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:
In the transcript Trump leads off with talking about Crowdstrike and the DNC hack.The conversation shifts to Rudy Giuliani and then Trump brings up Biden's son and Joe Biden. Now all you have to do is ask yourself why would Trump bring up Biden directly before the 2020 election and ask if Ukraine can look into it AGAIN, even after there were two investigations? All the Trump supporters attempting to make this into some ultra-complicated saga are ignoring this simple question.

The White House had to literally scramble and move the conversation to a more secure server because they didn't expect Trump to so brazenly bring up Biden. The whistleblower complaint was triggered by the simple fact that a non-nation threatening conversation was moved to the securest server possible "because reasons lol". Why the fuck would Trump ask another country to look into a direct political opponent months away from the presidential election other than political gain? I'm not even disagreeing that Joe Biden is corrupt as fuck, but if the President is attempting to get dirt on him in order to win an election that even worse.
Good question, but counter question. Why would Trump declassify all of it unless he genuinely believed it wasn't threatening? The side for impeachment has to turn this into a complicated saga to answer that question, and basically accuse him and the White House of doctoring it.
 
! I'm just posting evidence uncovered or just straight up admitted to by the Trump administration itself.

Hearsay from a third party isn't evidence and there is nothing in the full transcripts or the audio that indicates any sort of crime. The only "evidence" is from a Whistleblower who didn't even know WHO THE FUCK WAS IN THE ROOM. Wearing Green Sunglasses and telling me the sky is green isn't evidence that the sky is green.

Why is it that we have to simply accept that politics will just always be corrupt and nothing can be done about it? Its such a defeatist attitude.

Because fucking assholes like you only care about your side winning, you don't care about the Truth, you just want Orange man out because he has an R after his name. The Democrats have done the exact same thing that they are accusing Trump of now but you don't give one red fuck about that because they have a D after their names. You want step one to cleaning up corruption? Term Limits for Congress of course there is only one person who even advocates for that, but you would call him Hitler because he has an R after his name on the ballot so don't fucking bitch to me about "accepting" corruption.

You want Trump out of office? How about you Fucking tell me what the Democrats are going to do to improve my life, tell me what principles they stand on that I agree with. Cause guess what, in the past 2 years since Trump took office my Paycheck has gone up, and my Federal taxes have gone down, and I got to dump the Insurance I had which I had to do because Obamacare Doubled the cost of it. The only thing the Democrats have done in those past 2 years are

RUSSIA, TAX RETURNS, ORANGE MAN BAD!, WHITE MEN BAD! STRAIGHT MEN BAD!, IMPEACHMENT! WE ARE ALL GONNA DIE DUE TO CLIMATE CHANGE! BAN ALL GUNZ!

Now all you have to do is ask yourself why would Trump bring up Biden directly before the 2020 election and ask if Ukraine can look into it AGAIN, e

Maybe because a book about Biden being a corrupt asshole came out in May of this year.

Edit : Oh and once again..Rudy was looking into this as early as 2018.
 
They were banking on him trying to hide behind Executive Privelage, but when he said "Fine, here ya go" they had nothing except to become that which they swore to destroy: Obama Birther Nutbags: demanding the "REAL documents" , since the ones they got don't incriminate their nemesis, they're obviously FAKE!.
 
That's literally what happened? Here's a DIRECT QUOTE from the complaint.

View attachment 950005
Described the act as abuse of this electronic system because the call did not contain anything remotely sensitive from a national security perspective

While that may be true, his enemies make it seem like he gave away a nuclear launch code.........you know, something of national security.
 
Good question, but counter question. Why would Trump declassify all of it unless he genuinely believed it wasn't threatening? The side for impeachment has to turn this into a complicated saga to answer that question, and basically accuse him and the White House of doctoring it.
I believe it's far more simple than that, I believe Trump let it go totally public on purpose just to troll the shit out of everyone. This move wasn't for political gain at all this was all for having a massive lol at the Dems expense.
 
Odin's Eye, Ashy. You sure pack a lot of shit into... Well, frankly, a big ass post. It's also difficult to dissect line by line, because you mix that shit around like a pro shit-stirrer. But let's address the key point that your whole argument rests on.

You talk about evidence. What evidence of what, and evidence of what?

In the transcript Trump leads off with talking about Crowdstrike and the DNC hack.The conversation shifts to Rudy Giuliani and then Trump brings up Biden's son and Joe Biden. Now all you have to do is ask yourself why would Trump bring up Biden directly before the 2020 election and ask if Ukraine can look into it AGAIN, even after there were two investigations? All the Trump supporters attempting to make this into some ultra-complicated saga are ignoring this simple question.

That's... not evidence, Ashy. That's speculation. Whether it's credible or not is going to depend on your politics I suppose, but call it what it is. It's assuming impure motives, imagining things left unsaid were read to be there by both parties. It's the same nonsense Schiff just got his knuckles rapped for today.

Yes. If you presuppose that Trump is guilty ahead of time, you can probably read guilt into something he says. That's true of a lot of people in a lot of situations. I mean, if you overhead me telling someone "I fixed that leaky faucet last night", you could assume I actually did some amateur plumbing, or you could infer that I was using it as a euphemism for killing a prostitute that had dirt on me. Either one could be true, I suppose, but if you try to insist that me saying I fixed a leaky faucet is proof of murder, you're going to be laughed at in any court in the land, unless you can provide some additional evidence. And right now? All we have are inference and "reading between the lines" and "veiled threats left unsaid" and other such bullshit.
 
All we have are inference and "reading between the lines" and "veiled threats left unsaid" and other such bullshit.

That is something that I could frankly buy being a thing with 90% of people, but This is Trump we are talking about..do you really think he is subtle enough for "Reading between the lines" threats? This is the guy who I think would honestly put giant letters Spelling out TRUMP on the white house lawn if he could.
 
That is something that I could frankly buy being a thing with 90% of people, but This is Trump we are talking about..do you really think he is subtle enough for "Reading between the lines" threats? This is the guy who I think would honestly put giant letters Spelling out TRUMP on the white house lawn if he could.

Sure. He's a billionaire businessman. Don't ever assume he doesn't know how to be subtle when he needs to be. Being bombastic serves him well, but it's not the only tool in his box.

Again, don't fall into the same trap the dems have been. He can't simultaneously be an evil mastermind and a bumbling buffoon. It doesn't work that way.
 
IMG-1105.JPG
 
Sure. He's a billionaire businessman. Don't ever assume he doesn't know how to be subtle when he needs to be. Being bombastic serves him well, but it's not the only tool in his box.

Again, don't fall into the same trap the dems have been. He can't simultaneously be an evil mastermind and a bumbling buffoon. It doesn't work that way.
One thing Trump is, through and through, is a weapons grade asshole that loves making people work themselves into a frenzy. Even Bill Clinton couldn't whip the republicans into this much of a froth in the 90s and it was fucking super easy to do then!If anything in that document is proven to be illegal it's going to hurt both sides in a big way, so either Pelosi keeps the tough act up long enough for the inquiry to rule it a big nothing and then they move on and nothing happens to anyone, or she's going to have to eat crow ( or cock, she's kind of a GILF) and Biden is going to have to be deeply investigated and most likely prosecuted as well. And since she seems to really be banking on Biden 2020 this whole debacle is completely pointless.
 
Sure. He's a billionaire businessman. Don't ever assume he doesn't know how to be subtle when he needs to be. Being bombastic serves him well, but it's not the only tool in his box.

Again, don't fall into the same trap the dems have been. He can't simultaneously be an evil mastermind and a bumbling buffoon. It doesn't work that way.

Just because he isn't the type for subtlety doesn't mean he is evil or a buffoon. He is just bombastic and direct that isn't a bad thing. Sometimes you need to beat an opponent by slipping them poison, sometimes you need to do it by dropping a 5 ton bomb on their head.
 
6f09dda825c3b4ca61554e7f63375a2b.png


This is one example of the "Whistleblower" complaint being an outright lie. A “White House official” is quoted by the "Whistleblower" as objecting to the storage of the MEMCON transcript of in a secure storage system in the NSC, citing that it contained "nothing remotely sensitive from a national security perspective." That's demonstrably false. The President's call with Zelenskyy contains references to both Trump's and Zelenskyy's opinions on multiple European countries and leaders, especially Germany and France, Merkel and Macron, as well as sanctions policies towards Russia.

EFa2f8hXYAEaO40.jpg EFa2n45XYAAyaWj.jpg

This is why when the document was originally classified, the transcript was set at the SECRET, Original Classification Authority (ORCON), No Foreign Distribution (NOFORN) level. That classification was set because the diplomatic view of the United States (and POTUS) towards other countries and leaders can “cause serious damage to national security” if disclosed in an unauthorized way. In this case it could also damage the national security of the Ukraine. Those aren't just cool government letters, they do actually mean something.

EFa2wRPWkAIERrf.jpg

The reason that Comey was referred to the IG and DOJ for potential prosecution because just one of his memos contained a tiny amount of similar information: Trump’s views on the relative importance of two countries--one of which being Russia--and when to return their calls. Comey’s content was far milder and only pertained to six words, but even it was classified at the CONFIDENTIAL level. IE: It would cause damage to national security. Trump’s transcript was SECRET because it had far more information and far stronger views about a key US foreign policy: Russian sanctions.

The fact that Trump has since been, in essence, forced into disclosing the transcript is irrelevant. The document has been reviewed, declassified and sent off into the public sphere, but at the time, a SECRET classification was clearly warranted and the call did contain sensitive, national security information. The "Whistleblower" and their "White House official" were either lied to, or lying when they said that the transcript “did not contain anything remotely sensitive.”
 
Last edited:
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.
So, what's your defense for Hunter Biden and ol Sleepy Joe literally saying on live TV that he used his influence to get his son out of trouble?
 
Edit : Oh and once again..Rudy was looking into this as early as 2018.
And he has been flailing his arms around trying to get someone to pay attention to the Biden's in The Ukraine.
Up until now I'll bet 999 out of 1000 people had no idea Joe Biden had a living son let alone what his name was or what he was up to.
They know now.
 
So, what's your defense for Hunter Biden and ol Sleepy Joe literally saying on live TV that he used his influence to get his son out of trouble?
Ashy said they suck too, at least give credit where credit is due. As a commie, of course he's going to hate most of the frontrunners to the Democratic nominee. I'd seriously wonder why considering some of them are adopting even more extreme rhetoric than Bernie in regards to certain things, but you could easily argue they're pandering.
 
Ashy said they suck too, at least give credit where credit is due. As a commie, of course he's going to hate most of the frontrunners to the Democratic nominee. I'd seriously wonder why considering some of them are adopting even more extreme rhetoric than Bernie in regards to certain things, but you could easily argue they're pandering.
If you're going to give the Ukraine a buttload of money and guns, the least you can do is ask, "hey what's with this horrific corruption going on here"
 
What an odd decision by the NYT on this one. I guess they think outing the guy as a spook lends his claims more credibility? I can't imagine why ... nobody trusts the CIA to begin with.

Oh well. It's a delight to see them pilloried by the libs they pander to in any case.
Credibility and the New York Times don’t even share the same zip code anymore.

The degree that they have blatantly misled the public through this whole ordeal is astounding. It’s so obviously a hit job that I can only pray that normal people look at it and continue to lose faith in the press. It has not been a good year for them.
 
The fact that Trump has since been, in essence, forced into disclosing the transcript is irrelevant. The document has been reviewed, declassified and sent off into the public sphere, but at the time, a SECRET classification was clearly warranted and the call did contain sensitive, national security information.

The dumbest lie / cognitive dissonance seen so far in this mess is this ludicrous assertion that conversations between heads of state have no good reason to be classified, ever, and doing so is prima fascia evidence of something nefarious....
 
Back