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.
 
Last edited:
Do you know the funniest part about all of this? I don't think anyone in the media is even aware of this, yet: Let's say that it's absolutely true that Trump was expecting the Ukraine to offer legal assistance in the investigation of Biden or of the Crowdstrike server. Let's say that we didn't have the transcript so for all we know he just picked up the phone and went, "I want you to investigate Hunter Biden."

There is absolutely nothing illegal about that.

July 22nd, 1998. Treaty Document 106-16. The Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters. Bill Clinton himself signed it into the books on November 10th, 1999. It's a nice touch, isn't it?
 
Do you know the funniest part about all of this? I don't think anyone in the media is even aware of this, yet: Let's say that it's absolutely true that Trump was expecting the Ukraine to offer legal assistance in the investigation of Biden or of the Crowdstrike server. Let's say that we didn't have the transcript so for all we know he just picked up the phone and went, "I want you to investigate Hunter Biden."

There is absolutely nothing illegal about that.

July 22nd, 1998. Treaty Document 106-16. The Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters. Bill Clinton himself signed it into the books. It's a nice touch, isn't it?

As was pointed out to much merryment on The_Donald -- Biden was in congress during that. He helped pass the bill.
 
People have been saying this about the Dems, CNN, etc for years now.
When the Mueller report came out as nothing, people were saying anti-Trumper's would never be taken seriously again. When Mueller went before congress and outed himself as an old fool, "This will be the end of the DNC".
This will be a big deal for a while, it will strengthen the resolve of those who oppose Trump, maybe make a few people on the fence jump over, but it'll be replaced by the next big fake controversy eventually. As long as the left never backs down and never apologizes they'll be able to maintain some semblance of momentum. Despite Trump being in the office for 3 years, his entire term has been pretty much dominated by the left keeping up this "momentum"

Have you looked at the DNC's fundraising lately? Or compared it vs the RNC fundraising? They may not be being openly scorned from the public square, but the Dem's are finding it much harder to get people to hand over the checks anymore. Trump is out fundraising them in California by a very wide 7 figure margin.
 
July 22nd, 1998. Treaty Document 106-16. The Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters. Bill Clinton himself signed it into the books. It's a nice touch, isn't it?

Hmmm...so according to this document, Ukraine is allowed to keep American criminals as long as there is an agreement made between both parties, although not told, it is implied (if Ukraine is the receiving state).

Is there a possibility that there is actually a trans-national prison system that we don't know about?
 
Do you know the funniest part about all of this? I don't think anyone in the media is even aware of this, yet: Let's say that it's absolutely true that Trump was expecting the Ukraine to offer legal assistance in the investigation of Biden or of the Crowdstrike server. Let's say that we didn't have the transcript so for all we know he just picked up the phone and went, "I want you to investigate Hunter Biden."

There is absolutely nothing illegal about that.

July 22nd, 1998. Treaty Document 106-16. The Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters. Bill Clinton himself signed it into the books on November 10th, 1999. It's a nice touch, isn't it?

Does that also factor in how Trump allegedly was going to withhold military support to Ukraine if they didn't investigate Biden? Because that seems, to me at least, what the actual commotion is about.
 
Do you know the funniest part about all of this? I don't think anyone in the media is even aware of this, yet: Let's say that it's absolutely true that Trump was expecting the Ukraine to offer legal assistance in the investigation of Biden or of the Crowdstrike server. Let's say that we didn't have the transcript so for all we know he just picked up the phone and went, "I want you to investigate Hunter Biden."

There is absolutely nothing illegal about that.

July 22nd, 1998. Treaty Document 106-16. The Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters. Bill Clinton himself signed it into the books on November 10th, 1999. It's a nice touch, isn't it?
I’m assuming they’re going to call it “interfering with the election again” despite Biden not being the Democratic Represtive yet, the election cycle not even in full swing yet, and that there was never any proven inference by Trump the first time.

Maybe they’re just hoping to rile up the American people enough so they’ll give Trump out somehow.
 
Does that also factor in how Trump allegedly was going to withhold military support to Ukraine if they didn't investigate Biden? Because that seems, to me at least, what the actual commotion is about.

Is that the commotion? Because outside of a vague, blurlike motion where the left is flailing their arms at hypersonic speeds while screeching ORNAGE MAN BAAAAAAAAAD and wondering why mommy and daddy government haven't given them what they want yet, all while The Squad moves goalposts and Pelosi runs screaming the other way praying this little bit of red meat tides these fucking idiots over for a while... they haven't really defined what the problem is.

But I think I missed the military support for Biden thing. Or is that in some sort of magical supertranscript that exists only in the minds of AOC and the Whistleblower, who totally heard someone talking about it for realsies so it must exist?

I’m assuming they’re going to call it “interfering with the election again” despite Biden not being the Democratic Represtive yet, the election cycle not even in full swing yet, and that there was never any proven inference by Trump the first time.

Maybe they’re just hoping to rile up the American people enough so they’ll give Trump out somehow.

Basically this. IT WAS HER TURN at the start, and now HE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE IMPEACHED. Reality isn't conforming to the far left's bubble and they are screaming as loud as they can that reality MUST fucking change because THIS IS UNACCEPTABBBUEL!!!!1

I really hope he gets a second term, if only because I'd love to see some of these idiots escalate further. Can you imagine them deciding to do some sort of armed insurrection in like Portland or Berkeley?
 
Does that also factor in how Trump allegedly was going to withhold military support to Ukraine if they didn't investigate Biden? Because that seems, to me at least, what the actual commotion is about.

Hilarious part is that shit isn't illegal either. Congress has officially gone over the fucking edge with power.
 
Well, is there evidence he was going to withhold military aid? There's no audio of the call or audio and video of the event that I know of, only transcripts.
The 5 page transcript that was released doesn't even say the word "military" in it, nor the word "aid," much less the phrase "military aid" or some threat like, "We need action on Crowdstrike and Hunter Biden or else I'm going to get your country's military deals and aid packages squashed."
Even if he went so far as the last one, would that be illegal? I'm sure it would be, but what laws would quid pro do "do this or I take it away" blunt negotiation like that be violating?
He didn't come within a million miles of that, but suppose he did. What's the crime?
 
Have you looked at the DNC's fundraising lately? Or compared it vs the RNC fundraising? They may not be being openly scorned from the public square, but the Dem's are finding it much harder to get people to hand over the checks anymore. Trump is out fundraising them in California by a very wide 7 figure margin.
Why should I donate to a bunch of assholes who I thought were my friends but have spent the last several years calling me a nazi?

It's a real puzzler
 
Well, is there evidence he was going to withhold military aid? There's no audio of the call or audio and video of the event that I know of, only transcripts.
The 5 page transcript that was released doesn't even say the word "military" in it, nor the word "aid," much less the phrase "military aid" or some threat like, "We need action on Crowdstrike and Hunter Biden or else I'm going to get your country's military deals and aid packages squashed."
Even if he went so far as the last one, would that be illegal? I'm sure it would be, but what laws would quid pro do "do this or I take it away" blunt negotiation like that be violating?
He didn't come within a million miles of that, but suppose he did. What's the crime?
The crime is simply what they say Trump did and the evidence is all there.

>JUST SEE WITH YOUR EYES...IT'S RIGHT THERE....
>where?
>WELL YOU'RE JUST TOO STUPID..


This is literally everyone...
 
  • DRINK!
Reactions: FierceBrosnan
In response to the whole 'military aid' thing, from the transcript (which I know is suspect as fuck given all the many ways and forces that would want to manipulate it), the Ukranian president asks Trump for missiles, and very quickly Trump is asking the Ukranian president for a favor involving Crowdstrike and then namedrops Robert Muller. Apparently, Trump was very pissed off about Manafort having been nailed to the wall for tax evasion regarding the insane amounts of money he made through - you guessed it - Ukraine.

Honestly, part of me wonders if this is a play to get impeachement started through the uproar, and then keep it going through whatever might turn up, supported by the shit Trump's already done.

Hilarious part is that shit isn't illegal either. Congress has officially gone over the fucking edge with power.

Half of Congress wants Trump's head on a stick, the other pretends he's already a dictator.

Actually following the Constitution and law in general long since left the building.
 
Why should I donate to a bunch of assholes who I thought were my friends but have spent the last several years calling me a nazi?

It's a real puzzler

And apparently welfare queens, broke college teens, illegal aliens, and people with seventeen self diagnosed mental problems but no job? Not big donators.
 
So then when Joe Biden is on video talking about getting a prosecutor fired with the threat of withholding money access, then that's illegal, too, right?
Does this mean Joe Biden needs to drop out of the race, then?

Sssh, of course not. In fact, Biden is already instructing journalists not to report on it.




They know he's caught red handed. He's on video fucking bragging about it. The only thing they have left is to weaponize projection and pretend Trump is guilty of Biden's actions.
 
Sssh, of course not. In fact, Biden is already instructing journalists not to report on it.




They know he's caught red handed. He's on video fucking bragging about it. The only thing they have left is to weaponize projection and pretend Trump is guilty of Biden's actions.

I think this little investigation is MUCH larger than Biden. If all of fucking Congress is freaking the fuck out over this shit then Trump absolutely hit close to finding their stash of Shekels, Lolis, and Tax Laundered barabonds.

The louder they scream, the closer Trump is to the treasure. They have a poker face like an Ethiopian with food.
 
Well, is there evidence he was going to withhold military aid? There's no audio of the call or audio and video of the event that I know of, only transcripts.
The 5 page transcript that was released doesn't even say the word "military" in it, nor the word "aid," much less the phrase "military aid" or some threat like, "We need action on Crowdstrike and Hunter Biden or else I'm going to get your country's military deals and aid packages squashed."
Even if he went so far as the last one, would that be illegal? I'm sure it would be, but what laws would quid pro do "do this or I take it away" blunt negotiation like that be violating?
He didn't come within a million miles of that, but suppose he did. What's the crime?

Actually Trump was surprisingly clever if you read the transcripts. he didn't mention military aid, nor hold it over anyone's head. When he brought up Biden he specifically brought up Biden's recent PUBLIC claims of having influenced the Ukranian President to fire the State Prosecutor by threatening to deny $1 billion in aid if the prosecutor was not fired. Trump didn't simply ask the Ukranian President for dirt on his political opponent. He quite openly said "Joe Biden's been loudly claiming he had the Ukranian Prosecutor fired in 2016. What's the deal with that? And have you investigated whatever it is he's talking about?" At that point Zelansky takes the reins and offers to talk to Bill Barr and Giuliani about what they know.

Note how Trump framed it. He was incredibly carefully. He did not frame the conversation as digging dirt on a political opponent or enemy. He asked a legitimate question of National Interest regarding claims that Biden, the former VP, has been making in public openly bragging about exerting pressure on the former Ukrainian President in order to shut down the Prosecutor. There is no crime. There is nothing inappropriate, because Trump asked the question using Biden's own public boasting as the basis for his inquiry. And he never went beyond that legitimate area of National Interest.

In fact the transcripts seem so much of a nothingburger regarding Trump, that you honestly have to wonder what is actually going on here? I mean the supposed "Whistleblower" by all accounts was not in fact a direct witness to the conversation between the two Presidents. He or She got their information about the call second or third hand. And Trump turned over those transcripts real fast! Without the slightest pushback. I'm thinking somebody deliberately got fed a "Trumped Up Secondhand Story" that was just too good not to go public with. The White House has been starting to do that a bit lately. For example the "Trump wants to Nuke Hurricanes!" story from a few weeks back, is rather obviously suspected to be a story fed to White House staffers to see who was leaking. This Ukrainian phone call story might be similar. I mean Trump has seen that the Dems will never not take the bait, so may as well bait them with something good! Get them to go all on on their impeachment fantasy over something that is not only absurd, but leads straight back into their core leadership, and paints their "most honest man in the Senate" as an obviously crooked influence peddler to corrupt foreign leaders. That would be some truly masterful 4d chess. Yeah it's a conspiracy theory of sorts, but damn if it doesn't line up nicely.
 
Back