Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mulvaney, with Chris Wallace on Fox, precisely describes a quid pro quo but says it wasn’t a quid pro quo.
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/chris-wallace-brutally-grills-mick-mulvaney-as-he-attempts-to-walk-back-briefing-comments-you-said-what-you-said/amp/

Things Chris Wallace should, but does not say -
A) no, the President should not be poking his nose into a DOJ investigation
B) no, the President does not have the right to hold up aid that Congress approved because he thinks a country is corrupt
C) no, the President does not have the right to hold up aid that Congress approved because he thinks other countries aren’t paying more (when they actually are)

It still goes very, very badly for Mulvaney.

Thank you for posting, but this ultimately doesn't matter.

We know the House will impeach.

We know the Senate will only convict if McConnell worries his majority is at stake.

But, no, this isn't political now, is it?
Hopefully the House will reveal their "evidence" before they take a vote. I doubt it, though.

Who said impeachment and removal aren’t political?

Nervous Nancy.

Th point of the statement is that it isn't a criminal proceeding and the standard for a vote is whatever the House says it is. Is pulling the US Military away from Syria at the expense of the Kurds illegal? No. But it could be seen as an impeachable offense as it was counter to US interests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The House will maliciously broadcast the actual words spoken by Trump, Mulvaney, Volker, Sondland, et al.

Dems never play fair.

If they do that, then there is no reason for the Dems to vote for impeachment. Why not?
Sounds as if much of the closed door testimony simply doesn't fit the narrative that Schiff is promoting. What are you basing this on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The House will maliciously broadcast the actual words spoken by Trump, Mulvaney, Volker, Sondland, et al.

Dems never play fair.

Oh my god, no! Not their actual words with the direct admissions of their crimes! However can the Democrats hold these people to the words that they uttered publicly, usually on camera! It’s so unfair!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The House will maliciously broadcast the actual words spoken by Trump, Mulvaney, Volker, Sondland, et al.

Dems never play fair.

Oh my god, no! Not their actual words with the direct admissions of their crimes! However can the Democrats hold these people to the words that they uttered publicly, usually on camera! It’s so unfair!

Just because someone said something in front of a camera -- one or more times -- doesn't mean they actually *meant* what they said. In fact, very often they mean the exact opposite of what they said.

It's not like what someone says can be used against them in a court of... oh, wait...

[Anonymous]

So, if Pelosi met with Jordanian officials with the intent of getting an advantage on a political opponent, she broke the law and should be removed from office?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, if Pelosi met with Jordanian officials with the intent of getting an advantage on a political opponent, she broke the law and should be removed from office?

What she’s actually doing is trying to fix the mess Donald has made. She’s not asking them to manufacture dirt on him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, if Pelosi met with Jordanian officials with the intent of getting an advantage on a political opponent, she broke the law and should be removed from office?

She is the head of a co-equal branch of government doing what always happens. Very different than being an ex-military officer being paid by a foreign country doing their bdding while serving on a transition team or in a new Administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, if Pelosi met with Jordanian officials with the intent of getting an advantage on a political opponent, she broke the law and should be removed from office?

What 'advantage on a political opponent" was Pelosi getting?

It's not like she was meeting with the Russians in Moscow on July 4th.

[Anonymous]

https://twitter.com/RussVought45/status/1186276793172578306

OMB will not be complying with the depositions this week. I assume NSC will be the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/RussVought45/status/1186276793172578306

OMB will not be complying with the depositions this week. I assume NSC will be the same.

As of right now, Vindman from the NSC will be testifying on Thursday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/RussVought45/status/1186276793172578306

OMB will not be complying with the depositions this week. I assume NSC will be the same.

Only guilty people plead the Fifth or refuse to testify.

[Anonymous]

Good. We'll see how they respond.



https://biggs.house.gov/sites/biggs.house.gov/files/10-21-19%20Final%20Letter%20to%20Comm%20Chairs%20re%20Deposition%20Rules.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/RussVought45/status/1186276793172578306

OMB will not be complying with the depositions this week. I assume NSC will be the same.

Only guilty people plead the Fifth or refuse to testify.

https://twitter.com/jeremyherb/status/1186314166178648064

Three dropped for this week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good. We'll see how they respond.



https://biggs.house.gov/sites/biggs.house.gov/files/10-21-19%20Final%20Letter%20to%20Comm%20Chairs%20re%20Deposition%20Rules.pdf

Maybe they should send this to Paul Ryan since he’s the one who wrote the rules that the Democrats are using.

Also I wouldn’t trust either of the clowns who wrote this letter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. We'll see how they respond.



https://biggs.house.gov/sites/biggs.house.gov/files/10-21-19%20Final%20Letter%20to%20Comm%20Chairs%20re%20Deposition%20Rules.pdf

Maybe they should send this to Paul Ryan since he’s the one who wrote the rules that the Democrats are using.

Also I wouldn’t trust either of the clowns who wrote this letter.

+1

Idiot Tea Party Republicans, not serious about governing, just grifting.