View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
sambista
Joined: 25 Sep 2004 Posts: 16951 Location: way station of life
Back to top |
|
Genero36
Joined: 24 Apr 2005 Posts: 11188
Back to top |
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 21046
Back to top |
Posted: 10/20/19 5:00 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Send a letter, Ma-ria._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009 Posts: 8946
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 63769
Back to top |
Posted: 10/22/19 11:23 am ::: |
Reply |
|
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MuP7KgYqsM8" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
_________________ Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
cthskzfn
Joined: 21 Nov 2004 Posts: 12851 Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.
Back to top |
Posted: 10/22/19 7:25 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
if Trump had even a scintilla of decency, he'd resign.
but he is a fuckwad of the highest order, and will scorch the earth for as long as possible.
_________________ Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009 Posts: 15737 Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 63769
Back to top |
Posted: 10/23/19 12:12 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/q1vp_hTHhQc" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
_________________ Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009 Posts: 15737 Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 63769
Back to top |
|
cthskzfn
Joined: 21 Nov 2004 Posts: 12851 Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.
Back to top |
Posted: 10/24/19 9:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
DOJ is conducting a criminal probe of the 2016 Russia investigation.
IOW, the criminals are investigating those who exposed them.
The #OutlawGOP is soooooo fucked up now. Utterly lawless.
_________________ Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
|
|
Genero36
Joined: 24 Apr 2005 Posts: 11188
Back to top |
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009 Posts: 8946
Back to top |
Posted: 11/06/19 9:19 am ::: |
Reply |
|
I am sort of familiar with this town (a few friends and some distant family live here). VERY conservative. Grace College and Seminary is here. Home of Billy Sunday (from his Wiki page: "after being a popular outfielder in baseball's National League during the 1880s, became the most celebrated and influential American evangelist during the first two decades of the 20th century.")
The results of this poll surprise me. Right now, they are 1,420 in favor of an impeachment inquiry and 1,352 against. Maybe there is hope!
http://www.inkfreenews.com/
_________________ "Women are judged on their success, men on their potential. It’s time we started believing in the potential of women." —Muffet McGraw
“Thank you for showing the fellas that you've got more balls than them,” Haley said, to cheers from the crowd.
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009 Posts: 15737 Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
Genero36
Joined: 24 Apr 2005 Posts: 11188
Back to top |
Posted: 11/07/19 1:34 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
<embed><iframe width="606" height="342" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8Q_izcF5mYw" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe></embed>
https://youtu.be/8Q_izcF5mYw
_________________ I'm all for the separation of church and hate.
|
|
Genero36
Joined: 24 Apr 2005 Posts: 11188
Back to top |
Posted: 11/07/19 1:56 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
<embed><iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Wbk8AAUJfic" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe></embed>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wbk8AAUJfic
_________________ I'm all for the separation of church and hate.
|
|
Genero36
Joined: 24 Apr 2005 Posts: 11188
Back to top |
Posted: 11/07/19 1:58 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
<embed><iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sFnt3zRVio4" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe></embed>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFnt3zRVio4
_________________ I'm all for the separation of church and hate.
|
|
sambista
Joined: 25 Sep 2004 Posts: 16951 Location: way station of life
Back to top |
Posted: 11/07/19 3:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Trump Ordered to Pay $2 Million to Charities
the new york times wrote: |
A state judge ordered President Trump to pay $2 million in damages to a collection of nonprofit groups on Wednesday as part of a settlement of a lawsuit that accused his charity, the Donald J. Trump Foundation, of financial mismanagement.
Once billed as the charitable arm of the president’s financial empire, the Trump Foundation closed its doors in December, six months after the New York attorney general’s office sued it for acting “as little more than a checkbook to serve Mr. Trump’s business and political interests.” The suit said the foundation engaged in “a shocking pattern of illegality” that included improperly coordinating with Mr. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. |
_________________ no justice, no peace.
|
|
Stonington_QB
Joined: 05 Jul 2013 Posts: 756 Location: Siege Perilous
Back to top |
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012 Posts: 8407 Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
Posted: 11/07/19 5:00 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
The more unhinged and desperate the GOP becomes with this whistleblower nonsense as witness after witness screams Quid Pro Quo the more I get the warm fuzzies inside.
When your only line of defense is trying to out and discredit a person whose motivations have no bearing on the material facts and evidence of the case, it speaks to how desperate you are. He could literally be the leader of the "I Hate Trump and want him Impeached Party", and it wouldn't matter since it's not a he said/she said issue where he is a material witness and his credibility or motives matter. This is nothing more than the initial tipster telling investigators where to look for the actual evidence. And based upon the testimony of Taylor, Sondland, Vindman, and the rest, boy is that evidence piling up.
But yeah, keep focusing on someone so unimportant to the case that they wouldn't even be called upon to testify at trial.
_________________ ↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
Genero36
Joined: 24 Apr 2005 Posts: 11188
Back to top |
|
Stonington_QB
Joined: 05 Jul 2013 Posts: 756 Location: Siege Perilous
Back to top |
Posted: 11/07/19 9:14 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Evidence of what? What is the offense? There isn't even a charge. There isn't anything at all. The transcript of the call was released. The "whistleblower" didn't even hear the phone call.
With all the talk of "evidence" I'm still trying to figure out what there is supposed to be evidence of. The only ones with evidence of anything are William Barr and John Durham.
This whole round of "impeachment" will be dead by the end of the month because there's nothing there.
|
|
toad455
Joined: 16 Nov 2005 Posts: 22474 Location: NJ
Back to top |
Posted: 11/07/19 10:53 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
the ladies of The View had their claws out vs. Don Jr.
_________________ LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!
Twitter: @TBRBWAY
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012 Posts: 8407 Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
Posted: 11/07/19 11:54 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Stonington_QB wrote: |
Evidence of what? What is the offense? |
Well, impeachment requires one of three things:
1) Treason
2) Bribery
3) "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" (read: abuse of power)
From the released testimony we have seen evidence of a potential gross abuse of power by withholding congressionally designated foreign aid in order to gain personal advantages. Also, using the office and his role in that office to also gain said advantages.
Multiple witnesses have also testified to it being a "quid pro quo", which is important because it would also meet the definition of bribery.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/bribery
So if he offered a things of value to them (the aid and Offical White House visits) in return for personal favors done that could potentially assist him in the next election, that's bribery.
Quote: |
There isn't even a charge. |
Why would there be yet? They are still in the investigation phase. The charge comes when they draft the Articles of Impeachment, which based upon the released transcripts is a matter of when now, not if. Extremely credible people like Taylor, Sondland, and Vindman have all called it quid pro quo. That is very damning.
Quote: |
The "whistleblower" didn't even hear the phone call.
|
Agreed. Which is why it is so unconscionable and pointless that the GOP is trying to unmask him. He is not a material witness and is not providing any unique evidence to the case. All he did was point to the actual witnesses who could provide first hand knowledge and testimony. Those are the people that matter and who the case is built around. He straight up said in his initial whistleblower complaint that he had a bunch of hearsay information that was very concerning, and that they should talk to the people who would actually know for sure. So they did.
Quote: |
This whole round of "impeachment" will be dead by the end of the month because there's nothing there. |
Yeah, that's not going to happen. He will be impeached. The testimony released so far pretty much guarantees it, and there is already popular support for impeachment and removal without even having the public hearings yet. Once the public hearing happen, that number is going to go up.
The only open question is whether or not he is removed. I doubt it, since it appears the GOP has sold their souls to the Cult of Trump, but if the support for removal comes up enough it might change that calculus. The GOP is playing a very, very weak hand on this one as can be seen by the incoherent lines of defense they have come up with so far--like focusing on the name of the whistleblower who is a non-factor in the whole thing.
_________________ ↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
Last edited by justintyme on 11/08/19 3:57 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012 Posts: 8407 Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
Posted: 11/08/19 3:32 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Here is some good historical background about the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" and what it means:
https://www.crf-usa.org/impeachment/high-crimes-and-misdemeanors.html
Quote: |
What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.
The convention adopted “high crimes and misdemeanors” with little discussion. Most of the framers knew the phrase well. Since 1386, the English parliament had used “high crimes and misdemeanors” as one of the grounds to impeach officials of the crown. Officials accused of “high crimes and misdemeanors” were accused of offenses as varied as misappropriating government funds, appointing unfit subordinates, not prosecuting cases, not spending money allocated by Parliament, promoting themselves ahead of more deserving candidates, threatening a grand jury, disobeying an order from Parliament, arresting a man to keep him from running for Parliament, losing a ship by neglecting to moor it, helping “suppress petitions to the King to call a Parliament,” granting warrants without cause, and bribery. Some of these charges were crimes. Others were not. The one common denominator in all these accusations was that the official had somehow abused the power of his office and was unfit to serve.
After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”
For the more than 200 years since the Constitution was adopted, Congress has seriously considered impeachment only 18 times. Thirteen of these cases involved federal judges. The “high crimes and misdemeanors” that the House charged against these judges included being habitually drunk, showing favoritism on the bench, using judicial power unlawfully, using the office for financial gain, unlawfully punishing people for contempt of court, submitting false expense accounts, getting special deals from parties appearing before the court, bullying people in open court, filing false income tax returns, making false statements while under oath, and disclosing confidential information. |
So, in other words, what the House will be trying to prove is that Trump abused the power of his office in such a way that it violated the public's trust. While that might involve an actual criminal act, such an act is not required--as has been demonstrated in many past impeachment cases.
_________________ ↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
|
|