Impeachment now certain

Well Trump just fired Alexander Vindman. Trial over and he *immediately * turns to retaliating against witnesses.

Oh, and he fired Vindman's brother for good measure... because if you're going to go tin pot dictator/mob boss you might as well go all in and punish even the families of anyone who dares tell the truth about you to investigators.

This will only keep getting worse until he's stopped.

PS, he fired Sondland too. Clearing house of anyone who dares truthfully testify.

Way to get your facts straight. Trump is paring down the NSC Council to 100 staffers. They are being released back to their own departments. Serving on the NSC is a privilege not a right. Vindman is lucky that he is not being court-martialed for publicly disparaging the Commander In Chief. Songland had to edit his testimony 6 times because other witnesses contradicted his testimony. He is lucky that they are not going to prosecute him for lying to Congress.

gcomeau wrote:Well Trump just fired Alexander Vindman. Trial over and he *immediately * turns to retaliating against witnesses.

Oh, and he fired Vindman's brother for good measure... because if you're going to go tin pot dictator/mob boss you might as well go all in and punish even the families of anyone who dares tell the truth about you to investigators.

This will only keep getting worse until he's stopped.

PS, he fired Sondland too. Clearing house of anyone who dares truthfully testify.

smr wrote:Way to get your facts straight. Trump is paring down the NSC Council to 100 staffers.

Uh huh... and it just happens that the way he's "pairing it down" is to purge anyone who testified.

And their family members.

As soon as the "trial" ended.

How dense are you? Or alternatively, how dense do you think WE are?

They are being released back to their own departments. Serving on the NSC is a privilege not a right. Vindman is lucky that he is not being court-martialed for publicly disparaging the Commander In Chief.

He responded to a lawful subpoena and testified under oath.

NOTHING in his testimony has been factually disputed.

So you think he's lucky not to be court martialed for... NOT perjuring himself to Congress?

Songland had to edit his testimony 6 times because other witnesses contradicted his testimony. He is lucky that they are not going to prosecute him for lying to Congress.

Yes he is!!!!

You kind of glossed over the fact that every time he was caught being, let's say, not completely forthcoming it was COVERING for Trump. Until other witnesses exposed what he was holding back then he "remembered".

Why are you repeating the Demoncrat talking points. Please try to think logically and for yourself. They (NSC staffers) serve at the pleasure of the President. They no longer have his confidence. Kennedy fired entire NSC staff during his administration. They were both reassigned...Oh well! Remember he broke the chain of command and that is a big no no in the military. His own boss accused him of leaking information. Try to think logically and rationally on this issue. Hey idiot...he's going to the War College in 3 months!

Yes smr.

Logically, firing several people who "testified" against you immediately after the"trial", and blood relations who didn't actually testify,

If only there was a law against that, such as 18 U.S. Code§ 1513 E. Up to 10 years in prison.

That would be impeachable offence number, well something with double digits.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:Eyal:

The US is the only country to invoke Article V.
This was the result of the US being attacked with near nuclear weapons that would have resulted in Hiroshima level fatalities if the timing and impact locations had been slightly different. This was in retaliation for the US ejecting Iraq from Kuwait to guarantee global oil supplies rather than just concentrate on energy independence.

What the hell are you talking about?

President Trump is gradually transitioning to a neoisolationist policy. This is provoking considerable opposition from the Deep State operatives in the Pentagon, CIA, NSC and other organizations. The impeachment was the result.

No, the impeachment was a result of his committing crimes.

IMHO, I would find it highly entertaining to observe a war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, especially if it goes nuclear.

Yeah, well, we know you're an ass.

smr wrote:Why are you repeating the Demoncrat talking points. Please try to think logically and for yourself. They (NSC staffers) serve at the pleasure of the President. They no longer have his confidence. Kennedy fired entire NSC staff during his administration. They were both reassigned...Oh well! Remember he broke the chain of command and that is a big no no in the military. His own boss accused him of leaking information. Try to think logically and rationally on this issue. Hey idiot...he's going to the War College in 3 months!

Do you know what "breaking the chain of command" actually means? Because that's not what Vindman did. And it's not disparagement of the President either (certainly not in a way that violates the UCMJ).

I mean, if one to accept your interpretation, it would mean that soldiers are prohibited from testifying on any misdeeds their COs commit.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2020/02/07/trump-video-nancy-pelosi-tearing-sotu-speech-remain-facebook/4694454002/

What's your point? "Trump is dishonest and online companies are willing to go along with it"?

Eyal wrote:

TFLYTSNBN wrote:https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2020/02/07/trump-video-nancy-pelosi-tearing-sotu-speech-remain-facebook/4694454002/

What's your point? "Trump is dishonest and online companies are willing to go along with it"?

He's *proud* of it. He thinks it's a good thing if his team "wins" regardless of what immoral conduct they're engaged in.

Which sums up 90% of the Republican party.

smr wrote:Their already litigating the legitimacy of the Impeachment articles. What you thought the Demoncrats were being serious with the Impeachment Articles...no this was a show trial. Why did they not use what the Mueller report uncovered?

1) 2 of 4 Fisa Warrants have been ruled illegal. Also, DOJ is awaiting the verdict on the other 2 FISA warrants. All that information would be invalid. If their was evidence of wrong doing, the evidence would have been thrown out. (Fruit of the poisonous Tree)

No, Barr and the DoJ have declared that they were illegal. This could be considered a cover up. Something that Barr has already been caught attempting.

2) No evidence that could be used against Trump for Impeachment was found in the Mueller Report.

No. No evidence was used. But then the Mueller report was about a different abuse of power by Trump.

3) The biggest hint that the Demoncrats were not serious about Impeachment. The Demoncrats would have followed every procedure, precedent, and legal standard. So that Trump could not squirm out of the Impeachment.

They did. They pretty much followed every procedure, precedent, and legal standard that the GOP set.

What allowed him to "squirm out of the impeachment" was a GOP who pretty much to a man or woman vowed that they wouldn't vote guilty regardless of the evidence.

Remember, several PUBLICLY said that voted not guilty while admitting that Trump was guilty.


One even claimed that even though Trump was guilty it wasn't the Senate's job to remove Trump, showing an astounding lack of knowledge of the US Constitution.



Interesting phrase you use there by the way smr. "Squirm out of the impeachment" The relevant definition is: "to escape the responsibility for having done something"
So even you, his staunchest follower and defender, sub consciously admit he's guilty.