MAGAThread XVIII: The Authority Is Total

[Salandriagado]

Which is a crime outlined by the Constitution, so, you know.

So is using presidential power to get your vice president's son into a gas company in the Ukraine. (Obama)
So is giving billions of dollars to Iran for your benefit. (Obama)

That's two lies in a row.

Now some normal crimes.
Taking charity money and using it to buy your own shit. (Clinton (both of them))

That one's a lie too. Trump, however, has just been found guilty of precisely that.

Lying under oath. (Clinton (Bill))
And there are plenty more.

For which he was impeached. Funny, that.

[Gormwood]

That Lying under oath. (Clinton (Bill))
And there are plenty more.

For which he was impeached. Funny, that.

What a world we live in where lying about a blowjob is a bigger crime than extorting a domestic political smear from a foreign country in exchange for vital military assistance.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Trump hasn't done enough to warrant impeachment, except for taking emoluments. So most of the effort behind removing Trump is really the Democrats' sour grapes. Nixon probably would've stayed in if he had the benefit of something like Fox News. Only 20% of the country or less, actually wanted Nixon gone. He could've been brave enough to not leave voluntarily and let the US congress get the consequences of removing him.

“Trump has done nothing that warrants impeachment except for this impeachable offence, but that is only one, so prosecuting him for the crime he committed is just dems being sour.”

We all know, someone has to commit at least two crimes for it to be taken seriously.

[Saiwania]

We all know, someone has to commit at least two crimes for it to be taken seriously.

The impeachment process is partly a purely political one, so it stands to reason that plenty of US presidents have done wrongdoing before, but weren't called out on it. If a POTUS is liked enough or has their own party backing him sufficiently, impeachment going all the way to conviction is unlikely.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

We all know, someone has to commit at least two crimes for it to be taken seriously.

The impeachment process is partly a purely political one, so it stands to reason that plenty of US presidents have done wrongdoing before, but weren't called out on it. If a POTUS is liked enough or has their own party backing him sufficiently, impeachment going all the way to conviction is unlikely.

This all could very well be true. I don’t see why this would be a reason that Trump should not be impeached though.

We know he has committed crimes. This is not some speculation or extreme interpretation of a law. Trump has engaged in conspiracy to commit bribery. Why in god’s name should he be left off the hook? Because other presidents did bad things too? So we should pretend impeachment is not in the constitution?

[Greater Miami Shores]

The impeachment process is partly a purely political one, so it stands to reason that plenty of US presidents have done wrongdoing before, but weren't called out on it. If a POTUS is liked enough or has their own party backing him sufficiently, impeachment going all the way to conviction is unlikely.

This all could very well be true. I don’t see why this would be a reason that Trump should not be impeached though.

We know he has committed crimes. This is not some speculation or extreme interpretation of a law. Trump has engaged in conspiracy to commit bribery. Why in god’s name should he be left off the hook? Because other presidents did bad things too? So we should pretend impeachment is not in the constitution?

Again these are your opinions and of those who agree with you, not your facts.

Millions of us US citizens disagree with you all.

Even on US Court of Laws Grand Juries at times the jury is divided on the guilt or innocence of a person based on the same so called evidence of guilt against the person, no different on this Trump impeachment inquiry process.

This is Political Trial declared by the Democrats against President Trump for Political reasons against President Trump. Lets be honest about it. I have done Private Polls on my regions and the results are mixed on both sides.

Please read my previous post in context:
viewtopic.php?p=36434611#p36434611

I rest my case.

[Aclion]

For which he was impeached. Funny, that.

What a world we live in where lying about a blowjob is a bigger crime than extorting a domestic political smear from a foreign country in exchange for vital military assistance.

I know you've been corrected on this before and are just being gross, but for the audience: Clinton didn't merely lie about a blowjob. He lied about the use of his office to engage in... lets call it consentually ambiguous... sexual relations with female staff. He got caught because of a blowjob.

[Maineiacs]

The impeachment process is partly a purely political one, so it stands to reason that plenty of US presidents have done wrongdoing before, but weren't called out on it. If a POTUS is liked enough or has their own party backing him sufficiently, impeachment going all the way to conviction is unlikely.

This all could very well be true. I don’t see why this would be a reason that Trump should not be impeached though.

We know he has committed crimes. This is not some speculation or extreme interpretation of a law. Trump has engaged in conspiracy to commit bribery. Why in god’s name should he be left off the hook? Because other presidents did bad things too? So we should pretend impeachment is not in the constitution?

Technically, he engaged in a conspiracy to commit extortion, not bribery.

[Israeli Empiratic Commonwealth]

This all could very well be true. I don’t see why this would be a reason that Trump should not be impeached though.

We know he has committed crimes. This is not some speculation or extreme interpretation of a law. Trump has engaged in conspiracy to commit bribery. Why in god’s name should he be left off the hook? Because other presidents did bad things too? So we should pretend impeachment is not in the constitution?

Technically, he engaged in a conspiracy to commit extortion, not bribery.

Technically, courts still say there is not enough evidence. And I agree. I have not seen promising evidence. It is like the collusion thing. Didnt happen.

[Fartsniffage]

Technically, he engaged in a conspiracy to commit extortion, not bribery.

Technically, courts still say there is not enough evidence. And I agree. I have not seen promising evidence. It is like the collusion thing. Didnt happen.

What courts have said that?

[Heloin]

This all could very well be true. I don’t see why this would be a reason that Trump should not be impeached though.

We know he has committed crimes. This is not some speculation or extreme interpretation of a law. Trump has engaged in conspiracy to commit bribery. Why in god’s name should he be left off the hook? Because other presidents did bad things too? So we should pretend impeachment is not in the constitution?

Again these are your opinions and of those who agree with you, not your facts.

Millions of us US citizens disagree with you all.

Even on US Court of Laws Grand Juries at times the jury is divided on the guilt or innocence of a person based on the same so called evidence of guilt against the person, no different on this Trump impeachment inquiry process.

This is Political Trial declared by the Democrats against President Trump for Political reasons against President Trump. Lets be honest about it. I have done Private Polls on my regions and the results are mixed on both sides.

Again these are your opinions and of those who agree with you, not your facts.

You walked right into that one.

Please read my previous post in context:
viewtopic.php?p=36434611#p36434611

I rest my case.

Firstly I don't think you know what the phrase "I rest my case means" because that's a pretty weak point to be saying that you won't make any more arguments.

So, people have to directly talk and meet with President Trump to know about his wrongdoings?

[Israeli Empiratic Commonwealth]

Technically, courts still say there is not enough evidence. And I agree. I have not seen promising evidence. It is like the collusion thing. Didnt happen.

What courts have said that?

Point out one that hasnt.

[Gormwood]

What a world we live in where lying about a blowjob is a bigger crime than extorting a domestic political smear from a foreign country in exchange for vital military assistance.

I know you've been corrected on this before and are just being gross, but for the audience: Clinton didn't merely lie about a blowjob. He lied about the use of his office to engage in... lets call it consentually ambiguous... sexual relations with female staff. He got caught because of a blowjob.

Which apparently the Republicans deemed impeachable while extorting a foreign country over military aid for political gain is just a "witch hunt". Point stands.

[Ifreann]

“Now there is one witness, one witness that they won't bring in front of us. They won’t bring in front of the American people, and that’s the guy that started it all: the whistleblower,” Jordan said.

“I say to my colleague, I’d be glad to have the person who started it all come in and testify. President Trump is welcome to take a seat right there,” Welch said.

boom.

---

What courts have said that?

Point out one that hasnt.

All of them.

[Fartsniffage]

What courts have said that?

Point out one that hasnt.

Not a single court has said that. Because this is the impeachment investigation. Do you know the difference?

[Gormwood]

“Now there is one witness, one witness that they won't bring in front of us. They won’t bring in front of the American people, and that’s the guy that started it all: the whistleblower,” Jordan said.

“I say to my colleague, I’d be glad to have the person who started it all come in and testify. President Trump is welcome to take a seat right there,” Welch said.

boom.

Would love to see him testify, especially since history including the Mueller Probe shows he's incapable of not lying his ass off on the stand to the point his lawyers pissed in their pants at the thought of him talking with Bob.

[Greater Miami Shores]

Would love to see him testify, especially since history including the Mueller Probe shows he's incapable of not lying his ass off on the stand to the point his lawyers pissed in their pants at the thought of him talking with Bob.

Yes I would Gormwood. But I strongly disagree with you on your description of President Trump.

I for one will never make this kind of comment of any person - pissed in their pants - in the context of your post.

[Vassenor]

Taking charity money and using it to buy your own shit. (Clinton (both of them))

Wasn't Trump just fined several million dollars for taking charity money and funnelling it into his campaign coffers?

[Senkaku]

We all know, someone has to commit at least two crimes for it to be taken seriously.

The impeachment process is partly a purely political one, so it stands to reason that plenty of US presidents have done wrongdoing before, but weren't called out on it.

Is the rationale here that since other people have probably gotten away with crimes, he should be able to as well?

[Gormwood]

Taking charity money and using it to buy your own shit. (Clinton (both of them))

Wasn't Trump just fined several million dollars for taking charity money and funnelling it into his campaign coffers?

Yep. This is just a sad Trump style projection given the Clinton Foundation's transparency.

[Professor Irwin Corey]

For which he was impeached. Funny, that.

What a world we live in where lying about a blowjob is a bigger crime than extorting a domestic political smear from a foreign country in exchange for vital military assistance.

Actually you and I don't live in that world you describe just yet, however one could wonder if those that do are too deeply mired in some reality TV show. Seems many of them aren't able or refuse to distinguish the line between reality and bullshit garbage TV programming from whence this POTUS was drawn.

[Ifreann]

Would love to see him testify, especially since history including the Mueller Probe shows he's incapable of not lying his ass off on the stand to the point his lawyers pissed in their pants at the thought of him talking with Bob.

"Please state your name for the record, sir"
"My name is John Barron"

[The Rich Port]

Would love to see him testify, especially since history including the Mueller Probe shows he's incapable of not lying his ass off on the stand to the point his lawyers pissed in their pants at the thought of him talking with Bob.

"Please state your name for the record, sir"
"My name is John Barron"

"My name is... Jon... Barryn"
"... Did you just combine Barron's name with Jon Arryn from Game of Thrones?"
"... No."

[Makdon]

What courts have said that?

Point out one that hasnt.

ever heard of a logical fallacy?
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof
also, no courts have said anything about the impeachment because it's an investigation carried out by congress

[San Montalbano]

Impeachment is literrally a bunch of insane power hungry democrats voting to impeach him, then it will go to the senate where it will sink.