Reply to Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Title of Nobility Clause is a provision in Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution, that prohibits the federal government from granting titles of nobility, and restricts members of the government from receiving gifts, [b]emoluments[/b], offices or titles from foreign states and monarchies without the consent of the United States Congress.

So, Trump has every right to ask for foreign leaders to investigate others in exchange for something in return as long as he gets congress to approve it first.  Else he’s violating the constitution (ie breaking the law) and is subject to impeachment. Fairly simple. Trump did not ask Congress, and honestly repeatedly does not ask them for permission. He is simply exceeding his rights under our three branch system of government and needs to be removed, regardless of whether or not you agree or disagree with his policies or are Republican, Democrat, or independent. There is no arguing this point, although I am sure he will try. [/quote][/quote]

A proper investigation is conducted by the FBI, which has agreements with other countries to engage in investigations. Directing it from the White House, with the DOJ, Dept of Treasury, the GAO, NSC, DNI, etc involved, but spearheaded by a Presidential Agent (Giuliani) who is compensated by Oligarchs, is NOT the way to do it.[/quote]

"Proper" = led by insiders, often Democrats and corrupt.[/quote]

Stop being ridiculous.

You realize it was people in the FBI who leaked fake stuff about Clinton, right?  At the same time the FBI was ACTUALLY investigating the Russia - Trump Campaign. But they have a policy to not release info on investigations that could affect an election. So some FBI agents released untrue info about Clinton being investigated.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/09/fbi-trump-comey/597523/

[i]The president has spent much of his term complaining about a “deep state” conspiracy against him, but the available evidence suggests that Clinton is the one who should be complaining.

These statements mirror news reports from October 2016, when a series of damaging stories about FBI investigations into Clinton began leaking to the press. An FBI agent told The Guardian that Clinton is “the antichrist personified to a large swath of FBI personnel,” and that “the reason why they’re leaking is they’re pro-Trump.” The anti-Clinton leaks, however, appear to have drawn little interest from Horowitz, or from the Democrats now in charge of the House of Representatives. Comey himself reportedly ordered an investigation into whether FBI officials were leaking to Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani; The Wall Street Journal reported in late 2018 that “the status of the investigation is unknown.”

At this point in the 2016 election cycle, the FBI was already investigating ties between the Trump campaign and the Russian operation designed to put him in the White House. But in accordance with the bureau’s obligation to avoid interfering with elections, officials kept that investigation under wraps. Although Trump and his allies have called that investigation an attempt to overturn the result of the 2016 election, something close to the reverse is true: The FBI scrupulously held to its principles of noninterference with the Republican candidate, and disregarded those principles entirely with the Democratic candidate.

In hindsight, that disparity is even more inexplicable. Whereas the Clinton email case hinged on the possibility that the former secretary of state had compromised classified information, the current president carelessly tweets such information out, when he is not actively sharing it with hostile governments. Although the special-counsel investigation did not establish that Trump directly coordinated with the Kremlin, it documented that as a candidate, the president defended Russia from accusations of interference even as he knew he was benefiting from that interference, and even as he sought to profit from building a hotel in Moscow. Robert Mueller’s report all but accuses the president of obstruction of justice in his effort to stifle that investigation; an inquiry spun off from the probe established that the president may have committed a felony when he paid hush money during the 2016 campaign to cover up evidence of extramarital affairs. Against this litany of corruption, the president and his attorney general can only brandish a Justice Department policy against prosecution of a sitting president.

[/i]

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics