving this crap... and, it is crap.

Those of us in "flyover country"... we aren't stupid.


I never said anyone was stupid. The whole thread was started because I thought the point made by this article was something I had never heard before:

Trump’s Order to Defy Subpoenas Is Itself Grounds for Impeachment



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Will the USA benefit if we find and investigate and convict corruption?

Or are you pro corruption?

Asking for a friend.



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Gothmog
Every time you start an anti-Trump deep fantasy thread , he gets another 50,000 votes.
And , his approval ratings go up.
Keep up the good work....


Don't care about Trump getting more votes. I thought this article made a very interesting point:

Trump’s Order to Defy Subpoenas Is Itself Grounds for Impeachment

The idea of Trump giving an order to someone in his administration NOT to testify before Congress is clearly against our Constitution a document Trump took an oath to support.



I don't think so. Many presidents since Eisenhower have given Executive orders that flat out defy the constitution. The Supreme Court has roundly rejected subjecting EO's to that level of scrutiny. In fact, the weight or legal implications of defying congress are unclear, since congress' police powers are referred to, but not spelt out either.



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: visitedbythem

Can you stop being so cryptic and maybe give a link. Thanks.


Or you could possibly attempt to do your own research, jump on Duckduckgo, and inform yourself.

This is 80 percent of the problem with people on the left, they only take spoon fed info, they wont take the time to actually inform themselves or parse data.

This isnt the first time youve said in the last week, that you didnt know about something that was detrimental to all of this, and that is very well known by conservatives/libertarians.



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:18 PM
link   
and another thing. Congress hasn't actually begun impeachment proceedings yet. IT's all at the committee level, and the constitution doesn't even mention congressional sub-committees, let alone any police powers they assume when acting on behalf of the congress as a whole.

Trump's legal argument has been that the sub-committees don't have ANY impeachment powers. Congress, as a "committee of the whole" does. But they haven't voted to impeach "as a whole yet."

Isn't that still true???



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Graysen
Have they actually had anyone way it was a quid pro quo?

Honestly, I only follow the story when I'm driving; I listen to NPR--I trust them to do their level best to turn back time like this was Watergate in 1972.

But have any of the witness said anything more than "It looked like a quid pro quote to me."???

"speaking as a liberal deep-stater who lost hir job because hir loyalty was suspect, I can say that this definitely what a republican quid-pro looks like. Orange man bad."


Sullivan: "Soliciting investigations into a domestic political opponent, I don't think that would be in accord with our values"

A week later, Taylor was even more concerned, texting Sondland: "As I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."

Vindman: "I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine"

Vindman: "I am a patriot, and it is my sacred duty and honor to advance and defend OUR country, irrespective of party or politics"

These are quotes from the testimonies under oath. You may not agree with Taylor's opinion above. But this text " I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign" is why this looks suspicious.

Maybe Trump is completely innocent. But if someone working for his administration makes this statement, "I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign" you can't blame Democrats for taking advantage of it politically.

If Trump is truly innocent then at the very least he is incompetent or guilty of giving the appearance of quid-pro-quo. Regardless, I think this whole flap is ALL Trumps own fault. I don't think Republicans should expect Democrats to roll over and die. If Trump is innocent then this is all Trumps fault for making it political in the first place.


edit on 9-11-2019 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: dfnj2015

Will the USA benefit if we find and investigate and convict corruption?

Or are you pro corruption?

Asking for a friend.


I've already said on previous post I see your point on this. How many times do I have to agree with you.



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: SailorJerry

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: visitedbythem

Can you stop being so cryptic and maybe give a link. Thanks.


Or you could possibly attempt to do your own research, jump on Duckduckgo, and inform yourself.

This is 80 percent of the problem with people on the left, they only take spoon fed info, they wont take the time to actually inform themselves or parse data.

This isnt the first time youve said in the last week, that you didnt know about something that was detrimental to all of this, and that is very well known by conservatives/libertarians.


I did google it. It was too ambiguous.



posted on Nov, 9 2019 @ 10:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Graysen
and another thing. Congress hasn't actually begun impeachment proceedings yet. IT's all at the committee level, and the constitution doesn't even mention congressional sub-committees, let alone any police powers they assume when acting on behalf of the congress as a whole.

Trump's legal argument has been that the sub-committees don't have ANY impeachment powers. Congress, as a "committee of the whole" does. But they haven't voted to impeach "as a whole yet."

Isn't that still true???


Impeachment Inquiry Is Legal, Judge Rules, Giving Democrats a Victory




top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join