Impeachment

Of All the Things To Impeach a President for, They Chose This?

Working through the lows and highs of the House impeachment inquiry on the Reason Roundtable podcast

|

Who's ready for Week Two of the impeachment show (not to be confused with The Impeachment Show)? Well, ready might be a strong word, but the Reason Roundtable quartet of Nick Gillespie, Peter Suderman, Matt Welch, and Katherine Mangu-Ward have many thoughts about comparative presidential corruption, the Sixth Amendment, how politics keeps getting stuck in our government, and whether "bribery" is the right word for the job. The important thing is that it's all going to get worse.

Speaking of which, so are the Democrats' semi-phony yet heartfelt Centrism Wars, which get a thorough examination on the podcast as well. Is Pete Buttigieg a blank slate for the politically gullible? Does Michael Bloomberg's understanding of capitalism outweigh his enthusiasm for regulation? Is it time to blow the whole thing off and spend the weekend tripping balls on ayahuasca? All, and much more, are discussed.

SPEAKING OF DISCUSSION: Ever feel like harassing the Reason Roundtableists with individual or group questions? With our annual Webathon around the corner, the time to do so is right the hell now. Email your queries to podcasts@reason.com, and we shall do our best to answer them in a forthcoming video release during the Webathon.

Audio production by Ian Keyser and Regan Taylor.

'Confused State' by Kevin MacLeod is licensed under CC BY 3.0

Relevant links from the show:

"The Reason Podcast Is Now 3 Great New Podcasts. Subscribe!" by Katherine Mangu-Ward

"Far From Avoiding 'Quid Pro Quo' Talk, Calling Trump's Conduct Bribery Requires It," by Jacob Sullum

"Justin Amash to Trump: Let Bolton, Giuliani, and Mulvaney Testify," by Billy Binion

"Democrats Cry Corruption, Republicans Denounce Hearsay at First Impeachment Hearings," by Christian Britschgi

"U.S. Diplomat Bill Taylor: It Was 'Crazy' To Freeze Aid to Ukraine 'for Help With a Political Campaign,'" by Billy Binion

"Ambassador Changes Testimony, Admits Giving Quid Pro Quo Message to Ukraine," by Billy Binion

"Impeachment and the Sixth Amendment," by David Post

"Steve Calabresi Responds and Updates His Arguments on Impeachment Hearings," by Jim Lindgren

"Barack Obama Slams Woke Scolds and Hashtag Activism," by Robby Soave

"Pete Buttigieg Has a $1 Trillion Plan to Drive Up Housing, College, and Labor Costs," by Scott Shackford

"Glamour and the Art of Persuasion," by Virginia Postrel

"If Biden Won't Support Legalization Until We Know Whether Marijuana Is a 'Gateway Drug,' He Will Never Support Legalization," by Jacob Sullum

"The Democratic Primaries Get a Last-Minute Addition," by Zuri Davis

"'We Vape, We Vote' Crowd Got Through to Donald Trump, Advisors Say," by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

"Michael Bloomberg's Anti-Vaping Crusade Is Objectively Pro-Tobacco," by Jacob Sullum

"Michael Bloomberg's Centrism Combines the Worst Instincts of the Right and Left," by Jacob Sullum

"Couldn't You Choose a Sacrament That's Less Fun and More Nauseating?" By Jacob Sullum

"Review: Parasite," by Kurt Loder

NEXT: Michigan Lawmakers Overturn a Bad Regulation Restricting Access to Cancer Treatments

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Hey you’re the retards trying to get this stupid dog to hunt.

    1. Yeah, this has been something I’ve said since the very beginning. Colluding with Russians? Yeah that’s fucking treasonous. And Schiff assured us he had the smoking gun. Ok, that didn’t pan out. But that report pointed out very serious charges of OBSTRUCTION. Everyone knows that obstruction is super serious, and people like Amash, and a whole lineup of Reason writers insisted that what was alleged in the report was enough to begin impeachment.

      So now we are on to Quid pro quo which is downgraded to extortion then re-branded as bribery. The public is getting very used to this routine. If the collusion and obstruction charges weren’t serious enough to impeach, why do we think this next charge is serious enough to impeach.

      If I were a leftist, especially a Reason lefty, I would be pretty pissed off that the Reason writers keep setting up these “Totally Impeachable Offense” cases like Lucy setting out that football.

      1. And further, I will make a prediction today- there will be no impeachment vote. Or if there is a vote, it will fail.

        There is zero reason for the Dems to send this to the Senate, where Republicans hold the majority and can do exactly the same nonsense that Schiff has been perpetrating. They can summon Schiff, and his staff, ask them to provide details about their meeting with the Whistleblower. They can call the Whistle Blower. They can call the Bidens.

        There is just no way that the Dems want to go into 2020 with those proceedings leading the airwaves each night. It is unthinkable.

        1. https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/3537/Will-Donald-Trump-be-impeached-in-his-first-term
          I’m watching the betting markets, and expecting impeachment. Party line, no rhyme or reason (HA) except tactically for fundraising and prepping for the next election.
          I think it’ll happen. Might catastrophically fail in its intended goals though, like the Clinton impeachment.

          1. I mean I feel they have to otherwise their own base will eat them alive.

    2. I’ll give them credit for being a bit less retarded than most retards on this. But still disappointing from what I remembering being a much more skeptical and less politics-as-sport publication in the past.

      1. And I’ll equivocate if I want to, fucknuts.

  2. The entire national media, the FBI, and US intelligence community has spent nearly four years doing anything it could to destroy Trump and when push comes to shove all they have is some bullshit phone call with the President of a country almost no one in the electorate cares about involving withholding aid that was given anyway.

    Either Trump is the greatest criminal genius in history or the most honest man since Jesus because it is hard to imagine anyone surviving that onslaught without them finding something better than this. Yet, Trump did.

    That and the Deep State as it is known is just monumentally incompetent. God must really love Trump to bless him with such morons for opponents.

    1. Sensing, quite correctly, that the “quid pro quo” and “bribery” angles are factually and legally without merit, Democrats are now pivoting toward witness intimidation via Twitter and, unsurprisingly, whether Trump lied to Muller.

      https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-investigating-whether-trump-lied-to-mueller-during-investigation-today-2019-11-18/?

      They just know Trump is a Russian agent. They just know. As I’ve said before, they will investigate Trump for five more years, day in and day out, if given the chance.

      1. If they are going back to the Mueller investigation, they are really desperate.

        1. Haven’t you been paying attention to LeaveTrumpAloneLibertarian’s posts? He’s quite fond of copy / pasting from the Mueller Report. And for good reason, considering all the explosive bombshells Mueller uncovered.

          #Impeach
          #Its(Still)MuellerTime

        2. It has always been about Mueller. The quid pro quo “scandal” was just a spin-off. The Mueller tree has a thousand different branches and the Democrats will climb each and every one until they can find something even remotely plausible to hold onto.

          Once Sondland testifies that everything was on the up-and-up, and puts the whole thing to rest, the Mueller investigation will be front and center yet again. That’s a conspiracy theory that will never die, and the Democrats cannot afford to let it die because it is their only bulwark against the Barr-Durham counterattack.

          1. Mueller spent 22 months and $35 million, but his obviously partisan team still found no “collusion” and no actionable obstruction.
            With the constant DNC/legacy media scrutiny of everything Trump, and the total lack of any real issue, I’m beginning to wonder if Trump may be the cleanest politician in history.
            It’s staggering that someone who has the FBI, CIA, legacy media and the deep state riding up on his ass like he has, hasn’t had anything substantial come up.

            1. That is what I am wondering as well. I have always said they launched the Russia hoax with the certainty that Trump was as dirty as they were and once they found something no one would remember or care that the whole thing was based on a hoax. The problem is they didn’t find anything. Everything they have been doing since then is trying to come to terms with that reality and the prospect of having to explain the Russia hoax.

              1. December 11th for the FISA report. Schiff better hurry.

                1. I am prepared to be disappointed.
                  The Russia hoax is the most treasonous act any US administration has committed.
                  I doubt federal agents are willing to admit it for what it was.
                  The CIA, FBI, and NSA should not survive it, but they will. And in order for them to do so, a great deal has to be ignored or covered up

          2. The OMB guy testified over the weekend, and it is apparently so bad for Democrats Schiff wont release testimony until every other witness has spoken because it would cause their testimony to be irrelevant.

      2. “…Democrats are now pivoting toward witness intimidation via Twitter and, unsurprisingly, whether Trump lied to Muller….”

        Next up: D’s charge Trump with eating fired chicken with a knife and fork! Pelosi asks Trump to testify!
        (I hope Trump responds with “fuck off and die”)

    2. God must really love Trump

      Didn’t somebody once say that God loves children, animals, and idiots?

      1. No. Winston Churchill said something to the effect of God loves children and Americans or something like that.

        The constant need of Trump’s opponents to call him an idiot makes no sense to me. It just makes the opponents look worse for always losing to him.

        1. Well, Trump is President and a billionaire, and Sparky once openly lamented his lack of a college education because it was hampering his employment prospects.

          So… Draw your own conclusions.

        2. “God looks after children, animals, and idiots.”
          -Lou Holtz

          Your knee jerked pretty quick there.

          1. I had never heard the Lou Holtz one. My point about Trump’s opponents still stands, however.

          2. John was closer:
            “God has a special providence for fools, drunkards, and the United States of America.”
            Otto von Bismarck

            1. That was what I was thinking of. it was Bismarck. Thanks.

        3. If Trump isn’t an idiot, he goes out of his way to appear as one.
          I don’t think he’s actually stupid, but he’s fucking weird and doesn’t behave in normal ways.

    3. The most obvious explanation is that, if you are an even marginally competent and well-connected businessman, it is easier and safer to make money without breaking laws. Whereas, if you are a typical politician, it is impossible to make money without doing so.

  3. Look, if you can’t get the America electorate to be outraged about Ukrainian quid pro quo and violations of the Emoluments Clause then I just don’t know wha zzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZzzzZzzZZZZzzzzz

  4. Yawn.
    The real jury will return the verdict November 2020.

    1. 2020 will be an even more enormous #BlueWave than 2018.

      1. It might have been at one point. All the Democrats had to do was put up a reasonable and likable candidate that didn’t offend everyone, and they could have swept 2020 easily. There were so many reluctant Trump supporters and active Trump haters that someone inoffensive and somewhat boring like Jimmy Carter could have swept it. However, there has been so much insanity on the Democrat side, from O’Rourke saying that he would take all guns to Gabbard being declared a Russian spy to to everyone promising to give illegals healthcare, that I think Trump looks like the sane and moderate choice. He may be a crass boor in how he behaves, but his politics aren’t that far right of center.

        When you make Trump look sane and moderate, you are doing something terribly wrong.

        1. “All the Democrats had to do was put up a reasonable and likable candidate that didn’t offend everyone, and they could have swept 2020 easily. There were so many reluctant Trump supporters and active Trump haters that someone inoffensive and somewhat boring like Jimmy Carter could have swept it.”

          That’s the narrative at least…

          1. It fits personal observation, though you might guess from my username that I supported Cruz before he dropped out.

            Trump had his ardent supporters, but there were a lot of moderate Republicans who just did not like him at all, or didn’t like Clinton.

            In fact, I think Trump’s fairly centered stances on a lot of issues means that he has more solid support going into 2020, as people who thought he would get into a shouting/shooting match with Putin have been placated.

          2. And?
            Do you think it is an inaccurate narrative?
            I can’t say that I know (no one can), but it seems plausible.

            1. Maybe the US is that brainwashed, but I don’t know.
              It’s possible the popular narrative is accurate.
              It just seems odd that Trump’s opponents are always responsible for his results.
              I think Trump wins, rather than his opponents lose, more than he gets credit for.

  5. Something seems to have gone wrong with the player in this article, it’s crushed down and I can’t actually use it. I’ve tried on a couple different browsers and seeing the same thing in both.

  6. Whoa.

    A headline that actually questions the validity of the Democrat Impeachment Circus?

    Did Reason just swallow the Red Pill?

    1. No. They are just pretending there are good reasons to do this that the Democrats didn’t pursue for some reason.

      1. I’d like to know what all those supposedly good reasons are (without listening to the podcast).

        1. Bombing Afgani farmers
          Sending military aid to Saudis, who uses it to bomb Yemen
          The continued expansion of the surveillance state
          Failure to stop illegal wars their golden brown god king started

          I didn’t listen either but there’s plenty of NAP violations

          1. NAP. Non-Aggression Principle?

          2. Wasnt the Mueller/FISA example one of the worst abuses of the surveillance state?

            1. Why, yes, of course it was, but then again, Trump did not do it, so no, of course it was not.

              /ProgMedia

              1. So we’re officially labeling Reason prog media now?

                About time

                  1. What does comfortable German footwear have to do with anything?

          3. Well, they can’t impeach and remove him on those impeachable acts for a very simple reason.

            The majority of them approve of those actions, and they’d sorta have to throw Obama under the bus for having started some of it.

            1. “”The majority of them approve of those actions, and they’d sorta have to throw Obama under the bus for having started some of it.””

              You say that almost as if they have principles. If Trump deleted emails on his personal server. The “but her emails” crowd would have no problem calling a foul on Trump.

    2. Let’s see if their actions follow up on this

  7. I’m going to make a pronouncement (that I understand no one gives a shit about– fair enough) but I’m making it anyway. And I make this pronouncement as someone who didn’t support Trump in 2016 and I don’t consider myself a Trump “supporter”.

    I have come to the conclusion that this appears to be an attempted coup by the Deep State– or Permanent State if you prefer the Jeffrey Sachs term.

    Never have I seen more current or “former” intelligence officials or officials lurking in the background on every “bombshell revelation” or accusation that’s been leveled at Trump.

    If one wanted to compare this to the Clinton impeachment hearings, it might be reasonable to classify what happened in the 90s as an attempted GOP coup. It wasn’t supported by the media or the Democrats, and was largely localized to GOP actors and operatives. This appears to be a coup orchestrated by a lot of very shady actors within the the Deep state and is either wittingly or unwittingly* being supported by the Democrats and the Media.

    *I suspect a combination of both.

    1. He doesn’t accept their “wisdom” and “expertise.” Therefore, he’s a threat to the nation that every “true” patriot must work to destroy.

    2. I really didn’t think it was possible to find someone so shady that testifying in a military uniform didn’t help their credibility. Yet, in Vindeman, the Democrats managed to do that. My God that guy is a sleazy looking and sounding fucker.

      I can’t believe how tone deaf the Democrats much be not to understand how awful these people sound. They all talk with a smug certainty that they should be in charge of everything and none of them seem to give a shit about the country or anything but themselves.

      1. Considering that federal bureaucrats are overwhelmingly Team Blue, I think the Democrats understand exactly what they are doing and who they are pandering to. Smug, sleazy, and unabashedly partisan are qualifications, not disqualifying characteristics. These people are heroes among their own; and everyone loves them a hero in uniform.

        1. I don’t think they are heroes to even the average Democratic voter. I think they are heroes to a certain breed of journalist and political activist.

          1. Being the odd man out in my office, I can safely say that my colleagues are enthralled by the impeachment parade and are almost literally salivating over the hearings, as well as the “bravery” and “courage” of the witnesses. Based on my personal experience, your average white collar Democrat in NYC would trample children for the opportunity to shine Vindman’s shoes if it meant he was more comfortable when taking on “the world’s greatest tyrant.” I hear people literally praying for Trump to die on a daily basis, in one form or another.

            Trust me (for what it’s worth) these people are heroes for many; and not, to be clear, because of anything they’ve done, but because they see Trump as the greatest villain in the world.

            1. Yes, the Gentry left loves this shit. But, the Democrats already can count on their votes. So what is this getting them?

              1. Turnout.

                The more radical the approach, the more the Left salivates, the more likely they are to show up and vote. Again, speaking from personal experience, the Democratic faithful were desperately looking for something extreme. “If they don’t impeach, they’re useless; may as well stay home.” That kind of attitude is relatively common. The Democrats have a faithful base, many whose attitudes and political perspectives will never change. But you have to rile them up, and impeachment is the way to do it.

                1. There is some truth to that but to the extent it is true it just shows how desperate their situation is. They are in a position where to motivate their base, they have to do crazy and irrational things that turns away anyone outside of that base.

          2. “The saddest thing about the early impeachment hearings: the degradation and lampooning and lambasting of clear-eyed American government servants like Marie Yovanovitch, Bill Taylor and George Kent. It’s pathetic to impugn their dignity and honor.”

            – Sports Illustrated’s Peter King, in his Football Morning in America column today

            1. Like I said, a certain breed of journalist. My God King is stupid.

              1. I’ve always disliked him.
                Trash writer.
                Nobody gives a shit how your flight was or what you ate for dinner.
                Tell me what player, coaches, and management says behind the scenes. Give me some insight into process. But Peter King, as a person, is utterly irrelevant. Shut the fuck up and do your job.
                Feel the same about Matt Berry.
                These bitches are uninteresting and propped up by corporate media.
                They are delivery vehicles, not people.

                1. Bill Simmons was an awesome writer.
                  Unfortunately, he died years ago.
                  A woke husk of lazy pandering now inhabits his LA celebrity body.
                  Why can’t people deal with success better?
                  Chappelle is the only person I can think of who wasn’t utterly ruined by it. Stone and Parker to a lesser extent

            2. shocked Pete didn’t explode 40 years ago being so full of himself

            3. How is that related to Football?

      2. Tim Morrison stated the NSC was worried about Vindmans leaks and such prior to Ukraine. Guy is shady as fuck.

    3. We Know the deep state feed the media to pursue Trump “legally” so your assessment is spot on and un deniable

      1. I wouldn’t declare my assessment undeniable, it’s just a slow, careful conclusion I’ve come to after watching this shit for two years.

        There are a hundred different ways that this could have manifested itself as standard, partisan machinations– but this is deeper than that, and it seems more sinister.

        1. “sinister”

          Fuck you.

        2. You are now on baby Jeffrey’s trump mean girls list.

    4. Historian Victor Davis Hanson has a good article listing the reasons why this is actually a coup attempt by the deep state and the DNC.
      https://nypost.com/2019/11/12/10-reasons-why-this-impeachment-inquiry-is-really-a-coup/#content-wrapper

      1) Impeachment 24/7
      2) Fake whistleblowers
      3) First-term impeachment
      4) No special-counsel finding
      5) No bipartisanship
      6) No high crimes or misdemeanors
      7) No Quid pro quo
      8) Elimination of equality under the law
      9) The Schiff factor.

      Schiff is now de facto chief impeachment prosecutor. He has repeatedly lied about the certainty of impending Mueller indictments or bombshells. He flat-out lied that he and his staff had no prior contact with the whistleblower. He made up a version of the Trump call that didn’t represent the transcript, and when called out, he begged off by claiming he was offering a “parody.”
      10) Precedent/dissipation of constitutional government

      1. Even military coups come wrapped in some cloak of fake legality. The only response anyone has to VDH’s point is that “its being done by the mechanisms of the Constitution” which is just begging the question. If a court of law convicted me of something that wasn’t a crime, it would be done through legal mechanisms. That, however would not make it legitimate.

        1. I believe one of the indictments Cohen pleaded to wasn’t an actual crime – the one related to Trump of course

      2. VDH is the man.
        Wrote a great book about the soldier’s perspective on the Peloponnesian War (still my favorite war – the next two are the Crimean and World War I – I like the stupid/accidental wars)

  8. It seems like The Real World: DNC has been going on for way longer than any of the other seasons.

    1. And with a considerably less attractive cast.

      1. Bernie and Warren look like Lemon Party models.

    2. Yet another reason for them to be pissed… Trump Seasons 1-3 have had way better ratings

  9. Last week, it was Ukraine. This week, it is lying to the Special Counsel. Next week, it will be supposed impropriety.

    By all means Team D, please keep going. You make yourselves look completely incapable of acting in a rational fashion. That does not go over well with Jim & Jane Sixpack. But hey, we can spin this out to whenever. It just gets worse and worse for you.

    1. It goes over incredibly well with the progressive faithful California and New York, and that is all that matters. That is the relevant audience. When tens of millions of people believe, in some vague sense, that Trump “must be” a “criminal,” fishing for a crime does not appear to them to be unjust. That is the reality. Obliterate Trump’s reputation enough, and every conceivable transgression, every underhanded subversion of law and legal precedent, becomes a just action.

      The lack of rationality is a feature, not a bug.

      1. I figure they get two more ‘stunts’ after this latest horseshit of lying to the Special Counsel (this week). So two more weeks of new ‘bombshells’ and ‘new bullshit that looks like the old bullshit but we really mean it this time’.

        By that time, I think the patience of the American electorate gets exhausted.

        1. The giant shoe that is waiting to drop is the Durham investigation. If Durham starts indicting people over the Russia hoax, all of this shit will be forgotten in the blink of an eye.

          I am still skeptical that is going to happen. But smarter people than me think it will. So, we will see.

          1. Do you really think the media would cover any report that said bad things about ‘the gang’?
            That report will generate crickets.

          2. Brennan needs to be publicly executed.
            And how incompetent are everyone else to think HIS plan was the one to go all in on?
            He’s a moron

      2. It’s like prosecutors tacking on charges and keeping them present for the jury trial. The jury surely must decide that if this guy is charged with THAT many crimes, he MUST have done something.

      3. It goes over incredibly well with the progressive faithful California and New York, and that is all that matters.

        But Hillary won California and New York in 2016, so I’m not sure what Dems get by winning those states even more bigly in 2020.

        1. They get to ignore the constitution and cry “but the popular vote!”.

      4. That may help with funding, but no amount of wishing on a star the D’s do will cause the Blue Fairy to change our system from an electoral college to a popular vote.

    1. I posted a few days about the good reasons why Hearsay is inadmissible as a general rule. It is unreliable. And it allows people to invent accusations out of nothing by making them to each other.

      The whole thing is absurd.

      1. I’m not sure what scares me more… the fact that hack said that on national television, or there are useful idiots cheering him on.

        1. The whole thing is terrifying. Anyone who thinks that these standards are just something that will apply once because Orange Man Bad is delusional.

        2. You know what scares me? Encountering practicing *attorneys* that agree with Quigley.

          The suspension of reason is really frightening to watch. Colleagues whose judgment I trust in every other matter instantly switch into this alternative mode of thinking when it comes to Trump, discarding all of their legal instincts completely; an impenetrable quarantine where everyday common sense cannot come into contact with the jurisprudence of Trump.

          The only thing more uncomfortable than knowingly being lied to is watching people slowly, deliberately, and methodically twist their thought processes, and lie to themselves, and then watching them come to believe their own lies.

          1. I started to notice that when the whole transgender thing came along. I have liberal friends whom I have known literally for decades. I know for a fact that before it became a Prog cause, they thought transgenders were nutcases. Then suddenly the party orders that accepting the transgender is necessary to be tolerant and most of them bought it hook line and sinker. It made me think that if they would profess that, what wouldn’t they claim to believe if the movement told them so? Nothing as far as I can see.

            1. //It made me think that if they would profess that, what wouldn’t they claim to believe if the movement told them so? Nothing as far as I can see.//

              That is the shit that keeps me up at night.

              1. Same as found in Nazi Germany and the Cultural Revolution

          2. Sounds a lot like Lysenkoism.

    2. Wow, that really lays it out.

  10. That chair looks like it’s made of kielbasa.

    1. LOL. Well, the Nauga *is* pretty well extinct.

      1. Over-hunted for decades.

  11. you guys rooting for the Losers is comical

  12. Check out the constitutional standard, if you have genuine intellectual curiosity why this impeachment should go forward. It’s from our friends at the Federalist Society. Then you will understand why this is certainly an impeachable offense calling for removal.

    https://fedsoc.org/commentary/publications/impeachment-the-constitution-s-fiduciary-meaning-of-high-misdemeanors

    1. Without applying the standard to the facts, your assertion is meaningless. You really shouldn’t post things that you clearly don’t understand.

    2. When your argument is based on stating your conclusion and then telling people the conclusion is accurate, it’s not a strong argument. I don’t think anyone is arguing that bribery or extortion is not an impeachable offense.

      The argument hinges on two points: Does the alleged act qualify as such? Is this act actually about personal gain, or is it within the bounds of the proper duties of the office?

      And the second point: Did the alleged act actually take place?

      You don’t get to tell people that it’s obvious he should be impeached based on your assumptions about the disputed facts.

    3. Weird.

      Am I wrong to read it as “high crimes” and “misdemeanors” and not “high crimes” and “high…misdemeanors”? As in, there are some really bad crimes and some that aren’t so bad, but the president can be impeached for either. If that’s the case, then that’s a totally pointless article.

      1. I think it’s weird to assume that all misdemeanors are impeachable. Are we going to impeach the president because he was driving with an expired license?

        Clearly the modifier “high” indicates that it’s not all crimes which count as impeachable offenses, so it only makes sense that the signifier also applies to the latter case.

        1. Well according to the dems in Senate in 1998, Obstruction of Justice and Perjury doesn’t meet the standard to remove a president.

        2. “…Are we going to impeach the president because he was driving with an expired license?…”

          Hey, that late library book return is serious business!
          I think Mueller got a couple of convictions for that.

      2. Actually, the origin of “high crimes and misdemeanors” is that they are committed by someone in a “high” office.
        Any president can be impeached for any reason the house is willing to vote on.
        Getting convicted in the Senate is a bit more complicated, but they can vote guilty for spitting on the sidewalk if they want. (Hear that Warren?)

    4. JDS1
      November.18.2019 at 4:40 pm
      “Check out the constitutional standard, if you have genuine intellectual curiosity why this impeachment should go forward…”

      Starting with an assumed conclusion sort of leaves you looking like a fool. At best.

  13. If you can’t or won’t read the article, it’s like this thing where attempted bribery constitutes a breach of fiduciary duty so Trump should be removed.

    You can’t keep feigning ignorance.

    1. Sure bribery is a high crime and misdemeanor. Sadly, there is no bribery going on here. Words have meanings you fucking half wit.

    2. watching it be professed more entertaining.

    3. you can, and should, continue to whine about your impotence

    4. Are you already assuming Trump is guilty of attempted bribery?

      Is a candidate offering me something of value for my vote bribery? Seem like that is worse than someone asking for something that may or may not help his campaign. Why stop at ads and go directly for people trying to buy votes.

    5. If you can’t or won’t read the article, it’s like this thing where attempted bribery constitutes a breach of fiduciary duty so Trump should be removed.

      LMAO “bribery” is explicitly listed. You don’t need a double bankshot theory.

      1. It assumes confirmation when it’s not verifying either of the things in dispute.

        A) Was this Bribery, and
        B) Did this happen?

        You’re not convincing people by assuming the answer is yes to both questions, and telling them it’s clearly impeachable because bribery is wrong.

        1. I’m just pointing out that if you can prove bribery it’s listed right there in the Constitution. You don’t need some theory about fiduciary duty … high misdemeanor … aquatic mammal in the city limits …

          1. And he’s pointing out that it’s one more D attempt to ‘frame’ the issue.

  14. This is big from the AP: Zelensky not only felt pressured by Giuliani’s campaign to get investigations announced early on but the State Department knew about ithttps://apnews.com/139dd535eac749aa961bc0205d10e872 …

    State Department officials in Kyiv and Washington were briefed on Zelenskiy’s concerns at least three times, the two sources said. Notes summarizing his worries were circulated within the department, they said.”

    1. Walls closing in. Blormph won’t get away this time.

    2. Published by the AP? And they have sources you say? Wow. Just wow.

    3. Pod, the link got messed up. Can you post the title of the article?

      1. “…Pod, the link got messed up. Can you post the title of the article?…”
        Are you really dying to read one more opinion piece?

    4. “This is big from the AP: Zelensky not only felt pressured by Giuliani’s campaign to get investigations announced early on but the State Department knew about it”

      Did the State Department also know about that time Zelensky felt bloated?

      Is this what happens when people lose the ability to tell the difference between facts and feelings?

    5. “They spoke on condition of anonymity because of the diplomatic and political sensitivity of the issue.”

      So this as bullshit as every other “anonymous” source turned out to be. Every single fucking instance, Pod, every single one, where an anonymous source gave information against Trump turned out to be lying.
      How is this latest, unverified, super-secret source any different?

  15. I’m reading right now that the next step in the impeachment inquiry will be to probe whether Trump lied to Mueller.

    There’s this thing called a “fishing expedition”, and the Democrats are on one right now. They seem to have exhausted the Ukraine angle already.

    1. “There’s this thing called a “fishing expedition”, and the Democrats are on one right now. They seem to have exhausted the Ukraine angle already.”

      Not to mention “THE RUSSKIS!!!”, ‘collusion’, ‘obstruction of justice’, ‘eating fried chicken with a knife and fork’, ‘late return of a library book’, ‘the guy you hired was guilty of something many years before you hired him’, and other *serious* charges.
      And they’ve been doing it for THREE YEARS with nothing yet sticking to the wall.
      You’d think there would be a level of embarrassment which would halt the process, but instead, we have the continuing circus and the laughable D candidates.
      Cue shitbag tony to tell us how many ‘Trump associates’ have been convicted of un-paid parking tickets.

      1. STEAK WITH KETCHUP!!!! (shriek)

  16. OK, a bing search yielded this:

    Five Impeachment Charges for Donald Trump
    1) Abuse of Power.
    2) Advocating Political Violence.
    3) Collusion, Tons of it.
    4) Profiting from the Presidency.
    5) Obstructing Justice.

    Charges there are in abundance. ‘Evidence’ supporting those charges are ‘strong’ enough to allow shitbag, pod and others to cream their pants.
    The rest of us are waiting.

  17. Google is now paying $17000 to $22000 per month for working online from home. I have joined this job 2 months ago and i have earned $20544 in my first month from this job. I can say my life is changed-completely for the better! Check it out whaat i do…..

    Check here =====►►  swagto.com

  18. Three years of hearing and seeing nothing but the goofy Elmer Fudd trump haters stumbling over themselves for their trophy.

    The coyote had more success.

    1. I wonder if the media will scrutinize a different presidency in the future?

      Or will an establishment fascist run roughshod over the constitution with impunity?

      1. Depends if they have a “D” or and “R” after their name.
        The kleptocracy and the authoritarians have been moving all their eggs into one basket since the sixties.

        1. It’s the media’s job to know it’s affect on the public.

          In today’s surveillance state, they know more about us than ever before.

          Witnessing their incessant abusive beating on Trump is having an effect on us all.

          The question is, to what end?

  19. I know, Trump has done so many horrible things and Pelosi was okay with all of it, but suddenly Trump starts messing with the Bidens and THAT’S where she draws the line!

    Trump is going to look pretty stupid when Biden isn’t even the Dem nominee.

Please to post comments