Impeachment hearings

[_EAllusion]

Trump has been tweeting unhinged things all night that strongly signal using the government to shield allies and to harm opponents with the justice system while concrete steps are taken in the government to do exactly that.

It was a real bad idea to rush impeachment. I'm not not just saying this because it was my position prior, but Congressional impeachment investigation should have been broad and carried out into the general election so long as there was legitimate material to investigate, which there was and is. This is too much time before an election - which quite possibly might be an "election" - for Trump to be unhindered by any meaningful institutional check.

[_EAllusion]

Cool. Trump's doing that thing again where he confesses out in the open. Hopefully the press stops don't that thing where because they're not uncovering a secret, they don't treat it as serious as it is.

[_Icarus]

"A corrupt authoritarian and his henchmen are wielding the Justice Department as a shield for friends and a sword for political rivals," Shaub, who resigned from his post in July 2017, tweeted. "It is impossible to overstate the danger."

[Guest]

What's funny is that you think I've spent any time at all following your exchanges with any other poster besides myself. I've seen some of canpakes and other's replies to you. I have not followed your line of discussion with them.
.

LOL...Not actually...I called you a parrot, and it appears by this admission a parroting troll. So you didn't follow my posts, but just followed people replying to me, again not following my responses? By definition I believe that is a internet troll of sorts.

Jersey Girl wrote...If you recall (and I know you don't because you don't recall what you or anyone else said 5 minutes ago), I posed a simple question to you. Why? Because I saw that Tish posed the question to you, you never replied to it so I decided to take a crack at you myself.

So...How can that possibly be true (knowing I never replied to the answer), when you just said you didn't follow my discussion with them? So...again, by definition you are trolling...and admittedly parroting Tish's question...thus your new name is "Jersey Girl, the self admitted Parroting Troll."

I have also asked you for your answer to the mystery question...and you refuse to give it...again another trait of troll.

So here once again is the answer to "the question"... I believe, honestly, right or wrong, it is because there is so much evidence existing (which I have expounded on) that would warrant an investigation of goverment misuse of funds and power, that as president, he has every right to ask anyone he feels that might have information of the alleged crime to provide information in regards to that alleged crime.


I have answered the question several times in several different ways...and it boils down to ..."because he did not have to."

So unless you are going to continue trolling, please tell me why my answer is wrong, show me my error, and tell me the correct answer to this question.

Also keep in mind that Trump took the lead, with Giuliani spear heading it so to speak, and Barr (the DOJ) is currently doing investigation on Biden and Ukraine corruption.

So once again..."Why didn't Trump use the DOJ'...what in your opinion is the correct answer?

Love ya

[_Markk]

Meanwhile, forgetting for a moment that the President willfully hired a Ukrainian corruption participant and crony (Manafort) and is now attempting to politicize the DoJ in order to minimize any possible jail time for another corrupt crony (Stone), we have this completely predictable development:

Markk won't have trouble forgetting Manafort. He was still looking for context or a link on him as of yesterday. Odd that in all his research into Ukraine corruption that name never came up.

HUH...You asked me a specific question about him, and I told you truth.

He is a criminal, and as I wrote most likely got what he deserved. If you can somehow tie Manafort to Biden and Trump...great, make your case.

I am reading two books that cover a lot of this, and for sure the Ukraine is a mess, and Barr is moving very slowly because of so much past corruption, much of it, like Manafort and Yanukovych, during the Biden Obama years.

I did however go back and read a few articles on the times lines and the laundering and just flat out corruption, and there is not doubt he is a thief. So to answer your previous question, what I think about their relationship is that it was crooked, corrupt, and he is in prison for it, and that is good.

What's Ironic, very ironic and worth thinking about...Biden was the lead man for President Obama, for investigating corruption in the Ukraine, for most of the time Manafort was lobbying for Yanukovych, and apparently it seems that Biden's own lead man was CIA officer Eric Ciaramella, the alleged whistle blower.

Barr is apparently going slow on all this, and one can see why...he recently stated “There are a lot of agendas in the Ukraine,” Barr warned. “There are a lot of cross currents. And we can’t take anything we receive from the Ukraine at face value.”

So as Barr moves forward in the Ukraine investigation...it will be interesting to see what the DoJ finds.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Markk still won't give a straightforward answer as to why Trump didn't use the DoJ to conduct a probe of the Bidens. It's just endless BS and speculation about a laughable Democrat presidential candidate that Trump mistakenly thought was a political threat. All these turd birds interested in the Bidens are only in it because it distracts from their insanely venal, inept, and thoroughly corrupt President. What a damned joke they are.

- Doc

[_Markk]

Meanwhile, forgetting for a moment that the President willfully hired a Ukrainian corruption participant and crony (Manafort) and is now attempting to politicize the DoJ in order to minimize any possible jail time for another corrupt crony (Stone), we have this completely predictable development:


Does any of this actual corruption bother Trumpologists like Markk? Will any of them “look into it” someday, let alone scream apoplectically about how corruptly corrupt these corrupted dirtbags are?

Nahhhhhh. : : D

Well, if you have read my exchanges with Honor you would know that I would love to see every last one of them under oath..Biden, Trump, Obama, Hillary, Pelosi, Schiff, Mitch, Shummer, Rudy, Hunter, Barr, Archer, Kerry...all of them...but, LOL... that will never happen in that our goverment would all be in jail for lying under oath. Unfortunately, while I honestly believe we have the best system on earth, no system can eliminate the rich and powerful, only give them different platforms for their control. I believe our system does a pretty good job of keeping it all check, and through all this the past three years, I see it more and more.

Trump's association with Manafort looks very bad, and was bad, th eguys a crook...and if there is evidence that has not already been hashed through that ties Trump to corruption with Manafort and the Ukraine, or any other crime...it should be investigated. I have no problem with that. Stone was guilty, but it now seems he is political prisoner...which is part of the game I guess. One thing that is positive for him, his prison cell will most likely be nicer than a lot of homes, so I don't feel too bad for him.

He is guilty, I am not disputing that...he should be in jail. But his sentence when compared to other crimes is excessive, and that why a say a political prisoner. Right or wrong, Trump will sooner or later pardon him, most likely after he is re-elected, and if not re-elected...when all leaving president pardon folks. He will only do a year or so...but who knows with Trump...he might say F-U...and pardon him tomorrow...it would surprise me if he did before th eelection, but I wouldn't be shocked.

[_canpakes]

...Biden was the lead man for President Obama, for investigating corruption in the Ukraine, for most of the time Manafort was lobbying for Yanukovych, ...

And now Trump, the man who directly hired Manafort, is President. Hmm ...

Barr is apparently going slow on all this, and one can see why...

Yep. He needs to protect his boss. Gotta edit the facts carefully. ; )

[_canpakes]

Markk still won't give a straightforward answer as to why Trump didn't use the DoJ to conduct a probe of the Bidens. It's just endless BS and speculation about a laughable Democrat presidential candidate that Trump mistakenly thought was a political threat. All these turd birds interested in the Bidens are only in it because it distracts from their insanely venal, inept, and thoroughly corrupt President. What a damned joke they are.

- Doc

SS,DD.

I never thought that such a simple question would be so hard for someone to answer. : D

[_Markk]

For the record, "your" correct answer to the question was..."because their is not enough evidence" Is that correct?