All Things Impeachment Inquiry

justthefacts

Active member
They are co-equal branches along with the Judicial branch. Congress doesn’t have authority over the Executive branch.
There is no Republican who would have thought, let alone uttered, that second sentence any time between 1900 and 2016.

eg:



Also, the case law and precedent are both pretty clear on this point:






 

KillerGopherFan

Active member
There is no Republican who would have thought, let alone uttered, that second sentence any time between 1900 and 2016.
Let me phrase it better, Congress doesn’t have complete authority over the Executive Branch.

What’s your point? That Republicans should’ve impeached Obama?

I didn’t read the entire article, but I believe left out, was the power of the bully pulpit. Both Obama and Trump have used it. Trump overuses it to his own detriment, but still uses to his gain. The Congress cedes power, not b/c it wants to, but b/c it has to, as determined by public sentiment.

But go ahead, impeach Trump. See what happens.

You’ve already lost one Dem congresswoman in a very blue district in Michigan. She apparently doesn’t think with her dick, like Adam Schiffshow.
 

bga1

Active member
They have oversight over Executive Branch. Remember them investigating Benghazi! 57 times? Could you be a bigger hypocrite?
57 is the number of US states according to Obama, it is not the number of times Benghazi got investigated.

The number of committees and departments that investigated Benghazi was 10 in total. 5 standing house committees, a House Select committee, the Senate intel committee, the FBI, Homeland Security, the State Department.

The problem with Benghazi is that people actually died, among them our ambassador in what appeared to be a VERY preventable incident. There was a cover up of it that extended the investigation.

Today you are all fired up because an ambassador got offended by Trump. But you wanted to wash your hands of Benghazi, which is a running joke for you- in situation where an ambassador DIED.

You might have a mental problem.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member

"
U.S. Justice Department lawyers asked a judge on Tuesday to put on hold a ruling that would require former White House Counsel Don McGahn to comply with a congressional subpoena to testify in a legal battle that could have implications for the Democratic-led impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.
...
The Justice Department, representing McGahn in his former official capacity, said in a court filing that the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, which is seeking the testimony, has agreed to a seven-day temporary delay. If the judge does not immediately impose that delay, McGahn would file an emergency application at the federal appeals court in Washington on Wednesday, the administration lawyers said.
...
McGahn’s personal lawyer said on Monday that he would comply with the subpoena if it is not blocked.

"
 

TruthSeeker

Active member
The cross examination was a joke. If there is any decline in support, it simply fatigue. The average person isn't watching the hearings, and the "leftist" MSM feels compelled to "both sides" their reporting.
View attachment 6588
Oh surprise. An Obama appointed Federal Judge rules against Trump.

It’s under appeal and will go to the SC.
Use your brain dummy. Do you really think the Executive Branch deny this to the Legislative Branch? If you do, then you're no Originalist.
 

KillerGopherFan

Active member
I saw Raju on CNN connecting the dots for us. “Blowing a whole” in the timing theories.

Just b/c someone is asking about the aid, doesn’t mean they know it’s being withheld. And what does it matter when the aid was put on a hold. Nothing in the phone call, absolutely nothing in the phone call, would have initiated the hold on the date of the phone call. It could be a week before, two weeks before when it was discussed in early July, or a week after the call. It’s immaterial.
 

justthefacts

Active member
I saw Raju on CNN connecting the dots for us. “Blowing a whole” in the timing theories.

Just b/c someone is asking about the aid, doesn’t mean they know it’s being withheld. And what does it matter when the aid was put on a hold. Nothing in the phone call, absolutely nothing in the phone call, would have initiated the hold on the date of the phone call. It could be a week before, two weeks before when it was discussed in early July, or a week after the call. It’s immaterial.
Trump just happened to get concerned about the European contribution to Ukrainian aid and broader Ukrainian corruption that afternoon.
 

KillerGopherFan

Active member
Trump just happened to get concerned about the European contribution to Ukrainian aid and broader Ukrainian corruption that afternoon.
Oh, so he never thought about it before then? You need to pick a narrative and stick with it instead of constantly changing it every time some alleged new information is pitched.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
I saw Raju on CNN connecting the dots for us. “Blowing a whole” in the timing theories.

Just b/c someone is asking about the aid, doesn’t mean they know it’s being withheld. And what does it matter when the aid was put on a hold. Nothing in the phone call, absolutely nothing in the phone call, would have initiated the hold on the date of the phone call. It could be a week before, two weeks before when it was discussed in early July, or a week after the call. It’s immaterial.
Spin, spin, lick lick. It's OK Don, no matter what happens, KGF will always believe you. It was a coincidence the hold was placed the same day Trump asked for a favor!
 

KillerGopherFan

Active member
Spin, spin, lick lick. It's OK Don, no matter what happens, KGF will always believe you. It was a coincidence the hold was placed the same day Trump asked for a favor!
I think you missed the point. If it happened the day before, your claim would change and neither would your proof. Or the day after, the week before, the week after, etc.

But it does keep stroking your need to believe it’s more proof.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Howeda, is this the 1,037,289th time you’ve called KGF it for his BS?

Sure as the sun rises, he has dismissed you 1,037,289 times, changing his mind 0.0%.

And sure as the sun rises, you’ll be here tomorrow, calling him out for the 1,037,290th time.

Myself, I can only hit a tennis ball against a wall so many times, before I want to play with an actual human.
 

GoodasGold

Active member
57 is the number of US states according to Obama, it is not the number of times Benghazi got investigated.

The number of committees and departments that investigated Benghazi was 10 in total. 5 standing house committees, a House Select committee, the Senate intel committee, the FBI, Homeland Security, the State Department.

The problem with Benghazi is that people actually died, among them our ambassador in what appeared to be a VERY preventable incident. There was a cover up of it that extended the investigation.

Today you are all fired up because an ambassador got offended by Trump. But you wanted to wash your hands of Benghazi, which is a running joke for you- in situation where an ambassador DIED.

You might have a mental problem.
I’m now concerned about the ambassador to Ukraine. I think he might DIE.
 

KillerGopherFan

Active member
Howeda, is this the 1,037,289th time you’ve called KGF it for his BS?

Sure as the sun rises, he has dismissed you 1,037,289 times, changing his mind 0.0%.

And sure as the sun rises, you’ll be here tomorrow, calling him out for the 1,037,290th time.

Myself, I can only hit a tennis ball against a wall so many times, before I want to play with an actual human.
Howie hasn’t changed anybody’s mind. Why should I be different?
 

justthefacts

Active member
The law says that the OMB cannot hold up funds longer than it would take to spend them before they expire unless they notify Congress. As mentioned previously in this thread, the aid clearly WAS held up longer than that because the spending bill changed the expiry.

Here's the DoD saying that they knew in August it couldn't be spent in time. No notification to Congress. The OMB broke the law under Mulvaney's direction.

 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Howie hasn’t changed anybody’s mind. Why should I be different?
Do you believe in compromise?

In order to have compromise, you have to be able to recognize that other people are just as smart as you, and that they want to the world to work differently than how you want it to work, and that they aren't wrong, nor are they any more "correct" than you are.

This is the fundamental conundrum that occurs when living in the same place as other people. People are smart, have good arguments, and don't agree.

The best solution is compromise. You never get exactly what you want, but you get more than zero.


Or do you prefer that the nation split? Genuine question.
 

KillerGopherFan

Active member
Do you believe in compromise?

In order to have compromise, you have to be able to recognize that other people are just as smart as you, and that they want to the world to work differently than how you want it to work, and that they aren't wrong, nor are they any more "correct" than you are.

This is the fundamental conundrum that occurs when living in the same place as other people. People are smart, have good arguments, and don't agree.

The best solution is compromise. You never get exactly what you want, but you get more than zero.


Or do you prefer that the nation split? Genuine question.
Genuine response.

You have shown no desire to compromise in any of your posts. You have shown distain for other peoples’ opinions.

People don’t have to be smart or as smart in order for someone to compromise with them, or good or moral or right. One having more of any quality has little to do with the other being compromised with. It’s just a way of coming to an agreement going forward, whether it’s the best way forward or not.

Compromise isn’t always “the best” solution. And sometimes doing nothing is better than the alternatives.

But you are a good example of a lefty. You have a tendency to lecture.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
It sounds like multiple OMB employees resigned rather than participate in the extortion. More Deep Staters out to get poor, poor Don!
 
Top Bottom