JimL's Case for the Impeachment of Trump

[rogue06]

yet there IS no evidence of a crime.

Here is what is likely to be what the democrats try next.

Get Trump to testify under oath
Ask him some unrelated questions to try to get him to mis-state or exaggerate something (which he seems to do regularly)
Call that a lie and then impeach him for perjury (what Clinton was impeached on)

They would still end up with him finishing his term like Clinton did.

Considering how he has wildly expanded the scope of his investigation even before starting it looks like Mueller will set up perjury traps to snare someone, anyone, for something in order to justify his investigation^[1]. Sort of like what happened to Scooter Libby by the special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald who knew he didn't do anything wrong and that no crime had been committed but needed a scalp.









1. IIRC at least one of the people he brought in to assist him specializes in just that sort of thing

[Meh Gerbil]

Considering how he has wildly expanded the scope of his investigation even before starting it looks like Mueller will set up perjury traps to snare someone, anyone, for something in order to justify his investigation^[1]. Sort of like what happened to Scooter Libby by the special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald who knew he didn't do anything wrong and that no crime had been committed but needed a scalp.

1. IIRC at least one of the people he brought in to assist him specializes in just that sort of thing

Absolutely every witness should take the fifth - from start to finish.

[Sparko]

Considering how he has wildly expanded the scope of his investigation even before starting it looks like Mueller will set up perjury traps to snare someone, anyone, for something in order to justify his investigation^[1]. Sort of like what happened to Scooter Libby by the special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald who knew he didn't do anything wrong and that no crime had been committed but needed a scalp.









1. IIRC at least one of the people he brought in to assist him specializes in just that sort of thing

well Trump has a notoriously big mouth and even larger ego so he would be easily trapped. He can't help embellishing himself and can't shut up. He will brag about something totally unrelated like what he ate for breakfast and the democrats will pounce on it.
"No sir! You did NOT have the extra large Chalupa with sour cream!! It was a plain burrito without any sour cream at all!!! LIAR!!"

[rogue06]

well Trump has a notoriously big mouth and even larger ego so he would be easily trapped. He can't help embellishing himself and can't shut up. He will brag about something totally unrelated like what he ate for breakfast and the democrats will pounce on it.
"No sir! You did NOT have the extra large Chalupa with sour cream!! It was a plain burrito without any sour cream at all!!! LIAR!!"

Would anyone really obsess over food like that? I mean seriously?

Then again considering how the MSM pounced on Trump for taking two scoops of ice cream...

How they fact checked whether Russian salad dressing is really Russian...

Or even how back in 2003 they were consumed over whether or not the turkey that Bush carried in during his surprise visit to the troops in Iraq was real or not...

Never mind.

[Sparko]

Would anyone really obsess over food like that? I mean seriously?

Then again considering how the MSM pounced on Trump for taking two scoops of ice cream...

How they fact checked whether Russian salad dressing is really Russian...

Or even how back in 2003 they were consumed over whether or not the turkey that Bush carried in during his surprise visit to the troops in Iraq was real or not...

Never mind.

Case in point from just 5 hours ago:

If You Want to Understand Donald Trump, Pay Attention to What He Eats
His love for well-done steak and iceberg lettuce says a lot about his politics.

What do these tastes tell us about the president’s politics? Bouie had some thoughts: “He is someone who does not like change,” he said. “Someone who, you might say, has a core immaturity about him, who does not see the value in seeking out new experiences or even trying to understand them.”

http://www.motherjones.com/food/2017...eam-taco-bowl/

and don't forget the whole media frenzy about his Trump Taco Bowl and eating KFC. If that doesn't prove he is a racist bigot and guilty of an impeachable offense, well, they will find something else.

[rogue06]

Case in point from just 5 hours ago:

If You Want to Understand Donald Trump, Pay Attention to What He Eats
His love for well-done steak and iceberg lettuce says a lot about his politics.

What do these tastes tell us about the president’s politics? Bouie had some thoughts: “He is someone who does not like change,” he said. “Someone who, you might say, has a core immaturity about him, who does not see the value in seeking out new experiences or even trying to understand them.”

http://www.motherjones.com/food/2017...eam-taco-bowl/

and don't forget the whole media frenzy about his Trump Taco Bowl and eating KFC. If that doesn't prove he is a racist bigot and guilty of an impeachable offense, well, they will find something else.

Wanting your steak well-done ought to be an impeachable offense.

[Mountain Man]

Yes, we all know the order was not explicit, and that Comey conceded to that, but he also said that he took it to be a directive as any employee would take such a comment coming from their boss.


They weren't asked about their feelings, or what they believed. How they felt or what they believed has nothing to do with it, the question was were they asked to intervene. Their answers in the open hearing were an obvious attempt at answering without actually answering. All that was required was a simple yes or no.


No, they don't have to prove a crime, its not a court of law. Congress makes the judgement to impeach based on the evidence, they don't have to prove it. Now, if they should decide to impeach Trump, then, and only then, could he be indicted, and then a crime would need be proven.

What I find interesting though, is that you and your ilk only seem to be concerned about whether or not his behavior is criminal by law. You don't seem to care, or want to find out if Trump and or his staff colluded with Russia, or whether he used the power of his office to impede an investigation into Russian cyber attacking the U.S. elections or that those attacks were possibly tied to members of his staff. You don't care about all the lies, both Trumps own and those of his staff. All you seem to care about is if it was actually illegal or not. Sad!

More speculation and assumption backed by ZERO EVIDENCE. Haven't you noticed the pattern by now? The only evidence we have on record, which are statements given under oath, directly contradicts and refutes your wild-eyed conspiracy theories.

Bottom line: There is no evidence whatsoever that Trump or his associates colluded with Russia in order to win the election, and no evidence whatsoever that Trump or his associates attempted to obstruct justice.

And, no, Congress can't vote to impeach the President unless he has been found guilty of a crime. To suggest otherwise is as ignorant as saying that someone can be sentenced before his case is even heard by the court. Justice doesn't work like that, dumbass.

[Meh Gerbil]

More speculation and assumption backed by ZERO EVIDENCE. Haven't you noticed the pattern by now? The only evidence we have on record, which are statements given under oath, directly contradict and refute your wild-eyed conspiracy theories.

Bottom line: There is no evidence whatsoever that Trump or his associates colluded with Russia in order to win the election, and no evidence whatsoever that Trump or his associates attempted to obstruct justice.

And, no, Congress can't vote to impeach the President unless he has been found guilty of a crime. To suggest otherwise is as ignorant as saying that someone can be sentenced before his case is even heard by the court. Justice doesn't work like that, dumbass.

Anytime he makes an accusation just follow up with a one acronym post: ECREE.
Done.

[Sparko]

Wanting your steak well-done ought to be an impeachable offense.

Reminds me of a fortune teller, but instead of Tarot Cards they are using Carrot sticks.

His taco fetish show he is culturally inappropriate and wants to keep Mexicans out so he can steal their food and sell it in his restaurants.

and only a guilty person would want to do that so he should be impeached!!

[Zymologist]

Case in point from just 5 hours ago:

If You Want to Understand Donald Trump, Pay Attention to What He Eats
His love for well-done steak and iceberg lettuce says a lot about his politics.

What do these tastes tell us about the president’s politics? Bouie had some thoughts: “He is someone who does not like change,” he said. “Someone who, you might say, has a core immaturity about him, who does not see the value in seeking out new experiences or even trying to understand them.”

http://www.motherjones.com/food/2017...eam-taco-bowl/

and don't forget the whole media frenzy about his Trump Taco Bowl and eating KFC. If that doesn't prove he is a racist bigot and guilty of an impeachable offense, well, they will find something else.

If he liked tacos they'd accuse him of being a white supremacist Nazi who wants to profit off the backs of the poor, oppressed Mexicans, or some such.

Say, I like tacos....

[Sparko]

If he liked tacos they'd accuse him of being a white supremacist Nazi who wants to profit off the backs of the poor, oppressed Mexicans, or some such.

Say, I like tacos....

you can like tacos but you can never make them or buy them from someone who is not a genuine Mexican.

[Zymologist]

you can like tacos but you can never make them or buy them from someone who is not a genuine Mexican.

Ok, but what does liking tacos say about my politics? Answer that one!

[JimL]

More speculation and assumption backed by ZERO EVIDENCE. Haven't you noticed the pattern by now? The only evidence we have on record, which are statements given under oath, directly contradicts and refutes your wild-eyed conspiracy theories.

False, and Trump has more to worry about than just collusion now.

Bottom line: There is no evidence whatsoever that Trump or his associates colluded with Russia in order to win the election, and no evidence whatsoever that Trump or his associates attempted to obstruct justice.

Well thats just cognative dissonance on your part, but tell me something, would you even care if Trump did collude with the Russians? You keep saying that it isn't a crime. Is that good enough for you?

And, no, Congress can't vote to impeach the President unless he has been found guilty of a crime. To suggest otherwise is as ignorant as saying that someone can be sentenced before his case is even heard by the court. Justice doesn't work like that, dumbass.

Wrong again dufus. Impeachment is a political process, not a criminal trial, it takes only a simple majority of the House to begin the impeachment process, then a trial takes place in the Senate where all that is needed is a two thirds majority vote to impeach. If the law then decides to indict the ousted president criminally after he is impeached, then he could be indicted, but he can't be criminally indicted while President. Congress could have all the proof in the world, and decide not to impeach, and they can also impeach without such definite proof. So, being that Republicans have majorities in both the House and the Senate, the impeachment process is unlikely to occur without overwhelming proof, it is unlikely that you could get a simple majority in the House to vote to initiate impeachment proceedings against Trump unless they come under extraordinary pressure to do so by the public.

[Sparko]

Ok, but what does liking tacos say about my politics? Answer that one!

That you like to exploit poor mexicans for your culinary pleasure while relaxing in your decadent American lifestyle. duh.

[Sparko]

Well thats just cognative dissonance on your part

dang there go all the irony meters on the interwebz again. boom.

Jim your insane conclusions about Trump are the very definition of cognitive dissonance. You can't reconcile your firmly held belief (and the DNC talking points) that Trump is guilty with the facts that there is no evidence at all, so you ignore the facts and make up your own standards of evidence. And it gets sillier and sillier with every round.