Articles of Impeachment

Appears "bribery" will be one of the charges:

Wednesday’s public testimony from two senior diplomats, Pelosi (D-Calif.) said, “corroborated evidence of bribery uncovered in the inquiry and that the president abused power and violated his oath by threatening to withhold military aid and a White House meeting in exchange for an investigation into his political rival.”

Bribery, she suggested, amounted to a translation of quid pro quo that would stand to be more accessible to Americans: “Talking Latin around here: E pluribus unum — from many, one. Quid pro quo — bribery. And that is in the Constitution, attached to the impeachment proceedings.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...e9a202-0702-11ea-b17d-8b867891d39d_story.html

Bobber said:

Yeah doing a pretty good job at being the President.

Click to expand...

You honestly call this a good job?

GoldenBoy89 said:

You honestly call this a good job?

Click to expand...

From Russia's perspective it is.

Tigger45 said:

From Russia's perspective it is.

Click to expand...

Even Putin has got to be wanting his money back on this one.

GoldenBoy89 said:

Even Putin has got to be wanting his money back on this one.

Click to expand...

Nah he knew it was a loose canon when he bought it. He'll use the abnormalities to his advantage.

GoldenBoy89 said:

You honestly call this a good job?

Click to expand...

I'm not always a total fan of his style but yes I'd say honestly and sincerely he's done a pretty good job. And understand pretty doesn't mean perfect.....but yes pretty good.

Bobber said:

I'm not always a total fan of his style but yes I'd say honestly and sincerely he's done a pretty good job. And understand pretty doesn't mean perfect.....but yes pretty good.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. Thanks for the reply.

It would be hard not to, considering we saw him intimidating a witness while the hearings were happening on live TV.

Can Witness Intimidation be added to the poll?

GoldenBoy89 said:

You honestly call this a good job?

Click to expand...

He has accomplished more in three years than either Obama and Clinton did in their two terms that they were elected to, twice, because they were not so good, so they were reelected. Sad really.

ChristianForCats said:

With the impeachment inquiry hearings apparently finished, the Judiciary Committee will soon prepare for writing articles of impeachment. There have been no reports about when this is expected to happen, but I will be surprised if goes fast because so many articles have to be written.

Click to expand...

Schiff is making it sound like it’ll be ready when they return from thanksgiving.

Personally I think this rush is a mistake. Letting major witnesses get away with dodging subpoenas instead of taking it through the courts and forcing their testimonies just means the case ends up looking weaker than it otherwise could.

Kentonio said:

Schiff is making it sound like it’ll be ready when they return from thanksgiving.

Personally I think this rush is a mistake. Letting major witnesses get away with dodging subpoenas instead of taking it through the courts and forcing their testimonies just means the case ends up looking weaker than it otherwise could.

Click to expand...

I somewhat agree. The issue is that the Democrats want to get Impeachment -- no matter if they chose to impeach or not -- done before the end of the year. I clearly think they are looking to keep impeachment from being a major campaign issue, having it over before voting starts.

The issue is, if it goes to the Supreme Court, as all evidence suggests it will, then the hearings will likely drag at least into the summer -- after the primaries are finished. So, I can understand the Democrats not wanting to delay that long, and instead to just add an article for Obstruction of Justice.

OTOH, I do think they need to take a bit more time and issue subpoenas for Guiliani, Fruman, and Parnas; I also think they should see if they can get Bolton to testify since a lower court has ruled (I don't get the impression Bolton would appeal a decision he is required to testify). Parnas appears ready to testify and, I suspect, can add quite a bit into what actually happened in Ukraine.

SimplyMe said:

I somewhat agree. The issue is that the Democrats want to get Impeachment -- no matter if they chose to impeach or not -- done before the end of the year. I clearly think they are looking to keep impeachment from being a major campaign issue, having it over before voting starts.

The issue is, if it goes to the Supreme Court, as all evidence suggests it will, then the hearings will likely drag at least into the summer -- after the primaries are finished. So, I can understand the Democrats not wanting to delay that long, and instead to just add an article for Obstruction of Justice.

OTOH, I do think they need to take a bit more time and issue subpoenas for Guiliani, Fruman, and Parnas; I also think they should see if they can get Bolton to testify since a lower court has ruled (I don't get the impression Bolton would appeal a decision he is required to testify). Parnas appears ready to testify and, I suspect, can add quite a bit into what actually happened in Ukraine.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I totally didn’t get this whole ‘one court case to decide it all’ thing re subpoenas. If people want to ignore a subpoena then there should be a court case for each of them. Let them all put their arguments to a judge for why they think they can treat congress with contempt. Keep the pressure on them, and show them there are consequences to their actions and see if anyone breaks. It all just feels like the people dodging subpoenas are getting a much too easy ride of it.

Kentonio said:

Yeah, I totally didn’t get this whole ‘one court case to decide it all’ thing re subpoenas. If people want to ignore a subpoena then there should be a court case for each of them. Let them all put their arguments to a judge for why they think they can treat congress with contempt. Keep the pressure on them, and show them there are consequences to their actions and see if anyone breaks. It all just feels like the people dodging subpoenas are getting a much too easy ride of it.

Click to expand...

As was mentioned, the reason for almost all of them is that Trump ordered them not to testify. While each does tend to be its own case, once one has exhausted appeals, then the Supreme Court decision would likely apply to all of them.

Aryeh Jay said:

He has accomplished more in three years than either Obama and Clinton did in their two terms that they were elected to, twice, because they were not so good, so they were reelected. Sad really.

Click to expand...

A poster thinks Obama was not intimidating.

ChristianForCats said:

Does watching the impeachment hearings affect anyone's predictions on what will be included in the AOI?

Click to expand...

I think the real-time witness intimidation was something of a hint.