House Dems introduce impeachment articles against Trump

I wonder if any of them have heard thru the grapevine that their name is in one of those sealed indictments.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: StallionDuck

Wonder if it'll turn out any better than when they did it last month.

My guess: nope.

I'm wondering about the emoluments from* the US government, accepted without permission and when?
Are they talking about something in particular and before or after he was elected.

*Replaces 'for'.

What a joke
"6 House Dems Push Impeachment Articles For Trump"


From OP source.

Other lawmakers who have signed onto to the resolution are Democratic Reps. Luis Gutierrez of Illinois, Al Green of Texas, Marcia Fudge of Ohio, Adriano Espaillat of New York and John Yarmuth of Kentucky

when even crazy Pelosi and MAD Maxine wont sign on, you might have a problem.

a reply to: smurfy

As I've said before in another thread, probably not one American in several million has any clue what an "emolument" is, and only a small minority of those people really understand the concept.

You might as well be accusing Trump of violating time-space causality, or matter-antimatter parity.

originally posted by: DanteGaland
a reply to: Deetermined

Sorry, as much as you WANT it to be true...

Trump is NOT a "God King"...

He can't just do whatever he wants.

LOL! I never said he could! I only said he had every right under his authority to fire Comey, just like every President has the right to make new appointments to offices where there are holdovers. Just because no one liked the timing isn't going to fly, especially in light of the fact that the "obstruction of justice" charge they are trying to claim is pointless when there is currently a special prosecutor in place now for the same investigation.

Too bad you don't like it.

a reply to: stosh64

It's a TRIAL BALLOON.

Have you never heard of the strategy?

Every single politician in Washington should be impeached.

originally posted by: Deetermined

originally posted by: DanteGaland
a reply to: Deetermined

Sorry, as much as you WANT it to be true...

Trump is NOT a "God King"...

He can't just do whatever he wants.

LOL! I never said he could! I only said he had every right under his authority to fire Comey, just like every President has the right to make new appointments to offices where there are holdovers. Just because no one liked the timing isn't going to fly, especially in light of the fact that the "obstruction of justice" charge they are trying to claim is pointless when there is currently a special prosecutor in place now for the same investigation.

Too bad you don't like it.

Not to mention Comey himself testified it had zero impact on the investigation.

Just a bunch of disgruntled citizens hoping against all odds there was something they might do to get their way. They forget our reactions as Republicans as we watched 0bama pillage and destroy a lot of what makes America great, namely holding the populace hostage with 0bamacare extortion in cahoots with the IRS.

It's just rustling of the leaves, nothing will come of it.

originally posted by: DanteGaland
This is a NEAT idea...

When these GOP-types don't support it...

Their voting records can be put on DISPLAY down the road for not being on the right side of history.

"You voted not to impeach..."

Draws a LINE and puts people on record.

Do YOU think that THIS is honestly a good use of their time?
DO you REALLY think THAT this ACT OF IDIOCY should BE their priority?

(More random bold and underlined words)

a reply to: StallionDuck

Yawn. What, will this be the fifth or sixth unsuccessful attempt?

originally posted by: UnBreakable
a reply to: StallionDuck

Yawn. What, will this be the fifth or sixth unsuccessful attempt?

Yeah but it will put the naysayers on official record!!/Sarcasm
Or some drivel like that.

originally posted by: ZombieZygote

originally posted by: UnBreakable
a reply to: StallionDuck

Yawn. What, will this be the fifth or sixth unsuccessful attempt?

Yeah but it will put the naysayers on official record!!/Sarcasm
Or some drivel like that.

I'm more excited to get Pelosi on the record voting against it. It will be proof positive the majority of her allegations against Trump are false, because if they were true she would be supporting the impeachment effort. It'll prove it's all smoke and mirrors.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
a reply to: smurfy

As I've said before in another thread, probably not one American in several million has any clue what an "emolument" is, and only a small minority of those people really understand the concept.

You might as well be accusing Trump of violating time-space causality, or matter-antimatter parity.

Since I could only assume I kwew the correct definition I looked it up for my own edification...

e·mol·u·ment
/əˈmälyəmənt/
noun
formal

noun: emolument; plural noun: emoluments
a salary, fee, or profit from employment or office.
"the directors' emoluments"
synonyms: salary, pay, payment, wage(s), earnings, allowance, stipend, honorarium, reward, premium; fee, charge, consideration; income, profit, gain, return

This sounds like anything from a fruit basket to ????

Anyone know exactly what the POTUS is accused of accepting?

a reply to: StallionDuck

I'd love to be privy to the "occasional briefings" that will be held. I'd love to see the evidence backing the allegations and be able to make a more informed decision as to the validity of the articles of impeachment.

You never know--they may have a case. I doubt it, but I've been surprised before.

i fin it funny how all these people wanted comey fired before, yet when trump does it they get mad

another useless action by the dems...

i will enjoy the repub win in 2020

originally posted by: UnBreakable
a reply to: StallionDuck

Yawn. What, will this be the fifth or sixth unsuccessful attempt?

I may be mistaken but I think this is the third time somebody has introduced articles to the floor. But (and this is where I may be mistaken) I think the first two times were both the same guy. Or he said he was going to do it and everybody went nuts over it, then he did it and everybody went nuts again.

To be fair, I put very little effort in to figuring it out because not only is this whole thing just showboating, it's weak showboating.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
a reply to: smurfy

As I've said before in another thread, probably not one American in several million has any clue what an "emolument" is, and only a small minority of those people really understand the concept.

You might as well be accusing Trump of violating time-space causality, or matter-antimatter parity.

Perhaps, but what actually was it he was supposed to accept form the US government without permission, money, barter, dancing girls, the Florida joint, Trump house or a carry out of fish and chips!
It's not that I think he wouldn't knock something off for instance, the same guy would take the eye out of your head...maybe they had that bust of Churchill go missing again!

I'm surprised that it took so long. Predictable as hell. This will be just the first of many.

a reply to: StallionDuck

This will go nowhere.

At this point Donald Trump could start eating babies on television and Republicans wouldn't do a dam thing.