U.S. Politics

Page 2524 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
You need to get out more often..number 4, even tho completely unprepared and ignorant of 'Impeachment' as outlined in the Constitution(NO higher 'court' than Congress with regards to Impeachment), was hired by losers like Nunes and Jordan..
Please tell me when the impeachment will happen and when Trump will be removed from office.

I'll even give you the opportunity to provide a date range to make it easier for you.
 
If you're going to keep on with these highly biassed posts favoring your side of the aisle, you're going to provoke other biassed posts from the other side.:

Turley beclowned himself with his remarks, because this is not the first time Jonathan Turley has testified about impeachment. In 1998, testifying in front of the House Judiciary Committee during the Clinton impeachment hearing, Turley said, “No matter how you feel about President Clinton, no matter how you feel about the independent counsel, by his own conduct, he has deprived himself of the perceived legitimacy to govern. You need both political and legal legitimacy to govern this nation, because the President must be able to demand an absolute sacrifice from the public at a moment’s notice.”

There is simply no professional or societal downside for people like Turley in making these bad, intellectually dishonest arguments. Turley himself was a random environmental law wonk before he made himself famous during the Clinton impeachment years. He made the media rounds then, calling himself a “Democrat” who was willing to speak truth to power about the “serious” nature of Clinton’s misbehavior. Back then, Turley was lauded by people like Rush Limbaugh for demanding that Clinton’s own Secret Service agents be subpoenaed to testify about what they know.

You’ll note that Turley made no such demands yesterday of former national security adviser John Bolton or Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney. Instead of highlighting the fact that Trump is obstructing justice by refusing to allow these people to testify, Turley blamed the Democrats for moving too fast.
Turley eventually said that President Trump’s conduct was “clearly wrong” and with “more evidence” might rise to the level of an impeachable offense. He drew a contrast between how much “evidence” the committee had against Clinton, via the Starr report, versus the relative “rush” to impeach Trump with the work done by Adam Schiff and the House Intelligence Committee.

Here again, Turley is counting on no one’s having the institutional memory to notice his intellectual dishonesty. Turley knows full well that the reason the Starr report took “longer” was that Starr was appointed as an independent counsel by a three-judge panel to replace an independent counsel appointed by the attorney general. Turley knows that the current attorney general, his buddy Bill Barr, would never appoint a special counsel to investigate Trump (again). He also knows that Ken Starr so far exceeded his mandate—Starr was appointed to investigate the Whitewater scandal and ended up investigating a sexual affair—that they actually rewrote the independent counsel rules to make sure Starr could never happen again. To recap: Turley knows his comparison between the Starr report and the Schiff report is entirely inapposite and unfair. But he says it anyway because he thinks most people won’t know what he knows.
Btw, don't you find it interesting that the Republican's own legal expert said Trump was wrong--something no Republican in the room would admit--and that given enough evidence (maybe like what could be provided by Administration officials if they didn't refuse to testify), he could be impeached?

Me, I'm concerned about lowering the impeachment bar to include consensual extra-marital affairs, but obviously that didn't bother Turley.
 
Last edited:
Trump considers an ethanol gas mix to be a renewable energy.
Kinda base camp cool that Trump has given a speech to corn farmers about what great Americans they are..each year of his presidency.
Fight renewables and refuel the swamp w fossil fuels!!
 
If you're going to keep on with these highly biassed posts favoring your side of the aisle, you're going to provoke other biassed posts from the other side.:



Btw, don't you find it interesting that the Republican's own legal expert said Trump was wrong--something no Republican in the room would admit--and that given enough evidence (maybe like what could be provided by Administration officials if they didn't refuse to testify), he could be impeached?

Me, I'm concerned about lowering the impeachment bar to include consensual extra-marital affairs, but obviously that didn't bother Turley.
Since Clinton, perjury is meaningless. Oh, and BJ’s aren‘t sexual relations. 21st Century Stuff.

Please answer your own question: the R’s put forth a reasonable (not heretical) expert witness that said process is important.. and further encouraged the D committee to use the established process for fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy.

Why on earth would R’s stoop to the level of putting forth a sensible expert advocating fairness and legitimacy? Why would they do that?? I mean, impeachment shimpeachment, right?

Who really cares about 65 million votes. Throw the bum out.

The D idiocracy has no idea what they have unleased. Btw, did you see Schiff tapped phone records of his political opponents, private citizens and reporters? Should that MF’er go to jail?

Yes is the only sane answer. That POS has now established a police State right here in the good ‘ol USA. With luck, and I hope you’ll join me In saying, Schiff need to be investigated and let the facts lead us where they go.
 
fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy.
Pompeo.
Fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy.

Barr.
Fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy.

Mulvaney.
Fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy.

Pence.
Fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy.

Bolton.
Fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy.

What are you hiding, Donnie?

Btw, did you see Schiff tapped phone records of his political opponents, private citizens and reporters? Should that MF’er go to jail?
Love the way you use the word "tapped", which makes one think of wire taps. Of course, Schiff did nothing of the sort. He used subpoenas, which last time I looked were quite legal.

But if someone wants to subpoena Schiff's phone records, that's OK with me.
 
Pompeo.
Fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy.

Barr.
Fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy.

Mulvaney.
Fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy.

Pence.
Fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy.

Bolton.
Fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy.

What are you hiding, Donnie?



Love the way you use the word "tapped", which makes one think of wire taps. Of course, Schiff did nothing of the sort. He used subpoenas, which last time I looked were quite legal.

But if someone wants to subpoena Schiff's phone records, that's OK with me.
Subpoena‘d records is not surveillance, you are right. Big difference and I was wrong about that.

Pompeo, Barr, Mulvaney, Pence and Bolton. Sure. Why did’t Schiff subpoena those guys? They would have refused and the judicial branch would have decided who had privilige and who has to testify. We have three branches of Government. Schiff is counting on dupes not understanding that and will in fact name obstruction as one of the articles when there was nothing of the sort.

Wrt the phone records - does it bother you that he subpoena’d records of reporters while at the same time protecting the identity of the whistleblower? Do you see a great irony there? How about claiming Guliani was speaking directly to OMB except that it wasn’t an OMB number? How about including Nunes? Mind-blowingly irresponsible?
 
Last edited:
Subpoena‘d records is not surveillance, you are right. Big difference and I was wrong about that.

Pompeo, Barr, Mulvaney, Pence and Bolton. Sure. Why did’t Schiff subpoena those guys? They would have refused and the judicial branch would have decided who had privilige and who has to testify. We have three branches of Government. Schiff is counting on dupes not understanding that and will in fact name obstruction as one of the articles when there was nothing of the sort.

Wrt the phone records - does it bother you that he subpoena’d records of reporters while at the same time protecting the identity of the whistleblower? Do you see a great irony there? How about claiming Guliani was speaking directly to OMB except that it wasn’t an OMB number? How about including Nunes? Mind-blowingly irresponsible?
Once again..mention these criminals, barr, pompeo, mulvaney, pence, bolton and the real prize, guiliani and the trumpistas yell..Schiff!!

OBTW-'protecting' the ID of the whistleblower is REQUIRED by law..ya know, those pesky laws??

Also, in the constitution, it lays out that the ultimate responsibility of accusing and then removing a president lies COMPLETELY with the US Congress. Ya know, that EQUAL part of Government, along with judicial and executive? I'm surprised don the dope hasn't taken to his hand held brain cell and twitter-yell about this whole thing going to the Supreme Court..the boy needs to rewatch the cartoon about the constitution of listen to the smart people in the room.

So, refusing to recognize the subpoenas is Obstruction, just like obstruction of justice..also included in the Clinton and Nixon impeachment..
 
Once again..mention these criminals, barr, pompeo, mulvaney, pence, bolton and the real prize, guiliani and the trumpistas yell..Schiff!!

OBTW-'protecting' the ID of the whistleblower is REQUIRED by law..ya know, those pesky laws??

Also, in the constitution, it lays out that the ultimate responsibility of accusing and then removing a president lies COMPLETELY with the US Congress. Ya know, that EQUAL part of Government, along with judicial and executive? I'm surprised don the dope hasn't taken to his hand held brain cell and twitter-yell about this whole thing going to the Supreme Court..the boy needs to rewatch the cartoon about the constitution of listen to the smart people in the room.

So, refusing to recognize the subpoenas is Obstruction, just like obstruction of justice..also included in the Clinton and Nixon impeachment..
Pretty quiet about the DOJ IG report too..no, PRESIDENT Obama didn't spy on the trump camapiagn or wire tap trump tower. No deep state, quiet coup or whatever you GOP knuckleheads are calling it today.
 
Except 40,000++ of those were GM people coming off the strike and going back to work..
Which was reflected in the September jobs report when the GM workers walked off the job (revised to 195,000 added).

This economy is En Fuego. Did you happen to see Canada's jobs report for November? Minus 71,000 and a rise in unemployment to 5.9%.

Maybe Trudeau should gossip about POTUS less on the world stage.

French unemployment? 8.6% and has not been under 7% since 1983.

But we are being laughed at the world over.. in the Progressive mind.
 
Once again..mention these criminals, barr, pompeo, mulvaney, pence, bolton and the real prize, guiliani and the trumpistas yell..Schiff!!
Did your boy Schiff subpoena any of those 'criminals?' Why not? What's your boy Schiff afraid of?

OBTW-'protecting' the ID of the whistleblower is REQUIRED by law..ya know, those pesky laws??
Maybe you could point to that part in the statute that states the identity of the whistleblower shall remain concealed. I'll wait.

Also, in the constitution, it lays out that the ultimate responsibility of accusing and then removing a president lies COMPLETELY with the US Congress. Ya know, that EQUAL part of Government, along with judicial and executive?
Sure. When the House includes 'obstruction' without allowing judicial to settle the food fight between what is and what isn't Executive privilege then that becomes, as Turley said, an abuse of power by the House of Representatives.

So, refusing to recognize the subpoenas is Obstruction, just like obstruction of justice..also included in the Clinton and Nixon impeachment..
As with his tax records the court will decide. It's not obstruction unless the Supremes say "turn it over" and THEN POTUS refuses (see United States v Nixon).

Are we clear?
 
The report is not out and somehow the ex military person knows what it contains.

He wants to show his dd214 or whatever that is, I had to google it and now understand. What would say you did not forge it? The conduct with the postings here just do not appear to be someone who would have served their country.

no one is really questioning the representative that subpoenaed phone records and that is the first time anyone has acted in that manor. Or is that not correct? Has reps done this before? It would seem to be very scary if you don't expect the republican reps to do the same once they are given the majority. That should scare all citizens.
 
Which was reflected in the September jobs report when the GM workers walked off the job (revised to 195,000 added).

This economy is En Fuego. Did you happen to see Canada's jobs report for November? Minus 71,000 and a rise in unemployment to 5.9%.

Maybe Trudeau should gossip about POTUS less on the world stage.

French unemployment? 8.6% and has not been under 7% since 1983.

But we are being laughed at the world over.. in the Progressive mind.
Black face got embarrassed by his lack of leadership that has caused unemployment to reach such high levels. He was prob too busy getting his latest black face mock-up completed, and could not be worried about his own countries labor and economic issues. What a POS.
 
Pretty quiet about the DOJ IG report too..no, PRESIDENT Obama didn't spy on the trump camapiagn or wire tap trump tower. No deep state, quiet coup or whatever you GOP knuckleheads are calling it today.
You might want to give it a slight wait and see until monday thru wed. The report comes out on monday and then the IG testify at your senate.

Then again you might be one of those who fail to admit that obama admin continued the illegal enhanced torture by the cia. What a nazi POS obama was and is.

Right now we are watching biden take on other senior citizens and looking like a POS. that guy is a voter and biden showed his true colors.
 
Gotta feel a certain amount of Holiday season sadness knowing Trump gave huge tax breaks to companies and millionaires that didn't need them. Merry Christmas millionaires.
And to the poor he took away their food,shelter and medical care.
I guess it's a personal interpretation of the season's sentiments.
maybe I am off ..I thought,
Do unto others meant a positive thing. But maybe screwing people over is all Donald knows.
Happy Holidays President Trump
 
Pompeo, Barr, Mulvaney, Pence and Bolton. Sure. Why did’t Schiff subpoena those guys? They would have refused and the judicial branch would have decided who had privilige and who has to testify. We have three branches of Government. Schiff is counting on dupes not understanding that and will in fact name obstruction as one of the articles when there was nothing of the sort.
Pompeo, Perry, Giuliani and Mulvaney, among others, have already refused to comply with subpoenas. You think that isn't obstruction? That said, I think the Democrats should have taken these and other cases to the courts (they're dong this with Barr, who was also subpoenaed , but on a separate issue, not relevant to the impeachment). I don't know how long it would have taken to resolve these issues, but even if it dragged out the impeachment beyond the election, so what? Trump is not going to be convicted in the Sensate, obviously, and that fact might help him in the election.

Are the Democrats counting on using this refusal to make the obstruction case? Maybe. Or maybe they think that even if the courts rule in their favor, the defendants will claim executive privilege. Maybe they think that after the Mueller investigation, the public will lose interest if the impeachment drags on too long.

Or maybe they figure it doesn't really matter. Even if all of these Administration officials were compelled to testify, all they could do is provide confirmation from insiders of what others have already testified to. For most of us not wearing rose-colored Trump glasses, it's pretty obvious what happened. The Republicans have argued that either the evidence for what happened is hearsay, or that what happened does not rise to an impeachable offense (even denying what their own legal expert said). If the Administration officials testified, the hearsay argument, which is already bogus, would be officially dismissed, but the Republicans, who aren't in any circumstances whatsoever going to impeach Trump, would then go back to the it's not an impeachable offense. There is absolutely nothing Trump could do that would result in the slightest loss of support by Republicans. He could go on TV and announce that he physically threatened Zelensky if he didn't investigate Biden, and that he raped a 14 year old girl at one of Epstein's parties, and the Republicans would still support him 100%. Everyone knows that.

The case against Trump is stronger than the one against Nixon, who also tried to get dirt on his opponents, but with a third-rate burglary that didn't involve foreign parties and wouldn't have even been that big a deal if he hadn't tried to cover it up (just as Clinton did nothing remotely close to impeachable until he lied about doing it). But whereas Republicans in 1974 could objectively weigh impeachment as more important than staying in power, today's Republicans have no interest in doing anything that might weaken their power.

Wrt the phone records - does it bother you that he subpoena’d records of reporters while at the same time protecting the identity of the whistleblower? Do you see a great irony there? How about claiming Guliani was speaking directly to OMB except that it wasn’t an OMB number? How about including Nunes? Mind-blowingly irresponsible?
My understanding is that the only phone records subpoenaed were those of Giuliani and his indicted associate Lev Parnas. Not any reporters, nor Solomon nor Nunes, for that matter. So only people who spoke to them would be involved. That does include Solomon and Nunes. I'm not clear who else. There may well be some reporters, but I fail to see how this is relevant to the whisteblower. For all we know, the whistleblower may have been exposed by Schiff, in that he or she may have called Giulian or Parnas. But it doesn't compromise the individual's identity as a whistleblower, since evidence of having called one of the two men isn't proof of much of anything. Likewise, I don't see how a reporter who is "exposed" for having called Giuliani has anything to worry about. There's nothing unusual about a reporter talking to him.

All that said, I wouldn't have done it the way Schiff did. I would have told Giuliani that if he wouldn't testify, I would access his phone calls. So at least he wouldn't have been caught by surprise. And I wouldn't have made them public. The public has no need to know things like this, until/unless they become critical evidence. Since the phone records don't show what was said, there is unlikely to be much value in them as evidence, unless one of them happens to coincide with some other critical event.
 
Last edited:
Since Clinton, perjury is meaningless. Oh, and BJ’s aren‘t sexual relations. 21st Century Stuff.

Please answer your own question: the R’s put forth a reasonable (not heretical) expert witness that said process is important.. and further encouraged the D committee to use the established process for fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy. Fairness and legitimacy.

Why on earth would R’s stoop to the level of putting forth a sensible expert advocating fairness and legitimacy? Why would they do that?? I mean, impeachment shimpeachment, right?

Who really cares about 65 million votes. Throw the bum out.

The D idiocracy has no idea what they have unleased. Btw, did you see Schiff tapped phone records of his political opponents, private citizens and reporters? Should that MF’er go to jail?

Yes is the only sane answer. That POS has now established a police State right here in the good ‘ol USA. With luck, and I hope you’ll join me In saying, Schiff need to be investigated and let the facts lead us where they go.
Big sigh..

Mention trump and you get
Clinton! Schiff!Obama!

You are pathetic and ignore the point MANY attorneys have made that the process is proper and the CONGRESS has the ultimate responsibility when it come to IMPEACHMENT..

BUT, ignore trump's actions,....obstruction, abuse of power, perjury and yell
Process!!
Pathetic.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
MarieDGarzai Non-Cycling Discussions 1
Similar threads
The Politics of Sport

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS