The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
Politics

Trump

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...487 488 489 490 491 ...614 615 616 · >>
mrmhead On March 27, 2024




NE, Ohio
#7321New Post! Nov 14, 2019 @ 23:53:38
@chaski Said

I'm sure you got your information from somewhere... but there are a number of legitimate polling sights out there.



My guess is that there is a left-wing site out there stretching truths, or Fox News is reporting on left-wing sites out there stretching truths.
bobbimay On February 11, 2024




Tucson, Arizona
#7322New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 13:46:55
@mrmhead Said

Transcripts are hearsay?

So it's OK for GOPers to ignore subpoenas from the House, but unnecessary "witnesses" can't play the same game with the Senate?

I don't think there was ever much hope of the Trumpsterf***s in the Senate to vote for removal.
As many of them have been saying - and apparently agreed with by the lemming base -



I tend to disagree, but that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.


Yes it is OK for someone to ignore a subpoena from the house because the house has no judiciary power..if someone said no then the house has to send a complaint to the DOJ..if the DOJ said no then the only recourse the house would have then is to take the complaint to court...

So the question must be Why doesn't the shiffy and his ilk take this to court HMMM maybe it's because in a court of law hearsay, opinion, and feeling are not allowed...Just Facts

Quote:
"Coercion of a foreign country for personal gain is acceptable"
yet somehow biden being on video bragging about how he extorted the firing of a prosecutor investigating the company his son was working for....and you are OK with that right???



***edited to add end quote tag to fix the page. -tiger
mrmhead On March 27, 2024




NE, Ohio
#7323New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 14:23:27
@bobbimay Said

yet somehow biden being on video bragging about how he extorted the firing of a prosecutor investigating the company his son was working for....and you are OK with that right???


From Wiki:
2012: Ukraine investigations into Zlochevsky - owner of Bursima
2014: Hunter joins Burisma board
2015: Shokin becomes Ukraine prosecutor general "inheriting" investigation
Many gov'ts and others concerned Shokin wasn't doing his job and protecting elites " to the extent that Obama officials were considering launching their own criminal investigation into the company for possible money laundering"

"Vitaly Kasko, who had been Shokin's deputy overseeing international cooperation before resigning in February 2016 citing corruption in the office, provided documents to Bloomberg News indicating that under Shokin, the investigation into Burisma had been dormant. Also, the investigation into Burisma only pertained to events happening before Hunter Biden joined the company."


So, yeah, I'm OK with that.
chaski On March 28, 2024
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#7324New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 16:35:55
@bobbimay Said


So the question must be Why doesn't the shiffy and his ilk take this to court HMMM maybe it's because in a court of law hearsay, opinion, and feeling are not allowed...Just Facts




Or maybe shiffy and his ilk are not taking "this" to "court" because, per our Constitution, that is not the way the impeachment process works.

Based on our Constitution, Article 1 if I am not mistaken, the H.R. has the sole authority to impeach. That is shiffy and his ilk couldn't take "this" to court even if they wanted to.

Now, the Department of Justice (or one of the Federal law enforcement agencies with jurisdiction) could investigate and then present the case to a Grand Jury for indictment.... but that presentation to a Grand Jury would have to wait until Trump was no longer in office, because a sitting president can't be indicted.

Notes:

1. As a starting point the most obvious possible/potential crime might be a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices act, though one could easily imagine other possibilities.

2. My point about "a sitting president can't be indicted" of a Federal crime, is actually something that may or may not be possible... it just hasn't ever been tested.
mrmhead On March 27, 2024




NE, Ohio
#7325New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 17:05:08
Stone Cold Guilty!


.... does that tally up to the Mueller witch hunt? Or was that a separate endeavor?
chaski On March 28, 2024
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#7326New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 17:25:48
@mrmhead Said

Stone Cold Guilty!


.... does that tally up to the Mueller witch hunt? Or was that a separate endeavor?



Yes... Trump associate Roger Stone found guilty of all counts...

The witch hunt continues to be the most successful special counsel investigation in U.S. history:

5 People sentenced to prison
2 Person convicted at trial
7 People pleaded guilty
37 People and entities charged
199 Overall criminal counts
5 People sentenced to prison
etc....
DiscordTiger On December 04, 2021
The Queen of Random

Administrator




Emerald City, United States (g
#7327New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 17:47:11
@chaski Said

Or maybe shiffy and his ilk are not taking "this" to "court" because, per our Constitution, that is not the way the impeachment process works.

Based on our Constitution, Article 1 if I am not mistaken, the H.R. has the sole authority to impeach. That is shiffy and his ilk couldn't take "this" to court even if they wanted to.

Now, the Department of Justice (or one of the Federal law enforcement agencies with jurisdiction) could investigate and then present the case to a Grand Jury for indictment.... but that presentation to a Grand Jury would have to wait until Trump was no longer in office, because a sitting president can't be indicted.

Notes:

1. As a starting point the most obvious possible/potential crime might be a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices act, though one could easily imagine other possibilities.

2. My point about "a sitting president can't be indicted" of a Federal crime, is actually something that may or may not be possible... it just hasn't ever been tested.


How dare you bring the constitution in to this!
chaski On March 28, 2024
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#7328New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 18:02:27
@DiscordTiger Said

How dare you bring the constitution in to this!



I know... its kind of like when I bring up the bible in discussions of christianity...


bobbimay On February 11, 2024




Tucson, Arizona
#7329New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 18:12:29
@chaski Said

Or maybe shiffy and his ilk are not taking "this" to "court" because, per our Constitution, that is not the way the impeachment process works.

Based on our Constitution, Article 1 if I am not mistaken, the H.R. has the sole authority to impeach. That is shiffy and his ilk couldn't take "this" to court even if they wanted to.

Now, the Department of Justice (or one of the Federal law enforcement agencies with jurisdiction) could investigate and then present the case to a Grand Jury for indictment.... but that presentation to a Grand Jury would have to wait until Trump was no longer in office, because a sitting president can't be indicted.

Notes:

1. As a starting point the most obvious possible/potential crime might be a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices act, though one could easily imagine other possibilities.

2. My point about "a sitting president can't be indicted" of a Federal crime, is actually something that may or may not be possible... it just hasn't ever been tested.



that conversation was about subpoenas not the impeachment clown show...try again
DiscordTiger On December 04, 2021
The Queen of Random

Administrator




Emerald City, United States (g
#7330New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 18:12:35
@chaski Said

I know... its kind of like when I bring up the bible in discussions of christianity...




exactly, you are such a instigator.
chaski On March 28, 2024
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#7331New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 18:22:19
@bobbimay Said

that conversation was about subpoenas not the impeachment clown show...try again



And Congress has subpoena powers that are actually enforceable... so it is you who needs to "try again"...

Maybe a civics course (or a little reading and study of our Constitution) is in your future...?


Notes:

1. Congress' subpoena power has been upheld by the supreme court, so shiffy and his ilk do not have to go to court to either issue or enforce subpoenas.

2. As with all subpoenas for testimony (whether by a court or by Congress), witnesses can refuse to testify. Sometimes the refusal is based on one's right to not "self incriminate", sometimes it is based on "executive privilege". The "self incrimination" one is an easy fix: give the person immunity. "Executive privilege" is another matter... regardless of whether it is a court or congressional proceeding.
gakINGKONG On October 18, 2022




, Florida
#7332New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 18:42:27
I'm pretty sure them good-fer-nuthin GOPers won't go with this, but can ya'll just imagine how amazing it would be if we could bring back the white-hot iron shoes of death and let tiny-hands Trump dance until he dropped? Har Har Har!!! Serves em right!! Peaches and cream for the orange man. Peaches and cream.

Or something.
chaski On March 28, 2024
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#7333New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 18:43:08
chaski On March 28, 2024
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#7334New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 18:44:46
A couple of notes:

1. Congress' subpoena power has been upheld by the supreme court, so shiffy and his ilk do not have to go to court to either issue or enforce subpoenas.

2. As with all subpoenas for testimony (whether by a court or by Congress), witnesses can sometimes refuse to testify. Sometimes the refusal is based on one's right to not "self incriminate", sometimes it is based on "executive privilege". The "self incrimination" one is an easy fix: give the person immunity. "Executive privilege" is another matter... regardless of whether it is a court or congressional proceeding.

3. If a person refuses to testify, AND they don't have a legal out (like "self incrimination" or "executive privilege" ) the person can be held in contempt until one of three things happens...
a) the subpoenaing authority drops the issue
b) the witness decides to testify
c) the judge (or judges) decide that the contempt citation is no longer valid... (there are a variety of reasons for this type of decision).



Sorry.... somehow I broke my own post...
chaski On March 28, 2024
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#7335New Post! Nov 15, 2019 @ 18:48:15
@gakINGKONG Said

I'm pretty sure them good-fer-nuthin GOPers won't go with this, but can ya'll just imagine how amazing it would be if we could bring back the white-hot iron shoes of death and let tiny-hands Trump dance until he dropped? Har Har Har!!! Serves em right!! Peaches and cream for the orange man. Peaches and cream.

Or something.



Yes... or executing whitleblowers flippers.
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...487 488 489 490 491 ...614 615 616 · >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Politics Forum - Some Rudeness Allowed

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Politics
Thu Jun 15, 2017 @ 19:49
10 1630
New posts   Politics
Tue Mar 05, 2019 @ 00:39
16 1131
New posts   News & Current Events
Fri Sep 22, 2017 @ 15:52
10 694
New posts   News & Current Events
Fri May 11, 2018 @ 21:32
6 710
New posts   Politics
Sat Feb 04, 2017 @ 05:44
5 422