AP fact checks on The Lying Conman Last week

[lurker]

…… and this is why other countries do not allow Fox in their countries.

True story. Problem is you left out the why. The “other countries” are of a communistic nature, with socialism as their governing stance. Thus why, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC and the likes, are allowed in their counties.

[lurker]

How about it guys you'll for all the witnesses to testify so, it will be a fair trial don't you?

Senate Democrats had their %$#@ show already. They have what they WANTED and thought they needed to push the impeachment inquiry forward. Now the House Democrats more. Weird!! Guess they shouldn’t have been so hasty.

[Clayton_Wetters]

More facts on the IMPOTUS.

https://apnews.com/a79178f3676982531c104e11d6041f42

The Associated Depressed has much bias and fake news. You gullibled it up as usual.

Gullible: unsuspecting, foolish, unsophisticated, wide-eyed, believing, biting, credulous, green, innocent, mark, silly, simple, sucker, susceptible, trustful

See mirror for more details.....

[kidrock]

luker

Senate Democrats had their %$#@ show already. They have what they WANTED and thought they needed to push the impeachment inquiry forward. Now the House Democrats more. Weird!! Guess they shouldn’t have been so hasty.


Wait you want a fair trial right? you want the process to be fair right? or now all of a sudden that means nothing. Yes the Dems acted in haste but, you guys want a fair process which would mean a trial with witnesses right or has that changed lol. I'm not sure what Moscow Mitch is worried about. Must he be worried what they would say. I mean doesn't he want to hear from Hunter and Joe Biden, Adam Schiff, Pompeo, Mulvaney, Bolton

[lurker]

1. Honestly, what I want is totally irrelevant to the impeachment process. This is where I don’t have a voice or vote.

2. Why including me with the encompassing of “you guys”?

3. Personally IMHO, I say roll with what the Senate Democrats have put forward, push it to the House with no further delay and no further testimonies ---- and let it all blow up in the Democrats faces. That’s not said Pro or Con Democrat or Republican. That’s said as a Libertarian taking my personal moderate approach to politics. Nothing more, nothing less.

4. I’ve never stated that I want the House impeachment process to be fair. Personally, I’d like it to be Republican one sided just like the Senate was one sided Democrat. That is how the three Branches of our Government work, isn’t it? (that is all tongue in cheek because the entire impeachment ruse was and is a joke)

5. It is my personal opinion that, Hunter and Joe Biden, Adam Schiff, and a few others will be investigated later on down the road no matter the outcome of the impeachment.

You asked.

[Stefan2k4]

Yes it does come down to interpretations of the Constitution and some law professors believe that Abuse of power is a clear violation and comes under the High Crimes and misdemeanor.

But that's an opinion and not a fact and those law professors opinions are no more valid than any others. There are law Professors like Professor Turley who totally disagree and feel that congress is the one abusing their power, the impeachment process, and the constitution.

so where does that really leave us

It leaves us less than one year away from an election, and that's where opinions are meant to be settled. The voters who don't like the President will have a chance to make their voices heard in Nov 2020, just like those who do will and just as they did in 2016. Settling differences of opinion are what elections are for, not abusing and weaponizing the impeachment process.

They sure thought in Bill Clinton's case lying to congress rose to that level and rightly so

Clinton didn't lie to congress and that was not a charge against him. He lied when he testified under oath before a grand jury in a sexual harassment case filed against him. That's a real crime. Lying under oath in a legal case is consider Perjury and is actually a crime. He was also charged with Obstruction of Justice. Notice that's "obstruction of justice", not "obstruction of congress" which is really just a made up "crime". Obstruction of Justice is a real crime, unlike "obstruction of congress". What did he do that constituted obstruction of justice? He asked Monica Lewinsky to lie in her sworn affidavit to the court and to say that they no sexual relations, he asked her to create cover stories, and to lie about the gifts he gave her. He also asked his secretary Betty Currie to lie in her testimony and coached her on how to testify. All of those things are real Crimes and do indeed qualify as obstruction of justice.

In contrast, the made up "obstruction of congress" charge that Trump is being charged with is simply because he tried to fight them in court, as he is entitled to do, and they didn't want to go through the proper legal process. That is NOT obstruction of justice. If you get a speeding ticket and you decide to not pay it and instead challenge it in court before a judge, is that obstruction of justice? Of course not. It's considered "due process" and you're legally entitled to it. You may still lose and have to pay the ticket, but you have a right to fight it in court, just as the president has a right to challenge the congressional subponeas in court.

The contrast between Clinton and Trump, is that Clinton committed real crimes. Whether or not those crimes rose to "high crimes" and qualified as an "impeachable" is a matter of opinion, and is certainly debatable and ultimately the senate decided it was not. However, there is no denying he committed real crimes. And in fact, he did later have his legal license suspended and was fined for those crimes.

That's why I'm for hearing from all witness at this trial and that could change my opinion or solidify it.

You said yourself, that the transcript of the presidents own words, in that phone call said it all. What purpose would other people who simply heard those words serve as witnesses? All they could do is give us their opinion of those words. Why can't we form our own opinion? They are NOT fact witnesses, because the facts are the transcript itself

it's their turn to have a fair trial

A trial is not 'fair" if there's no grounds to put a person on trial in the first place. A difference of opinion or political belief is not an appropriate reason to put a person on trial. A district attorney doesn't walk into a court room and say "Judge, I've got no solid evidence this guy committed any crime, but I don't like him and he looks like a criminal to me. Therefore, I want you to put him on trial and subpeona and investigate everything he's done in his entire life in the hopes that we might find some excuse to punish him." If a district attorney did that, any self respecting judge would immediately dismiss the case and would find the DA in contempt for wasting the courts time and violating due process. That is in essence exactly what's happening here. It's an impeachment in search of a justification. Furthermore, the house democrats are asking the judge and jury, the senators, to do their job of investing and finding a cause for the impeachment, something they either couldn't do, because their was insufficient evidence or were too lazy to do. In a real court of law, no judge would accept a DA asking the judge to do his job for him. He would immediately dismiss the case! Neither would he accept a case based only on opinion and no fact evidence.

[lurker]

Said very astutely Stefan2k4.

[lurker]

CNN - Fact-checking Trump's false claims of FBI spying

This is a prime example of Fake News that is, misleading, fabrication, misconstrued, so far out of full context, outright lies, and most importantly - full of opinions - that are being represented as truthful News. Note the comments section, ouch!!!!


Fact-checking Trump's false claims of FBI spying - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_7jX6Id16U

[kidrock]

But that's an opinion and not a fact and those law professors opinions are no more valid than any others. There are law Professors like Professor Turley who totally disagree and feel that congress is the one abusing their power, the impeachment process, and the constitution.



It leaves us less than one year away from an election, and that's where opinions are meant to be settled. The voters who don't like the President will have a chance to make their voices heard in Nov 2020, just like those who do will and just as they did in 2016. Settling differences of opinion are what elections are for, not abusing and weaponizing the impeachment process.



Clinton didn't lie to congress and that was not a charge against him. He lied when he testified under oath before a grand jury in a sexual harassment case filed against him. That's a real crime. Lying under oath in a legal case is consider Perjury and is actually a crime. He was also charged with Obstruction of Justice. Notice that's "obstruction of justice", not "obstruction of congress" which is really just a made up "crime". Obstruction of Justice is a real crime, unlike "obstruction of congress". What did he do that constituted obstruction of justice? He asked Monica Lewinsky to lie in her sworn affidavit to the court and to say that they no sexual relations, he asked her to create cover stories, and to lie about the gifts he gave her. He also asked his secretary Betty Currie to lie in her testimony and coached her on how to testify. All of those things are real Crimes and do indeed qualify as obstruction of justice.

In contrast, the made up "obstruction of congress" charge that Trump is being charged with is simply because he tried to fight them in court, as he is entitled to do, and they didn't want to go through the proper legal process. That is NOT obstruction of justice. If you get a speeding ticket and you decide to not pay it and instead challenge it in court before a judge, is that obstruction of justice? Of course not. It's considered "due process" and you're legally entitled to it. You may still lose and have to pay the ticket, but you have a right to fight it in court, just as the president has a right to challenge the congressional subponeas in court.

The contrast between Clinton and Trump, is that Clinton committed real crimes. Whether or not those crimes rose to "high crimes" and qualified as an "impeachable" is a matter of opinion, and is certainly debatable and ultimately the senate decided it was not. However, there is no denying he committed real crimes. And in fact, he did later have his legal license suspended and was fined for those crimes.



You said yourself, that the transcript of the presidents own words, in that phone call said it all. What purpose would other people who simply heard those words serve as witnesses? All they could do is give us their opinion of those words. Why can't we form our own opinion? They are NOT fact witnesses, because the facts are the transcript itself



A trial is not 'fair" if there's no grounds to put a person on trial in the first place. A difference of opinion or political belief is not an appropriate reason to put a person on trial. A district attorney doesn't walk into a court room and say "Judge, I've got no solid evidence this guy committed any crime, but I don't like him and he looks like a criminal to me. Therefore, I want you to put him on trial and subpeona and investigate everything he's done in his entire life in the hopes that we might find some excuse to punish him." If a district attorney did that, any self respecting judge would immediately dismiss the case and would find the DA in contempt for wasting the courts time and violating due process. That is in essence exactly what's happening here. It's an impeachment in search of a justification. Furthermore, the house democrats are asking the judge and jury, the senators, to do their job of investing and finding a cause for the impeachment, something they either couldn't do, because their was insufficient evidence or were too lazy to do. In a real court of law, no judge would accept a DA asking the judge to do his job for him. He would immediately dismiss the case! Neither would he accept a case based only on opinion and no fact evidence.

Very good post!! and I do agree that the Dems screwed up by rushing their case. They should have waited for the courts to play out. I believe that if they could get the testimony from all involved we may have a different outcome.

So even the professors have an disagreement on the Constitution. Who's right.

I'm all for settling it at the ballot box but, Pelosi decided to go this route which I believe will cost them the house in 2020 But, also agreed it needed to be done even if it does cost them.

I didn't realize Clinton lied to a grand jury I was wrong about that. I thought it was to congress. I do agree he should have been impeached just as I do Trump. I realize you don't agree so, I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

My whole point about a fair trial is how some have complained about the process during the houses hearings and now will not speak up and demand a fair trial in the senate. it seems a little bit of hypocrisy if you ask me. Sometimes people have a trial even though they never committed the crime and sometimes convicted only to be released years later so, now that there is likely to have a trail you would expect it to be fair right?

[ss12]

There's only thing you need to know is Trump was impeached in the house. Never has a president been removed from the senate. So why would anybody expect anything different this time. You all can argue that is was political, the process was wrong and what ever else. But the fact is he was impeached. This will be what he will be remembered as. Presidents are not impeached all the time and this probably won't happen for a long time. The IMPOTUS didn't leave house any other choice but to take actions against this conman. He had to be stop sooner or later. Did it hurt the democrats political future? Maybe in some cases but they did what is right for our republic. They followed the rule of law and this is what are country is all about. The rule of law over everything including you political future.

It has been said in the senate that if the could have a blind vote most of the republicans would vote the IMPOTUS out of office. This just shows that most republicans know what IMPOTUS did was wrong!

I would like to give thanks to the democrats that have the courage to follow the rule of law for our republic.

And for all of you republican posters on here please send me your information and I will send you a tube of preparation H because by all of your post on here lately I can tell your butts are hurting.

[lurker]

There's only thing you need to know is Trump was impeached in the house.

Being impeached in the House means nothing to me personally as the process is incomplete at this time.

It has been said in the senate that if the could have a blind vote most of the republicans would vote the IMPOTUS out of office.

Cite source please.

[Stefan2k4]

Never has a president been removed from the senate.

There's a reason for that. The founder fathers knew this could be abused for political reasons. That's the reason they required a 3/5 majority to convict. And history has proven them right. In the 2 previous cases (Johnson and Clinton), there were indeed political motives involved. In the one instance where it would likely have not been partisan and the President likely would have been convicted (Nixon), he resigned before they had a chance to impeach him. This impeachment is alot like the impeachment of Andrew Johnson. At least in Clinton's case there were real crimes involved, the partisan question was whether those crimes rose to the level of "high crimes" and as such was worth of attempting to undo democracy. In Johnson's case it wasn't a one party versus another type situation but it was very political. It was a power struggle between the congress and the Executive branch with the congress wanting powers that weren't afforded to them in the constitution. It involved a law called "the tenure of office act" which was an attempt by congress to restrict the presidents ability to remove officers of his cabinet without their approval. The law was later declared unconstitutional by the Supreme court. Anyway, the Congress basically passed this law and impeached Johnson when he violated it, because they simply disagreed with his policies, much like the democratic house disagrees with Trumps policies.

This will be what he will be remembered as.

I seriously doubt that! Nixon was not impeached. He resigned before it happened and ironically, he's the one president who likely would have been removed and is the one president most people think of when you talk about impeachment. Then there is Clinton, who was impeached and not removed. Clinton isn't typically remembered for being impeached. So, clearly the circumstances surrounding the impeachment do indeed matter greatly. As for Johnson, he served only a short term, taking over the office after Lincolns assasination and only serving out that term. He may be remembered for being impeached, but it's also remembered that the impeachment was unjust and political. Anyway, what Trump will be remembered for will more likely depend on his accomplishments in office. Right now, with the economy in such great shape and all the federal judges he's appointed, it looks like whatever happens, he's going to have a lasting impact.

Presidents are not impeached all the time and this probably won't happen for a long time.

That's because as I said the founding fathers set the bar high to make it unlikely except in extreme circumstances like treason, and also because there have in the past been consequences for frivolous impeachments. In the most recent impeachment of Clinton, the republicans faced a political backlash in congress. And in the Andrew Johnson case the tenure of service act was overturned by the supreme court. The democrats must fail here and they must face serious consequences in the 2020 election as well. If they do not, it will set a precedent and Impeachment will from now on be used a political weapon by all parties, present and future. It will make our political system even dirtier and uglier than it already is. This isn't just about Trump. It isn't just about democrat versus republican. It's about the future of our system as a whole. What the democrats are doing here is compromising that future just for their own potential short term political gain.

they did what is right for our republic.

No. They did what was wrong for our republic, very very wrong. Turing the impeachment clause in the constitution into a political weapon is NOT good for the republic. In the long run, it's bad for everybody!

They followed the rule of law and this is what are country is all about. The rule of law over everything including you political future.

"Rule of law" without liberty and democracy is tyranny! "Rule of law" is not what our country is "all about". Because "rule of law" without democracy to shape that rule of law and individual liberty is the tool that totalitarian regimes and dictators use to oppress people. Democracy and Liberty both must, to some extent, Trump (pun intended) "rule of law". That's the reason we have a constitution. Thats the reason we have a Supreme court. It's the reason we have elections, and why we have 3 branches of government with checks and balances. All of that is to guarantee that 'rule of law" can't be used to take away freedom and democracy. It's highly ironic that the Democrats are now the people talking about "rule of law" and trying to use it to overturn democracy ( removing a duly elected president) and that they are claiming to be the one's who are "defending our democracy". Quite the opposite is true. They are demanding a duly elected president be removed in the name of "rule of law". And it's even more ironic that they cite no "law" the president has allegedly broken.

[Barbecueboy]

SS tosses out stuff to see if it will stick........Stefan crushes them all .....like a bug

[Barbecueboy]

There's only thing you need to know is Trump was impeached in the house. Never has a president been removed from the senate. So why would anybody expect anything different this time. You all can argue that is was political, the process was wrong and what ever else. But the fact is he was impeached. This will be what he will be remembered as. Presidents are not impeached all the time and this probably won't happen for a long time. The IMPOTUS didn't leave house any other choice but to take actions against this conman. He had to be stop sooner or later. Did it hurt the democrats political future? Maybe in some cases but they did what is right for our republic. They followed the rule of law and this is what are country is all about. The rule of law over everything including you political future.

It has been said in the senate that if the could have a blind vote most of the republicans would vote the IMPOTUS out of office. This just shows that most republicans know what IMPOTUS did was wrong!

I would like to give thanks to the democrats that have the courage to follow the rule of law for our republic.

And for all of you republican posters on here please send me your information and I will send you a tube of preparation H because by all of your post on here lately I can tell your butts are hurting.

And only one thing you need to know.....Your president is still your president and that trend will continue.

Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha ......still mad bro?

[Clayton_Wetters]

There's only thing you need to know is Trump was impeached in the house. Never has a president been removed from the senate. So why would anybody expect anything different this time. You all can argue that is was political, the process was wrong and what ever else. But the fact is he was impeached. This will be what he will be remembered as. Presidents are not impeached all the time and this probably won't happen for a long time. The IMPOTUS didn't leave house any other choice but to take actions against this conman. He had to be stop sooner or later. Did it hurt the democrats political future? Maybe in some cases but they did what is right for our republic. They followed the rule of law and this is what are country is all about. The rule of law over everything including you political future.

It has been said in the senate that if the could have a blind vote most of the republicans would vote the IMPOTUS out of office. This just shows that most republicans know what IMPOTUS did was wrong!

I would like to give thanks to the democrats that have the courage to follow the rule of law for our republic.

And for all of you republican posters on here please send me your information and I will send you a tube of preparation H because by all of your post on here lately I can tell your butts are hurting.

Impeached by a lock step Democrat party because they just don't want him to be president. It puts a hold on their Commie and globalist agenda. That all you need to know. Trump did nothing to actually be impeached. That angry party can make it all up and stand by it all they wish but it's only done for a political reason. Democrats quit listening to the will of the people a long time ago. Now they only tell the people what they need and the media is their tool for this.

You like that though, don't you?