Nunes sues CNN over 'demonstrably false' Ukraine report

[Cow Poke]

I'm sure you'd have said the same during the Nixon Impeachment, it's your team, which apparently is more important to you than your Constitution.

What you can't seem to comprehend is that the whole Nixon affair began with an actual undeniable CRIME, and it was really hard to deny he had to go. The Nixon impeachment (attempt) is nothing at all like this partisan Democrat impeachment sham.

[firstfloor]

What you can't seem to comprehend is that the whole Nixon affair began with an actual undeniable CRIME, and it was really hard to deny he had to go. The Nixon impeachment (attempt) is nothing at all like this partisan Democrat impeachment sham.

Bribery is a crime. Trump has confessed already by issuing the infamous transcript. Trump says black is white and Repubs are looking the other way. That is the whole story.

[Cow Poke]

Bribery is a crime. Trump has confessed already by issuing the infamous transcript. Trump says black is white and Repubs are looking the other way. That is the whole story.

That must explain why the third article of impeachment so clearly lays out the case for prosecution of bribery! Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

[firstfloor]

That must explain why the third article of impeachment so clearly lays out the case for prosecution of bribery! Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

It’s in the first article.

[Cow Poke]

It’s in the first article.

Any suggestion as to why Nadler didn't mention bribery at all when he was explaining the charges?

The first article is for abuse of power. It is an impeachable offense for the president to exercise the powers of his public office to obtain an improper personal benefit while ignoring or injuring the national interest. That is exactly what President Trump did when he solicited and pressured Ukraine to interfere in our 2020 presidential election, thus damaging our national security, undermining the integrity of the next election, and violating his oath to the American people.

Think about this -- since bribery is actually used as an example of an impeachable offense, why doesn't Nadler call it that?

It is not in the first article.

[firstfloor]

Any suggestion as to why Nadler didn't mention bribery at all when he was explaining the charges?

The first article is for abuse of power. It is an impeachable offense for the president to exercise the powers of his public office to obtain an improper personal benefit while ignoring or injuring the national interest. That is exactly what President Trump did when he solicited and pressured Ukraine to interfere in our 2020 presidential election, thus damaging our national security, undermining the integrity of the next election, and violating his oath to the American people.

Think about this -- since bribery is actually used as an example of an impeachable offense, why doesn't Nadler call it that?

It is not in the first article.

What constitutes bribery? Do you see those ingredients in the first article?

[Cow Poke]

What constitutes bribery? Do you see those ingredients in the first article?

The point is, ff, that these hyper-partisan Democrat hacks want you to BELIEVE it's bribery, but their focus groups told them America simply isn't buying it, so they kinda dance around it, knowing they can't actually prove it. While our Constitution actually mentions 'bribery', our loony left friends just can't make themselves put that in writing.

[firstfloor]

The point is, ff, that these hyper-partisan Democrat hacks want you to BELIEVE it's bribery, but their focus groups told them America simply isn't buying it, so they kinda dance around it, knowing they can't actually prove it. While our Constitution actually mentions 'bribery', our loony left friends just can't make themselves put that in writing.

In this matter, I am putting my faith in Andrew Torrez. It seems to me that Abuse of Power is a ‘catch-all’ sort of thing to provide plenty scope.

[Cow Poke]

In this matter, I am putting my faith in Andrew Torrez. It seems to me that Abuse of Power is a ‘catch-all’ sort of thing to provide plenty scope.

Andrew Torrez -- didn't he pitch for the Cleveland Indians?

[JimL]

What you can't seem to comprehend is that the whole Nixon affair began with an actual undeniable CRIME, and it was really hard to deny he had to go. The Nixon impeachment (attempt) is nothing at all like this partisan Democrat impeachment sham.

Well, yes, it does have similarities, but this crime, and this lawless President, is much worse than Nixon.

[Cow Poke]

Well, yes, it does have similarities, but this crime, and this lawless President, is much worse than Nixon.

Thanks, Jim, I needed a laugh - my secretary just informed me we're out of coffee.

[JimL]

The point is, ff, that these hyper-partisan Democrat hacks want you to BELIEVE it's bribery, but their focus groups told them America simply isn't buying it, so they kinda dance around it, knowing they can't actually prove it. While our Constitution actually mentions 'bribery', our loony left friends just can't make themselves put that in writing.

Doesn't matter what you call it. Asking a foriegn government to interfere in U.S. elections is an abuse of power in and of itself, and withholding desperately needed congressionally appropriated military aid until the foreign government concedes to the request is an abuse of power. Aiding and abetting a common enemy, i.e. Russia, in their aggression on that foreign government, a fledgling democracy and ally of the U.S., risking the national security of both our countries, adds to the abuse of power. So, call it what you will, it's impeachable. And so to is the cover-up, the obstruction.

Stop doing Russia's bidding!

Oh, and btw, President Zelensky of Ukraine never got that visit to the White House that would insure his country that the U.S. was backing them, but guess who got a visit instead? Yep, that's right Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister. How do you think that makes our supposed ally feel?

[Cow Poke]

Doesn't matter what you call it.

It certainly does to the Democrats, or they wouldn't be consulting focus groups.

Asking a foriegn government to interfere in U.S. elections is an abuse of power in and of itself, and withholding desperately needed congressionally appropriated military aid until the foreign government concedes to the request is an abuse of power. Aiding and abetting a common enemy, i.e. Russia, in their aggression on that foreign government, a fledgling democracy and ally of the U.S., risking the national security of both our countries, adds to the abuse of power. So, call it what you will, it's impeachable. And so to is the cover-up, the obstruction.

Objection! Alleged, not proven, facts not in evidence, the list goes on...

Stop doing Russia's bidding!

Wow, talk about conspiracy nutters!

Oh, and btw, President Zelensky of Ukraine never got that visit to the White House that would insure his country that the U.S. was backing them, but guess who got a visit instead? Yep, that's right Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister. How do you think that makes our supposed ally feel?

You mean, President Zelensky, who repeatedly attests there was no QPQ?

[Juvenal]

A) No, I opposed Nixon - and wasn't overly thrilled with the pardon.
B) I was Democrat most of my life.
C) You're only anti-Trump. This sham flies in the face of the Constitution but all you care about is your corrupt, power abusing, Constitution destroying heroes leading your insane democrat tribe to victory, Pyrrhic though it be.

I supported Nixon (going so far as advocating burning those tapes on the White House lawn). I'm happy that he was pardoned, but glad we still have the tapes.

He was a deeply flawed president, but a highly accomplished statesman.

Trump is half of that.

I liked Trump as the brash buffoon from the Bronx, but have yet to hear any defense of that kind of behavior from a president, and it's that behavior which makes him unfit. He has never stepped up to the challenges of his oath, to "faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and ... to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Buffoons, oaths.

In defense of liberal democracy, the presidency of the United States needs the authority to call out political purges by Xi in Hong Kong and the mullahs in Iran. Trump is openly targeting anyone who has ever supported his political opponents or refused to support him.

China is already the world's largest emitter, projections show they will have the largest economy within the next decade, and Erdogan has a free rein. Trump is withdrawing from the Paris agreement, has withdrawn from the TPP, and is inciting crowds against journalists covering his rallies.

In the wider picture, the details, no matter how compelling, are almost irrelevant.

Because America is the world's guarantor of liberal democracy, and our president is its speaker.

Individual actions can be countered. What can't be countered is the ongoing erosion of the authority of the presidency. Every world leader outside the liberal democracies will be pointing at him, from here forward, whenever it's convenient.

[rogue06]

The point is, ff, that these hyper-partisan Democrat hacks want you to BELIEVE it's bribery, but their focus groups told them America simply isn't buying it, so they kinda dance around it, knowing they can't actually prove it. While our Constitution actually mentions 'bribery', our loony left friends just can't make themselves put that in writing.

Meanwhile, since the impeachment circus put up their big tent, Trump's numbers continue to improve. He now leads every Democrat in Iowa with something like 7 points over Sanders and Warren. This is a state that just a month or so ago all the pundits were assuring everyone that was a lock for the Democrats in 2020.