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:
I know they have they're reasons. Reasons like hating black & brown folx, hating the LGBTTQIAAP community, wanting to see people you hate get hurt even if you get hurt in the process.

You're reasons excist but their bad reasons. Hillary was too blunt for saying it, but Trumpists really are deplorable.

Well, you're right on one count. I do hate the LGBTWTFBBQ community.

They threw gay people like me under the bus years ago.
 
I know they have they're reasons. Reasons like hating black & brown folx, hating the LGBTTQIAAP community, wanting to see people you hate get hurt even if you get hurt in the process.

You're reasons excist but their bad reasons. Hillary was too blunt for saying it, but Trumpists really are deplorable.
Dynastia, is that you?
 
You're reasons excist but their bad reasons. Hillary was too blunt for saying it, but Trumpists really are deplorable.

D8BYTnlXUAIxeIm.jpeg


What's your reddit account name?
 
I mean if you can't point out any examples your talking out of your ass.


It's whataboutism to me because the comparison your making is that we went from shit to mediocre and you expect me to overlook it or even praise it.


I don't know if you're just exceptional or being deliberatly obtuse. The estate tax exemption only applies to estates worth 5.8 million. So everyone else who wants to be pass on their shit to someone else has to pay and they don't. Why?



Because both of their actions were fucking shit you absolute fucking re-tard. Just because one person was slightly less shit doesn't mean it wasn't shit.

I ignored that fact because it was a non-sequitur. I didn't even mentioned or even remotely talked about trump killing his own citizens. I mainly was referring to the amount of money wasted and unnecessary budget increase. But even so, do you want me to praise something that should be an expectation? You want me to give your dear leader a gold star? Congratulations, he's still wasting a shit ton of money over in the middle east.


Yes, he didn't campaign on draining the swap and presidents don't have the power to hire or fire anyone in his cabinet that he likes. Fucking idiot.



My point is he didn't do a good job with stop outsourcing locally. How the hell can he stop outsourcing abroad? Boomers like you need to be hit with a rubber chicken.


Stupid fucking boomer. I'm mad that he keeps continuing the shit practices. That's why I hate it when someone says, "well obamur did it too!". I don't care who's doing it. I want it to scale back.

I said hes polices were shit and he's unpresidential. I've said nothing about him being impeached or anything. Having trouble getting your shit together old man?

Look bro, if you don't understand how all of this is related, you're being willfully ignorant.

I'm done here, because all you're doing is pretending Gen X doesn't exist, You're a boomer because you were around for NAFTA and I don't have any points left,WHY CAN'T YOU JUST AGREE WITH MEEEEEEEEE!!!!

You do you my man, but I'm not going to sit here all day and explain how propaganda works, how economics work, how corporations "following the rules" is a massive joke, race relations, and everything else you seem to ignore.

Go jerk off and pretend you won I suppose, because hearing the same shit in every response you make is boring me now. Seriously, go back to Reddit if you want to have 2 day arguments that neither person understands square one about, because the majority of people here actually know what they're talking about.
 
After pushing Pelosi to impeach, Commie Mommy has knifed her in the back and walked away leaving Pelosi holding the bag.

Ver archivo adjunto 959106

Lol.
This is why I call her the Pink Scorpion. Don't let the lipstick distract you from her stinger.

ci-four-loko-pink-scorpion-329bd2d1b5e15372.jpeg
 
I'm a lazy faggot. I should've taken the source directly.
Then do so.

Literally anytime prior to 2016.
So show me the evidence that they were actually doing that prior to 2016.

Because from what I'm seeing, 2016 was merely when the MSM blew it up as a scandal, not when Google actually started collecting and selling data with impunity.

No you're misunderstanding. The upperclass got more tax breaks than the lower class should've.
What do you mean "should've"? Even one of your own sources show that people got more taxes the higher income they had.

I am legitimately failing to understand what is your problem here.

I already sourced it like 3 times. I will edit when I find it again.
Please do.

I feel like your deliberately missing the point thats why I insulted you. I'm sorry your weren't pretending to be exceptional. The estate tax excemption only benefits people with property over 5.8 milllion. Not any one else. Why are the only people with those property values allowed to have those kickbacks?
Let's assume that this is a real problem now, because you're still wrong.


As of 2019, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) requires estates with combined gross assets and prior taxable gifts exceeding $11.4 million to file a federal estate tax return and pay estate tax as required. For the two years prior, 2017 and 2018, the return and taxes were owed if the estate exceeded $5.49 million and $11.18 million respectively.

At no point were estates worth over $5.8 million exempt from taxes until 2018, and even then you would still be taxed at around the $11 million mark.

How State Estate Taxes Work
An estate that escapes federal tax may still be subject to taxation by the state in which the deceased person was living at the time of their death. That's because the exemptions for state and district estate taxes are all less than half those of the federal exclusion. That said, estates valued at less than $1,000,000 are not taxed in any jurisdiction.
Only upper middle class and rich people *really* get estate taxes anyway.

If you say so. I want save that money or do something else with it.
Like what?

"Donnie this isn't Vietnam there are rules." On top of that I just don't want to be in debt to those countries anymore for killing their civilians.
We wouldn't be in debt to those countries regardless. Literally who considers themselves beholden to Pakistan?

If they planned any terriorist attacks that are a threat to the US, allies, or citizens abroad, yes. If they just wanna bomb some random mosque because they belonged to the wrong sect of the religion I don't care. They tend to do the latter a lot more than the former.
Those two types very often overlap and intersect though.

The what is that the polices he put in place are still there.
And?


It proves that the parts that were re-negotiated under the new USMCA deal were vital and not trash.
Which was merely a variation of my original point, which was that (assuming the NYT was accurate) the renegotiated elements of the TPP were likely the ones that weren't trash.


1570209729815.png

If your gonna bitch about sources you better damn well give me a good one.
Well, I trust a Trump-backed org more than a Soros-backed org.

You still ignored http://www.magapill.com/, by the way.


What's your argument though? You also did a logical fallacy too by the way.
My argument could have been gleaned by simply reading what you quoted, so your "fallacy fallacy" accusations already fail, but let me spell it out for you.

You're crying about Trump's Twitter shitposts instead of looking at what he's actually done. You're putting a politicians style of appearance, form, and rhetoric before what he's actually performed and accomplished.

Because you didn't present any piece of real legislation, you didn't argue anything with any prove and demanded proof from others all the damn time, your sources are shit and now your claiming you have "facts and lawwwwgic" on your side like Sargon of Akkad commenter. You think I'm not gonna make fun of you?
Most if not all of what I've said can be confirmed with a simple Google search. I'm not going to put in the effort to prove basic shit like the US having a military budget in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Anything particularly contentious I've cited, even using your own sources at points (which means you just called your own sources "shit"). I haven't demanded much of anything from you, and at least two of my sources already contained examples of "real legislation".
 
I enjoy political sperging more than the next guy, but I liked it more when I could check this thread and actually figure out what the news on impeachment was in 5 mins. Now let me be a hypocrite:

The tax cuts had the huge added benefit of reducing subsidies for far left blue areas with high state and local taxes. Nothing against high taxes, but that should be between the state and the people with nothing from the fed. That's a big deal everyone leaves out. No it wasn't perfect.

People compare Presidents to former ones. Would anyone complain about me saying Bill Clinton was doing a better job than George Bush? Why then do people insist I can't prefer the job Trump is doing to Obama?

Yes I am disappointed by his performance and lack of real promise keeping, but there isn't exactly anyone offering anything I think is better. If it's some guy who does like 2/6 things I like, 1/6 thinngs I don't, and 3/6 things I'm ambivalent about, that's better than someone who does 5/6 things I hate and 1/6 things I like.

As a vague social conservative and economic protectionist/liberal I was 90s Democrats' to lose, and they seem to insist on it by offering hate and discrimination against my race, blatant political double standards, selling out citizens for random people around the world, making me pay for obviously useless higher education I worked hard and planned for, and unfunny elite snark.
 
Última edición:
9b132607c20f218e38b2cf3a2aebc4e6.png


I'd very much like to see that testimony, now. You are absolutely supposed to make these things known on the form you fill out for this; failing to disclose that information would present a serious problem and would open this person up to potential criminal charges for lying to these agencies.

“I certify that all of the statements made in this complaint (including any continuation pages) are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I understand that, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1001, a false statement or concealment of a material fact is a criminal offense punishable by a fine of up to $10,000, imprisonment for up to five years, or both.”
 
9b132607c20f218e38b2cf3a2aebc4e6.png


I'd very much like to see that testimony, now. You are absolutely supposed to make these things known on the form you fill out for this; failing to disclose that information would present a serious problem and would open this person up to potential criminal charges for lying to these agencies.

“I certify that all of the statements made in this complaint (including any continuation pages) are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I understand that, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1001, a false statement or concealment of a material fact is a criminal offense punishable by a fine of up to $10,000, imprisonment for up to five years, or both.”
Don't worry, they'll just change the law again to get rid of that pesky clause.
 
I'm really loving the current logic of
"Sure, Trump was right and his opponents are incredibly corrupt and making money under the table with foreign nations BUT he asked about it so he needs to be impeached nownownownownowNOWNOW!"
To be fair, Biden would say that he did what he did to stop corruption in the Ukrainian government. I'm strongly inclined to believe that's complete bull. But it's hard to come out of that place with your hands clean.

If its any consolation, I've never understood the whole Nazi shit. I just think trump is at best decent and has some polices I disagree with.
I agree. Solid C+ to B- president. He could have won more points by sticking to his guns on shit like Saudi Arabia instead of doing what every president does. But he didn't.

I know they have they're reasons. Reasons like hating black & brown folx, hating the LGBTTQIAAP community, wanting to see people you hate get hurt even if you get hurt in the process.

You're reasons excist but their bad reasons. Hillary was too blunt for saying it, but Trumpists really are deplorable.
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Transexual, Queer, Intersexed, Asexual, and...? What are the last two.

Dynastia, is that you?
Nah Dynastia was way smarter than this guy. A raging lefty with a retarded world view but damn, he could craft a post.
 
Última edición:
After pushing Pelosi to impeach, Commie Mommy has knifed her in the back and walked away leaving Pelosi holding the bag.

Ver archivo adjunto 959106

Now that's actually a pretty clever political maneuver. Who advised her to do that?
 
Última edición:
Look, Trump isn't perfect, far from it but at least he's a actual New Yorker and he's not Hillary, a carpet bagging pol using her position as a senator to renege on promises to bring jobs and infrastructure to upstate NY (where its needed the most) and instead used her position to pave her way to President of the United States while doing shit like voting for the Iraq war when everyone in NY wanted out. The DNC, instead of sidelining this geriatric, bitter and loony bitch, runs with the premise the election was stolen and tries to parlay that into impeachment, by hook or by crook then puts up the most pathetic lineup to battle it out for the nomination. Anyone who doesn't recognize that Trump's election was a slap in the face to the DNC, the Democratic Party and most of all corrupt lying pols like Hillary isn't facing reality. Short of outright civil war (and the DNC is doing their best to foment one) this was the only way voters would make their feeling known. If the DNC thinks Fauxahontas, Comrade Bernie or sleazy Grandpa Biden (Kamala, Booker and Buttagreg are just sideshow freaks) has a serious chance at President they're delusional.

The DNC is destroying itself and in the process, our system of government. They should be careful because one day, a charismatic individual with some power may decide to cross the proverbial Rubicon and then proscribe every talking head, shifty politician and grifter who tries buying his/her way into politics to enrich themselves. They'd only have themselves to blame.
 
Is that [a gridlocked legislature] really such a bad thing?
Yes. It's a terrible thing because in the absence of a functional Legislative branch, the Executive has to issue sweeping, unilateral orders to get things done. It was shitty when Obama did it and it is shitty when Trump does it. Rule by executive order is the rule of one and that is antithetical to what America is supposed to stand for.

But I also feel for the aforementioned Presidents because ultimately Congress is forcing their hand. I frame a lot of what we've been seeing over the last few cycles as a war between the Executive and Legislative branches of the US government, not a party struggle. The Legislative branch is intentionally sabotaging the Executive branch in a bid to gain back power that they willingly ceded over years. By seizing up the legislative process they are only proving why they were unworthy of the powers ceded to the Executive in the first place.
 
After pushing Pelosi to impeach, Commie Mommy has knifed her in the back and walked away leaving Pelosi holding the bag.

Ver archivo adjunto 959106

WTF, I love AC now.
 
I know it's Glen Beck, so be skeptical, but he appears to have unearthed a rather intriguing accidental recording of the Ukranian Prosecutor that Biden had installed after he had the first guy fired for sniffing around his son.


The then new Ukranian Prosecutor would seem to admit that they set up Manafort and were working with Hillary. I'm sure this will be viewed as "old news" by our oh so judicious media.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo