Pelosi to Announce Trump Impeachment Inquiry

 

Speaker Nancy Pelosi late Tuesday said that she supports a formal impeachment inquiry into President Trump, according to a Democratic lawmaker. The purported reason is the allegation that Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden. No actual evidence has been released of any wrongdoing in this matter. From The Hill:

Pelosi is expected to make her announcement at 5 p.m. on the House floor after meetings with Democratic chairmen of six committees investigating Trump and his administration and with the full Democratic Caucus.

“As soon as we have the facts, we’re ready,” Pelosi said Tuesday at The Atlantic Festival. “Now we have the facts, we’re ready … for later today.”

More than two-thirds of House Democrats publicly support launching an impeachment inquiry. Pelosi has not been among those backing an inquiry.

On Tuesday alone, more than a dozen lawmakers — including close Pelosi ally Rep. Lois Frankel (D-Fla.) — have come out in support of an impeachment inquiry in the aftermath of reports about the phone call with Zelensky.

Earlier Tuesday, Trump acknowledged he had withheld about $400 million in U.S. military aid for Ukraine just days ahead of the July 25 phone call.

Democrats have demanded the release of the call’s transcript, which Trump already cleared for distribution. “You will see it was a very friendly and totally appropriate call,” Trump said on Twitter Tuesday morning. “No pressure and, unlike Joe Biden and his son, NO quid pro quo! This is nothing more than a continuation of the Greatest and most Destructive Witch Hunt of all time!” .

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 163 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Jager (View Comment):

    I think it is important to note that there 170 members of the House that have stated that they support impeachment or “are open to it”

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/impeach-trump-tracker-representives-calling-for-impeachment-inquiry-democrats-independents-republicans-house/

    Not sure how many are in the fully support group and how many are just willing to talk about it.

    This could be much ado about nothing. They are 48 members short of a majority vote. IF the transcripts show this to be making a mountain out of a mole hill, then this will go exactly no where.

    Trump says he will release the transcript.

    Trump also said that he would release his taxes after the audit was over.

    Trump also said that he wanted to be interviewed by Mueller.

    I will believe it when I see it.

    Not really sure what this has to do with anything. The vote count is the vote count no matter what Trump does.

    • #31
  2. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    Gary, are you still considering voting for Joe Biden, and if so, how does his interactions with the Ukrainians while vice president, in getting a prosecutor fired who was looking into a company paying his son $50,000 a month, differ from Trump’s current dealings with the Ukrainians?

    I think that there is a strong argument that the two scenarios are opposite each other. https://thebulwark.com/truth-lies-and-the-nonsense-trump-biden-ukraine-false-equivalency/ Its bottom line is as follows:

    (1) Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, did take consulting work for a Ukrainian oil company, Burisma, that was under investigation by a Ukrainian prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, for the work under the prior Russian-allied regime. This is where the true part of the Trump disinformation comes to an end.

    (2) The problem was that Shokin actively stood in the way of international investigations that the U.S. and other democratic reformers were pursuing.

    (3) Vice President Biden, U.S. diplomats, and our E.U. allies all called on the prosecutor to be fired so the corrupt oligarchs could be investigated MORE AGGRESSIVELY. This includes the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine calling out by name Mykola Zlochevsky, the oligarch who ran the company Hunter Biden worked for, as someone this prosecutor was letting off the hook.

    (4) Donald Trump was allegedly pressuring the Ukrainian government to investigate a domestic political foe on a bogus conspiracy for personal gain. Joe Biden was pressuring the Ukrainian government to root out corruption in their own country and bring about democratic reforms.

    (5) For the kids in the back:

    PRESSURING A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO INTERFERE ON YOUR BEHALF IN DOMESTIC ELECTIONS = VERY BAD.

    PRESSURING A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO INVESTIGATE CROOKS = GOOD.

    So you’re essentially willing to give Biden the benefit of the doubt here that he had no ulterior motives in pressuring the firing of Shokin, but not grant the same thing to Trump, pending release of the transcript? (and why would a Ukrainian company hire Hunter Biden at $50,000 a month?)

    Let’s hear the tapes.  My only point is that it appears that Trump and Hunter Biden are at the opposite points.  

     

    • #32
  3. Jason Obermeyer Member
    Jason Obermeyer
    @JasonObermeyer

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):

    Meanwhile, Bill Weld decides to out-do Nancy, and suggests that Trump should be executed.

    You can’t take Bill Weld literally, but you do have to take him seriously.

    Whatever else you say, this should be applauded. 

    It would be like Trump refusing to release education department funds allocated by Congress to the City of New York unless the local DA started an investigation into Bill DeBlasio. 

    From – I believe – Jefferson until the 1970’s, the President was able to do exactly that. But the shock of Watergate caused people – including some self-described libertarians – to abandon Constitutional government for “good” government and Congress passed a law saying he couldn’t sequester funds in that way. My position has always been that Congress can’t subtract from the Constitutional grant of Executive Power via statute, but the 70s were a weird time. 

     

    • #33
  4. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Jager (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Jager (View Comment):

    I think it is important to note that there 170 members of the House that have stated that they support impeachment or “are open to it”

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/impeach-trump-tracker-representives-calling-for-impeachment-inquiry-democrats-independents-republicans-house/

    Not sure how many are in the fully support group and how many are just willing to talk about it.

    This could be much ado about nothing. They are 48 members short of a majority vote. IF the transcripts show this to be making a mountain out of a mole hill, then this will go exactly no where.

    Trump says he will release the transcript.

    Trump also said that he would release his taxes after the audit was over.

    Trump also said that he wanted to be interviewed by Mueller.

    I will believe it when I see it.

    Not really sure what this has to do with anything. The vote count is the vote count no matter what Trump does.

    If the Democrats issue a subpoena and the Supreme Court says that it must be obeyed, then Trump will be impeached if he refuses to comply with the subpoena.

    After the 1974 elections, the Democrats won 4 Senate seats to take a 71-39 lead in the Senate, and 49 seats in the House to take a 291-144 lead in the House.   The GOP lost 4 governorships and the Democrats had a 36-13-1 lead with Governors, with one independent governor in Maine.

    • #34
  5. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    Am I recalling correctly that recent reports indicated that the Ukrainian government had information on the whole Biden matter it had been trying to furnish to the US Government but it had been ignored or refused by the DOJ or FBI powers that be?

    Perhaps this all amounts to Trump essentially saying ‘hey, congrats on your win, and now that you’re there and I’m here, with AG Barr in the DOJ and the Mueller investigation over and done, go ahead and send it on over.”

     

    • #35
  6. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Jager (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Jager (View Comment):

    I think it is important to note that there 170 members of the House that have stated that they support impeachment or “are open to it”

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/impeach-trump-tracker-representives-calling-for-impeachment-inquiry-democrats-independents-republicans-house/

    Not sure how many are in the fully support group and how many are just willing to talk about it.

    This could be much ado about nothing. They are 48 members short of a majority vote. IF the transcripts show this to be making a mountain out of a mole hill, then this will go exactly no where.

    Trump says he will release the transcript.

    Trump also said that he would release his taxes after the audit was over.

    Trump also said that he wanted to be interviewed by Mueller.

    I will believe it when I see it.

    Not really sure what this has to do with anything. The vote count is the vote count no matter what Trump does.

    If the Democrats issue a subpoena and the Supreme Court says that it must be obeyed, then Trump will be impeached if he refuses to comply with the subpoena.

    After the 1974 elections, the Democrats won 4 Senate seats to take a 71-39 lead in the Senate, and 49 seats in the House to take a 291-144 lead in the House. The GOP lost 4 governorships and the Democrats had a 36-13-1 lead with Governors, with one independent governor in Maine.

    IF Trump does something potentially impeachable in the future he should be impeached? 

    Ok but that has nothing to do with where we are right now or where the votes are right now 

    • #36
  7. D.A. Venters Inactive
    D.A. Venters
    @DAVenters

    If the transcript is handwritten with a sharpie, I’m going to be skeptical. Just sayin…

    • #37
  8. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Fritz (View Comment):

    Am I recalling correctly that recent reports indicated that the Ukrainian government had information on the whole Biden matter it had been trying to furnish to the US Government but it had been ignored or refused by the DOJ or FBI powers that be?

    Perhaps this all amounts to Trump essentially saying ‘hey, congrats on your win, and now that you’re there and I’m here, with AG Barr in the DOJ and the Mueller investigation over and done, go ahead and send it on over.”

    I understand that the opposite is true.  See comment #26.  

     

    • #38
  9. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    The wonder of impeachment proceedings in an election year. Or will they get it all done in 2019?

    It could be more of an insurance policy.  Plan A is to open investigations that will keep generating news they hope will embarrass Trump during the election year.  Plan B is if he wins re-election, but they manage somehow to retake the Senate, they can always impeach and convict Trump in 2021.

    • #39
  10. Jon1979 Inactive
    Jon1979
    @Jon1979

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I think that there is a strong argument that the two scenarios are opposite each other. https://thebulwark.com/truth-lies-and-the-nonsense-trump-biden-ukraine-false-equivalency/ Its bottom line is as follows:

    (1) Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, did take consulting work for a Ukrainian oil company, Burisma, that was under investigation by a Ukrainian prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, for the work under the prior Russian-allied regime. This is where the true part of the Trump disinformation comes to an end.

    (2) The problem was that Shokin actively stood in the way of international investigations that the U.S. and other democratic reformers were pursuing.

    (3) Vice President Biden, U.S. diplomats, and our E.U. allies all called on the prosecutor to be fired so the corrupt oligarchs could be investigated MORE AGGRESSIVELY. This includes the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine calling out by name Mykola Zlochevsky, the oligarch who ran the company Hunter Biden worked for, as someone this prosecutor was letting off the hook.

    (4) Donald Trump was allegedly pressuring the Ukrainian government to investigate a domestic political foe on a bogus conspiracy for personal gain. Joe Biden was pressuring the Ukrainian government to root out corruption in their own country and bring about democratic reforms.

    (5) For the kids in the back:

    PRESSURING A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO INTERFERE ON YOUR BEHALF IN DOMESTIC ELECTIONS = VERY BAD.

    PRESSURING A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO INVESTIGATE CROOKS = GOOD.

    So you’re essentially willing to give Biden the benefit of the doubt here that he had no ulterior motives in pressuring the firing of Shokin, but not grant the same thing to Trump, pending release of the transcript? (and why would a Ukrainian company hire Hunter Biden at $50,000 a month?)

    Let’s hear the tapes. My only point is that it appears that Trump and Hunter Biden are at the opposite points.

    Hunter’s last name made him valuable, or Ukrainians are really big on hiring foreign meth heads at $50,000 a month.

     

    • #40
  11. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    The reason why this new allegation is so potent is that it can be explained in only one sentence:  

    “That’s what seven House Democrats who are military veterans did in an op-ed published in The Post on Tuesday, when they endorsed impeachment hearings:  “The president of the United States may have used his position to pressure a foreign country into investigating a political opponent, and he sought to use U.S. taxpayer dollars as leverage to do it.'”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/09/24/why-ukraine-allegations-broke-democratic-dam-impeachment/

     

     

    • #41
  12. cirby Inactive
    cirby
    @cirby

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I think that there is a strong argument that the two scenarios are opposite each other. https://thebulwark.com/truth-lies-and-the-nonsense-trump-biden-ukraine-false-equivalency/ Its bottom line is as follows:

    (snip)

    Sorry, but relying on such a deeply anti-Trump source as The Bulwark isn’t the slam-dunk you suggest.

    The core concept is that Biden was fighting against corruption by demanding that the prosecutor in charge of investigating his son be fired, and that it was a good, successful Obama administration effort to do so.

    The one unanswered question is then “if they were going after corruption, then why was Hunter Biden and the company that hired him left alone after this event?”

    …and then they try to blame Trump for Hunter Biden not being prosecuted!

    If the fix was in by Trump, then why hasn’t Biden’s kid been brought up on charges by Ukrainian prosecutors?

    Nope, your whole scenario makes zero sense.

    • #42
  13. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    cirby (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I think that there is a strong argument that the two scenarios are opposite each other. https://thebulwark.com/truth-lies-and-the-nonsense-trump-biden-ukraine-false-equivalency/ Its bottom line is as follows:

    (snip)

    Sorry, but relying on such a deeply anti-Trump source as The Bulwark isn’t the slam-dunk you suggest.

    The core concept is that Biden was fighting against corruption by demanding that the prosecutor in charge of investigating his son be fired, and that it was a good, successful Obama administration effort to do so.

    The one unanswered question is then “if they were going after corruption, then why was Hunter Biden and the company that hired him left alone after this event?”

    …and then they try to blame Trump for Hunter Biden not being prosecuted!

    If the fix was in by Trump, then why hasn’t Biden’s kid been brought up on charges by Ukrainian prosecutors?

    Nope, your whole scenario makes zero sense.

    If I accept your premise, would that lead to the conclusion that both Trump and Biden should be disqualified from election as president in 2020?

    • #43
  14. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Can somebody explain to me in very short words of one or two syllables why, even if Trump did what they say he did, it’s a bad thing?

    I honestly don’t see the problem.

    If the worst of what they are alleging is true, which is a big “if” at this point, since no actual evidence has yet been produced, I think it’s pretty bad. The allegation is that Trump used his diplomatic position as president, as a negotiator in foreign relations, to pressure a foreign country to investigate a domestic political rival – not in pursuit of our country’s best interest, but in his personal, political best interests. Imagine Obama had, in 2010 or 2011, used the diplomatic leverage of the US (withholding aid, changing a stance on a treaty negotiation, or whatever), not to advance US interests, but to pressure them to investigate and hopefully dig up dirt on Mitt Romney. That would be a major abuse of power.

    Again, there may not be evidence of this. I’m not saying Trump did this. I’m only trying to help explain why, if he did it, it would be a legitimate scandal.

    Still not seeing the problem.  Did he ask them to make stuff up?  Or to investigate a legitimate allegation against a politically connected individual?

    The problem with the Steele Dossier is not that there was an investigation, it’s that the investigation was [redacted], and then the product of the [redacted] investigation was used as a pretext for domestic spying against an opponents political campaign itself.

    • #44
  15. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Of note, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed a resolution today 100-0 calling for the whistle-blower complaint related to Trump be released to the Senate and House Intelligence Committees.

    • #45
  16. cirby Inactive
    cirby
    @cirby

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    cirby (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I think that there is a strong argument that the two scenarios are opposite each other. https://thebulwark.com/truth-lies-and-the-nonsense-trump-biden-ukraine-false-equivalency/ Its bottom line is as follows:

    (snip)

    Sorry, but relying on such a deeply anti-Trump source as The Bulwark isn’t the slam-dunk you suggest.

    The core concept is that Biden was fighting against corruption by demanding that the prosecutor in charge of investigating his son be fired, and that it was a good, successful Obama administration effort to do so.

    The one unanswered question is then “if they were going after corruption, then why was Hunter Biden and the company that hired him left alone after this event?”

    …and then they try to blame Trump for Hunter Biden not being prosecuted!

    If the fix was in by Trump, then why hasn’t Biden’s kid been brought up on charges by Ukrainian prosecutors?

    Nope, your whole scenario makes zero sense.

    If I accept your premise, would that lead to the conclusion that both Trump and Biden should be disqualified from election as president in 2020?

    You seem to have misunderstood the part where I pointed out that Trump didn’t do what you claimed, because Biden’s son wasn’t prosecuted. If you were correct, he would have been.

    He wasn’t, so you’re wrong.

    Now, would you please stop trying to invent “Reason Number 459 To Impeach Trump,” since the other 458 have failed so miserably?

     

    • #46
  17. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    cirby (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    cirby (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I think that there is a strong argument that the two scenarios are opposite each other. https://thebulwark.com/truth-lies-and-the-nonsense-trump-biden-ukraine-false-equivalency/ Its bottom line is as follows:

    (snip)

    Sorry, but relying on such a deeply anti-Trump source as The Bulwark isn’t the slam-dunk you suggest.

    The core concept is that Biden was fighting against corruption by demanding that the prosecutor in charge of investigating his son be fired, and that it was a good, successful Obama administration effort to do so.

    The one unanswered question is then “if they were going after corruption, then why was Hunter Biden and the company that hired him left alone after this event?”

    …and then they try to blame Trump for Hunter Biden not being prosecuted!

    If the fix was in by Trump, then why hasn’t Biden’s kid been brought up on charges by Ukrainian prosecutors?

    Nope, your whole scenario makes zero sense.

    If I accept your premise, would that lead to the conclusion that both Trump and Biden should be disqualified from election as president in 2020?

    You seem to have misunderstood the part where I pointed out that Trump didn’t do what you claimed, because Biden’s son wasn’t prosecuted. If you were correct, he would have been.

    He wasn’t, so you’re wrong.

    Now, would you please stop trying to invent “Reason Number 459 To Impeach Trump,” since the other 458 have failed so miserably?

    If memory serves, I didn’t call for Trump’s impeachment, but said that we would need to wait to see what the Mueller Report would have to say.  

    The Senate just voted unanimously for Trump to release the whistle-blower’s referral to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees.  If Trump doesn’t do so, and thereafter refuses to honor a subpoena, and thereafter refuses to follow Court orders, I would think that that would be an impeachable act.  It is time for Trump to release the tape recording and allow the American people to come to their own conclusions as to if Trump committed an impeachable act.

     

    • #47
  18. Jeff Hawkins Inactive
    Jeff Hawkins
    @JeffHawkins

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    The wonder of impeachment proceedings in an election year. Or will they get it all done in 2019?

    It’s not even proceedings, there’s been no floor vote.  It’s an announcement that they’re looking into possibly having a vote that will then begin an inquiry as to whether or not they should have an impeachment vote.

    It’s the “Credibly accused” of the election cycle.  Well, we can’t vote for Trump because they’re thinking about maybe having a vote to impeach him.

    It’s passive aggressive nonsense right now, because they don’t know if it will work.  If they were brave, they’d announce a vote on impeachment and take the hit, but they’re not.  They’re scared to death of what the American people will do to them, so they’re trying to make it look like they’re doing something for the base and if it gets to be too much of an albatross they’re going to say, “just kidding we were just looking into it.”

    • #48
  19. DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    It might surprise people to hear that I have a different point of view.

    Not at all. Also, you’re a Weld-supporter — do you support his call to have the President executed?

    • #49
  20. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Jeff Hawkins (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    The wonder of impeachment proceedings in an election year. Or will they get it all done in 2019?

    It’s not even proceedings, there’s been no floor vote. It’s an announcement that they’re looking into possibly having a vote that will then begin an inquiry as to whether or not they should have an impeachment vote.

    It’s the “Credibly accused” of the election cycle. Well, we can’t vote for Trump because they’re thinking about maybe having a vote to impeach him.

    It is way premature to think about impeachment.  First we need to see the whistle-blower’s referral that the Senate voted unanimously should be released to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees.  Second, we need to hear the recordings of the phone calls.  Then a judgment can be made.  The delays only harm our country.  It is time for Trump to act promptly.  Otherwise he is 

    Delay only helps the Democrats.  Nixon resigned in August 1974.  In the 1974 elections, the Democrats won 4 Senate seats to take a 71-39 lead in the Senate, and 49 seats in the House to take a 291-144 lead in the House. The GOP lost 4 governorships and the Democrats had a 36-13-1 lead with Governors, with one independent governor in Maine.  

    • #50
  21. DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Jeff Hawkins (View Comment):
    They’re scared to death of what the American people will do to them

    And Republicans like Mitt Romney ought to likewise be scared to death of what the American people will do to them.

    • #51
  22. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    It might surprise people to hear that I have a different point of view.

    Not at all. Also, you’re a Weld-supporter — do you support his call to have the President executed?

    I am a ARBT supporter, “Any Republican But Trump.”  My preferences are Sanders, Weld, and Walsh all over Trump.  I hope that Romney or Haley jump in.     

    • #52
  23. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    They know they’re gambling, so they’re already claiming the transcript is “doctored.” And they’re only moving to try to impeach Trump because the Kavanaugh circus blew up in their faces last week. Gee I wonder why nobody’s talking about Kavanaugh all of a sudden if it was so important? That didn’t work because a NYT staff member  blabbed about what really happened. So now we have this.

    They need to realize that Trump is playing 4-D chess and they’re the pawns. It kills me how they and some of you on this site try to portray him as some kind of childish buffoon because that’s how you want us to see him. But he knows exactly what he’s doing. This will be hilarious.

    The Dems haven’t done the job they were elected to do. Instead of working on any of the issues before them, they’ve spent every minute in denial, feverishly meeting in the Secret Tree House dreaming up ways to negate the voice of the people and unseat a duly elected president. And to think THEY were going to make Trump pledge to “accept the election results.” Hahaha! They’re handing him 2020 on a silver platter, and now they’re handing us control of the House. Good job, Dems.You look like a bunch of five-year-olds.

    And after you fail AGAIN, and Trump goes on doing what he does, this time he’ll be doing it “Against All Odds!” and “In the face of persecution from all sides!”  You only succeed in making him look better every time. just hilarious.

    • #53
  24. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):

    Jeff Hawkins (View Comment):
    They’re scared to death of what the American people will do to them

    And Republicans like Mitt Romney ought to likewise be scared to death of what the American people will do to them.

    Trump only got 14% of the votes in the Utah Republican Primary.  McMullin got 21% of the Utah vote in 2016.  Romney is in the perfect state to be able to take a stand against Trump.

     

    • #54
  25. DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    It might surprise people to hear that I have a different point of view.

    Not at all. Also, you’re a Weld-supporter — do you support his call to have the President executed?

    I am a ARBT supporter, “Any Republican But Trump.” My preferences are Sanders, Weld, and Walsh all over Trump. I hope that Romney or Haley jump in.

    So, you support Weld’s call to have the President executed?

    • #55
  26. DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Thought Leader
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Romney is in the perfect state to be able to take a stand against Trump.

    For what?

    • #56
  27. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    Jon Gabriel, Ed.: The purported reason is the allegation…

    Pelosi went out of her way to brag about her first hand knowledge of the pertinent laws (she was there!)…it will be interesting to see over the next 24-48 hours if she clearly understands the definition of “whistleblower.”

    • #57
  28. Jason Obermeyer Member
    Jason Obermeyer
    @JasonObermeyer

    It should also be noted that it seems the whistle-blower statute (can a person claiming only second -hand knowledge even be a whistle-blower under the statute?) is being used to circumvent executive privilege. Normally there would have to be a showing of need in order to get at executive communications; here, it is asserted that we have to have the complaint to know what’s in it. This is – to put it mildly – exactly backwards. Just another example of people preferring “good” government to constitutional government.  #republicansfortheruleoflaw 

    • #58
  29. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    5 minutes after Trump was elected I heard Democrats talk about impeachment.  Now they will do it.  It really does not matter what for.  Impeachment is a political process, no wrong doing required.

    • #59
  30. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    Jason Obermeyer (View Comment):

    It should also be noted that it seems the whistle-blower statute (can a person claiming only second -hand knowledge even be a whistle-blower under the statute?) is being used to circumvent executive privilege. Normally there would have to be a showing of need in order to get at executive communications; here, it is asserted that we have to have the complaint to know what’s in it. This is – to put it mildly – exactly backwards. Just another example of people preferring “good” government to constitutional government. #republicansfortheruleoflaw

    Paraphrasing the old Tip O’Neill maxim from the Reagan era:

    “It’s not the nature of the evidence that matters, it’s the seriousness of the charge.”

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.