DOJ Impeachment?Breaking news

[Riders]

Either the lawyer was misquoted, or he needs to go back to law school.

No he can not order the DOJ to do anything its abuse of power. Abuse ofpower is cause for impeachment.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Dems in the House could but it does not matter who would do it.

The House is the only group who can impeach a President. Then, if impeached, the case goes to the Senate to vote if the indictment is valid and to have the President removed from office or not. This is probably why Trump will not be impeached, even with a Dem controlled House, because it would be born, live, and die in the House.

 

[Riders]

The House is the only group who can impeach a President. Then, if impeached, the case goes to the Senate to vote if the indictment is valid and to have the President removed from office or not. This is probably why Trump will not be impeached, even with a Dem controlled House, because it would be born, live, and die in the House.

MAybe maybe not but he still has to be warned if his behavior could warrant impeachment.

 

[Shaul]

I did not ring up impeachment this time his Lawyer did. Don't kill the messenger, I'm telling you his Lawyer said to him its considered to abuse of power its coming upon CNN now. If he could do it sense he said he was he would so if your right you will see him doing it, he already said he was going to do it.

Actually you can’t say even that. This NY Times storied can not be relied on for a host of reasons. To begin with the NY Times is biased against Trump. Furthermore it has, by its own admission, fabricated and falsified stories before. Also it uses two purported anonymous sources. Do these sources even exist? Who are they? Were these purported sources present during a private meeting between Trump and his attorney? That seems unlikely. Did they hear this first hand? We can’t know. Do we have the context of this supposed discussion? No, we don’t. We can say that these witnesses are the kind of people that would violate a confidential lawyer client conversation and do it anonymously so they could say anything they want. And that they would knowingly spread rumors to an institution that they knew wanted “dirt” on Trump. What we have is the following. A biased newspaper that hates Trump claims that two purported confidence breaking anonymous sources, who may not even have first hand knowledge of the events they talked about claim that Trump asked his attorney about that legality of ordering the DOJ to investigate people and that his attorney supposedly told him he might possibly face impeachment should he try. None of this is confirmed by Trump nor his attorney. In other words, it is all unsubstantiated nonsense. There is no actual evidence that Trump asked his attorney about this. Which even if he did is no crime whatsoever. Clients can discuss things and get advice on things with their attorneys. In fact,that is kind of the purpose of consultation.

Some “Trump haters” want to believe these things. That’s why media outlets supply them with grist for their fevered imaginations. Some people despise Trump soooo much they willing buy anything that will confirm their biased opinions that Trump is evil incarnate.

 

[Riders]

Actually you can’t say even that. This NY Times storied can not be relied on for a host of reasons. To begin with the NY Times is biased against Trump. Furthermore it has, by its own admission, fabricated and falsified stories before. Also it uses two purported anonymous sources. Do these sources even exist? Who are they? Were these purported sources present during a private meeting between Trump and his attorney? That seems unlikely. Did they hear this first hand? We can’t know. Do we have the context of this supposed discussion? No, we don’t. We can say that these witnesses are the kind of people that would violate a confidential lawyer client conversation and do it anonymously so they could say anything they want. And that they would knowingly spread rumors to an institution that they knew wanted “dirt” on Trump. What we have is the following. A biased newspaper that hates Trump claims that two purported confidence breaking anonymous sources, who may not even have first hand knowledge of the events they talked about claim that Trump asked his attorney about that legality of ordering the DOJ to investigate people and that his attorney supposedly told him he might possibly face impeachment should he try. None of this is confirmed by Trump nor his attorney. In other words, it is all unsubstantiated nonsense. There is no actual evidence that Trump asked his attorney about this. Which even if he did is no crime whatsoever. Clients can discuss things and get advice on things with their attorneys. In fact,that is kind of the purpose of consultation.

Some “Trump haters” want to believe these things. That’s why media outlets supply them with grist for their fevered imaginations. Some people despise Trump soooo much they willing buy anything that will confirm their biased opinions that Trump is evil incarnate.

Uh no your wrong NY Times is NOT the only ones reporting this.Actually there's about 50 other webs sights I found it on.

I will post 1 of the 100: Frankly I am getting tired of you Trump supporters crying out fake news every time you hear anyone give new reports that makes your guy look bad so you can stay in your fantasy world.

Not only that but actually uh sorry totally you this but frankly I have seen Trump
talk about trying to get the investigators to keep investigating Clinton inappropriatly way way after she was cleared.He stills talks about it so nuff said.

 

[Skipper]

There will be no impeachment. Why? It would be futile for the Democrats in the House to begin impeachment proceedings. The Senate is controlled by Republicans, and they would not support the impeachment of Trump unless he did something so traitorous that they had no choice.

So, my prediction is the Democrats will go after others in the Trump administration as well as hold investigation after investigation of Trump and make his life totally miserable.

 

[Revoltingest]

So its Just coming breaking news.No no impeachment yet.

I feel so informed!

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

There will be no impeachment. Why? It would be futile

That depends on what the purpose of impeaching Trump is. If it to show the nation that at least one house of Congress cares about the president's words and deeds and finds some unacceptable, cares about meeting its oversight responsibilities, and thinks that impeachable offenses should be followed by impeachment, then the House should act to impeach. Nothing else need be accomplished for the process to be justified.

The Senate is controlled by Republicans, and they would not support the impeachment of Trump unless he did something so traitorous that they had no choice.

That's not possible. The Senate Republicans would not convict Trump even were he found colluding with the Russians traitorously and illegally manipulating the 2016 elections. They're obviously not interested in Trump's character or any criminal past that Meller might uncover.

 

[fantome profane]

That depends on what the purpose of impeaching Trump is. If it to show the nation that at least one house of Congress cares about the president's words and deeds and finds some unacceptable, cares about meeting its oversight responsibilities, and thinks that impeachable offenses should be followed by impeachment, then the House should act to impeach. Nothing else need be accomplished for the process to be justified.

Impeachment might also be a way to make public information the A.G. might try to conceal.

 

[Shad]

I will post 1 of the 100: Frankly I am getting tired of you Trump supporters crying out fake news every time you hear anyone give new reports that makes your guy look bad so you can stay in your fantasy world.

Hilarious. You get basic facts wrong and when called out on it you whine about the wrong things without a clue.

 

[Riders]

Hilarious. You get basic facts wrong and when called out on it you whine about the wrong things without a clue.

No my facts are not wrong.You just want them to be. Thats your fantasy.

 

[Riders]

I feel so informed!

Read the article,One of the many articles.

 

[Shad]

No my facts are not wrong.You just want them to be. Thats your fantasy.

Like you getting impeachment wrong in this very thread. Hilarious.