Democrats Begin Impeachment of Trump

[mr6666]

Democrats Predict Speedy Impeachment Inquiry Lasting Weeks, Not 'Months'

 

....."This is not going to require months and months and months of hearings," says Rep. David Cicilline, D-R.I., who spoke with NPR on Saturday.

Cicilline holds a seat on the Judiciary Committee, which would bring together multiple House inquiries and then decide whether to formally draw up articles of impeachment.

The issues surrounding President Trump's contacts with Ukraine are relatively straightforward and easy to grasp, says Cicilline, particularly when compared to the complexity of former special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

"Unlike the Mueller report, where we're trying to piece together events of the past, this played out in plain view and real time to the American people,"......

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/28/765365243/democrats-predict-speedy-impeachment-inquiry-lasting-weeks-not-months?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_term=nprnews&utm_campaign=npr&utm_medium=social

[TheCid]

Democrats Predict Speedy Impeachment Inquiry Lasting Weeks, Not 'Months'

 

....."This is not going to require months and months and months of hearings," says Rep. David Cicilline, D-R.I., who spoke with NPR on Saturday.

Actually it has been going on for months already, although not officially.

My understanding is that Pelosi is letting the House Judiciary Committee under Nadler sort of be the central point for this inquiry.  The other 3(?) committees investigating the administration will continue and forward their findings to Judiciary.  Then Nadler (and Pelosi) will determine if sufficient grounds for impeachment motion to go before the whole House.

[TomJH]

On 9/27/2019 at 12:09 PM, LawrenceA said:

Let me ask you a question, and I'm not trying to set you up for some snarky comment or rude dismissal, I'm sincerely curious: do you think what Trump has done with the call to Ukraine is wrong? If not, why? How about the attempt at a cover-up afterward (AG Barr using the secret server to store the call log, against protocol [law?])? Do you think that the whistleblower is sincere, or a partisan attacker? If the latter, why do you think that?

 

On 9/27/2019 at 12:38 PM, hamradio said:

I've heard what he state is based on hearsay / rumor.

 

On 9/27/2019 at 12:48 PM, LawrenceA said:

But didn't the White House themselves release a call summary that said the same thing as the whistleblower's complaint?

 

On 9/27/2019 at 12:50 PM, hamradio said:

Rumor has it yes. 

For what it's worth, ham, even with the White House release of the call confirming much of the whistleblower's complaint, you still ducked answering Lawrence's original question asking you whether you thought what Trump did in his call to the Ukrainian President was wrong.

Your "Rumor has it" response at the end looks like someone backed into a corner and trying to joke his way out of giving an honest reply.

[TheCid]

18 hours ago, TomJH said:

 

 

 

For what it's worth, ham, even with the White House release of the call confirming much of the whistleblower's complaint, you still ducked answering Lawrence's original question asking you whether you thought what Trump did in his call to the Ukrainian President was wrong.

Your "Rumor has it" response at the end looks like someone backed into a corner and trying to joke his way out of giving an honest reply.

 

[TheCid]

From CNN:  "An agreement has been reached to have the anonymous whistleblower who filed a complaint against President Trump testify before the House Intelligence Committee. But just when that will happen is still up in the air. Committee chair Adam Schiff says protecting the whistleblower's identity is a primary concern. Trump tweeted up a storm about the whistleblower over the weekend, saying he deserves to "meet my accuser." The President's escalating threats prompted lawyers representing the whistleblower to send letters to Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire, expressing concerns for the person's safety."

According to newspaper one issue is getting security clearances for whistleblowers attorneys so they can be present for the testimony.

[Arturo]

Donald Trump **** bricks.

Edited September 30 by TCMModerator1
Edited for Language

[Arturo]

👍

[fxreyman]

This all Much Ado About Nothing. If the dems in Congress really do get their way and vote for impeachment and then it goes to the Senate, guess what happens then?

The President's lawyers can call as many witnesses as they want to testify. And those witnesses could very well be the following people: Loretta Lynch, Eric Holder, James Clapper, James Comey, John Brennan, Christopher Steele, Bruce Orr, Nellie Orr, and the list could go on and on. I wonder if the dems have even thought about what they could set in motion?

[hamradio]

12 minutes ago, fxreyman said:

This all Much Ado About Nothing. If the dems in Congress really do get their way and vote for impeachment and then it goes to the Senate, guess what happens then?

The President's lawyers can call as many witnesses as they want to testify. And those witnesses could very well be the following people: Loretta Lynch, Eric Holder, James Clapper, James Comey, John Brennan, Christopher Steele, Bruce Orr, Nellie Orr, and the list could go on and on. I wonder if the dems have even thought about what they could set in motion?

Can congress simply...

 

[mr6666]

 

POLITICO

 

@politico

·

55m

 

BREAKING: The House Intelligence Committee slapped a congressional subpoena on Rudy Giuliani, Donald Trump’s personal attorney,

 

as part of the House Democrats’ rapidly accelerating impeachment inquiry

[NipkowDisc]

think of it.

hordes and hordes of GOP voters going to the polls November 2020 to vote for a bunch of stupid spineless bleeperbleepers who were so chicken sheet as to let themselves be spooked into aiding the democrat party in removing a GOP potus from power.

 

 

[spence]

Though not especially a fan he's like Teflon & nothing sticks

[hamradio]

No one seems to be concerned about leaking confidential phone calls between a president and world leaders.  Don't think this will affect future presidents, how can anyone now trust that private communications will stay that?

Even if Trump is impeached, is leaking conversations by spying the price worth paying?  Don't think this will come back and bite us in the future.  

So to be fair, what was secretly talked about during this telephone call?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-un-assembly-iran/obama-irans-rouhani-hold-historic-phone-call-idUSBRE98Q16S20130928

 

Bigger question, is Big Brother or the Deep State listening TO YOU?

 

Don't know why I just asked that since Snowden said they ARE!

[Arturo]

7 hours ago, hamradio said:

No one seems to be concerned about leaking confidential phone calls between a president and world leaders.  Don't think this will affect future presidents, how can anyone now trust that private communications will stay that?

Even if Trump is impeached, is leaking conversations by spying the price worth paying?  Don't think this will come back and bite us in the future.  

So to be fair, what was secretly talked about during this telephone call?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-un-assembly-iran/obama-irans-rouhani-hold-historic-phone-call-idUSBRE98Q16S20130928

 

Bigger question, is Big Brother or the Deep State listening TO YOU?

 

Don't know why I just asked that since Snowden said they ARE!

This phone call was not just a business as usual phone call between two world leaders.  This was Donald  Trump exhorting Another leader for his own personal gain.  This was a criminal endeavor on Trump’s part.  And your kool-aid is obvious when you spout the Trump line that the legitimate whistleblower is a “spy”......NOT!!!!  A spy would have reported this information to another government, not to our own.  This person did something heroic, exposing the president’s criminal activity at great personal risk to him-/herself.

Trump’s lawyers and WH staff obviously knew how bad the call was, hiding it as they did in the super-secret server reserved to hold national security information.  And this was not the first time.  Other calls, such as those between Trump and Putin or MLS are also hidden here.  These are the calls for which Trump has refused to released the transcripts.  Who knows what nefarious things were discussed or promised in these hidden calls.

[TalkTalk123]

 

[hamradio]

"Spying", eavesdropping, wiretapping - what's the difference?  In a court of law such evidence is called having unclean hands.  It's HOW the evidence is gathered then reported, doesn't matter if what one "discovered" is illegal. It is legal if the wiretap is granted by means of a warrant.

During the early days of cordless phones, one cannot eavesdrop by means of a scanner, hear something illegal transpiring i.e. a drug transaction then report it to the police.

The word spying can be used generically, i.e. "my neighbor is spying on me." (aka being nosy)  Does that mean the neighbor will tell Putin? 

[Bogie56]

 

[Arturo]

Ham,

These apparently are White House employees whose JOB it is to listen in on these phone calls, for transcription into a written narrative.  If they overhear illegal, even criminal activity, they are protected by the Whistlblower Protections to do what they have done.  They are NOT SPIES; they are doing their job.  In fact, doing this has demonstrated that they are Patriots beholden to the Constitution and the Rule of Law, something Donald Trump wipes his wide aaaasss with in his contempt of them. 

[Arturo]

3 minutes ago, Bogie56 said:

 

Just one of several Clowns employed by the Administration this weekend to try to defend Trump’s indefensible behavior, so they tried to muddy the waters.  Typical, but far less successful than usual.

[LawrenceA]

2 minutes ago, Arturo said:

Ham,

These apparently are White House employees whose JOB it is to listen in on these phone calls, for transcription into a written narrative.  If they overhear illegal, even criminal activity, they are protected by the Whistlblower Protections to do what they have done.  They are NOT SPIES; they are doing their job.  In fact, doing this has demonstrated that they are Patriots beholden to the Constitution and the Rule of Law, something Donald Trump wipes his wide aaaasss with in his contempt of them. 

Yes, even Trump himself, in one of his earliest defenses of this incident, stated that he knew that the call was being listened to. Here's his actual Twitter quote:

"Another Fake News story out there - It never ends! Virtually anytime I speak on the phone to a foreign leader, I understand that there may be many people listening from various U.S. agencies, not to mention those from the other country itself. No problem!

....Knowing all of this, is anybody dumb enough to believe that I would say something inappropriate with a foreign leader while on such a potentially “heavily populated” call. I would only do what is right anyway, and only do good for the USA!"

Notice he uses the words "No problem!" I guess now he has a problem with it.

[TalkTalk123]

 

[hamradio]

15 minutes ago, Arturo said:

Ham,

These apparently are White House employees whose JOB it is to listen in on these phone calls, for transcription into a written narrative.  If they overhear illegal, even criminal activity, they are protected by the Whistlblower Protections to do what they have done.  They are NOT SPIES; they are doing their job.  In fact, doing this has demonstrated that they are Patriots beholden to the Constitution and the Rule of Law, something Donald Trump wipes his wide aaaasss with in his contempt of them. 

Such information should be relayed to the proper authorities NOT some whistleblower whom then leak it to the media.  If someone's job is to monitor sensitive calls to any world leader, then that's new one on me. Shouldn't this be considered a national security issue? 

The method of how this was done is what's disturbing, I thought private presidentlal conversations were just that and any eavesdropping or wiretap had to be issued by some legal order.  This I have no issues with!  Yes if a governmental entity had the legislative / courts permission to gather information, then any illegal activity is discovered, Trumps impeachment is perfectly fine with me. Trump is not above the law.

 

[hamradio]

27 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

Yes, even Trump himself, in one of his earliest defenses of this incident, stated that he knew that the call was being listened to. Here's his actual Twitter quote:

"Another Fake News story out there - It never ends! Virtually anytime I speak on the phone to a foreign leader, I understand that there may be many people listening from various U.S. agencies, not to mention those from the other country itself. No problem!

....Knowing all of this, is anybody dumb enough to believe that I would say something inappropriate with a foreign leader while on such a potentially “heavily populated” call. I would only do what is right anyway, and only do good for the USA!"

Notice he uses the words "No problem!" I guess now he has a problem with it.

Apparently Trump believed Snowden.

World leaders should feel comfortable with this. 

[jamesjazzguitar]

4 minutes ago, hamradio said:

Such information should be relayed to the proper authorities NOT some whistleblower whom then leak it to the media.  If someone's job is to monitor sensitive calls to any world leader, then that's new one on me. Shouldn't this be considered a national security issue? 

The whistleblower 'position' was created by Congress;  this is necessary when there are concerns that the 'proper authorities' are involved in the potential impropriety.     E.g.  Attorney General is a 'proper authority' but since the President mentioned him,  by name,  in the potential impropriety,   there was a need for a whisleblower to make their report to the head of the intelligence agency.

 

[Bogie56]

The whistleblower went through proper channels and did not leak anything to anybody.