President Donald Trump answers questions from reporters in the White House, Wednesday. Photo: AP
world

Defying impeachment inquiry, Trump makes charge more certain

67 Comments
By MARY CLARE JALONICK, MATTHEW DALY and JONATHAN LEMIRE

The combative White House letter vowing to defy the "illegitimate" impeachment inquiry has actually put President Donald Trump on a more certain path to charges. His refusal to honor subpoenas or allow testimony would likely play into a formal accusation against him.

The letter sent to House leaders by White House Counsel Pat Cipollone Tuesday evening declared the president would not cooperate with the investigation — a clear reason, Democrats say, to write an article of impeachment charging him with obstruction.

The White House insists that a formal House vote is necessary just to start the impeachment process. But Democrats are moving ahead without one, confident for now that they are backed by the Constitution and Trump's own acknowledgements of trying to persuade a foreign government to investigate a political foe.

"The White House should be warned that continued efforts to hide the truth of the president's abuse of power from the American people will be regarded as further evidence of obstruction," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in response to the letter. "Mr President, you are not above the law. You will be held accountable."

Trump again defended his decision not to cooperate on Wednesday, calling a whistleblower's complaint about his call with Ukraine's leader "a fraud being perpetrated on the American public" and saying Republicans are being treated unfairly. He repeated he was being vilified for "a perfect phone call."

Bolstered by polls showing increased public support for impeachment, Pelosi has shown no signs of shifting her strategy. Democrats plan to continue investigating while focusing on the president's own words — and documents that confirm he asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate his country's involvement in the 2016 presidential election and also political rival Joe Biden and his family.

"The evidence provided by the president and his people has already been overwhelming," even without additional witness testimony, said Connecticut Rep Jim Himes. Himes is a Democratic member of the House intelligence committee, which is leading the Ukraine investigation.

The intelligence panel, along with the Foreign Affairs and Oversight and Government Reform panels, subpoenaed Gordon Sondland, the U.S. European Union ambassador, on Tuesday after Trump's State Department barred him from showing up at a scheduled deposition. Texts provided by another diplomat last week showed Sondland and others navigating Trump's demands for investigations as they spoke to Ukrainian government officials about a possible visit to Washington.

Trump's stonewalling of impeachment comes as polls find that Americans are more likely to approve than disapprove of the inquiry, even as they divide on whether Trump should be removed from office. A new Washington Post-Schar School poll finds 58% supportive of the decision by Congress to launch an impeachment inquiry that could lead to Trump being removed from office. About half of all Americans also think Congress should remove Trump from office.

Still, the White House signaled it would not give an inch. Trump has taken to Twitter frequently to bash the probe, charging that the inquiry is not about anything more than partisan politics.

"The Do Nothing Democrats are Con Artists, only looking to hurt the Republican Party and President," Trump wrote. "Their total focus is 2020, nothing more, and nothing less."

After two weeks of an unfocused response to the impeachment probe, the White House letter amounted to the first volley in a strategy that is more defined — but one that carries its own risks.

"All that defiance does is add to the case" against the president, including obstruction of Congress, said Virginia Rep. Gerry Connolly, a Democrat who sits on the Oversight and Foreign Affairs panels. He said the White House strategy actually works to convince the public of the president's guilt, citing the recent polls.

"The public gets what's happening," Connolly said.

But Trump allies both inside and outside the West Wing were pleased at the shot the letter represented.

They argue their best chance at winning the politics of impeachment is to emulate the just-say-no tactics they used for much of the special counsel's Russia probe and against other investigations launched by Democrats in the House majority.

By making the fight as contentious as possible, the White House hopes to convince voters that the impeachment process is simply about politics. They also want to push the proceedings into next year, when the first ballots of the 2020 primaries are cast. That would make it easier for Republicans to demand that impeachment be put aside in favor of letting the voters decide in November.

Trump predicted Wednesday that the impeachment fight will end up in the Supreme Court, but it's unclear whether Democrats will go to court at all and risk long delay. They could simply move to an article of impeachment on obstruction.

Aware of the risks, Democrats are planning to move quickly — unlike the two-year Russia investigation, which Republicans had ample time to try and discredit. Multiple subpoenas sent by the House panels — including to the White House, Cabinet agencies and Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani — came with a deadline to respond within the next two weeks.

As the House returns from a recess next Tuesday, the Democrats plan to hold hearings and votes to make their case, including legislation designed to improve the security of elections and prevent foreign interference. But they are so far declining to hold high profile hearings featuring fierce, argumentative allies of the president, including Giuliani, who was involved in the negotiations with Ukraine.

Democrats believe the president's own words are paramount to impeachment and don't want to distract from that.

But they will also continue to investigate.

"I think what we have is overwhelming evidence that the president has engaged in multiple wrongdoings," said Florida Rep Val Demings, a member of both the intelligence and Judiciary panels. "But what we don't know is how much more is out there."

© Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.


67 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

The courts have made clear that impeachment is a political question, which means the courts will should stay out of it.

The constitution clear gives sole power of impeachment to the House, which means the House sets the rules, not the president. Pelosi is leader of the House, so she and the Dems sets the rules. You know, like Moscow Mitch and the repubs in the Senate.

13 ( +13 / -0 )

Donald Trump is just like a villainous & bizarre character straight out of a Stephen King novel.

12 ( +14 / -2 )

Trump again defended his decision not to cooperate on Wednesday,

The question has to be asked: Are Trump's ongoing attempts to furher undermine US systems his doing and his alone? My sense is he's too incompetent to do the damage he's been doing to the republic without significant help from many others in the US and around the globe. (CT#xfile)

Given he's got lifelong deep swampmen like Barr backing him up, it stands to reason that the deep swamp is helping Trump. 

Given Trump's got global oligarchs backing him up and meddling in US politics, it stands to reason that they, too are backing him up. 

Given Trump’s making the defense industries even more profitable, along with big energy, it stands to reason that they, too are backing him up. Both also getting increased federal subsidies. (aka socialism for the rich)

And given Trump’s making Wall Street and global big finance even richer, it stands to reason that they, too are backing him up.

No wonder Trump has so much free time to play golf, tweet, and look after his own businesses. He’s got all the global powers doing the heavy lifting for him. #butyouguys #backatcha

11 ( +11 / -0 )

It's what any criminal would do.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

The really great thing about the Magna Carta was, for the first time in history, that it made one law for everybody. Kings, queens and emperors prior to this were above the law and could do as they pleased. Since then, the leaders of democratic countries are subject to the same laws as everybody else.

Looks like Trump is about to find this out.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

hat it made one law for everybody. 

And that's why Trump, McConnell etal are trying to stack courts to get judges who'll support the most powerful in their quest to establish corporatist authoritarianism. (Think the movie 'Rollerball', esp the James Caan version)

The ruling class say 'laws are for peasants'. hee hee

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Trump clearly has something to hide.

What's most astounding is how Trump's cult followers continue to defend him. He'd throw them under the bus in a flash.

14 ( +14 / -0 )

Say nothing, don't appear, refuse, deny ......

.... that's exactly what guilty people would do.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Too bad they could not have ousted Trump a week ago. Turkey is now rolling ground troops into Syria. Trump's true "crime" is the damage he has done to global affairs. I think he should be impeached. Afterwards they should also steadfastly investigate what was going on with Biden as well. As I said before; Trump was right about DC being a swamp and now every day Trump is looking more and more like one of the most vile creatures in that swamp.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

.

Not a Trump fan. Find his radical,impetuous, not thought-though mercurial policies very worrying.especially with regard to his foreign policy..

But I'll bet he'll swim into the next election - and this obsession to bring Trump down will backfire on detractors.

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

Trump is clinging to office by his tiny little hands.

Time someone stamped on then.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

They argue their best chance at winning the politics of impeachment is to emulate the just-say-no tactics they used for much of the special counsel's Russia probe and against other investigations launched by Democrats in the House majority.

No, this isn’t some normal strategy and don’t make it sound like it! Rather than “just-say-no”, say it like it is: refusal to provide evidence! If Trump were innocent he could just release the full unedited transcripts, allow his people to be interviewed without qualms. Heck he would even have released his tax returns. His dogged refusal speaks volumes. Guilty, guilty, guilty!

9 ( +9 / -0 )

The trouble with Trump, evident to all but admiring fashionistas of the "Emperor's New Clothes", is that he is simply unqualified for the job, way out of his depth and, in his few lucid moments, he himself knows it. Much of what he says and does might be attributed to his visible affliction, commonly known as the "Imposter Syndrome" which has manifested itself as a pathological narcissism while from his public behavior psychologists would diagnose him as a text-book case of the Dunning-Kruger Syndrome.

Simply stated, Trump does not know and cannot learn how to be a POTUS. Although intellectual brilliance has rarely been a quality displayed presidents, the learning curve for an elderly person of no previous experience and impaired brain function has proven to have been too steep. It has not helped that Trump cannot read, write (or tweet) and is a poor public speaker. His charisma at his rabble-rousing rallies comes merely from his bulk and bluster and his ability to push the buttons of his emotionally needy and intellectually naive fans in search of a "father figure" to "make them feel loved again" (what the cold, patrician Clinton was incapable of doing).

All this would explain why he is now going down under the dark cloud of an impeachment. A man without any experience in government or politics who had previously lived the sordid life of a mafioso-lite wheeler-dealer and who, as POTUS, swore an oath to defend and uphold the principles of a document he had never read or understood was bound to be brought down by hubris. He doesn't seem to realize that by stonewalling and refusing to cooperate with the requests of Congress he is bringing additional charges of "obstruction of justice" down on his head, just as Nixon did. So if the debacle of his presidency ends in an impeachment, Trump will be glad to have been relieved of a job he was incapable of doing and which he never really wanted in the first place. The mess he will leave behind and the damage done will be a sobering chapter in the history of the Republic.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

We’ve seen this before. If you attempt to defend yourself in any way from unproven charges, it’s “obstruction”. If you get angry or speak out, you are “guilty”. If you ask why it was ok when your predecessor did the same thing or worse it’s “whataboutism”.

-13 ( +1 / -14 )

Defying impeachment inquiry, Trump makes charge more certain

Genius. To have the House vote to impeach, which is unpopular, especially among tax paying Americans, will just make the 2020 landslide even bigger.

Democrat corruption needs to be investigated and arrests need to be made.

-14 ( +2 / -16 )

So what would actual innocent people do? Trump gave a transcript of the call as requested. Adam schiff proceeds to pretend to read from a piece of paper with a made up version of what was said, you can be innocent all day but if people are allowed to lie and conspire what can you do?

Say nothing, don't appear, refuse, deny ......

.... that's exactly what guilty people would do

-13 ( +1 / -14 )

Whistleblower complaints are not multi page documents written by partisan actors in legal terms with an Appendix.

-14 ( +1 / -15 )

So what would actual innocent people do?

Hillary testified in front of the House GOP for 11 hours.

11 ( +13 / -2 )

Also very Easy to testify when you have the President, DOJ and FBI already publicly commenting in advance that you did nothing wrong in their eyes.

so you really want to set the precedent that the President testifies before partisan members of Congress including all the Dem 2020 candidates?

-11 ( +1 / -12 )

Simply stated, Trump does not know and cannot learn how to be a POTUS. Although intellectual brilliance has rarely been a quality displayed presidents, the learning curve for an elderly person of no previous experience and impaired brain function has proven to have been too steep

But we already knew he was inexperienced with government. People like you and the MSM talk to us like we are stupid. We already knew his character; we wanted a change. I personally dont think Trumps transgressions are that big a deal, and that all government people are eventually corrupted, its just with Trump, what you see what you get.

He will most likely get impeached, but will the Senate convict? Im liking what I see with the Repubs closing ranks.

So let me ask you, if Trump is removed, all the good things he has done, what are you going to replace that with?

-13 ( +1 / -14 )

The problem I have with Trump, and its due to his lack of government experience, is that he does not listen to expert advice, and he is surrounded by yes men. I like much of what he does, domestically. But his foreign policy, kind of agree / disagree. He should of had a more diverse team. The people around him, are probably scared of him. They also like these once in a lifetime policy changes, but cant persuade him on other issues, that have serious affects. He got to learn to balance it. us_reamer makes good points, but Im not willing to throw Trump out yet. I just cant imagine one of these Dem loons in charge, thats very scary.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

Trump's stonewalling of impeachment comes as polls find that Americans are more likely to approve than disapprove of the inquiry, even as they divide on whether Trump should be removed from office. A new Washington Post-Schar School poll finds 58% supportive of the decision by Congress to launch an impeachment inquiry that could lead to Trump being removed from office. About half of all Americans also think Congress should remove Trump from office.

BINGO! And this majority will only increase as more and more revelations of Donnie's corruption and inept cover-up are brought out for all to see.

He'll take the Repub brand down the toilet for the next 50 years.

And Go Crazy Rudy! You're doing more to take Trump down than Schiff or Pelosi...

9 ( +9 / -0 )

From FoxNews.com:

Fox News Poll: Record support for Trump impeachment

"Since July, support for impeachment increased among voters of all stripes: up 11 points among Democrats, 5 points among Republicans, and 3 among independents. Support also went up among some of Trump’s key constituencies, including white evangelical Christians (+5 points), white men without a college degree (+8), and rural whites (+10)."

Wow on the last part. Never thought I'd see that.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Blacklabel: Whistleblower complaints are not multi page documents written by partisan actors in legal terms with an Appendix.

Good thing we have Trump's transcripts.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

all of that recent support for impeachment is due to the MSM 24/7 coverage and bias against him. This is taking its toll on everybody.

I never take what they say as gospel; I step back and look at all of it. I still dont see enough for impeachment. He just dont think because he has no government experience. Government work is not to be productive, its all political.

I really am disgusted by the MSM dismissal of Bidens corruption however.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

Whistleblower complaints are not multi page documents written by partisan actors in legal terms with an Appendix.

Newsflash - the whistle blower was told to contact a lawyer and then go to the IG to file a report if that's what they desired...

6 ( +6 / -0 )

@serannoDemocrat corruption needs to be investigated

All corruption should be investigated, regardless party, regardless who's in power. The DC swamp needs to be drained.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

@longtermrI really am disgusted by the MSM dismissal of Bidens corruption however.

I just did a quick Google search for biden corruption, clicked News, and found 14,400,000 hits. No doubt posters who actually wanted to find articles that support their position could easily be able to do so. Unless they just want to cavil.

https://www.google.com/search?q=biden+corruption&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi6mOX1vpDlAhVNMd4KHTvOBcYQ_AUIEigB&biw=1164&bih=537

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I really am disgusted by the MSM dismissal of Bidens corruption however.

What corruption? Please tell us what was exactly the Bidens did. What investigation are you referring to that have identified actual corruption?

Perhaps the reason that the MSM dismissed whatever you are looking for is because it never existed in the first place.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

We’ve seen this before. If you attempt to defend yourself in any way from unproven charges, it’s “obstruction”.

No, it's obstruction when you try to get witnesses not to testify or try to get the investigator fired.

If you get angry or speak out, you are “guilty”.

No. Playing the victim card, I see.

If you ask why it was ok when your predecessor did the same thing or worse it’s “whataboutism."

It is a whataboutism, which is a bad faith argument.

Trump gave a transcript of the call as requested

This inaccuracy again? We've been over this; it was an incomplete summary. Either way, it demonstrates Donny was going for a quid pro quo.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

so you really want to set the precedent that the President testifies before partisan members of Congress including all the Dem 2020 candidates?

You do realize that every member of congress is partisan, correct? It's why they are a member of a party.

If a president is suspected of committing a crime and there is potential evidence, then yes, I'm okay with this "precedent."

7 ( +7 / -0 )

I still dont see enough for impeachment. He just dont think because he has no government experience.

So, ignorance of the law excuses one of culpability for illegal actions?

6 ( +6 / -0 )

We’ve seen this before. If you attempt to defend yourself in any way from unproven charges, it’s “obstruction”.

It is when you obstruct the investigation. Are you saying that obstructing investigations should not be illegal?

If you get angry or speak out, you are “guilty”.

No... that's not how it works. To be guilty a judge, jury, or congress have to find you guilty.

If you ask why it was ok when your predecessor did the same thing or worse it’s “whataboutism”.

Yep. Because it has no bearing on this guy's guilt. That's a different conversation.

Or you could keep on going on with whataboutism. And we can keep mocking your team for it.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Donald Trump is just like a villainous & bizarre character straight out of a Stephen King novel.

Or a Batman comic.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

How long can a fat man tread water?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

We're seeing the exact same comments now about Trump as we did during the whole Russia debacle, and by the same people.

Trump tuned your rear on that one and he'll done the same again.

Bet on it.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Perhaps the reason that the MSM dismissed whatever you are looking for is because it never existed in the first place.

No its because of the obvious media favoritism towards Biden and his son.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

No its because of the obvious media favoritism towards Biden and his son.

No, it's because the media has better things to do than to indulge Trump and his supporters with their feeble attempt at smearing someone without actual evidence. Most also realize that these baseless accusations are nothing more than a distraction by Trump to take the spotlight off of his impeachment problems.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Trump knows the House will vote to impeach, and they will have to comply with providing documents and people with subpoenas will have to appear.

He's just stalling to coordinate with McConnell to be sure any of the majority Republican senators on the fence are taken care of through appropriations, subsidies and grants to their states. The senate will never vote to remove from office.

However, I believe the Supreme Court will be called to rule on the question of presidential immunity to criminal prosecution. There is nothing in The Constitution granting such immunity, so I believe the White House will lose on the claim the are making. There is simply no Constitutional or legislated rule of law stating this.

How can anyone be immune from prosecution for a criminal act? Now, the Justice Department, run y the executive branch (Trump) may choose not to prosecute.

I think the court of public opinion will be ruling against Trump by then, so he will be removed from office by electoral defeat or resignation to save face. If he resigns, he can be pardoned by Pence, then whine and complain and tweet forever.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

We're seeing the exact same comments now about Trump as we did during the whole Russia debacle, and by the same people.

We are also seeing the same exact denials by members of Cult 45 regarding credible evidence against Trump and his corrupt administration.

Trump tuned your rear on that one and he'll done the same again.

What does that mean in English?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

"The notion that you can withhold information and documents from Congress no matter whether you are the party in power or not in power is wrong. Respect for the rule of law must mean something, irrespective of the vicissitudes of political cycles." - Trey Gowdy, R – South Carolina, 2012

5 ( +5 / -0 )

"The notion that you can withhold information and documents from Congress no matter whether you are the party in power or not in power is wrong.

But that’s what Democrats are doing now? They’re not allowing the Republicans to see any documents, won’t let them call witnesses, that’s wrong as well.

Respect for the rule of law must mean something, irrespective of the vicissitudes of political cycles." - Trey Gowdy, R – South Carolina, 2012

Yes and now that’s he’s been hired by the WH he’s going to make sure they legally do that.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

But that’s what Democrats are doing now? They’re not allowing the Republicans to see any documents, won’t let them call witnesses, that’s wrong as well.

Really? How about some examples--you know, like not letting someone testify or something like that, or maybe refusing to handover documents from a secret server that really don't belong there? That kind of stuff?

Yes and now that’s he’s been hired by the WH he’s going to make sure they legally do that.

Yep, can't wait! Let's see how much Trey makes Trump hand over everything that the committees have been asking for.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Really? How about some examples--you know, like not letting someone testify or something like that, or maybe refusing to handover documents from a secret server that really don't belong there? That kind of stuff?

Oh, please! Hillary didn’t turn over 33,000 emails that somehow mysteriously disappeared. Or how about last year when the Democrats refused, flat out refused to let Nunes and Gowdy to view documents on Trump spying.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

The constant need by the Trump supporters but she is no longer relevant and isn't the president.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Oh, please! Hillary didn’t turn over 33,000 emails that somehow mysteriously disappeared. Or how about last year when the Democrats refused, flat out refused to let Nunes and Gowdy to view documents on Trump spying.

Off the topic. This is about Trump and his potential impeachment proceedings.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

"No president can be allowed to subvert the judiciary or thwart the investigative responsibility of the legislature," Roy Blunt, R – Missouri, 1998

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@bas4fDefying the constitution is what Democrats do best,

Example?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office." Lindsey Graham – R, North Carolina, 1998.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Trump's got his own man Barr, a career deep swamp man, running the DOJ for him plus he's got Rudy G. and other fixers working side by side with the DOJ.

Don’t forget to add Trey Gowdy to that list.

The question should be directed at them. While the DOJ and Barr are being questioned, someone should ask what happened to Epstein - directly under Barr's DOJ watch.

Why? Why is it for example Democrats don’t want to give the President equal and fair justice under the law which he is guaranteed as an American, but want to block Republicans from seeing any documents on Biden or Hunter as it relates to Ukraine?

Odd......

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Told by whom and why? The whistleblower process is clearly spelled out and doesn’t say to contact your local democratic committee as the first step.

its also supposed to be your complaint, not your lawyer’s. Yeah sure “if desired”....I’m quite sure they were encouraged at a minimum. Cause somehow Schiff knew for certain it was coming.

Newsflash - the whistle blower was told to contact a lawyer and then go to the IG to file a report if that's what they desired...

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Unemployment rate, particularly among minorities, at historical lows, and the Democratic Party wants to impeach the president whose policies made this possible? Show that the Democrat leadership doesn't really care about the welfare of the people, but rather only about obtaining power.

Many Republican members are not much better, but at least Trump is in it for the people and delivering on his promises. Drain the Dem and Republican swamp Mr. President.

The impeachment drive will backfire spectacularly.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

"The United States is a nation of laws, not men,

Please tell that to Nadler, Pelosi and Schiff! Apparently, they forgot that crucial point.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Democrats . . . want to block Republicans from seeing any documents on Biden or Hunter as it relates to Ukraine?

The impeachment hearings are based on the whistleblower report. Biden and Hunter aren't in it.

Baseless allegations from conspiracy theories are not part of the impeachment hearings. Now, before you try to twist this by saying, "but that's what the Democrats are doing," try to remember that the Democrats are simply trying to follow up on a report submitted to them by a Trump-appointed IG named Michael Atkinson who deemed the complaint by the whistleblower as being credible. Therefore, by law, Congress must investigate.

Republicans are free to demand an inquiry into Biden if they have actual proof (which the do not), so when the FBI determines that there has been actual wrongdoing, they can have at it. Until then, this whole Biden smokescreen is nothing but a pathetic distraction.
3 ( +3 / -0 )

The impeachment hearings are based on the whistleblower report. Biden and Hunter aren't in it.

Yes, but Congress can walk and chew gum at the same time...at least that’s the hope, so the Dems will carry on with their flimsy hoax and the GOP, Barr and Durham who by the way just broadened his team and expanded his search as to the Dems corruption on the Russian and Ukraine scandal.

Baseless allegations from conspiracy theories are not part of the impeachment hearings.

But they are, we don’t need to go further because if the Dems had a real solid case they would bring it to the floor for a vote and they’re not doing that. And why? Because they know they’d be in a political pickle.

Republicans are free to demand an inquiry into Biden if they have actual proof (which the do not),

Enter Barr and Trey Gowdy as well Durham. They’ll get it and please don’t come at me with the FBI. I wouldn’t trust them with a bad of dog food. Don’t know about you, if I were accused of something I believe I didn’t do I would fight to clear my name and yet, Hunter is nowhere to be found.

Odd......

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Unemployment rate, particularly among minorities, at historical lows, and the Democratic Party wants to impeach the president whose policies made this possible?

Severe logic flaws here:

So, just because you believe that a President has achieved something positive, it's OK for him to break laws.

I've asked for specific policies that make all of these so-called wonderful achievements possible, but I've never gotten any--and don't bother, it's off the topic.

The Democrats are upholding the oath that the took to protect the Constitution. They received a credible complaint about criminal wrongdoing by the President, but since they are investigating this, they are actually just wanting to grab power, right?

Trump is in it for the people and delivering on his promises. 

No, Trump is in it for himself by using the office of the presidency to enrich himself, his family, and his business buddies. As far as promises go, we have no new healthcare plan, no wall, no term limits, and many other things that he vowed during his candidacy--and I don't want to hear about the supposed "200 or so Accomplishments" because that's a bunch of bull, too.

The impeachment drive will backfire spectacularly.

Only for those Republican Senators who willfully ignore hard evidence. Think back to 1974 and see just how fast some of them changed their mind after United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974) was decided.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

So, just because you believe that a President has achieved something positive, it's OK for him to break laws. 

No, in fact, I would submit to you I am not ok with the Democrats breaking the law, circumventing the political process and trying to impeach the President on something as weak as this accusation.

I've asked for specific policies that make all of these so-called wonderful achievements possible, but I've never gotten any--and don't bother, it's off the topic.

I did. Just take a look at the Mueller hoax probe where Republicans we’re constantly denied to look at evidence or that a lot of it was highly redacted. Anyway, it all blew up in their faces and rightly so, but they still want to get punched again....ok....

The Democrats are upholding the oath that the took to protect the Constitution.

If they did they would give the President the right to face his accuser, oversee documents, take this to a vote and allow him and the GOP to call witnesses and cross examine them, but they won’t do that. Now when it was the opposite, Democrats went nuts calling foul to the impeachment of their then savior.

No, Trump is in it for himself by using the office of the presidency to enrich himself, his family, and his business buddies.

Ahhh, like Biden and his son, gotcha.....

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

. . . on with their flimsy hoax and the GOP, Barr and Durham who by the way just broadened his team and expanded his search as to the Dems corruption on the Russian and Ukraine scandal.

The only "flimsy hoax" here is Barr abusing his authority and wasting taxpayers' money by flying around the planet and trying to get Russia off the hook for their interference in the 2016 election. He is essentially trying to undermine what the intelligence agencies and the Mueller Report showed. It won't work. The only people who buy into all of this nonsense of his are the hard-core Trump loyalists.

. . . if the Dems had a real solid case they would bring it to the floor for a vote and they’re not doing that. And why? Because they know they’d be in a political pickle.

Nope, and I went over all of this in great detail yesterday, but since you just want to be stubborn and keep repeating the false notion that some kind of floor vote is needed before impeachment investigations begin, then so be it.

They’ll get it and please don’t come at me with the FBI. I wouldn’t trust them with a bad of dog food. 

Too bad then since the FBI is the only agency that can do an actual criminal investigation here.

Odd......

That describes the entire Trump defense so far.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

It’s weird that the pubs think the democrats should investigate their weird witch-hunt conspiracy theory about Biden.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

A Whistle Blower comes forward with a complaint that says Trump tried to shakedown the Ukraine President with a quid-pro-quo to get dirt on Biden....Trump and Trumpers allege its all bogus, fabricated, and untrue...

Then Trump's genius lawyer tell him to release the transcript of the phone call which then proves and substantiates everything the Whistler Blower details in the complaint - to include the smoking gun; "I would like you to do us a favor THOUGH"...

Then a second Whistle Blower comes forward to say the exact same thing as the first...

Then we find out that associates of Trump and Giuliani were in Ukraine buying off directors of the State Gas Company, to steer contracts to Trump businesses....

Then the inept cover-up of all Trump's Ukrainian corruption starts to unravel...

Is it any surprise Americans support impeachment 51% to 40%? And from a Fox News poll yet...

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-record-support-for-trump-impeachment

And because he knows he's guilty, Trump now does his best Nixon impression and tries the stall tactic.

It didn't work for Nixon and it won't work for Mr QPQ...

2 ( +2 / -0 )

No, in fact, I would submit to you I am not ok with the Democrats breaking the law, circumventing the political process and trying to impeach the President on something as weak as this accusation.

The Democrats have done none of these things, and you don't have one shred of evidence other than pure rhetoric to "support" your weak-sauce counter-arguments.

Just take a look at the Mueller hoax probe where Republicans we’re constantly denied to look at evidence or that a lot of it was highly redacted.

The fact that you still label the Mueller Report a "hoax" does nothing for your credibility. Republicans were not denied evidence since the Democrats didn't do any of the redacting--Barr did--take that up with him.

President the right to face his accuser, 

Only in a court of law. You really don't understand how these impeachment things work, do you?

Ahhh, like Biden and his son, gotcha.....

Zero evidence of this, but please provide it if you have it.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Unemployment rate, particularly among minorities, at historical lows, and the Democratic Party wants to impeach the president whose policies made this possible?

By which law are illegal actions excused due to a good economy? And is this a blanket rule, where any crime is excused, even rape and murder? I’m not clear on the details of excusing illegal actions for a good economy so it would be nice if someone could explain this clearly.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The only "flimsy hoax" here is Barr abusing his authority and wasting taxpayers' money by flying around the planet and trying to get Russia off the hook for their interference in the 2016 election.

Well, that’s the same argument conservatives have about the Russian witch hoax, if Dems aren’t worried then why are they complaining? If they were so innocent they wouldn’t be worried about Barr and Durham.

Nope, and I went over all of this in great detail yesterday,

Yes. So did I.

Too bad then since the FBI is the only agency that can do an actual criminal investigation here.

And too bad, the Dems can’t remove the President. McConnell will see to that. Thank the lord for the Senate.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

The Democrats have done none of these things,

They’ve done far worse.

.

The fact that you still label the Mueller Report a "hoax" does nothing for your credibility.

Not mine, but Mueller’s is shattered, completely.

Only in a court of law. You really don't understand how these impeachment things work, do you?

I do, please tell that to Nancy and have her take a vote!

Zero evidence of this, but please provide it if you have it.

This is what we are asking for this impeachment hoax and still nothing.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

If they were so innocent they wouldn’t be worried about Barr and Durham.

Barr and Durham will be facing their own problems very soon--especially Barr. Remember a guy named John Mitchell? That's where Barr is headed.

Yes. So did I.

And you failed to make your point in a convincing manner, especially when I asked you cite the specific place in the Constitution where it says that a vote on the floor must be taken before an inquiry is done. I'm still waiting.

And too bad, the Dems can’t remove the President. McConnell will see to that.

Really? How? What can he do?

Thank the lord for the Senate.

Let's see if you feel that way after they start doing what their predecessors did back in 1974.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Barr and Durham will be facing their own problems very soon--

Yeah, I’ll believe that when ever Democrats becomes a Catholic. If that happens, I’ll owe you an apology.

And you failed to make your point in a convincing manner, especially when I asked you cite the specific place in the Constitution where it says that a vote on the floor must be taken before an inquiry is done. I'm still waiting.

And you failed to make your point, but I will say this, if the Dems don’t want to give due process to the executive branch, they can tell the legislation to kiss off and then take it to the Judicial Branch and let them sort it out. Done.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

 If that happens, I’ll owe you an apology.

Excellent. Then I have you on record for that.

And you failed to make your point,

Really? How so? Tell me how I failed when I quoted directly from the Constitution. I gave a specific section that was very clear. Please, go back to Article 1 of the Constitution and tell us the exact place where it says that a floor vote must be done before an impeachment inquiry is done. It's a simple request, and you should be able to show me so I can update my copy (and I will even use a Sharpie).

if the Dems don’t want to give due process to the executive branch, 

They are. They are following up on the whistleblower's complaints by trying to hold hearings so that the allegations can be either verified or shown to be false. Unfortunately, they can't do it because President "Phone Spurs" refuses to provide any evidence on his part showing his innocence.

. . . then take it to the Judicial Branch and let them sort it out.

I hope it does. Then we can get United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 -- 2019 Version and watch the Republican Senators jump off the sinking ship before they are forced to go on the record should the impreachment trial go to the Senate.

Done.

Yep, Trump and his henchmen will be.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites