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 Battle Royal, Big Daddy Don has just flipped Bolton and Schiff over the ropes. Game over, End this farce. And when this is over, believe both Vindmans are toast. Fuck both of them, fully. No-good sacks of shit. Can only post link, otherwise too much to cut out.


'GAME OVER,' Trump declares, as old Bolton, Schiff videos surface amid Senate impeachment trial
I couldn't be happier. Every time a Democrat loses his seat an angel will get his wings. These little communists running around the Democratic party have guaranteed a solid decade of Republican rule and I just want to thank them.
 
Nah nah, it's gotta be Don Jr. with Michael Pence. You know, the son of Mike Pence. They could just reuse all the same branding!
I'll disagree on that one. It's got to be Ivanka with Kushner VP. It would be delightful to have more of these blanket accusations of misogynist and Nazi aimed at a woman and a Jew, plus all the actual women hatred that would pour forth from all the male feminist mouths and feminists devaluing a woman President by saying she's not a real woman and a chattel of her VP husband. Plus, I like the idea that it would push the shit in for so many people that the first president was a woman, and how she would carry on the Trump Rally stuff, where she would introduce her Dad to join the stage at every event saying "And here's my father... And the GREATEST PRESIDENT IN THE HISTORY OF THE USA!" And then the left would end up having a total of sixteen years of bi-weekly or monthly Trump rallies and having Donald shoved in their faces. And by the end of that there might be what? four or five federal judges NOT appointed by a Trump...

IT would warm my cockles how that would upset so many people.

Not going to happen, but it's kind of fun to think up what scenarios would get the REEEEEing, academic, and media class the most bent out of shape.


EDIT
The link in the post a couple above mine wounldn't play the video for me... HEre's a link of Schiff if others have that same problem:
 
Last edited:
I'll disagree on that one. It's got to be Ivanka with Kushner VP. It would be delightful to have more of these blanket accusations of misogynist and Nazi aimed at a woman and a Jew, plus all the actual women hatred that would pour forth from all the male feminist mouths and feminists devaluing a woman President by saying she's not a real woman and a chattel of her VP husband. Plus, I like the idea that it would push the shit in for so many people that the first president was a woman, and how she would carry on the Trump Rally stuff, where she would introduce her Dad to join the stage at every event saying "And here's my father... And the GREATEST PRESIDENT IN THE HISTORY OF THE USA!" And then the left would end up having a total of sixteen years of bi-weekly or monthly Trump rallies and having Donald shoved in their faces. And by the end of that there might be what? four or five federal judges NOT appointed by a Trump...

IT would warm my cockles how that would upset so many people.

Not going to happen, but it's kind of fun to think up what scenarios would get the REEEEEing, academic, and media class the most bent out of shape.
Ivanka and Kushner can go after Don Jr and Mike Jr.

Basically I just want the Juniors to take over from their fathers because it would be awesome.
 
In the Battle Royal, Big Daddy Don has just flipped Bolton and Schiff over the ropes. Game over, End this farce. And when this is over, believe both Vindmans are toast. Fuck both of them, fully. No-good sacks of shit. Can only post link, otherwise too much to cut out.


'GAME OVER,' Trump declares, as old Bolton, Schiff videos surface amid Senate impeachment trial

1580400912979.png

1580400902027.png


tl;dr: Bolton is on tape during an interview contradicting the line of BS he's peddling in his book now that he's mad that President Trump won't give him his foreverwar he wants.

Shiff is on tape calling Bolton everything but a human and 100% untrustworthy.
 
After a rather deft defence from the White House council yesterday, outlets like Democracy Now are trying their damndest to spin it in a negative light, saying things like:

“trumps lawyer says it’s ok for a sitting president to do anything he can to boost reelection chances if it’s in the best interest of the people.”

Needless to say, having actually watched this nothingburger for weeks and all day yesterday, that’s not remotely what council was trying to say or imply. Way to gloss over the actual issue, ‘Professional Journalists’
 
Ugh.

The thing I hate the most about this Chezami faggot is that Catholicism is the greatest christian heresy since Gnosticism was rightfully stamped out by the Romans.

I don't need some pedophile in Rome telling me how to be righteous, while he worships Ishtar dressed up as the Holy Mother.

If that's happening in the Vatican, I unironically blame communism. Not 60 years ago would the Pope be aborted for even thinking that was remotely okay.
 
basically it was "if mitt romney's son was taking money from a corrupt company would president obama be impeached if he asked for an investigation"

Adam Schiff took up the question and he filibustered about withholding aid from allies to benefite adversaries. i think at the end he said, I'ts wrong for presidents to ask for a political investigation from the DOJ.

So what would you do if you knew a political adversary were committing actual crimes? Nothing? Just let them?

Presumably, you'd be obliged to do something.
 
"Catholicism requires open borders" is a completely predictable position for a moribund religion that desperately craves the immense tithe-bucks from the Hail Mary-ing throngs of illiterates pouring in from Mexico and regions south. It's the self-righteous priggery of it that rankles.
It also is totally false. Pre-1960's Catholic teaching required it adherents to obey the secular law insofar as it doesn't breach divine law. Current "Catholic" justifies whatever comes from the syphylitic imagination of some Jesuit theologian and yet always mysteriously conforms to the agenda of George Soros's Open Society.
 
So what would you do if you knew a political adversary were committing actual crimes? Nothing? Just let them?

Presumably, you'd be obliged to do something.
It would be more insane to me that the Dems are trying to make the case that motive alone is what determines whether something is a crime, if they hadn't already pulled the same shit with Hillary and the emails. Except in that case, it was totally okay that she stored all that sensitive information on a secret unsecured server because she's a Democrat she just didn't know any better! Never mind how many state secrets probably ended up in enemy hands, never mind wiping the server ("with a cloth?") to cover up her mistakes and shady dealings. Nope, she just couldn't possibly have known that she wasn't supposed to do that, so no crime was committed!

Meanwhile Trump does anything that might have a side benefit of helping his reelection, and immediately the Dems jump on that as his primary motivation and claim that he must have criminal intent and thus everything he does is a crime worth impeaching him over. Absolute fucking lunacy.
 
These dumb cunts thought John Bolton, a warmonger who gets erections over soldiers raping foreign women, who wanted endless wars in the Middle East for all eternity, and to drop bombs on Tehran is a trustworthy and credible source. Are you fucking high?

What the fuck are you thinking to use John fucking Bolton, a man that nearly everyone in any position of authority, left or right, despises. Who is a known fucking liar. Who got put in his place by Trump because Trump wouldn't embroil us with war with Iran and quit. John Bolton, the worst representation of American politics and a believer in a modern, suicidal manifest destiny which if he was president, would make the United States poor and catastrophically decimate the country, is a good key witness.

Fuck all these people. If you're willing to sink that low to use this piece of shit, when basically everyone sane celebrated getting his ass booted out of politics forever, you are identical to Trump. You have no morality or moral principles. You are endorsing a man who wanted the deaths of hundreds of thousands for no reason. A real piece of shit with a chip on his shoulder for Trump making him even more of a fucking national embarrassment.

You are no better than your enemy. So why the fuck should I care about you? The stunningly obvious answer that most people come to is: they shouldn't.
 
Chief Justice John Roberts is being a total bitch and tried to block people from even asking questions about the whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella. The Republicans balked, so Roberts just shielded the name and makes people issue their questions to him on notecards. Rand Paul is so sick and tired of the Eric Ciaramella shit, he shouted, "I'm not going to sit here and be ignored and have people refuse to recognize me. If I have to fight for recognition, I will!"

I hope Rand Paul just starts screaming Eric Ciarmella while calling Schiff a liar and a pencil-necked geek.

This is not a surprise. I remind you that we're talking about John "There are no Obama judges" Roberts here. He is going to try and hobble Trump if he can out of spite, McCain style.
 
This was interesting. Okay. The D position they keep repeating is that it is criminal/impeachable for a politician to elicit help from a foreign power in elections and the internal American political process. They have said that many times even without saying "....when it involves a quid pro quo". About 20 minutes ago, Philbin (iirc) mentioned that three D senators wrote a letter to the Ukrainian government in 2018 warning them to comply with Mueller's Investigation. What is that other than asking a foreign power to do something which could damage one's political opponent's election chances?

Pretty much every single thing that has been thrown at Trump in the last 4 years has its basis as Dems doing something akin or identical. I just hope to fuck the Maxine Waters pee tape has been destroyed, for the sake of all humanity.
 
This was interesting. Okay. The D position they keep repeating is that it is criminal/impeachable for a politician to elicit help from a foreign power in elections and the internal American political process. They have said that many times even without saying "....when it involves a quid pro quo". About 20 minutes ago, Philbin (iirc) mentioned that three D senators wrote a letter to the Ukrainian government in 2018 warning them to comply with Mueller's Investigation. What is that other than asking a foreign power to do something which could damage one's political opponent's election chances?

Pretty much every single thing that has been thrown at Trump in the last 4 years has its basis as Dems doing something akin or identical. I just hope to fuck the Maxine Waters pee tape has been destroyed, for the sake of all humanity.
The house dems really hate answering questions about biden and burisma. Ted Cruz asked "Joe said X on this date in this newspaper but hunter said Y on this date in this newspaper. why do they contradict each other" and the house manager said "i have a son, i say things to my son that i can't repeat here. Joe biden is the same *orangeman bad, ruin america*"

I think Sen. Collins asked a fair question that went something like "is there ever a time a president can ask a foreign country to investigate an american citizen." Schiff ignored it and went on an orangeman bad tirade.

They really hate answering it.
 
“trumps lawyer says it’s ok for a sitting president to do anything he can to boost reelection chances if it’s in the best interest of the people.”


By that, ahem, "logic" a President can be impeached for sponsoring an economic stimulus package that aims to reduce unemployment because that means people who get jobs through that plan will be more likely to vote for the President when he's up for reelection. His actions may have been "in the best interest of the people" but since they also boosted his chances at winning, it's illegal collusion and he's out?

This is where we are?

A President breaks the law if he makes himself reelectable through his Administration's legal actions?!

It's actually now a CRIME to be POPULAR as a Republican?

I always suspected the Dems thought it should be so, but I never thought they'd come out and SAY it so blatantly...
 
It also is totally false. Pre-1960's Catholic teaching required it adherents to obey the secular law insofar as it doesn't breach divine law. Current "Catholic" justifies whatever comes from the syphylitic imagination of some Jesuit theologian and yet always mysteriously conforms to the agenda of George Soros's Open Society.
They might think that borders in the modern sense only exist because of nationalism, a late 18th century construct that emerged due to the decline of the Church. They're just trying to bring things back to the way they were in Europe before nationalism, when an international priestly caste had all the moral power, spoke a language that only the educated understood, controlled much of the recording and copying of the written word (via monasteries), and could demand great wealth from rich and poor alike using the threat of excommunication. If this gets re-established with wokeness as the religion rather than Christianity it's better than nothing.
 
Back