Trump Must Be Impeached. Here's Why

Extenuating circumstances surrounding Clinton's crimes, which I already went over, coupled with aggravating circumstances surrounding Trump's which I also already went over.

You are rather grasping at straws here, going back 20 years and acting as if Congress is bound by precedent in these matters, which they are not. Clinton was popular and the Impeachment against him was seen by the public ( and rightly IMO) as a coup attempt by a rogue Congress. If anyone is the rogue now it's the President and the general public, (minus the Trumpistas, of course) is looking to the Congress to be saved from him. The Congress, for their part, is wondering how much he will hurt them in 2018 and how much they can mitigate this by getting rid of him themselves. Trump, finally, has nothing he can offer the Congress to enlist their support.

Face facts, your badger-headed hero is history, especially if any more smoking guns are found with the Hacking Collusion charges

 

For the umpteenth time: WHAT CRIMES?

 

http://www.commonknowledge.com

 

What crime?
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-37

 

Soooooo you think Trump helped Russia hack the DNC server, starting in Summer of 2015??? I really don't believe they would have needed his help. And "collusion" isn't a crime.

 

And yet, still nothing.

 

Obstruction of Justice and Coordinating the Hacking of the 2016 Election, and no, he has been PROVEN guilty of neither as they are both still under investigation. Please don't keep acting as if we must prove someone guilty of a crime in order to investigate them for it.

 

No, but there should be probable cause. And probable clause does not include 'I think the guy talked to a Russian some time ago.... and besides I hate the guy.' The Russian connection was a third rate speculation until 24 hours after the election when the Dems concluded that story might be a good scapegoat and get legs as to why the anointed one lost her arse.

 

You are wayyyy behind on the news.

 

Ah... Equivocation. Its OK when -your- guy commits a felony, but not the -other- guy.
Clearly, when I ask "Why would they change their mind", the answer is "The R next to his name".
Got it. Thanks.

 

Do you mean behind on the news that every intelligence agency and congressional committee -- including Democrats -- have been saying they have never seen any evidence of any Trump-Russian collusion? And that Comey has said the same thing? Only the Times and the Post (and, well, CNN and MSNBC, et al), your news sources I bet, have said that they heard from up to 30 or more anonymous sources (WOW!) these past months that there might be collusion.

 

The FBI, the NSA and the CIA all agree that the Russians hacked the election. It is documented fact that Trump and the Trumps had and have extensive connections to Russia, more than most of the Great Fortunes at their level. If Trump was innocent he would welcome an investigation, hell, he's demand one so as to be exonerated, instead he has done everything he can to block it, even resorting to means of dubious legality. How much more probable cause do you need?

 

This is true in the Constitution "misdemeanors" merely means misbehavior. That being said however the Democrats set the precident that obstruction of justice is not grounds for impeachment let alone removal from office. And as Dershowitz is noted above and as I have cited Prof. Turely and and former US Federal Prosecutor Andrew McCarthy elsewhere what has been reported does not constitute an obstruction of justice.

 

Amazing how the alt left dismisses the Clinton foundation, her servers, and props her up to run the country. Then they take "unnamed sources" and prove-false information about Russia and they want to impeach someone they hate. Best of luck to the hypocrites.

 

Define "extensive" and espeically as compared to others either in office or running for office.

 

Not equivocation, common sense. You want us to unseat an elected President because he cheated on his wife and look the other way when your man cheats the election with the help of a hostile foreign power, Yet another of the wonders we've come to expect from party that sees getting 3 million FEWER votes than its opponent as being a "mandate"

 

Characterize it how you want, the facts remain:
The only reason Democrats would change their mind about perjury and obstruction being impeachable offenses is if a Republican President is the target.
Please -- continue to prove my point for me.

 

This old ploy of shifting the focus is tiresome. There is the question of Russia meddling in our election process. Then there is the question of Trump (or his campaign) colluding with the Russians. Note Bene: NOT THE SAME THING. Second, I already said that 'I heard he talked to a Russian or two a few months ago' is not even close to probable cause. How many times did Obama and Hillary talk to Russians? (And we even got Obama's collusion on tape!) You seem to be unaware that businessmen and government officials talk to Russians and other foreign people all the time.
Why would anybody in their right mind open their affairs to a bunch of blood thirsty antagonists who have avowed to unseat him? Because the wolves said they would play nice???????

 

As I said, more than most of the Great Fortunes. Most American investment houses have tried to steer clear of Russia because of their instability, Trump has not. This may be just good business sense on his part as it means he has a clear field but it also means that he would have extensive contact with Putin and/or Putin's people, anybody that heavily invested in Russia would have to.

 

Clinton was not impeached because he cheated on his wife. IIRC cheating on a spouse was never mentioned in the articles of impeachment, or if they were it was just in passing. Hell, he wasn't even impeached for being a rapist and sexual abuser. Or for messing with Lewinsky, though that did play an unfortunate sideshow to the impeachment proceedings; that is not an impeachable offense in my view.

 

If Trump is so all fired innocent then WHY are all of you so against an investigation? Why aren't you and he DEMANDING one, so as to exonerate your pure lamb. I'll tell you why, because you and anyone else can see he's as crooked as dog's hind leg and you just want him to "get on" with his program to carve up the vulnerable populations like a Thanksgiving turkey for him and his friends.....er..."Make America Great Again"

 

Of course normal people are against any further waste of U.S taxpayer money. It's ridiculous. It's a joke. You lost the election because you were not good enough. If you want a proper investigation, call former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan to testify before the congress. There was never a Russian hacking. All important leaks from the DNC came from Americans, Americans with conscience. Unfortunately one of them had to pay with his life.

 

Oh bull **** too. He perjured himself to avoid his wife finding out he had an affair and he did that because CONFIDENTIAL testimony before a Grand Jury was being ILLEGALLY leaked to the public. You are not allowed to ask questions in open court that are allowed in a Grand Jury testimony just because such testimony is supposed to be confidential. The Republicans used illegal manuevers to try and unseat a sitting President and thwart the will of the people, this thwarting being a common goal of theirs throughout their history

 

Your tinfoil hat looks new, Kaiser or Alcoa?

 

If you have done nothing wrong, why bother with the 4th amendment?