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:
He's been facing impeachment proceedings from the day he took office, this is just another day ending in "Y" as far as I'm concerned. The only person alleging that these transcripts were being moved to some secure, shadowy server is the person that I'm directly implicating. If you don't contest the accuracy of the transcript then that would imply that you don't believe that it's been modified, in which case once the transcript was released, why did it contain none of the damning information that the whistleblower was alleging? Both his complaint and the transcript can't be accurate at the same time; they directly contradict each other.

I find it fascinating that Trump's managed to achieve something that I thought impossible, though: He's managed to make an avowed Communist openly defend an unnamed, government employee working for the CIA, insisting that they're 100% truthful and worthy of trusting blindly and unquestioningly. I never thought I'd see that happen.

You know anyone can publicly read the transcript, right? You don't have to lie to my face and say it contains none of the "damning evidence".

After Ukraine's president mentions javelin missiles Trump goes ahead and asks "could you do us a favor" first. Then the conversation moves on to Crowdstrike and Biden and his son, and Trump asks him if they can "look into it". All of this is publicly available information and all you're saying to me is NO U, DUMB COMMIE IT MEANS NOTHING.

As impeachment proceedings progress I look forward to hearing you continue to spin everything that happens as somehow good for Trump. Of course, when you're so busy deepthroating his dick your vision is obscured by the pubes.
 
That's literally what happened? Here's a DIRECT QUOTE from the complaint.

View attachment 950005

I would wait for facts to come out about the transcription process before jumping to conclusions.

These are the same people who brought you the Kavanaugh hearings. They don't deal in facts.

I think you're absolutely correct. Evidence doesn't mean jack shit to Trumpers like yourself. You don't believe the evidence because you don't want to believe it/its 45D underwater backgammon/don't believe its that bad. I'm not debating the accuracy of the transcript. I'm presenting the fact that this call was moved into a seperate system because it was politically inconvenient for the President, which triggered the complaint.

Furthermore its pretty clear that you would see literally nothing wrong with Trump asking another country to look into an election opponent in exhange for foreign aid even if you believed the evidence.

You *think* the complaint is a lie and you're presenting that opinion as fact, despite their being no proof to the contrary. But perhaps you can point me to anyone saying the call wasn't moved to the secure server despite having no contents that would threaten national security?

The fucking delusion of saying the Dems are being strung along when all of Trumps closest allies are currently imploding and he's facing impeachment provlceedings is insane. I've been gone for a while but good god its literally turned into r/the_donald in here lol

Actually, evidence matters quite a bit.

Right now, there's a transcript that sounds like a normal conversation between 2 people, and a whistleblower report that sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers. The whistleblower report contains factual errors, not the least of which is claims that people were attending the call who were not there.

OTOH, the former VPs son was receiving $50k a month from a Ukraine company with one of Mitch Romney's close advisors on the board. There are multiple letters from Democrats to the Ukraine issuing explicit warnings about losing funding.

I have not seen evidence leading me to believe Trump was seeking incriminating evidence from a foreign government for political purposes. I am seeing A LOT of evidence Democrats are accusing Trump of something they did.

So help me out here, change my mind with some facts. All I see is a fifth column trying to stage a coup and I'm having none of it.
 
It's funny seeing people who supposedly hate the CIA bend over backwards to claim that this spook needs to be anonymous because think of the poor little CIA hero. I don't mind publishing any of the contents of the call that Trump had, but this dude should get outed too.

Wouldn't be so bad if the "complaint" was based on anything this guy actually heard, saw, or read, but everything is hearsay. This would be laughed out of any court.

My guess - we'll know who this guy is before long. Another guess - this guy should either retire from the CIA or start looking for new employment. Another question that could be asked - if this guy is willing to write up a "complaint" based strictly on hearsay, how can anyone have any faith in any operational report he writes? Maybe he's making stuff up.
 
You know anyone can publicly read the transcript, right? You don't have to lie to my face and say it contains none of the "damning evidence".

After Ukraine's president mentions javelin missiles Trump goes ahead and asks "could you do us a favor" first. Then the conversation moves on to Crowdstrike and Biden and his son, and Trump asks him if they can "look into it". All of this is publicly available information and all you're saying to me is NO U, DUMB COMMIE IT MEANS NOTHING.

As impeachment proceedings progress I look forward to hearing you continue to spin everything that happens as somehow good for Trump. Of course, when you're so busy deepthroating his dick your vision is obscured by the pubes.
As a registered D, you're out of your mind if you think anything you submitted constitutes damning evidence. What am I saying, you're a commie furry, "out of your mind" is a given, isn't it?
 
Furthermore its pretty clear that you would see literally nothing wrong with Trump asking another country to look into an election opponent in exhange for foreign aid even if you believed the evidence.

I mean, frankly? No, I don't. And in any event, the Biden being "investigated" here isn't really Joe, it's Spunkmeyer or whatever his name is. They are separate people, both in law and in fact. There's very little need to investigate Joe himself, he's confessed to what he did publicly. He's proud of it.

But let's explore this for a minute.

So, is it your contention, then, that being a "political opponent" means a person can't be investigated for wrongdoings, even if they admit to them?

Because at worst, like... Absolute most hypothetical, everyone spinning this story is 100% correct worst... And at this point it's a virtual certainty very little, if any, of it actually is but let's just assume for a minute... Then he still didn't do anything that Biden didn't do and publicly bragged about.

So, I mean... If we can't investigate Biden for it, why is not only ok but apparently mandatory we investigate his political opponent for it?

Also, something something FISA warrants?
 
You know NYT, doxing generally entails one of two things:

Either a) you reveal the name of the person who blew the whistle (and that, from what I can tell, they didn't do despite "revealing" who this person's supposed to be).
or b) have it create a mass shitstorm that backfires spectacularly while also targeting the doxed in question (which seems to be the case here).

As much as people need more transparency with their politicians, I'd argue that this really isn't the way to do it. It makes everyone come off like idiots, and the ones trying to cash in look like even bigger idiots by trying to get a piece of it. No wonder people want the NYT to be canceled. From what I've been able to gather, we still know next to nothing about Trump's "favor" to the Ukrane. For all we know it might have been just an average conversation between two world leaders or maybe he's attempting North Korea democracy 2.0 with them. Again, we know next to nothing about this and everyone going apeshit over this- the Dems, news outlets and the general public, are all coming off as crazy spergs over this situation.

Me personally, I'm just waiting to see where this train of insanity goes. And if it is something serious, then it's something serious, I ain't jumping to conclusions on this one.
 
Wouldn't be so bad if the "complaint" was based on anything this guy actually heard, saw, or read, but everything is hearsay. This would be laughed out of any court.

My guess - we'll know who this guy is before long. Another guess - this guy should either retire from the CIA or start looking for new employment. Another question that could be asked - if this guy is willing to write up a "complaint" based strictly on hearsay, how can anyone have any faith in any operational report he writes? Maybe he's making stuff up.
Not like the CIA has never made shit up before, to be fair.
 
You know anyone can publicly read the transcript, right? You don't have to lie to my face and say it contains none of the "damning evidence".

After Ukraine's president mentions javelin missiles Trump goes ahead and asks "could you do us a favor" first. Then the conversation moves on to Crowdstrike and Biden and his son, and Trump asks him if they can "look into it". All of this is publicly available information and all you're saying to me is NO U, DUMB COMMIE IT MEANS NOTHING.

As impeachment proceedings progress I look forward to hearing you continue to spin everything that happens as somehow good for Trump. Of course, when you're so busy deepthroating his dick your vision is obscured by the pubes.
I'll be honest with you, I'm not a fan of Trump's character, but if you want to say someone is doing some deep hardthroating while gurgling nonsense after someone has told them to take the dick out of their mouth and ears to listen for a second, you might start to hear a little more clearly cause the only dicksucker I'm seeing is this thread is you and it's about a mile deep down your throat.

The evidence has already slapped down a lot of what the Democrats have regurgitated so far and you seem to not be willing to accept that for a second to replace it with the hopes that you will get your wish. Get out of your dreams for a moment to take a look at reality for what it is cause right now it is not playing out like the Democrats are hoping it would.
 
You know anyone can publicly read the transcript, right? You don't have to lie to my face and say it contains none of the "damning evidence".

After Ukraine's president mentions javelin missiles Trump goes ahead and asks "could you do us a favor" first. Then the conversation moves on to Crowdstrike and Biden and his son, and Trump asks him if they can "look into it". All of this is publicly available information and all you're saying to me is NO U, DUMB COMMIE IT MEANS NOTHING.

As impeachment proceedings progress I look forward to hearing you continue to spin everything that happens as somehow good for Trump. Of course, when you're so busy deepthroating his dick your vision is obscured by the pubes.
Yes, I'm somewhat aware of the contents of both the transcript and the whistleblower's report, thank you. Again, as outlined in Treaty Document 106–16, asking the Ukrainian government to mutually cooperate with investigations is completely legal. The investigations in question were pertaining to the 2016 election, not the current election, and the Ukrainian President was the one who brought up Rudy Gulianni first; Trump was just continuing that discussion.

The whistleblower's report also said that an official was present during the call who has since gone on record as not being present-- You know, these discussions would be a lot easier to have if you just read these sorts of threads before posting in them, all of this information's already been presented and we're only 17 pages deep. Please consider doing so, it would clear up a lot of your questions.
 
The Dems are about to start a 2 week vacation.

This is fucking retarded. They say the President has to go, they drag the DNI in to testify, then they leave everyone hanging for a couple weeks.

Motherfuckers better come back with a better story. This is the Steele Dossier mk II, a festering pile of garbage they expect to shove down people's throats.

Oh, and the bullshit about 30 Senators who will vote against Trump: it's from a Romney advisor. Why are his fingerprints all over this?
 
Could this be the beginnings of a Trump bodycount?

I imagine his people could come up with much more inventive ways to eliminate...obstacles.

No need, this person did him a favour. The whole impeachment thing allows him to get away with a lot of things that he didn't accomplish.

If anything, if he isn't waging a lowkey war with CIA/deepstate and if some of his political opponents hadn't gotten so deeply involved, I would have thought it was a CIA plot to help him get re-elected.
 
Well that's the beauty of it. It doesn't even have to make it past the Senate for it to have its intended effect. When Nixon was undergoing impeachment proceedings he resigned once he learned Republicans wouldn't support him once it reached the Senate. One of the most important parts of any impeachment process is that it allows the House to form investigation committees to uncover and dig through all the dirt a President might be sitting on.

During the investigation into Nixon for example the watergate tapes were uncovered, and due to a Supreme court ruling they were turned over and exposed to the public eye. In a similar manner Trump's dealings will be investigated thoroughly and then it'll be decided by a House vote whether things move forward to a trial in the senate.

So you should look forward to the weeks ahead, things are gonna get REALLY fun!
Trump isn't Nixon. He isn't backing down and doesn't give a fuck what anyone thinks much less Nancy, the Suicide Squad and fellow but failed real estate brokers like Schumer and Nadler. The House fags can bloviate all they want but nothing that's something gets done in public which means nothing came up in closed committee so this dog and pony show was cooked up. They're losing 2020 and praying something sticks that damages Trump but it ain't happening simply because Giuliani is real good at ferreting out people's skeletons and won't hesitate to show them on prime time.
 
Back