US President Donald J. Trump Impeachment Megathread - Democrats commit mass political suicide

On September 24th, 2019, Nanci Pelosi did what everyone expected was some exceptional political posturing -- initiating a formal impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.

The initial "charge," such as it was, was "betraying his oath of office and the nation's security by seeking to enlist a foreign power to tarnish a rival for his own political gain." This, amusingly, was after it was discovered and widely reported on that the DNC had contacted the very same foreign power to attempt to tarnish Trump.

Specifically, this was all based on a rumor that Trump had asked the Ukraine to investigate how a prosecutor investigating Joe Biden's son for corruption had gotten fired, and withheld foreign aid until they had agreed. (He did ask the leader of the Ukraine to investigate what happened with the prosecutor, but did not hold up any foreign aid nor threaten anything of the like.)

Around this time, Trump did something they could not, and still cannot, understand: He publicly turned over all the documents. The transcript of the phone call they claimed showed him committing the crime of blackmailing the Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden for him was released, showing that Trump did nothing wrong. The only reaction the radical left had was arguing over the definition of "transcript" and spouting off a conspiracy theory about official state documents being edited.

At the same time, old video evidence of Joe Biden publicly bragging about blackmailing the Ukraine into NOT investigating his son came to light. Yes, this is exactly what they're accusing Trump of doing. The left is nothing if not subtle. Right after this, evidence came to light that Pelosi, Kerry, and Romney's kids had similar fake jobs in the Ukraine, getting paid ungodly amounts of money and embezzling US foreign aid to the Ukraine -- all things that Trump's Attorney General has openly discussed investigating.

By releasing the transcripts, the DNC was tripped up. Instead of being able to leak information from their secret investigation until November 2020, they were forced to play their hand publicly.

And they had no hand to play. The impeachment accusations came from second and third hand sources -- watercooler talk from Unelected Deep State Analysts with Trump Derangement Syndrome, outraged that President Trump refused to obey them when they felt they had a better idea as to how to run Foreign Affairs. Other allegations included that supposedly, the telepathic DNC members working in the state department knew what Trump was thinking (despite him literally saying the exact opposite) or could tell that Trump would do something even worse -- maybe something actually illegal -- in the future, and boy howdy, the imaginary Trump in their minds was a right bastard.

(As an aside, the name of the whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, has been censored across pretty much all social media, a test run of whatever censorship they're going to enact in the next few months to try and swing the election.)

At the same time, the DNC performed significant amounts of partisan political fuckery to do this all publicly, but unofficially -- preventing the GOP from bringing forth witnesses or questioning the DNC's witnesses, or even reading the double plus secret evidence the DNC supposedly had. Those GOP that did get access to the evidence have confirmed it's a 3 pound 5 ounce nothingburger.

The charges have since mutated, with them initially being changed to "bribery" -- as "bribery" focus groups easier and is easier to spew out on Twitter.

On December 18th, 2019, along party lines and with bipartisan opposition, they finally drafted their articles of impeachment -- first for "Abuse of Power" and second for "Obstruction of Congress." Neither are actually crimes nor are they impeachable offenses, even if they were true -- which the DNC has provided no evidence of, explaining that it's the Senate's job to investigate and find the evidence.

Narrator: It is not the Senate's job to investigate and find the evidence.

The "Obstruction of Congress" charge is particularly egregious, as they are claiming that Trump, by reaching out to the courts to act as mediators in his dispute over the rules with Pelosi, was obstructing her. In other words, Pelosi's stance is that the President must obey her, even if she's being a batshit insane drunk. Many legal scholars, including Alan Dershowitz, have pointed out that this is absolute bullshit.

The latest development as of this writing on December 21th, 2019, is that Pelosi is demanding that the GOP recuse itself, allowing the DNC to reshape the Senate in order to make the process "fair" -- by creating a Kangaroo court. The GOP is refusing outright, as the Senate's role during this is very specifically to take the charges and all the evidence gathered from the house -- which is none -- and vote yes or no on impeachment. They need 2/3rd majority to vote yes, and the DNC does not have the votes.

Pelosi is refusing to send over the articles of impeachment until the GOP allows her to stack the Senate against Trump, an act that Dershowitz as well as Noah Feldman, the DNC's own star legal expert witness, has said is unconstitutional and "a problem," as Trump isn't impeached until the articles have been filed. Meanwhile, the DNC has put the House on vacation until the new year, while the Senate is exploring options including forcing the articles over without Pelosi's ok. Trump and the Senate have both went to the SCOTUS to ask them if any of this is constitutional.

tl;dr: Trump may have found where the Swamp was embezzling US Foreign Aid. Many politician's children working fake jobs for huge amounts of money in the Ukraine, blatantly selling influence. This caused the DNC to freak out and try and headshot Trump. They missed. The Democrats appear to have committed political suicide, making Trump a Martyr and only realizing in the aftermath that they didn't actually get rid of him or even weaken him in any way. They also appear to realize they fucked up and are trying to slow walk it back, keeping the "he's impeached!" victory while not actually having to let anyone read the evidence or have a trial on it.


@Yotsubaaa did a great writeup here with links to various winner posts: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/nancy...kraine-phone-call.61583/page-135#post-5606264

And @Yotsubaaa did a new version very late on the 21st of December: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/presi...chment-megathread.61583/page-260#post-5754920

Which are too big to quote here.



https://archive.fo/oVGIv

WASHINGTON — Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced on Tuesday that the House would initiate a formal impeachment inquiry against President Trump, charging him with betraying his oath of office and the nation’s security by seeking to enlist a foreign power to tarnish a rival for his own political gain.

Ms. Pelosi’s declaration, after months of reticence by Democrats who had feared the political consequences of impeaching a president many of them long ago concluded was unfit for office, was a stunning turn that set the stage for a history-making and exceedingly bitter confrontation between the Democrat-led House and a defiant president who has thumbed his nose at institutional norms.

“The actions taken to date by the president have seriously violated the Constitution,” Ms. Pelosi said in a brief speech invoking the nation’s founding principles. Mr. Trump, she added, “must be held accountable — no one is above the law.”

She said the president’s conduct revealed his “betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security and betrayal of the integrity of our elections.”

Ms. Pelosi’s decision to push forward with the most severe action that Congress can take against a sitting president could usher in a remarkable new chapter in American life, touching off a constitutional and political showdown with the potential to cleave an already divided nation, reshape Mr. Trump’s presidency and the country’s politics, and carry heavy risks both for him and for the Democrats who have decided to weigh his removal.

Though the outcome is uncertain, it also raised the possibility that Mr. Trump could become only the fourth president in American history to face impeachment. Presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were both impeached but later acquitted by the Senate. President Richard M. Nixon resigned in the face of a looming House impeachment vote.

It was the first salvo in an escalating, high-stakes standoff between Ms. Pelosi, now fully engaged in an effort to build the most damning possible case against the president, and Mr. Trump, who angrily denounced Democrats’ impeachment inquiry even as he worked feverishly in private to head off the risk to his presidency.

Mr. Trump, who for months has dared Democrats to impeach him, issued a defiant response on Twitter while in New York for several days of international diplomacy at the United Nations, with a series of fuming posts that culminated with a simple phrase: “PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT!” Meanwhile, his re-election campaign and House Republican leaders launched a vociferous defense, accusing Democrats of a partisan rush to judgment.

“Such an important day at the United Nations, so much work and so much success, and the Democrats purposely had to ruin and demean it with more breaking news Witch Hunt garbage,” Mr. Trump wrote. “So bad for our Country! For the past two years, talk of impeachment had centered around the findings of the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, who investigated Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections and Mr. Trump’s attempts to derail that inquiry. On Tuesday, Ms. Pelosi, Democrat of California, told her caucus and then the country that new revelations about Mr. Trump’s dealings with Ukraine, and his administration’s stonewalling of Congress about them, had finally left the House no choice but to proceed toward a rarely used remedy.

“Right now, we have to strike while the iron is hot,” she told House Democrats in a closed-door meeting in the basement of the Capitol. Emerging moments later to address a phalanx of news cameras, Ms. Pelosi, speaking sometimes haltingly as she delivered a speech from a teleprompter, invoked the Constitution and the nation’s founders as she declared, “The times have found us” and outlined a new stage of investigating Mr. Trump.

At issue are allegations that Mr. Trump pressured the president of Ukraine to open a corruption investigation of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., a leading contender for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, and his son. The conversation is said to be part of a whistle-blower complaint that the Trump administration has withheld from Congress. And it occurred just a few days after Mr. Trump had ordered his staff to freeze more than $391 million in aid to Ukraine.

Mr. Trump has confirmed aspects of his conversation with the Ukrainian leader in recent days, but he continues to insist he acted appropriately.

The president said on Tuesday that he would authorize the release of a transcript of the conversation, part of an effort to pre-empt Democrats’ impeachment push. But Democrats, after months of holding back, were unbowed, demanding the full whistle-blower complaint and other documentation about White House dealings with Ukraine, even as they pushed toward an expansive impeachment inquiry that could encompass unrelated charges.

President Trump’s personal lawyer. The prosecutor general of Ukraine. Joe Biden’s son. These are just some of the names mentioned in the whistle-blower’s complaint. What were their roles? We break it down.

Ms. Pelosi told fellow Democrats that Mr. Trump told her in a private call on Tuesday morning that he was not responsible for withholding the whistle-blower complaint from Congress. But late Tuesday, the White House and intelligence officials were working on a deal to allow the whistle-blower to speak to Congress and potentially even share a redacted version of the complaint in the coming days, after the whistle-blower expressed interest in talking to lawmakers.

Although Ms. Pelosi’s announcement was a crucial turning point, it left many unanswered questions about exactly when and how Democrats planned to push forward on impeachment.
 
Última edición:
88c9ffe91a63e8c90e174f77eaf089b5.png


Yeah no shit, NYT. Thanks for finally catching up with the rest of us.

Lol. Now we have to wait for the rest of the info to finally flow out.
 
We need an impeachment megathread. Too many conversations in too many different threads.
 
Honestly I'm more alarmed by how you don't seem think that any of these Senators running for office should recuse themselves from the Senate. Don't you think that they have a massive conflict of interest in their position given that they politically benefit if they succeed in impeaching their biggest political rival? Why should they be allowed to investigate the President if they themselves directly benefit if he's found guilty?

Any judge or jury member would be immediately barred from serving in the court if they were able to obtain a direct benefit from the guilty verdict of the person they were putting on trial, so how is it absolutely nobody has ever mentioned the massive conflict of interest generated by all of these actively-serving senators both running for political office whilst running the investigation for their largest opponent?

Kinda' funny how no one's mentioned that yet, isn't it?

Well, I mentioned it in this thread. Impeachment is far from a legal process. Its a political one. Andrew Johnson was impeached simply because people didn't like his reconstruction policies. They drew up a trial in the Senate and everything. The whole thing drew down party lines, and he was largely spared a conviction because hey, the senators had integrity and thought they shouldn't impeach someone they disagreed with. Respect is something that has vanished with empathy.

We've got no such luck. Impeachment is a horrible fucking idea and needs to be carried out by completely impartial courts, not a court made up of senators. You don't need evidence for impeachment. You just need enough people to sign off on whatever. Like I said, Trump can be impeached for getting too drunk at a state affair and be visibly intoxicated. It honestly doesn't matter. You just have to find shit that looks bad, write a fiction about it, force it into a law he violated, draw up articles of impeachment and hold a trial.

It literally does not matter what the truth is for impeachment. It just really doesn't. All it is is people who think you violated the rules, and this is largely based on political perceptions.

The news media can't mention the true nature of impeachment, because Americans think it is a criminal action. Its not. The president doesn't go to jail, he's removed from office. If the president goes to jail that's another matter. But by its nature, impeachment cannot result in prison. Its technically not a trial. You've got people thinking once he's impeached, he goes to jail. He doesn't. And that's going to cause even more people to lose their shit. "HES IMPEACHED WHY ISNT HE IN JAIL BLARGSWAGFG". Because technically you don't have to comitt a crime to be impeached. Its more like an ethics, procedural or rule violation and gets you kicked out. This may or may not lead to criminal charges, which is then a normal trial.

Of course with impeachment, there's MAJOR MAJOR conflict of interests, from political rivals to simply not liking someone because they're an asshole. The truth doesn't matter so much. The thing is the Senate has ultimate discretion of whether a trial goes on or not. McConnell can just go: "Nah." and end it, no matter what the house wants. Or, alternatively, it basically functions like a vote. You get your whips to 'unofficially' gauge the temperature of the room. If they don't have the votes to impeach, you hold the trial and just clown your political opponents as the President is cleared of wrong-doing. Then you counter investigate these 'baseless' claims and start ass-fucking everyone involved.

Regardless, these hearings are an extraordinarily bad idea and are already starting to collapse a week in. The Republicans have the votes and have the power and will not impeach Trump. It makes no sense for them to do so. Pence is nowhere near as popular and not a decent replacement. You vote against, you curry favor with Trump, you build a United Front, and steam roll everyone who tried this.

This is why impeachment is typically only done when the guarantees are there. Because political impeachments, when they fail, open you up to a complete ass raping. As they say, if you come at the king, you best not miss. And they do not have the votes in the Senate to impeach. Period. End.
 
Having to look at all these photos of Adam Schiff made me realize the celebrity he most resembles is Andy Kaufman.

Each time he opens his mouth, I hear the Mighty Mouse theme. Wonder if this whole investigation is deep method acting.
 
Lets get into the details

Trump applied pressure to Ukraine on "Corruption" issues
He also said "Hey you know who was corrupt....Joe Biden and Crooked Hillary."

You need something from A-B

Nixon had a secretary who got caught trying to create a fiction about how the tapes "Accidentally" got erased. You need moments like that to sell an impeachment

you need a "I did not have sex with that woman (Ms Lewinsky)."

They dont have that with Trump. If House Dems would pay me I could get it for them and its not even hard
 
Political ads must be fact checked now. Only Republican ones though.

 
f1e183d8b23ed9c62ce79705cda19e10.png


He knew the "whistleblower’s" allegations before the "whistleblower’s" attorney, and before there was a whistleblower complaint even filed. It's no longer a mystery as to who told this person to be a whistleblower, to hire an attorney, and to file a complaint with no first-hand knowledge. In doing all this, Schiff deliberately broke the House Intelligence Committee rules by hiding this information from the GOP members of the HPSCI.

This is a serious violation of the rules and protocols and it's no surprise whatsoever that he's still spinning his wheels as hard as he possibly can to continue lying outright to deflect away from this. I'm also not the least bit surprised that this MSNBC journalist is currently busy choking on Schiff's Johnson so hard that he'll be flossing hair out of his teeth for the next week.

There's panic in the ranks, today.
 
f1e183d8b23ed9c62ce79705cda19e10.png


He knew the "whistleblower’s" allegations before the "whistleblower’s" attorney, and before there was a whistleblower complaint even filed. It's no longer a mystery as to who told this person to be a whistleblower, to hire an attorney, and to file a complaint with no first-hand knowledge. In doing all this, Schiff deliberately broke the House Intelligence Committee rules by hiding this information from the GOP members of the HPSCI.

This is a serious violation of the rules and protocols and it's no surprise whatsoever that he's still spinning his wheels as hard as he possibly can to continue lying outright to deflect away from this. I'm also not the least bit surprised that this MSNBC journalist is currently busy choking on Schiff's Johnson so hard that he'll be flossing hair out of his teeth for the next week.

There's panic in the ranks, today.
Yes, this is a serious violation of the rules. He had an obligation to inform other members of his committee. The Speaker of the House has known about these communications since last Friday and it took 5 days to figure out a strategy.

5 days is an eternity in politics. It means they have been discussing the matter with constitutional lawyers and polling to gauge people's reactions. Aside from ethics, laws related to coordination with intelligence services were likely broken. Barr will be coming out with a report about the Russia scandal which will lead to additional leaks in the dam.

You're going to see a lot of talk about Trump wanting to slow down Impeachment hearings. The fact of the matter is, the longer this goes on, the harder it's going to be for Dems to cover up their behavior in bringing this complaint through the whistleblower process. Every time a Democrat has a town hall, they will be asked questions about Impeachment. Videos will be made, the GOP will be using them in campaign ads, and Trump will have over $1 bil in his war chest to promote the hell out of them and make Democrats look like a treasonous pack of conspirators.

While things could change and Trump is not out of jeopardy, if this is handled right, we are looking at a commanding GOP majority in the House and the Senate along with criminal charges against Democratic leaders.
 

Jesus christ. The left doesn't get it. They convinced themselves that he's an idiot, a buffoon. But he's wrecking them.

Also, this was bait. All of this was bait. The entire thing.


And the DNC walked right into it.
 
reading the article shows that the differences are roughly as follows:
trump: whistleblower is wrong, i want to meet with them
grassley: whistleblowers should be protected

So Snowden is finally coming home?

Ukrainian deck of cards isn't yet in play and it could go in very different directions. There is some political shit brewing there as is and they may provide some interesting ammo.
 

Jesus christ. The left doesn't get it. They convinced themselves that he's an idiot, a buffoon. But he's wrecking them.

Also, this was bait. All of this was bait. The entire thing.


And the DNC walked right into it.
Everyone knows you don't talk business on the golf course. What kind of an idiot is Trump? I bet he's never even set foot on a golf course.
 
So Snowden is finally coming home?

Ukrainian deck of cards isn't yet in play and it could go in very different directions. There is some political shit brewing there as is and they may provide some interesting ammo.

In case nobody has figured it out yet, apparently everybody and their families in our government started cutting sweetheart deals with Ukranians when the shit hit the fan around 2014-15'ish. In fact it more and more looks like the only person not on some Ukranians payroll was Trump ... who the Dems are trying to accuse of trying to bribe Ukranians (to apparently tell him who in our government they had bought and paid for...)
 
In case nobody has figured it out yet, apparently everybody and their families in our government started cutting sweetheart deals with Ukranians when the shit hit the fan around 2014-15'ish. In fact it more and more looks like the only person not on some Ukranians payroll was Trump ... who the Dems are trying to accuse of trying to bribe Ukranians (to apparently tell him who in our government they had bought and paid for...)
that’s an interesting approach.
i’d actually be on the side of “hey, we invested in this containment and we intend to see it pay off”, if it weren’t tied to decadence and corruption.
 
What specific instance of violence are they accusing him of inciting? Violence against the person who's identity no one knows?

Neo-Marxists use Postmodernism (logic is a tool of the oppressor!) and Motte and Bailey arguments (one word, multiple definitions, pick the one that benefits you the most at a given moment).

Speech is "violence," if they disagree with it. "I don't believe we should be taking children and forcing them to look at the exposed erect dicks of gay pedophilic men at 'pride' events" is "violent homophobia." "3 year olds are not old enough to transition and giving them chemicals that permanently sterilize them is wrong" is "violent transphobia." "Women should be held to the same standards as men" is "violent sexism." "Maybe we should investigate what the common theme is amongst all these shithole countries these masses of islamic immigrants are fleeing is" is "violent islamophobia."

Violence is "speech" if they agree with it. Antifa bashing the heads in of students? Free speech. Spraying people in the face with Bear repellant, causing permanent eye damage? FREE SPEECH! Splashing journalists with acid laced milkshakes? THAT'S FREEDOM OF SPEECH BRO WHAT ARE YOU A FASCIST?!

With that in mind, Trump's mere existence as a non-cucked member opposing them is inciting all kinds of people mocking them, which is violence. After all, they are the beautiful ones, those beyond criticism and reproach, and you disagreeing with them by definition makes you wrong, evil, and fair game.
 
This is a completely unrelated aside, but props to Nadler for losing all that weight. I don't like the guy, but good on him for making the right life choice and trying to better himself instead of thinking that it is okay to be a fat slob.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo