US President Donald J. Trump Impeachment Megathread - Democrats commit mass political suicide

On September 24th, 2019, Nanci Pelosi did what everyone expected was some exceptional political posturing -- initiating a formal impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.

The initial "charge," such as it was, was "betraying his oath of office and the nation's security by seeking to enlist a foreign power to tarnish a rival for his own political gain." This, amusingly, was after it was discovered and widely reported on that the DNC had contacted the very same foreign power to attempt to tarnish Trump.

Specifically, this was all based on a rumor that Trump had asked the Ukraine to investigate how a prosecutor investigating Joe Biden's son for corruption had gotten fired, and withheld foreign aid until they had agreed. (He did ask the leader of the Ukraine to investigate what happened with the prosecutor, but did not hold up any foreign aid nor threaten anything of the like.)

Around this time, Trump did something they could not, and still cannot, understand: He publicly turned over all the documents. The transcript of the phone call they claimed showed him committing the crime of blackmailing the Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden for him was released, showing that Trump did nothing wrong. The only reaction the radical left had was arguing over the definition of "transcript" and spouting off a conspiracy theory about official state documents being edited.

At the same time, old video evidence of Joe Biden publicly bragging about blackmailing the Ukraine into NOT investigating his son came to light. Yes, this is exactly what they're accusing Trump of doing. The left is nothing if not subtle. Right after this, evidence came to light that Pelosi, Kerry, and Romney's kids had similar fake jobs in the Ukraine, getting paid ungodly amounts of money and embezzling US foreign aid to the Ukraine -- all things that Trump's Attorney General has openly discussed investigating.

By releasing the transcripts, the DNC was tripped up. Instead of being able to leak information from their secret investigation until November 2020, they were forced to play their hand publicly.

And they had no hand to play. The impeachment accusations came from second and third hand sources -- watercooler talk from Unelected Deep State Analysts with Trump Derangement Syndrome, outraged that President Trump refused to obey them when they felt they had a better idea as to how to run Foreign Affairs. Other allegations included that supposedly, the telepathic DNC members working in the state department knew what Trump was thinking (despite him literally saying the exact opposite) or could tell that Trump would do something even worse -- maybe something actually illegal -- in the future, and boy howdy, the imaginary Trump in their minds was a right bastard.

(As an aside, the name of the whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, has been censored across pretty much all social media, a test run of whatever censorship they're going to enact in the next few months to try and swing the election.)

At the same time, the DNC performed significant amounts of partisan political fuckery to do this all publicly, but unofficially -- preventing the GOP from bringing forth witnesses or questioning the DNC's witnesses, or even reading the double plus secret evidence the DNC supposedly had. Those GOP that did get access to the evidence have confirmed it's a 3 pound 5 ounce nothingburger.

The charges have since mutated, with them initially being changed to "bribery" -- as "bribery" focus groups easier and is easier to spew out on Twitter.

On December 18th, 2019, along party lines and with bipartisan opposition, they finally drafted their articles of impeachment -- first for "Abuse of Power" and second for "Obstruction of Congress." Neither are actually crimes nor are they impeachable offenses, even if they were true -- which the DNC has provided no evidence of, explaining that it's the Senate's job to investigate and find the evidence.

Narrator: It is not the Senate's job to investigate and find the evidence.

The "Obstruction of Congress" charge is particularly egregious, as they are claiming that Trump, by reaching out to the courts to act as mediators in his dispute over the rules with Pelosi, was obstructing her. In other words, Pelosi's stance is that the President must obey her, even if she's being a batshit insane drunk. Many legal scholars, including Alan Dershowitz, have pointed out that this is absolute bullshit.

The latest development as of this writing on December 21th, 2019, is that Pelosi is demanding that the GOP recuse itself, allowing the DNC to reshape the Senate in order to make the process "fair" -- by creating a Kangaroo court. The GOP is refusing outright, as the Senate's role during this is very specifically to take the charges and all the evidence gathered from the house -- which is none -- and vote yes or no on impeachment. They need 2/3rd majority to vote yes, and the DNC does not have the votes.

Pelosi is refusing to send over the articles of impeachment until the GOP allows her to stack the Senate against Trump, an act that Dershowitz as well as Noah Feldman, the DNC's own star legal expert witness, has said is unconstitutional and "a problem," as Trump isn't impeached until the articles have been filed. Meanwhile, the DNC has put the House on vacation until the new year, while the Senate is exploring options including forcing the articles over without Pelosi's ok. Trump and the Senate have both went to the SCOTUS to ask them if any of this is constitutional.

tl;dr: Trump may have found where the Swamp was embezzling US Foreign Aid. Many politician's children working fake jobs for huge amounts of money in the Ukraine, blatantly selling influence. This caused the DNC to freak out and try and headshot Trump. They missed. The Democrats appear to have committed political suicide, making Trump a Martyr and only realizing in the aftermath that they didn't actually get rid of him or even weaken him in any way. They also appear to realize they fucked up and are trying to slow walk it back, keeping the "he's impeached!" victory while not actually having to let anyone read the evidence or have a trial on it.


@Yotsubaaa did a great writeup here with links to various winner posts: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/nancy...kraine-phone-call.61583/page-135#post-5606264

And @Yotsubaaa did a new version very late on the 21st of December: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/presi...chment-megathread.61583/page-260#post-5754920

Which are too big to quote here.



https://archive.fo/oVGIv

WASHINGTON — Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced on Tuesday that the House would initiate a formal impeachment inquiry against President Trump, charging him with betraying his oath of office and the nation’s security by seeking to enlist a foreign power to tarnish a rival for his own political gain.

Ms. Pelosi’s declaration, after months of reticence by Democrats who had feared the political consequences of impeaching a president many of them long ago concluded was unfit for office, was a stunning turn that set the stage for a history-making and exceedingly bitter confrontation between the Democrat-led House and a defiant president who has thumbed his nose at institutional norms.

“The actions taken to date by the president have seriously violated the Constitution,” Ms. Pelosi said in a brief speech invoking the nation’s founding principles. Mr. Trump, she added, “must be held accountable — no one is above the law.”

She said the president’s conduct revealed his “betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security and betrayal of the integrity of our elections.”

Ms. Pelosi’s decision to push forward with the most severe action that Congress can take against a sitting president could usher in a remarkable new chapter in American life, touching off a constitutional and political showdown with the potential to cleave an already divided nation, reshape Mr. Trump’s presidency and the country’s politics, and carry heavy risks both for him and for the Democrats who have decided to weigh his removal.

Though the outcome is uncertain, it also raised the possibility that Mr. Trump could become only the fourth president in American history to face impeachment. Presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were both impeached but later acquitted by the Senate. President Richard M. Nixon resigned in the face of a looming House impeachment vote.

It was the first salvo in an escalating, high-stakes standoff between Ms. Pelosi, now fully engaged in an effort to build the most damning possible case against the president, and Mr. Trump, who angrily denounced Democrats’ impeachment inquiry even as he worked feverishly in private to head off the risk to his presidency.

Mr. Trump, who for months has dared Democrats to impeach him, issued a defiant response on Twitter while in New York for several days of international diplomacy at the United Nations, with a series of fuming posts that culminated with a simple phrase: “PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT!” Meanwhile, his re-election campaign and House Republican leaders launched a vociferous defense, accusing Democrats of a partisan rush to judgment.

“Such an important day at the United Nations, so much work and so much success, and the Democrats purposely had to ruin and demean it with more breaking news Witch Hunt garbage,” Mr. Trump wrote. “So bad for our Country! For the past two years, talk of impeachment had centered around the findings of the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, who investigated Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections and Mr. Trump’s attempts to derail that inquiry. On Tuesday, Ms. Pelosi, Democrat of California, told her caucus and then the country that new revelations about Mr. Trump’s dealings with Ukraine, and his administration’s stonewalling of Congress about them, had finally left the House no choice but to proceed toward a rarely used remedy.

“Right now, we have to strike while the iron is hot,” she told House Democrats in a closed-door meeting in the basement of the Capitol. Emerging moments later to address a phalanx of news cameras, Ms. Pelosi, speaking sometimes haltingly as she delivered a speech from a teleprompter, invoked the Constitution and the nation’s founders as she declared, “The times have found us” and outlined a new stage of investigating Mr. Trump.

At issue are allegations that Mr. Trump pressured the president of Ukraine to open a corruption investigation of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., a leading contender for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, and his son. The conversation is said to be part of a whistle-blower complaint that the Trump administration has withheld from Congress. And it occurred just a few days after Mr. Trump had ordered his staff to freeze more than $391 million in aid to Ukraine.

Mr. Trump has confirmed aspects of his conversation with the Ukrainian leader in recent days, but he continues to insist he acted appropriately.

The president said on Tuesday that he would authorize the release of a transcript of the conversation, part of an effort to pre-empt Democrats’ impeachment push. But Democrats, after months of holding back, were unbowed, demanding the full whistle-blower complaint and other documentation about White House dealings with Ukraine, even as they pushed toward an expansive impeachment inquiry that could encompass unrelated charges.

President Trump’s personal lawyer. The prosecutor general of Ukraine. Joe Biden’s son. These are just some of the names mentioned in the whistle-blower’s complaint. What were their roles? We break it down.

Ms. Pelosi told fellow Democrats that Mr. Trump told her in a private call on Tuesday morning that he was not responsible for withholding the whistle-blower complaint from Congress. But late Tuesday, the White House and intelligence officials were working on a deal to allow the whistle-blower to speak to Congress and potentially even share a redacted version of the complaint in the coming days, after the whistle-blower expressed interest in talking to lawmakers.

Although Ms. Pelosi’s announcement was a crucial turning point, it left many unanswered questions about exactly when and how Democrats planned to push forward on impeachment.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
f6933632bf887270fda07c412e8d1826.png


Here's another interesting question: If according to all of these polls the national average for being pro-Impeachment has been steadily on the rise since he's been in office and has spiked considerably since the Ukrainian "scandal", how is it that his approval ratings have essentially flattened out in the 40-50 range and are actually projected to keep improving.

I'm not even using one of the super Pro-Trump polls like Rasmusen. If the country actually believes that he needs to be impeached over this, why aren't his approval ratings declining as that support for impeachment rises? Why is the opposite of that happening? It's like they think that people are just too stupid to ask these questions.

Because Media polls are incredibly easy to manipulate to achieve the desired response. Just by not so randomly selecting your samples.
 
Here's the article that Pool is talking about, if anyone wants to read it over themselves. I've had it open since yesterday, but I haven't gotten around to reading it just yet.

Burisma paid Joe Biden $900,000 for lobbying – Ukrainian MP

KYIV. Oct 9 (Interfax-Ukraine) – Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden received $900,000 for lobbying activities from Burisma Group, Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada member Andriy Derkach said citing investigation materials.

Derkach publicized documents which, as he said, "describe the mechanism of getting money by Biden Sr." at a press conference at Interfax-Ukraine's press center in Kyiv on Wednesday.

"This was the transfer of Burisma Group's funds for lobbying activities, as investigators believe, personally to Joe Biden through a lobbying company. Funds in the amount of $900,000 were transferred to the U.S.-based company Rosemont Seneca Partners, which according to open sources, in particular, the New York Times, is affiliated with Biden. The payment reference was payment for consultative services," Derkach said.

He also publicized sums that were transferred to Burisma Group representatives, in particular Hunter Biden, a son of the former U.S. vice president.

"According to the documents, Burisma paid no less than $16.5 million to [former Polish President, who became an independent director at Burisma Holdings in 2014] Aleksander Kwasniewski, [chairman of the Burisma board of independent directors] Alan Apter, [Burisma independent director] Devon Archer and Hunter Biden [who joined the Burisma board of directors in 2014]," Derkach said.

"Using political and economic levelers of influencing Ukrainian authorities and manipulating the issue of providing financial aid to Ukraine, Joe Biden actively assisted closing criminal cases into the activity of former Ukrainian Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, who is the founder and owner of Burisma Group," he said.

"Biden's fifth visit to Kyiv on December 7-8, 2015 was devoted to making a decision on the resignation of [then Ukrainian Prosecutor General] Viktor Shokin over the case of Zlochevsky and Burisma. Loan guarantees worth $1 billion that the United States was to give to Ukraine was the point of pressure. Biden himself admitted exerting pressure in his speech at the Council of Foreign Relations in January 2018, calling Shokin 'son of a bitch who was fired'," Derkach said.

The timeline of events proves that the U.S. linked the Zlochevsky case to loan guarantees, he said.

After the decree dismissing Shokin was published on April 3, 2016, the governments of the United States and Ukraine signed a loan guarantee agreement worth $1 billion, several months later, on June 3, he said.

"In this case, there are facts should be subject to investigation. There is an agency that has powers to investigate them; the U.S. Department of Justice. If the Ukrainian Prosecutor General signs documents and send them to U.S. Department of Justice without any requests, he will accomplish his mission," he said, adding that the Ukrainian Prosecutor General has such powers.

"Considering international corruption in public is a way-out for President Zelensky. I am certain that he is not involved in international corruption," Derkach said.

It was reported earlier that Derkach publicized correspondence between the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and officers of the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv. According to publicized correspondence, starting from July 14, 2017, the lists of criminal proceedings undertaken by NABU officers were sent from the electronic mailbox of Polina Chyzh, an assistant to NABU first deputy head Gizo Uglava, to the electronic mailbox of Hanna Yemelianova, a legal specialist of the anti-corruption program of the U.S. Justice Department at U.S. Embassy in Ukraine.

Derkach also said that NABU-leak materials will be published on his Facebook account and materials that he got from investigating journalists have already been passed to Ukraine's State Bureau of Investigations and the Prosecutor's General Office.

He also said he will initiate the creation of an ad hoc parliamentary investigative commission and has already requested launching a criminal case against Ukrainian officials into interference into U.S. elections. The court session is scheduled for October 21, he said.
Burisma Holdings is a Cyprus-registered gas producing company holding assets in Ukraine. It is one of Ukraine's top-three independent gas producers headquartered in Kyiv. Zlochevsky is the founder and the ultimate beneficiary owner of the company
 
Yeah. This is a Vox article, which means treat it like bullshit.

"Impeachment Inquiry" means hearing. It doesn't entitle Congress to anything beyond a normal hearing.

"Whistleblower" means accuser. The identity of the person is important to understand. We have Constitutional protections to confront accusers, which the Dems seem to be taking steps to deny.
So that is true, but don’t trials also allow people to give anonymous testimony in certain instances? I had a debate with a coworker about that the other day.
I thought anonymous testimony was only ok for people who were not the direct accuser, but I don’t pretend to be a lawyer, so if someone would like to correct me, I’d love it.

They are using words and comparisons with Nixon to dress up the truth. Democrats are insane.
And they’re clearly using Nixon v United States in hopes people won’t look closer and realize it’s not THAT Nixon.
 
f6933632bf887270fda07c412e8d1826.png


Here's another interesting question: If according to all of these polls the national average for being pro-Impeachment has been steadily on the rise since he's been in office and has spiked considerably since the Ukrainian "scandal", how is it that his approval ratings have essentially flattened out in the 40-50 range and are actually projected to keep improving.

I'm not even using one of the super Pro-Trump polls like Rasmusen. If the country actually believes that he needs to be impeached over this, why aren't his approval ratings declining as that support for impeachment rises? Why is the opposite of that happening? It's like they think that people are just too stupid to ask these questions.

I presume it is because people don't understand what the fuck impeachment actually means.
 
I don't believe that poll for one second. It does suggest they're desperate -- they know this impeachment thing was their last chance of screwing up 2020 for America.
 
EGh90ppWsAI_ckD.jpg:large

Fox news poll show that 55% support impeachment and 51% support removal.
This whole ordeal is already a major victory for the Dems

Any time you see a poll hovering around 50%, remember that half of the population is of below average intelligence.

Which isn’t necessarily to say which side the idiots are on, but it’s good to keep in mind.
 
So is this shaking out to be a case of:

Probably okay guy Joe Biden did the wrong thing by pressuring Ukraine to fire the dickhead prosecutor.
Dickhead prosecutor was did the right thing for once by investigating Joe Biden's crackhead son.
Donald Trump becomes President of the United States.

Am I missing anything? CrowdStrike?
 
So what's the deal with the two randos attached to Guiliani?

They're two goons who shifted millions in funds to a pro-Trump PAC under dufferent names, and moved smaller amounts to Pete Sessions, a former Republican Senator who pressed for the original US Ambassador to Ukraine to resign. They also pressured various Ukrainians to look closer into Biden. Guiliani represents them as a lawyer. He met with them the day before they got caught trying to flee the country.

Basically Guiliani was unhappy with the fact that they weren't making enough headway in digging up dirt on Biden, so he sent these two to spread cash around the Republican administration to "influence" certain hiring decisions with regards to the Ambassador to Ukraine. It worked because she got yeeted right after.

This plays into the impeachment process as these two seem to be Guiliani's main enforcers who JUST SO HAPPENED to be doing exactly what the President needed to be done to investigate Biden. Gotta admit, Trump's a genius. In order to investigate corruption he surrounded himself with people even more demonstrably corrupt.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/giuli...or-fruman-arrested-on-campaign-finance-charge
 
Fascinating they aren't jumping on getting this impeachment rolling with this new revelation. It's a no brainer now. They could have had him out before the weekend.
The senate aren't the people responding to the poll though, so if the numbers are true they still couldn't do it unless a ton of people flipped and the numbers aren't nearly one sided enough to cause that.
 
They're two goons who shifted millions in funds to a pro-Trump PAC under dufferent names, and moved smaller amounts to Pete Sessions, a former Republican Senator who pressed for the original US Ambassador to Ukraine to resign. They also pressured various Ukrainians to look closer into Biden. Guiliani represents them as a lawyer. He met with them the day before they got caught trying to flee the country.

Basically Guiliani was unhappy with the fact that they weren't making enough headway in digging up dirt on Biden, so he sent these two to spread cash around the Republican administration to "influence" certain hiring decisions with regards to the Ambassador to Ukraine. It worked because she got yeeted right after.

This plays into the impeachment process as these two seem to be Guiliani's main enforcers who JUST SO HAPPENED to be doing exactly what the President needed to be done to investigate Biden. Gotta admit, Trump's a genius. In order to investigate corruption he surrounded himself with people even more demonstrably corrupt.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/giuli...or-fruman-arrested-on-campaign-finance-charge
>no archive

fuck off, idiot
 
They're two goons who shifted millions in funds to a pro-Trump PAC under dufferent names, and moved smaller amounts to Pete Sessions, a former Republican Senator who pressed for the original US Ambassador to Ukraine to resign. They also pressured various Ukrainians to look closer into Biden. Guiliani represents them as a lawyer. He met with them the day before they got caught trying to flee the country.

Basically Guiliani was unhappy with the fact that they weren't making enough headway in digging up dirt on Biden, so he sent these two to spread cash around the Republican administration to "influence" certain hiring decisions with regards to the Ambassador to Ukraine. It worked because she got yeeted right after.

This plays into the impeachment process as these two seem to be Guiliani's main enforcers who JUST SO HAPPENED to be doing exactly what the President needed to be done to investigate Biden. Gotta admit, Trump's a genius. In order to investigate corruption he surrounded himself with people even more demonstrably corrupt.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/giuli...or-fruman-arrested-on-campaign-finance-charge
Look nigger, no one is going to take an anarcho-communist furry seriously, especially when he’s know for saying stupid shit and sperging. Just save your breath and kill yourself already
 
He isn't stonewalling shit until Democrats sac up, vote for impeachment hearings and issue proper subpoenas, not the pussyboy "strongly worded letters" that Secretary of State Pompeo was right to tell them to turn sideways and stick up their twats.

What kind of baffles me is that they think Trump and his legal advisers (Giuliani, etc.) are so dumb as to think they can keep yelling the word "Impeachment" like it will scare the President and members of his cabinet into making a mistake. Like, they think he's dumb enough to react to the ongoing circus like it's an actual legal process (it isn't), which would play straight into the Democrats' hands.

I heard an interesting example on Hannity today, I think it was Gingrich who stated that up until 1650 or so, in England, a secret court could be convened and any person (although it was used primarily against political figures) could be called before it, with no warning, no chance to prepare, no attorney present, and told they had charges being brought against them and in a matter of minutes, convict a person. It was the origin of the phrase "Star Chamber", in fact. During the founding of the US, one of the inherent rights was that to face your accuser.

This is what the Democrats are trying to engage in: they've created this "star chamber" of secret meetings, secret hearings, carefully crafting a narrative with these so-called "whistleblowers", none of whom can or will be identified or interviewed in a neutral environment...and they think they can scare Trump into reacting to it?

Are they this dumb, and this desperate? Look, when this mess started, Trump said, "I'll show you a transcript,". Right before it was released, Adam Schiff read a fanfic of what he thought the transcript would say, and tried to pass it off to the media and the official federal congressional record as true. He still won't give an answer as to why he did that. Then when the transcript dropped, the left media and the Democrats said, aha, there's a bunch of REDACTED material here! You didn't give us a transcript at all! This is a lie! Impeach, impeach, impeach! So...they turned over an un-redacted transcript, and what has the response been? Ahblahblahblah we're past that now! Impeach impeach impeach!

The Democrats have even said, this may lose us the house in 2020. I sincerely hope it does, and that Trump gives them a (metaphorical) taste of the bayonet from 2020-2024.
 
Stop telling Ashy to fuck off. He gets to spout his ridiculous bullshit just like you do. Attack the bullshit, tear it apart piece by piece and laugh at it all as much as you like, (or ignore him as much as you like, if you really want him to stop) but stop telling him to stop posting. I can't read another thread that has become the 'boy Ashy is dumb' hour for two pages every time he posts.
 
Congrats US. This is what a coup looks like.
Park Geun-Hye sends her regards.
Next up, Boris Johnson.
 
@KingCoelacanth quit this dumb bullshit about how the Trump impeachment inquiry is totally a Democrat win you guys.

Unironically and uncritically citing polls was the last straw for me.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole