Dems are counting on impeachment

2020? Trump is ****ing ancient. Let's get these old mummified cucks out of office.

 

Impeachment is a political remedy. WHY would they need a Constitutional Scholar to "ready" themselves ?

There are many reasons why impeachment is a pipe dream. Since impeachment is political, it requires votes which the dems don't have. They are the minority so they have no chance, but even if they gain a majority in the mid-terms, impeachment requires a super majority 2/3 vote. They need what, 67 senators for impeachment ? Not gunna happen. The right will NEVER impeach Trump, no matter what he does.

Trump needs to be guilty of a crime to be impeached. The most dangerous thing I have seen in my lifetime is the game that the right is playing in trying to destroy the foundational pillars of our government for political gain. But if the left tries to impeach him with no proven crimes, that would be a close second.

The political divide in this country today is probably the largest I have seen in my lifetime. It currently borders on dangerous to the citizens of the US. You may not like Amanda Marcotte, but what she says has credence in that in most of the legislation and discourse lately, it seems that each side is more focused on pissing the other party off, than they are in doing whats best for the country. And this is a great example of that

 

Show us where that "bais" affected or changed any of the evidence gathered ?

Go ahead, I'll wait

 

Sometimes going after a low hanging fruit ,due to how easy it is to get to, yields a poisonous fruit or at least one full of worms and rot, which might set rot upon your entire barrel, Muellers barrel.

To early to saw that with confidence, and so I just offer it up as a possibility.

But really, isn't this the huge risk a special investigation might yield, when nothing was done illegally by trump, and that investigation was little more than a politically driven investigation? And the effort to find russians involved, which had nothing to do with trump, was perhaps a bit shoddy, given that Mueller perhaps thought, the russians would never defend themselves? Something to at least consider, if you are not in the trump hating crowd. IMO

BTW, if this involved a democratic president, who had this poltiically driven circus used against him ,in an effort to make his win illegit, I would post the same kind of things on behalf of the democrat. I am not a trump voter. But I am an honest guy or I try hard to be, with some integrity, and of course I have a set of thinking and beliefs that took 76 years to arrive at, with many changes in opinion over the years as facts and truth demanded it. Unlike your run of the mill partisan driven brain. Who seem to be rather impervious to fact and truth, being revealed throughout ones life.

When you have to embrace the same ideology and tribalism, even in the face of facts and truth, well, you know my opinion of such minds. Moot when it comes to actually trying to solve problems, and indeed only get in the way of solutions. There is hardly any pragmatism with ideologues and tribalistic people. It destroys ideological beliefs, and we sure cannot have that, given how tightly many of us seem to grip those beliefs and values. Ideology first and foremost, and to hell with anything else! I find ideologues quite destructive and dangerous, on both side of the spectrum. And IMO, these sorts hardly ever solve problems that demand to be solved, but can actually not solve a problem, but create more in trying to solve it, while never solving the original problem to begin with. In all areas in which the gov't is involved.

One wonders what will happen if we ever do develop AI to the point that we can use it to manage many aspects that affect the daily lives of our citizens. And remove the human nature, the self interests of a few, and puppet politicians from the equation, and then manage based upon AI which is bound to rationality, logic, reason, but with a built in basic moral compass as well. Kinda like Asimov's laws of robotics, analogous to that. Where the imperative programmed into AI has consideration for basic, age old, moral principles.

Or would power driven sociopathic politicians ever turn over what gratifies and intoxicates them so much, to an AI which in intelligence makes them look like village idiots, drunk on alcohol? I kinda doubt it. Robots and AI is fine for displacing the lower IQ working americans, in order for greater profits and efficiency, but taking away power from our politicians? I doubt they would stand for it!! ha ha. Even if doing it would create a golden age for humanity. And efficiency as well as logic, rationality and reason being the foundation for all law and policy.

 

This thread can keep going all 8 years. Always promising impeachment till his last day in office. It looks like this will be the Dems platform for mid terms.

IMPEACH. IMPEACH. IMPEACH!!!!

 

What else do they have ? Russian collusion fell apart, tax cuts didn't kill people ,they just got to keep more of their people . Little rocket man didn't nuke the world . Trump didn't cause Armageddon. Did the stock market tank like lefty warned . Nope. Dems look and sound foolish . Americans see.

 

Gotta keep importing more illegals to vote in the midterms. Not to mention the fortune it will cost to distribute them around the country where Dems think they can get some seats.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016...-votes-being-cast-from-grave-year-after-year/

 

I don't know why Mueller has done what he has done, but it certainly has blown up in his face.

He unveiled a grandiose indictment Feb. 16 against 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies. The 13 Russians in question were charged with waging “information warfare” in the United States, interfering with the 2016 presidential election, and conspiracy to defraud the United States.

Mueller may now have to try the case, Concord’s lawyers have put the special counsel on notice they fully intend to invoke “discovery” to obtain the courtroom level evidence that backs Mueller's grandiose indictment, and the ONLY indictment after two years that even involves the 2016 campaign. Mueller's last ditch attempts to get a continuance are not evoking confidence that he has anything more than pettifoggery.

Mueller thought he could make this association of Russian collusion and it would never be challenged in court.

Concord is demanding that Mueller produce his evidence of their conspiracy in a constitutionally timely manner.
Mueller tried to a fast shuffle to put off appearing but Concord opposed the motion. “The Special Counsel is not entitled to special rules and is required like the Attorney General to follow the rules of the Court,” Dubelier stated in his response to Mueller.

U.S. District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich agreed with Concord and rejected Mueller’s request for a delay in the trial which led to Wednesday’s arraignment, the case will resume July 9.

It is the second legal headache for Mueller in two weeks. Last week, federal Judge T.S. Ellis, III threatened to throw out the special counsel’s indictment of Paul Manafort since the charges against President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager did not relate to any charges of Russian collusion. Instead, the charges were tied to banking activities that went as far back as 2005 — more than a decade before Trump announced his intention to run for president.

 

Does Mueller even have any evidence of Russian Trump Collusion after two years of investigation (one year of investigation bfore Mule-Whore took over)? Well, we will know on July 9, because Mule-Whore has only issued ONE set indictments that actually relate to the 2016 election, complete with grandiose claims of Court Room Level evidence against those indicted. But,weird thing, when one of the accused showed up to court to contest Mule-Whore's pretentious pronouncements, Mule-Whore suddenly went into the fast shuffle looking for a delay. But Concord opposed the motion. “The Special Counsel is not entitled to special rules and is required like the Attorney General to follow the rules of the Court,” Dubelier stated in his response to Mueller.

U.S. District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich agreed with Concord and rejected Mueller’s request for a delay in the trial. The case will resume July 9 when Mule-Whore will either present Courtroom level evidence to support his ONLY indictments pertaining to the 2016 election, or after 2 YEARS of investigation it will be revealed to all that this has always been nothing more than Crooked Obama Officials engaging in pettifoggery, lies and malicious prosecution.

It is the second legal headache for Mueller in two weeks. Last week, federal Judge T.S. Ellis, III threatened to throw out the special counsel’s indictment of Paul Manafort since the charges against President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager did not relate to any charges of Russian collusion. Instead, the charges were tied to banking activities that went as far back as 2005 — more than a decade before Trump announced his intention to run for president.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/09/russian-collusion-trial-robert-mueller-first-casualty/

 

So for political gain, you want Mueller to give up the evidence he has in open court ? Do you know if that evidence is still being used In ongoing investigations of other defendants ? Or maybe that evidence has security implications ? Or maybe....just maybe.....that evidence is classified and could be heard in a secret court.

An please stop with this ridiculous talking point that all charges have to relate to russian collusion. That’s beyond ridiculous, and only rubes actually think that’s a real defense.

Mueller, and Rosenstien, and Comey were “crooked Obama officials”.....these defenses are bordering on the obscene anymore. We get it, the entire world is some Obama plot, and the Clintons are the antichrist incarnate. everyone is out to get trump. Its all a liberal plot....we get it.

 

Mueller is the one who indicted them, do you think he never considered that he would actually have to provide evidence of their guilt in order to convict them?

Mueller obtained his authorization from Rosenstein, and Rosenstein is only authorized to act as AG in the area where Session's is recused and that is only Russian Collusion in the 2016 election, Silly!

And it's not just me pointing this out, The Court has pointed this out to Mueller and he has about a Week to furnish evidence that he is authorized to be engaged in what appears to be an independent frolic. What do you make of his reluctance to produce this evidence?

The Court also noted that Mule-Whore appears to be engaged in an impeachment inquiry, and impeachment is constitutionally charged to the Congress, not the DOJ. Mule-Whore is also refusing to produce his authorization to the Congress. So you have two Co-Equal Branches of Government asking just what in the hell Mueller is doing and the 3rd Co-Equal branch of Government is Trump! So just what in the hell is Mueller doing and what is his authorization for doing it?

Mule-Whore's response to The Court when they asked for his authorization was to claim his authorization was "not reviewable by the Court!" That is when the Judge read them the riot act, from the Bench, that NO ONE IN THIS CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC HAS UNFETTER POWER and gave him 2 weeks to produce it, so about another week!

Two Co-Equal Branches of Government have demanded their authorization and they have yet to produce it, and the 3rd Branch is Trump. If they are not Constitutionally authorized by anyone in our 3 branches of government, then just what the hell are they up to?

 

I'm not a leftist, but I think impeaching Trump would be a terrible idea. Just think of who would then be president. Trump may be a nincompoop, but he's so disorganized that the amount of harm he has done to the country has been limited. Sure, the tax bill and the budget, which both milk us ordinary Americans and skyrocket the national debt to the benefit of the very rich are harmful to the nation, but Trump just put his name on them. He had little to do with their passage. Those bills were Paul Ryan's idea.

Now, if Trump is impeached, Mike Pence takes over. Pence is a religious fanatic who, like Trump, cares for no one but himself. However, unlike Trump, Pence has just enough brains to do the country real harm.

Should Pence go, Paul Ryan will be president. Remember that Paul Ryan is not only the guy who sucked up to the rich in his tax bill and budget, Paul Ryan is the guy who wants to get rid of Medicare. Anyone who is approaching the age of 65 or has family members approaching the age of 65 should be quaking at the thought of a Ryan presidency.

So, as rotten a president as Trump is, impeaching him would make things even worse.

 

No a government official does not have to have committed a crime to be impeached. Malfeasance in office can get a person impeached. Misbehavior, misdemeanor, can get one impeached. Abuse of power if so declared by enough in Congress. As you said it is a political act to remove the official and then if there is a crime involved the person can be prosecuted.

But what would the Democrat impeachment articles look like

Article I
We don't like him

Article II
We don't like his policies

Article III
We don't like his Tweets

 

One of the Russians groups he indicted has told the judge not only do they want to go to trial they want to go to trial now, their right to a speedy trial, and with that their right to discovery to see what Mueller has. Mueller made have made a HUGE tactical error on the hopes none of the Russians would ever be extradited and none would ever fight the charges. He just had his bluff called.

 

C'mon, I know you can do better than Cuomo and Warrren. Andrew "corrupt" Cuomo and Lizzy Hiawatha Warren, really? Where do I send my contributions because I want both of them to be at the top of the democratic party. Nothing says "VOTE TRUMP" like having one of those two as the other choice. Did the democrats learn anything from the last election. I hope not.

 

Mueller does have to prove his case. But he may need to withhold some of that from public release For various reasons. I’m not saying he doesn’t haven’t to prove his case, he does, but not in public.

Please read article II of his authorization. Good lord. How many times do you need to be shown that document ?

Simple, its being used in other parts of the investigation.

No, you have REPUBLICANS playing politics. As I said many time, the Judge in the case has no real legal standing to make that claim in the case before him. Him throwing out his opinion has no bearing on the legal standing of the case. If that judge said the Trump should be impeached, you and yours would be in the streets chanting “activist judge !!!!”

And when he doesnt produce it the judge will dismiss the case, and it will them move to a higher court where they will rule that that judge overstepped his authority in requiring some hit goal that had no bearing on the case.

Their “authorization” is public record. This debate is ridiculous

 

I’m saying he needs to have committed a crime as in “something that is legally impeachable”, not just political hatred.

 

Which will send it back to his courtroom for trial. That should be fun!

Rosenstein appointed Mueller on May 17, 2017, days after President Trump’s firing of FBI director James Comey.

Rosenstein’s order appointing Mueller violated governing special-counsel regulations. They make the trigger for such an appointment the existence of a “criminal investigation of a person or matter,” which some conflict of interest prevents the Justice Department from conducting in the normal course — requiring that an attorney from outside the U.S. government be assigned to conduct the criminal investigation (see 28 CFR Sections 600.1 and 600.3). Rosenstein’s order disclosed no basis for a criminal investigation and indicated no crimes that had allegedly been committed.

Instead, the deputy attorney general assigned Mueller to conduct a counterintelligence investigation. Rosenstein defined the probe as “the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017.” In that testimony, Comey had quite explicitly confirmed a counterintelligence probe: “I have been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part of our counterintelligence mission, is investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election”

Months and months after the fact we learned that on August 2, Rosenstein issued a classified memorandum, undertaking to correct the appointments order’s deficiencies by describing various grounds for a criminal investigation.

We learned then about a month ago when Paul Manafort filed a motion to dismiss the money-laundering indictment Mueller filed against him in the District of Columbia (and he has since filed a motion to dismiss the bank- and tax-fraud indictment Mueller filed against him in the Eastern District of Virginia). The motion to dismiss, which was foreshadowed by a civil lawsuit Manafort filed in January, claims that the special counsel’s charges against him, based on Manafort’s dealings with a Kremlin-backed Ukrainian political party, exceed the jurisdiction outlined in Rosenstein’s appointment order, which focuses on Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.

Manafort’s claim is a serious one. Nevertheless, Rosenstein could easily cure the deficiency of his appointment order by granting Mueller additional jurisdiction to investigate any crimes arising out of Manafort’s involvement with Ukraine.

It turns out that this is exactly what Rosenstein did (among other things) in his August 2 memo.

In the memo, the deputy attorney general claims that his original order appointing Mueller did not mention the criminal investigations Mueller was authorized to conduct because Rosenstein wanted to make the public aware that Mueller was being appointed “without confirming specific investigations involving specific individuals.”

That's BS. If that is what Rosenstein intended, he could have issued the classified memorandum defining Mueller’s jurisdiction at the same time he issued the appointment order — i.e., on May 17. After all, the special counsel’s jurisdiction to conduct criminal investigations is supposed to be established at the time of the special counsel’s appointment, not ten weeks later.

Most of it is 2nd memo is redacted. The memo is a little over two pages long. After some opening background, Rosenstein instructs Mueller, “The following allegations were within the scope of the Investigation at the time of your appointment and are within the scope of the [May 17 appointment] Order.” But after that, everything is blacked out except for two “allegations” regarding Paul Manafort. The redacted portion is four times bigger than the unredacted Manafort portion, so Rosenstein has obviously authorized Mueller to investigate several “allegations” about which we are still in the dark.

Do these include “allegations” that expressly name President Trump? We do not know.

The special-counsel regulations are not satisfied by mere allegations; they require that there be factual grounds warranting a “criminal investigation of a person or matter.” Now, the regulation governing a special counsel’s jurisdiction (Section 600.4) is unclear on how much must be said about the grounds for the investigation — the acting attorney general must give the special counsel “a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated.” The term “specific factual statement” implies that more than a mere, conclusory allegation is required.

The allegation that Rosenstein lists against Manafort is intriguing: The “allegation” that Manafort

committed a crime or crimes by colluding with Russian government officials with respect to the Russian government’s efforts to interfere with the 2016 election for President of the United States, in violation of United States law.​

Collusion is not a crime in and of itself — even “colluding with Russian government officials.” Concerted activity must rise to the level of conspiracy to commit a violation of federal criminal law (or some similar form of joint criminal activity, such as aiding and abetting another person’s or entity’s commission of a federal crime). Rosenstein may invoke the words “crime or crimes” and the phrase “in violation of United States law,” but there is no factual statement describing actions that amount to concrete crimes.

The August 2 memo’s amplification of Mueller’s jurisdiction is no more edifying than the May 17 appointment order’s original grant of jurisdiction, which authorized Mueller to investigate “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of Donald Trump.” It is not a crime to have “links” to, or to “coordinate” with, Russia. To be sure, it would be a crime to, say, coordinate with Russia in the hacking of email accounts. But Rosenstein does not allege anything like that. So even with the amplification, we still do not know what crimes Rosenstein suspects, such that “collusion” should have prompted the appointment of a special counsel.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018...ion-rod-rosenstein-memo-mueller-probe-limits/

And Rosenstein and Mueller pretending that they cannot be supervised or reviewed by The President, The Congress or The Courts? Does God just whisper instructions into Rosenstein's ear and he communicates them by redacted memo to Mueller?

And this all strikes you as constitutionally authorized? Do you think you live in a Rosensteinocracy?

 

There is so much WRONG in your post, that it isn't even worth taking seriously.

But, I will correct a glaring piece of MISINFORMATION for you:

Impeachment only requires a Simple Majority of the House.

It is Conviction (and Removal) that requires 2/3 in the Senate.

Try to get a better grasp of The Constitution before you embarrass yourself further.

Thanks in advance.

 

Wait, so now Rosenstein appointed Mueller "illegally" ? Just WOW. The straws are being grasped

And You honestly think that the president should oversee the investigation ? What F'n world do you live in ?

But I'm sure you would have been fine with Bill Clinton overseeing ken Starrs investigation of him.

I have a serious question for you: "if there is no "there there", then why not let the investigation run its course ?

 

I was speaking of impeachment as a process, including removal if you read thru the thread........ But you knew that

 

And again impeachment does not require a crime having been committed. Its not a legal act it is a political act.

 

It wasn't in accordance with DOJ regulation. You're buying all crap that they hiding all these things behind redactions because of "NATIONAL SECURITY!" and not to hide their screw-ups?

Out of the 3 branches of government you picked one and cursed... nice! So, let's go through this again.

As the Court noted, this appears to have little to do with the 2016 election and a LOT to do with impeaching the President, A power held by CONGRESS and so The Court demanded Mueller's authorization - Mueller argued that his authorization was not reviewable by THE COURT - that's one third of The Federal Government.

Congress, who actually has Impeachment power has repeatedly demanded Mueller's authorization and Rosenstein will not give it to them, that's another third of the Federal Government.

So, if they are not accountable to the President then they are attempting to arrogate Unfettered Power and there is no such power in our Constitutional Republic, so yes, their indepdendent frolic here is both illegal and unconstitutional.

Ken Starr was asserting that he was unaccountable all 3 branches of government? Defying both The Court and The Congress? Are you sure you didn't just make that up? And when you figure that out, ask yourself: "Why did I make that up?" And you will understand the slowly closing vice that all supporters of Mueller and Rosenstein are finding themselves in.

Because we have a Constitution and a 4th Amendment, Silly! The Left has probably pretended harder that they support the 4th Amendment than they have pretended that they are feminists!

 

Funny how you haven't mentioned this to the liberals/Democrats who hold the delusion Trump will be impeached and removed from office.

 

That article must be right-wing propaganda. Trump's voter fraud commission was discredited, so we already know that there can't be any fraud.

I really love how the author said those voters were "so-called dead".