Lindsey Graham to tell Nancy Pelosi that Senate will not impeach Trump

In fact he is.
1.(especially of an official body) absolve (someone) from blame for a fault or wrongdoing, especially after due consideration of the case.

 

So there are accusers, much like the Kavanaugh case. Any charges at all?

 

By any and all means possible...... Yep, conduct your party like a band of outlaws so you can get rid of someone that is doing a good job. Sounds about right for modern day Democrats. (And also Democrats during Reconstruction.)

 

I'm listening to the House right now. The GOP sounds hysterical. The party for which insane conspiracy tales has become a staple is ironically spewing the same accusations against the Dems, ignoring all of the testimony and facts to date.

That moron Jim Jordan is one of the worst. He's making the claim that Americans will see the investigation as a "sham"; they're already seeing Bonespurs for what he is--a scumbag who needs to be impeached and removed.

 

Now they're whining and sobbing that none of their resolutions for the process didn't pass.

*LOL*

As they're so fond of saying: "Elections have consequences".

They can have their professionals question witnesses, they can take part in the process and they can continue to cry and sob in public about the process. Yet, they complain that they're "shut out" of the process? B.S.

Maybe they're just not used to being the minority party. Tough ****.

 

That doesn't address my question--upon what evidence is such a conclusion based?

 

Yep.

 

Excuse me? You lectured in Message #135:

"Mueller cannot exonerate anyone. It's either guilty or not guilty. There is no other option. If he is not guilty then, in fact, he has been exonerated of any crimes."​

According to the DoJ, a sitting President cannot be charged with a crime. You would have us conclude Trump has been exonerated because he hasn't been indicted?

 

A sitting President can be indicted but its not commended..Trump was not charged with a crime nor was he found guilty of any crime. Is that not good enough for you?

 

Democrats and media say it's so. Therefore, it must be true.

Investigate them, now!

 

Mueller was not operating under those parameters, was he?

 

The DoJ says there is no possibility of prosecution until the President is out of office. He can't be convicted of a crime if he can't be tried.

His DoJ won't charge him with a crime.

For what purpose?

 

He said he was in his report.

 

Kavanaugh has a couple of accusers, Trump has a couple of dozen.

 

I wanted the trumper to answer. Because it was Fred's opinion that a sitting President may be indicted.

 

You are right but the reality is more people voted against him then voted for him

Mueller very clearly said that he did not vindicate Donald Trump. He said that if Donald Trump did nothing wrong he would have said so and it’s up59 Congress
I am sorry that you see a President of the United States asking a foreign country to intrude in our democracy the same as returning a library book.Trump really knows his base and that’s why he talks to his base like they’re stupid

 

Yes, accusations spread by the Russians in the 2016 election were apparently enough to make Hillary lose the election.

 

"Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

 

Actually, not at all like with Trump. We've now had over a week of testimonies by State Dept professional foreign service employees, who take their oath to America & the Constitution very seriously, all in agreement that Trump has abused his Presidential powers in his dealings with Ukraine. Ukraine was dependent on U.S. military aid to resist invasion by the Russian military, who already annexed Crimea from them several years ago, but were still fighting & killing them in their own country. Trump felt he had the right to use that aid as a lever to get Ukraine to bend to his will & conduct investigations into Trump's political opponents. Such behavior subjects U.S. national foreign policy to the whims of one individual autocrat, which is unconstitutional. That's why the framing fathers put the power of impeachment into the Constitution--to prevent any President from selling out our foreign policy to any foreign country. Trump has made several important decisions during his Presidency that have been beneficial to Putin & Russia at the expense of the U.S. Trump is like a mole inside our government, working for the Russians. He definitely deserves impeachment, conviction & removal from office.

 

Opening an investigation is NOT a pronouncement of guilt. Investigations are simply the process used to determine whether there is evidence supporting suspected misbehaviors. I have seen no evidence to support Hillary's accusation against Gabbard, but, as a Democrat, I have no problem with starting an investigation into the matter to determine whether that accusation has merit or not. I have precisely the same attitude toward Trump & all the investigations currently running regarding his behaviors. But in his case, the evidence is pretty convincing.

 

Accusers are a dime a dozen, and none of them worth a penny without proven evidence to back it up. The only one proven to be guilty in the Kavanaugh case was the accuser herself; guilty of lying under oath.

It's much the same with the Dems today. The only one proving himself to be guilty is Schiff himself; guilty of witness tampering, fabricating false testimony in a Congressional hearing, and lying about not having had contact with the whistle blower; along with abusing the tenets of constitutional due process.

 

But he can't be tried on the indictment while in office.

 

Dream on dreamer. The only thing that caused Hillary to lose in 2016 was Hillary herself.

 

I know that. Which is why I disagreed with Fred by asking him if he thought that Mueller was constrained by OLC policy.

 

It should be, but this is about power. Nothing more.