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.

 

Can someone tell me why President Trump should be thrown out of office

page: 6
28
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: JoseGarcia

You keep drinking that orange Kool Aide, Jose!


I have to admit orange kool-aid is tasting more refreshing than that muck that the Dems keep shoveling out!

Edit add: obstruction of Congress can be easily disproved as simply a partisan Article with no meritous crime.
All they have to go on is Abuse of Power...but that will be extremely difficult to prove or disprove since all evidence is hearsay and based on partisan opinions.
edit on 1 20 2020 by CynConcepts because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 12:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Breakthestreak
The best part of this whole thing is: There will never be a President Joe Biden. There will never be a President Elizabeth Warren and there most definitely will never be a President Sanders.


Better hope not.

Because if there is a president Warren or Sanders we're EFFED.

BIG TIME.



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: CynConcepts

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: CynConcepts

Congress sets its own rules. The House rules regarding how subpoenas are issued were written in 2015 by a Republican majority. The subpoenas were entirely legitimate. The House doesn't need to get permission to do its constitutional duty from the Judicial Branch. Thus, Trump is impeached by The House for obstruction of Congress.





The June 11 resolution passed by the House changes this, however. Now, committee chairs have the ability to go to court on behalf of their committees to try to force compliance with subpoenas they’ve issued without first receiving approval of the full House. Instead, committee chairs will require the approval of the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG), which comprises the speaker, the majority leader, the majority whip, the minority leader and the minority whip. Specifically, the resolution states that a vote of the BLAG—on which Democrats have a majority—“is the equivalent of the vote of the full House of Representatives.”
bolding emphasis mine.
Law fare Source

They made this resolution and still did not go to court to enforce their subpeonas. Their own House rules and they still decided not to follow the process to its full extent.

Edit add: this was created to enforce Barr to testify right before they began impeachment process on Trump.


From your link:

The House of Representatives adopted a resolution on June 11 authorizing Rep. Jerrold Nadler, chair of the House Committee on the Judiciary, to go to court to pursue civil enforcement of subpoenas issued to Attorney General William Barr and former White House Counsel Don McGahn. Importantly, however, the measure also makes changes that will increase the power of House committees to pursue enforcement of additional subpoenas.


The House did take Don McGahn to court, and two times the court ruled that McGahn must honor the subpoenas. The case is now to be heard by SCOTUS in the spring of 2020, along with The House Ways and Means' subpoena on Trump's taxes, March or June, I can't remember which.

I believe, If I recall correctly, the House also negotiated a release of the underlying evidence in the Mueller report, that AG Barr was withholding.



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 12:20 PM
link   
and even without the courts decision
"obstruction"
lol
they deserve what they get

trump wins again



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Remember when Holder obstructed congress,

And they didn't impeach him.




posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: CynConcepts

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: CynConcepts

Congress sets its own rules. The House rules regarding how subpoenas are issued were written in 2015 by a Republican majority. The subpoenas were entirely legitimate. The House doesn't need to get permission to do its constitutional duty from the Judicial Branch. Thus, Trump is impeached by The House for obstruction of Congress.





The June 11 resolution passed by the House changes this, however. Now, committee chairs have the ability to go to court on behalf of their committees to try to force compliance with subpoenas they’ve issued without first receiving approval of the full House. Instead, committee chairs will require the approval of the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG), which comprises the speaker, the majority leader, the majority whip, the minority leader and the minority whip. Specifically, the resolution states that a vote of the BLAG—on which Democrats have a majority—“is the equivalent of the vote of the full House of Representatives.”
bolding emphasis mine.
Law fare Source

They made this resolution and still did not go to court to enforce their subpeonas. Their own House rules and they still decided not to follow the process to its full extent.

Edit add: this was created to enforce Barr to testify right before they began impeachment process on Trump.


From your link:

The House of Representatives adopted a resolution on June 11 authorizing Rep. Jerrold Nadler, chair of the House Committee on the Judiciary, to go to court to pursue civil enforcement of subpoenas issued to Attorney General William Barr and former White House Counsel Don McGahn. Importantly, however, the measure also makes changes that will increase the power of House committees to pursue enforcement of additional subpoenas.


The House did take Don McGahn to court, and two times the court ruled that McGahn must honor the subpoenas. The case is now to be heard by SCOTUS in the spring of 2020, along with The House Ways and Means' subpoena on Trump's taxes, March or June, I can't remember which.

I believe, If I recall correctly, the House also negotiated a release of the underlying evidence in the Mueller report, that AG Barr was withholding.



Yes, they went to court to enforce their subpeonas per their new resolution, so why did they not go to court to enforce their subpeonas during the Impeachment inquiry?

Their subpeonas are not enforceable without going to court, thus there is NO obstruction. If the courts determine they need to appear per subpeonas and they do not, THEN it would be obstruction not before.
edit on 1 20 2020 by CynConcepts because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: CynConcepts



Their subpeonas are not enforceable without going to court, thus there is NO obstruction.

They would lose in court then have no grounds for impeachment articles

their articles are ridiculous
the registered democratic voters have been sorely misrepresented
all the house dems have done is ensure the re election of donald john trump



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 12:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

No man is above the law. We have a Constitution not a dictatorship. He should be thrown out of office for having no respect for our Constitution and our laws. If Trump is allowed to stay in office it will be a dangerous precedent. Because the next president may be a Democrat. Dictatorship is great as long as your party is the one who is in charge!!!


What law did he break? What did he do that Obama didn't do and at a much more serious level?



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: eManym
a reply to: shooterbrody

He delayed funding to a foreign entity for political gain. He is in violation of the The Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Where do you get your information that shows the president did otherwise?


So you have no problem then having the Bidens testify to prove that Trump really did go after them for political gain and not corruption???
edit on 0302020-01-20T12:54:30-06:0020202020Monday by Iscool because: Left out the topic of the sentence.



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: CynConcepts




es, they went to court to enforce their subpeonas per their new resolution, so why did they not go to court to enforce their subpeonas during the Impeachment inquiry?


Since the McGahn subpoena did go to the courts, and 2 courts ruled against Trump's claim of absolute immunity, and the case now awaits a hearing in front of the Supreme Court, why would the Democrats redundantly file a law suit for every ignored subpoena?



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: LSU2018




And he hasn't corrupted the office.


The fact that Trump has been impeached for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress says otherwise.



That means the unconstitutional ones here are the democrats.


Impeachment isn't "unconstitutional".


But objectively abuse of power isn’t a crime. If it was the dems would all be arrested. Obstruction of Congress? Also objectively not a crime.
Even if everything the left is saying is true, the question is.....”So what?”



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoseGarcia
a reply to: chr0naut

What a stinking pile of unmitigated Marxist globalist nonsense.

Mark Taylor & Kim Clement--real prophetic Christian voices affirm that TRUMP IS GOD'S ANOINTED FOR THIS TIME preserving the Constitution against satanic evil.

Get a clue.
Quit spewing Marxist globalist treason.


Yeah, well I'm just reading what's in the Word. I didn't write it.



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 02:06 PM
link   
After the Senate trial is over, Trump will still be president.

The leftists will still be upset and try another coup or just assassinate Trump.

But either way, the Senate won't be kicking Trump out of office.



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Re - mobile.twitter.com...

Throw the bum out. Impeach the MF!



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Breakthestreak
The best part of this whole thing is: There will never be a President Joe Biden. There will never be a President Elizabeth Warren and there most definitely will never be a President Sanders.


Better hope not.

Because if there is a president Warren or Sanders we're EFFED.

BIG TIME.



Never gonna happen.

There is a zero point zero percent chance that a dEmocrat will gain the Whitehouse in November

And a less than zero point one percent chance that a dEm will win in 2024 either

And they have NOBODY to blame but themselves, the media and their hateful, intolerant supporters.



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha




and the case now awaits a hearing in front of the Supreme Court, why would the Democrats redundantly file a law suit for every ignored subpoena?


because Duuuuuh your court system works like that, ever heard of Executive privilege?
ill assume that you dont know Executive privilege ( which I doubt ) which is similar to pleading the 5th in this case, got something on me prove it, so put up or shut up kind of thing, so your team cant just make up rules and over throw the constitution like they're doing now, so again, put up or shut up.



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Dr UAE




because Duuuuuh your court system works like that, ever heard of Executive privilege?


Executive privilege has a mechanism, and requires a subpoena to be answered as such. Trump didn't assert executive privilege, as an answer to the subpoenas. He dismissed the whole inquiry as a hoax and a scam and ordered his administration, et al, to ignore the subpoenas, and then declared in court that he and his administration, et al, had "absolute immunity". There is no such legal term, and therefore no such exemption.

Claiming executive privilege is nothing like citing the 5th Amendment.
edit on 20-1-2020 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 02:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: eManym

He delayed funding to a foreign entity for political gain. He is in violation of the The Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Where do you get your information that shows the president did otherwise?


Your first sentence is pure opinion and speculation. The fact that Hunter was made a multi-millionaire for just breathing while his dad was VP and led the Ukraine corruption investigation while his son made millions in the same country is factual information that could warrant an investigation at anytime. This is something the left just puts their head in the sand on while seeing the Steel dossier full of fake information, paid for by Hillary and DNC team, used to investigate with FISA warrants as OK...

The funds were delayed but actually released within the allotted time frame before the money was set to expire and was released on Sept 11 well before the beginning of 2020 fiscal year Oct 1, so the control Act was not in violation. There is some talk that 35 million might have not been spent by Oct 1, but the reality is it was released within the viable time frame no matter the delay.

BTW no one in the world really knew about The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 outside regulators and now its something to impeach the president over...really?


edit on 20-1-2020 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha


Trump didn't assert executive privilege


prove it
edit on 20 1 2020 by Dr UAE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: JoseGarcia

Is insulting anyone that disagrees with Trumps agenda and calling them a Marxist your only way to respond?

I don't believe any Marxists globalist agents or any Marxists philosophy and I am not treasonous.

I say BS that the president was checking on corruption of Burisma Holdings. The company is riddled with corruption, which has been a known fact for a number of years but what does a Ukrainian company have to do with the US Executive Branch, nothing.

Hunter Biden is a member of the board of directors at Burisma Holdings, which is an oil and gas company. Looks to me that the president was attempting to dig up dirt on the Bidens for political reasons.

Trump has a conflict of interest in that he is making millions using his personal businesses to do government business. Trump appears to be an opportunist that will take any means necessary to make more money through his position, ie. getting reelected.

Also, which Democrats are a Marxist? Seems that is a common moniker used by MAGA and hard line christian zealots.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join