House Democrats Announce Two Articles of Impeachment Against Trump

| December 10, 2019

San Fran Nan, unhinged

He is being charged with abuse of power and obstructing Congress, which can mean pretty much anything they want.  No doubt they’ll get the votes to impeach, but it will be interesting to see which Dems cover their asses and vote against the charges. The Dems have no chance in the Senate and they know it- this entire charade is meant to tarnish Trump and reduce his chances for re-election, a very risky move. The best outcome will be McConnell stretching out the Senate trial, keeping the Senators running for the Presidency off the campaign trail.

The 2020 election could turn the House over to the Republicans and maintain their majority in the Senate and of course Trump in the White House. The operative word being “could.” It’s going to be a very interesting race, especially who gets the nod from the Dem Primary. Right now Warren looks the strongest and will  likely get the nomination, unless a dark horse appears on the scene.

Like Hillary.

 

House Democrats unveil 2 articles of impeachment against Trump

Category: Politics

Comments (85)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. ninja says:

    Oh, the hypocrisy.

    Bill Clinton. Personal Benefit. Lying under Oath and on National TV to the Public about Monica.

    And don’t forget Adam Schiff.

    …”exercised the powers of his office for his personal benefit while ignoring or injuring the public interest.”

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/democrats-to-unveil-articles-of-impeachment-focused-on-abuse-of-power-obstruction-of-congress

    “Nadler said the judiciary panel will introduce two articles “charging the president with high crimes and misdemeanors.” He said the first is dedicated to “abuse of power,” alleging the president has “exercised the powers of his office for his personal benefit while ignoring or injuring the public interest.” Nadler said Trump put himself before country while endangering national security and America’s democracy.”

  2. USMC Steve says:

    I find it soooo funny when socialist democrats claim to be acting in accordance with the Constitution, when they seek daily to do away with it and subvert it any chance they get. Marvelous. How many rings in this circus?

  3. ninja says:

    Oh the hypocrisy.

    Bill Clinton. Personal Benefit. Lying under Oath and on National TV to the Public about Monica.

    And don’t forget Adam Schiff.

    …”exercised the powers of his office for his personal benefit while ignoring or injuring the public interest.”

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/democrats-to-unveil-articles-of-impeachment-focused-on-abuse-of-power-obstruction-of-congress

    “Nadler said the judiciary panel will introduce two articles “charging the president with high crimes and misdemeanors.” He said the first is dedicated to “abuse of power,” alleging the president has “exercised the powers of his office for his personal benefit while ignoring or injuring the public interest.” Nadler said Trump put himself before country while endangering national security and America’s democracy.”

    • Hack Stone says:

      Are they talking about Donald Trump or Joe Biden, because Joe Biden sure as hell exercised the power of his office for his and his son’s personal benefit. He even said so on video. But if you were to ask Joe Biden about it, he would call you a damn liar and challenge you to a push-up contest.

  4. USMC Steve says:

    A thought here: how do you think the socialist democrats will react, particularly the ringleaders, when the Senate shoves all this up their asses?

    • MustangCryppie says:

      A conviction would be nice in their minds, but the point is to drag this out ad infinitum, keeping it in the voters’ minds up to the election and beyond if PDT is re-elected.

      They believe this strategy is what won them the House in 2018.

      They’ll bitch and moan, but then they will simply start all over again.

  5. MustangCryppie says:

    Like a lot of us here, I have defended this country for close to 40 years. In the Navy, as a cop, and in intel jobs for the fed.

    This insanity, along with the destruction of the rule of law, makes me think it has all been a big fucking waste.

    I am just glad that my parents are not allowed to see this. I remember when Nixon resigned. It was one of the only times I saw my father cry. Not cause he loved Nixon, but because he couldn’t believe his adopted country had come to that.

    He would be sobbing uncontrollably if he were alive today.

  6. Combat Historian says:

    Hijacking a grave Constitutional process for use in a partisan political shit show. This is just plain sad and tragic for our country…

    • Fyrfighter says:

      Proof that nothing is too low for the dims, if they think it will gain them power.. They truly are the “domestic enemies” our oaths spoke of.

      • Poetrooper says:

        “They truly are the ‘domestic enemies’ our oaths spoke of.”

        You just nailed it, Fyrfighter.

        • 5th/77th FA says:

          ^WORD^….What Poe said.

          Again…3 years of this sh^tshow because that scrunt, dashildabeast, THE Bitch of Benghazi, and all of the other domestic enemies of our Republic “didn’t get her turn.” Tens of millions of taxpayer dollars pissed away by a bunch of self centered, egotistical, power hungry, piece of sh^t that got their job by lie and deceit. DRAIN THE EFFING SWAMP!

          You can just look at Frantic Frannie and see the pure evil oozing out. No, make that gushing out. And the pure stupid from Shiffty… Volcanic spewing! Nadler, nearly 30 years as a swamp rat. The saddest part for us all is the stupid dumbasses that can’t see this and keep re-electing those types.

        • Anonymous says:

          Democrats haven’t been the anti-American since they fired on Fort Sumter.

    • GDContractor says:

      What’s sad and tragic is that it will become SOP.

    • Anonymous says:

      It’s all Democrats have for 2020.

  7. Slow Joe says:

    Any comments on the IG report?

  8. Comm Center Rat says:

    “I’m living in America, and in America you’re on your own. America’s not a country. It’s just a business. Now fuckin’ pay me.”

    ~ Jackie Cogan (character in Killing Them Softly movie)

  9. A Proud Infidel®™️ says:

    Further proof of what a filthy whorehouse Washington DC has become.

  10. A Proud Infidel®™️ says:

    I can’t wait to see what that babbling seagull from UC Berzerkely will spout off because he’ll be back to hyperventilating in a corner when this backfires on the D-rats!

  11. Commissar says:

    There is no dispute that he committed these acts. The evidence and testimony is overwhelming.

    Trump and the white household have admitted to the fact that Trump tried to get the Ukrainian president to announce an investigation into Biden in exchange for releasing the allocated defense funds. The White House ADMITTED IT!

    None of the Republican rebuttals have focused on the facts. Only on the process and whether they think it is impeachable.

    The process complaints have all been bullshit.

    The fact that republicans say what Trump did is not rise to the level of impeachable is essentially saying the president should be allowed to use the powers of his office, use the resources and funds of the United stages, and bribe other work leaders to participate in political attacks against his opponents. The president should be allowed to abuse his office and leverage foreign interference to help him get elected.

    Also, the GOP, and even some DNC claims that we should let the election decide is bullshit. We can’t let election outcomes be the adjudicators of whether someone is guilty of abusing their power and leveraging foreign assistance to interfere in the outcome of an election.

    • AW1Ed says:

      Your argument falls apart, Lars, when one considers the three prior Presidential impeachments- Jackson, Nixon and Clinton- all had bipartisan support and legal representation for the accused. Now with Trump?
      Not even close.

      • LC says:

        I didn’t look up the expected numbers for Nixon, but Clinton’s impeachment votes were very partisan, though the country does somehow seem to have become even more so over time.

        On the perjury charge, the 5 Republicans (out of 228) voted with the Democrats, and 5 Democrats (out of 205) voted with the Republicans. On the obstruction charge, 12 Republicans voted with the Democrats, and 5 Democrats voted with the Republicans.

        Links:
        Perjury roll call:
        http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1998/roll543.xml
        Obstruction roll call:
        http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1998/roll545.xml

        More than now? Almost certainly yes, but even the largest move across the aisle, the 12 Republicans on the obstruction charge, represents just 5.6% of Republicans . Calling that bipartisan is a bit of a stretch, in my opinion.

        • Fyrfighter says:

          I’d agree LC, despite the obvious evidence that Clinton committed perjury (hell, he was disbarred for it), the dems were lockstep in protecting him, because it’s alright when the left lies.. just look at the stuff Pelosi and Schumer said during the run up to that process.. 100% in conflict with their current positions.. So you’re correct, those were not bipartisan votes.

        • AW1Ed says:

          What of the legal representation afforded to the first three, but denied for Trump? The Star Chamber-like closed meetings of the Dems, and their one-sided press releases? They’ve taken “high crimes and misdemeanors” and turned it into a political process. I think they’ll regret this one day.

    • Commie-Tsar says:

      My talisman (THE FLACCID MICROPENIS OF TRUTH) has always told me that ORANGE. MAN. BAD. It’s all I have to hold onto in this evil world that you have created for me and my followers in the Free Shit Army!

      Nancy and the other will bring truth and socialist justice to us all. I am looking forward to suckling off the socialist tit for the rest of my life… at your expense!

      Time for me to go massage more of my empiric data…

    • thebesig says:

      Commissar: There is no dispute that he committed these acts. The evidence and testimony is overwhelming.

      False. The overwhelming evidence is that President Trump did not commit the acts that you guys are accusing him of doing. Have you read the transcripts? I highly doubt that you did. A reading of the transcript, as well as listening to the claims and statements by those involved with the call, including both presidents, argue that your accusations are false.

      Commissar: Trump and the white household have admitted to the fact that Trump tried to get the Ukrainian president to announce an investigation into Biden in exchange for releasing the allocated defense funds. The White House ADMITTED IT!

      Not correct. If you read the transcript of the phone call where the investigation of the Bidens is mentioned, you would find no talk about foreign aid as an incentive for the investigation. Nowhere, in the transcripts, does President Trump require his counterpart to investigate the Bidens in exchange for receiving the aid. In fact, the Ukrainian side of the call was not even aware of the issue involving foreign aid.

      What you saw, with the exchange, was diplomacy and action. Joseph Biden’s own statement shows that he may have violated US laws. The Ukrainian investigation could turn up the information needed for the US side to investigate and prosecute. Present Trump’s Ukrainian counterpart requested support in order to complete an investigation on their end.

      Two individuals, in charge of the executive branches of their countries, asking for each other’s support in order to be able to further do their duties. That is not quid pro quo. That is not an admission of doing what the left accuses him of doing. This is not abusing the office to get one’s way.

      Commissar: None of the Republican rebuttals have focused on the facts. Only on the process and whether they think it is impeachable.

      False. None of the Democrats had the facts on their side. All you have to do is read the transcripts of the phone calls that are the subject of this impeachment process. The Democrats are accusing the president of engaging in quid pro quo and illegal influence. A reading of the transcripts does not support the “justifications” used for pushing impeachment.

      The facts are on the Republican side. The Democrats are pulling crap out of their rear ends to continue to further their argument against President Trump.

      Commissar: The process complaints have all been bullshit.

      Wrong. What is complete BS is what the Democrats are doing with pursuing this impeachment process. They have no argument. President Trump committed nothing illegal or impeachable. Yet, the Democrats, drunk with power, and butthurt over the fact that they did not win the presidency in 2016 nor did they get their way since then with President Trump, want to pursue this farce.

      Commissar: The fact that republicans say what Trump did is not rise to the level of impeachable is essentially saying the president should be allowed to use the powers of his office, use the resources and funds of the United stages, and bribe other work leaders to participate in political attacks against his opponents. The president should be allowed to abuse his office and leverage foreign interference to help him get elected.

      Wrong. What the Republicans are arguing is that there is no impeachable offense. Again, if you read the transcripts, you will not find President Trump telling Ukraine that if they did not investigate the Bidens, they would not get the aid. In fact, President Trump repeatedly explained that he withheld the aid to Ukraine as part of his issues with other European countries not contributing their fair share. He asked a fair question, why should the United States shoulder the burden and responsibility of supporting Ukraine when this was a European problem that should be a mainly European effort? That aid was released. However, it was not done so as a result of anything occurring or requested during the phone call.

      How many times does the Ukrainian president have to say that there was no quid pro quo before you will finally understand that the Democrats have no argument?

      This does not rise to an impeachable offense because it isn’t an impeachable offense.

      Commissar: Also, the GOP, and even some DNC claims that we should let the election decide is bullshit. We can’t let election outcomes be the adjudicators of whether someone is guilty of abusing their power and leveraging foreign assistance to interfere in the outcome of an election.

      No, it is not BS. Why? Like me, other people have read the transcript of the phone call between the presidents. A reading of the transcripts would not support any argument or claim in favor of the impeachment approach. Nothing. Go ahead, locate the transcripts and read them for yourself. Not guilty, nothing impeachable.

      The Democrats are out of touch with what is going on in with the rest of the United States. They are too blinded by their desire and intoxication for power and for not getting their way. This process is going to bite them in the rear end.

      • rgr769 says:

        Glad you did that. I do not have enough sunrises left to waste my time reading and analyzing commie seagull shit. My response to bird shit on my vehicles is to promptly hose it off before it corrodes the paint.

      • Nucsnipe says:

        Not to mention, that when the witnesses were all asked if they had direct knowledge they all said no. While democrats may allow here say legal proceedings do not.

    • NHSparky says:

      Jesus, Lars, it’s like you’re not even trying anymore.

    • Anonymous says:

      But this (“Well, sonofabith… he got fired!”) is just normal business, right?

    • Berliner says:

      Trump is not being pursued for committing “acts”. He is being pursued for “thought crimes”held by others with an axe to grind because Hildabeast lost the election she thought had been bought and paid for.
      D’s are upset the free-flowing “consulting” taps from the Clinton Foundation ran dry from foreign entities seeking to buy influence.

    • A Proud Infidel®™ says:

      Hey Lars:
      1. You have been completely full of shit in the past.
      2. You are STILL completely full of shit.
      3. You have had to eat crow on multiple occasions in the past.
      4. I and everyone else predict that you and your side will be eating crow again.
      5. President Trump has already planned for this and will make it blow up in your faces, just watch, KAGA 2020!!!
      6. President Trump CONTINUES to speak to sold out crowds in huge venues with standing room only with people queuing up DAYS before he speaks while none of the D-rat candidates can even halfway fill a small high school gymnasium, cafeteria or a medium size tent.
      7. BIDEN is the one who abused the power of his Office to get that Ukrainian Investigator fired while his Son *SNORT!* Hunter was on the board for a Ukrainian Gas Company.

      You lose yet again, Comrade Seagull.

    • The Other Whitey says:

      Lars, have you ever made an accurate prediction, estimation, summation, or description in your entire existence?

      Why do I get the feeling that you spent lots of time in the Army telling everyone how good you supposedly are at what you do, while the guys and gals under you were busy doing your job for you? Does anyone else get that feeling?

    • Slow Joe says:

      Lars, your troll level is going down.

      You are back down to recruit.

      • A Proud Infidel®™️ says:

        Ooh, *POW!*, right in the kisser!!!

        Good one SJ, I’d also recommend that he gets Post Police Call duty this weekend as well!

  12. So If Trump asked the Ukraine to investigate reports of biden doing something not legal with under age boys, then the POTUS would be wrong asking since biden was running against him for president. Hmmmm.

    • Fyrfighter says:

      That pretty much sums up the dims position..

    • Poetrooper says:

      The Dems loudly and piously proclaim, “No one is above the law!” then immediately declare Joe Biden exempt from criminal investigation because he’s a presidential candidate.

      Typical Dem hypocrisy.

      • rgr769 says:

        But all the organs of the 0bama regime (CIA, FBI, State Dept., and DOJ) investigating and surveilling Trump during his campaign at the behest of Hillary and the DNC, based upon fraudulent reports, was perfectly proper.

    • Anonymous says:

      It’s only bad when it might make Democrats look bad, of course.

  13. Stacy0311 says:

    Hillary’s a dark horse? Percheron or Clydesdale?

  14. Ex-PH2 says:

    I really expected the Democrats to have a universal fit of apoplexy over this business. This is pretty close, but it would be nice if they’d all shrivel up and blow away.

    What a bunch of spoiled brats they are.

  15. Devtun says:

    These pols need to put some skin in the game. Those who vote to impeach, and then remove need to resign if the Senate fails to get the votes to convict. Yes, when the congresscritter resigns, they can never come back.

  16. A Proud Infidel®™️ says:

    I’m sure that President Trump already has a plan and will make this blow up in the face of the D-rats, I’m making some nachos after making a beer run!

    • The Other Whitey says:

      I wonder how much he plans vs how much he pulls out of his ass on the fly, Indy-style. Either way, it’s worked so far.

  17. Ex-PH2 says:

    Geez, Louise, that photo of Pelosi is the portrait of a rancorous, coiffured old harridan who finds out her poison didn’t work to get rid of her rival!

    Maybe that gavel she pounds will break at an auspicious time…. and publicly, too….

    • A Proud Infidel®™️ says:

      Nancy Pelosi doesn’t merely have a few loose nuts or bolts, that old hag’s gearbox is completely stripped out!!!

    • AW1Ed says:

      Why thank you, Ma’am. I searched for just the right pic to set the tone, and this one scared the bejeezus out of me. So I just had to share.
      *grin*

    • The Other Whitey says:

      Pelosi thinks she’s the second coming of Servilia of the Junii. She’s actually more like Cruella DeVille crossed with Fearless Leader (Boris & Natasha’s boss) and David Lo Pan.

  18. SFC D says:

    “Today, in service to our duty to the Constitution and our country…”

    They keep using these words. I do not think they mean what they think they mean. Translation:

    “Today, in order to maintain the level of power and control that we deem necessary, the House Committee on the Judiciary is introducing two articles of impeachment because we alone will decide what is best for the American public, because they cannot be trusted to think for themselves. The truth must be told, and the truth is whatever we say the truth is.”

  19. Wireman611 says:

    At least when the Clinton impeachment was undertaken, they had physical (blue dress} evidence. Here, all there is, everything is hurt feelings and a risk of job security. If I was Trump, after 2020, I’d turn the AG loose and have a more or less continuous stream of perp walks of the swamp monsters. Up to and including the former POTUS and FLOTUSes.

    • Mason says:

      What’s worse is all their witnesses are either giving second and third hand information or conjecture. The only direct testimony given thus far entirely exonerates the president.

      • A Proud Infidel®™ says:

        When this blows up in the D-rats’ faces I’m sure it’ll make the Mount St. Helens eruption look like a mole fart!

  20. USAFRetired says:

    How about we enforce existing Federal law

    18 USC 2384

    f two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

    (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, § 1, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

    18 USC 2382

    Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.

    (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(H), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

    There are a number of denizens of the swamp that seem to have run afoul those items of law.

  21. MSG Eric says:

    Two articles they could charge any president in history with…