(10-05-2019, 05:35 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 04:55 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 03:20 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 02:51 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 01:59 PM)zigbee Wrote: What law? Provide the statute...
I don't have the exact statute, but it's been referenced here previously. Here's what I found.
Justice Department veterans say Trump could be accused of breaking 4 laws in the Ukraine whistleblower scandal
On Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formally launched an inquiry into impeaching President Donald Trump based on his conduct during a July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
The phone call, and the actions of Trump and those around him before and after the conversation, are the subject of an explosive whistleblower complaint an intelligence official filed against Trump in August, which was released by the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday.
The complaint accused Trump of "using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election" during the call.
Trump ordered his administration to withhold a nearly $400 million military-aid package to Ukraine days before the phone call.
While the White House's publicly-released notes of the call show the US president made no direct mention of offering aid in exchange for Zelensky's assistance in probing former Vice President Joe Biden, they confirm Trump brought up how the US does "a lot for Ukraine" right before asking Zelensky to do him a "favor" by investigating Biden and discrediting the former special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe.
Read more:Â 2 key facts refute Trump's conspiracy theories about the Ukraine scandal
The House of Representatives doesn't need to prove that a president committed a crime outlined in the federal code to pass articles of impeachment. They instead impeach based on whether the president committed "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" as outlined in Article II, Section 4 of the US constitution.
But Justice Department veterans say that by pressuring Ukraine's government to investigate his political rivals - and possibly using taxpayer-funded military aid as a leverage tool - Trump may well have violated a number of federal laws.
"The conduct discussed in this complaint is so direct that it's striking," said Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor from the Southern District of New York who specialized in organized crime. "You have the President of the United States in direct communication - some might say collusion - with the president of Ukraine."
In all, former prosecutors told Insider, there are at least four areas where Trump could face legal jeopardy.
Illegally soliciting campaign help from a foreign government
The most obvious way in which Trump could have violated the law is by soliciting material campaign aid from a foreign government, which expressly violates the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971.
More:
https://www.businessinsider.com/laws-tru...ase-2019-9 AS always...dem talking points and you got nothing.
You want us to believe that there's nothing there. Which is fine. It's all part of the dogmatic support for Trump. US??????????????? LOL, you mean you and dumbazzzzz libs? I don't care what you believe. I asked what law and you couldn't produce any.  Its really YOU want to convince the board libs are not wrong.  They are. No law was broken.
You care about what Fox News tells you. Even if Trump is impeached, I'll bet the farm you don't admit a law was broken.
(10-05-2019, 05:48 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: You care about what Fox News tells you. Even if Trump is impeached, I'll bet the farm you don't admit a law was broken.
Perfect example of a double standard
Posts: 37,751
Threads: 3,260
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
58
(10-05-2019, 05:48 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 05:35 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 04:55 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 03:20 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 02:51 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: I don't have the exact statute, but it's been referenced here previously. Here's what I found.
Justice Department veterans say Trump could be accused of breaking 4 laws in the Ukraine whistleblower scandal
On Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formally launched an inquiry into impeaching President Donald Trump based on his conduct during a July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
The phone call, and the actions of Trump and those around him before and after the conversation, are the subject of an explosive whistleblower complaint an intelligence official filed against Trump in August, which was released by the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday.
The complaint accused Trump of "using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election" during the call.
Trump ordered his administration to withhold a nearly $400 million military-aid package to Ukraine days before the phone call.
While the White House's publicly-released notes of the call show the US president made no direct mention of offering aid in exchange for Zelensky's assistance in probing former Vice President Joe Biden, they confirm Trump brought up how the US does "a lot for Ukraine" right before asking Zelensky to do him a "favor" by investigating Biden and discrediting the former special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe.
Read more:Â 2 key facts refute Trump's conspiracy theories about the Ukraine scandal
The House of Representatives doesn't need to prove that a president committed a crime outlined in the federal code to pass articles of impeachment. They instead impeach based on whether the president committed "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" as outlined in Article II, Section 4 of the US constitution.
But Justice Department veterans say that by pressuring Ukraine's government to investigate his political rivals - and possibly using taxpayer-funded military aid as a leverage tool - Trump may well have violated a number of federal laws.
"The conduct discussed in this complaint is so direct that it's striking," said Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor from the Southern District of New York who specialized in organized crime. "You have the President of the United States in direct communication - some might say collusion - with the president of Ukraine."
In all, former prosecutors told Insider, there are at least four areas where Trump could face legal jeopardy.
Illegally soliciting campaign help from a foreign government
The most obvious way in which Trump could have violated the law is by soliciting material campaign aid from a foreign government, which expressly violates the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971.
More:
https://www.businessinsider.com/laws-tru...ase-2019-9 AS always...dem talking points and you got nothing.
You want us to believe that there's nothing there. Which is fine. It's all part of the dogmatic support for Trump. US??????????????? LOL, you mean you and dumbazzzzz libs? I don't care what you believe. I asked what law and you couldn't produce any.  Its really YOU want to convince the board libs are not wrong.  They are. No law was broken.
You care about what Fox News tells you. Even if Trump is impeached, I'll bet the farm you don't admit a law was broken. What law? I'm still waiting. ![[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR8z0S90tAVJAvj-ZB5p1H..._FlkkqMMa1]](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR8z0S90tAVJAvj-ZB5p1H59NHW05qiCS87VXulTD_FlkkqMMa1)
Impeach and conviction of impeachment to remove from office isn't the same.  Glad to give you a little government lesson...but you seem to get schooled a good bit on here. ![[Image: emoji310.png]](https://emoji.tapatalk-cdn.com/emoji310.png)
Make America Honest Again
Posts: 9,254
Threads: 154
Joined: Jun 2019
Reputation:
22
Why are any of you responding to that sack of *****?
He will ruin every opportunity at decent debate or discourse around here...
(10-05-2019, 05:56 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 05:48 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 05:35 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 04:55 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 03:20 PM)zigbee Wrote: AS always...dem talking points and you got nothing.
You want us to believe that there's nothing there. Which is fine. It's all part of the dogmatic support for Trump. US??????????????? LOL, you mean you and dumbazzzzz libs? I don't care what you believe. I asked what law and you couldn't produce any.  Its really YOU want to convince the board libs are not wrong.  They are. No law was broken.
You care about what Fox News tells you. Even if Trump is impeached, I'll bet the farm you don't admit a law was broken. What law? I'm still waiting.Â
Impeach and conviction of impeachment to remove from office isn't the same.  Glad to give you a little government lesson...but you seem to get schooled a good bit on here.
Of course you're waiting. Dwelling on a minor detail is a great way to avoid the actual issue.
I never said impeachment means removal from office but, please, feel free to keep making up *****.
Posts: 37,751
Threads: 3,260
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
58
(10-05-2019, 07:33 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 05:56 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 05:48 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 05:35 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 04:55 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: You want us to believe that there's nothing there. Which is fine. It's all part of the dogmatic support for Trump. US??????????????? LOL, you mean you and dumbazzzzz libs? I don't care what you believe. I asked what law and you couldn't produce any.  Its really YOU want to convince the board libs are not wrong.  They are. No law was broken.
You care about what Fox News tells you. Even if Trump is impeached, I'll bet the farm you don't admit a law was broken. What law? I'm still waiting.Â
Impeach and conviction of impeachment to remove from office isn't the same.  Glad to give you a little government lesson...but you seem to get schooled a good bit on here.
Of course you're waiting. Dwelling on a minor detail is a great way to avoid the actual issue.
I never said impeachment means removal from office but, please, feel free to keep making up *****. Sure, he can be impeached but not convicted...BUT, your point is that I would not admit a law broken. WHAT LAW? Impeaching in the house and sent to the senate still doesn't mean ANY law was broken at all.
Make America Honest Again
(10-05-2019, 07:40 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 07:33 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 05:56 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 05:48 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 05:35 PM)zigbee Wrote: US??????????????? LOL, you mean you and dumbazzzzz libs? I don't care what you believe. I asked what law and you couldn't produce any.  Its really YOU want to convince the board libs are not wrong.  They are. No law was broken.
You care about what Fox News tells you. Even if Trump is impeached, I'll bet the farm you don't admit a law was broken. What law? I'm still waiting.Â
Impeach and conviction of impeachment to remove from office isn't the same.  Glad to give you a little government lesson...but you seem to get schooled a good bit on here.
Of course you're waiting. Dwelling on a minor detail is a great way to avoid the actual issue.
I never said impeachment means removal from office but, please, feel free to keep making up *****. Sure, he can be impeached but not convicted...BUT, your point is that I would not admit a law broken. WHAT LAW? Impeaching in the house and sent to the senate still doesn't mean ANY law was broken at all.
Like I said, the specific law/code was already noted here. I don't care if a law was broken.  Trump has out lived his usefulness. I want a different, potentially viable, person to get the R nomination.
Posts: 37,751
Threads: 3,260
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
58
(10-05-2019, 08:09 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 07:40 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 07:33 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 05:56 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 05:48 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: You care about what Fox News tells you. Even if Trump is impeached, I'll bet the farm you don't admit a law was broken. What law? I'm still waiting.Â
Impeach and conviction of impeachment to remove from office isn't the same.  Glad to give you a little government lesson...but you seem to get schooled a good bit on here.
Of course you're waiting. Dwelling on a minor detail is a great way to avoid the actual issue.
I never said impeachment means removal from office but, please, feel free to keep making up *****. Sure, he can be impeached but not convicted...BUT, your point is that I would not admit a law broken. WHAT LAW? Impeaching in the house and sent to the senate still doesn't mean ANY law was broken at all.
Like I said, the specific law/code was already noted here. I don't care if a law was broken.  Trump has out lived his usefulness. I want a different, potentially viable, person to get the R nomination. Can you name it? I missed it. Thankx
Make America Honest Again
(10-05-2019, 08:11 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 08:09 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 07:40 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 07:33 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 05:56 PM)zigbee Wrote: What law? I'm still waiting.Â
Impeach and conviction of impeachment to remove from office isn't the same.  Glad to give you a little government lesson...but you seem to get schooled a good bit on here.
Of course you're waiting. Dwelling on a minor detail is a great way to avoid the actual issue.
I never said impeachment means removal from office but, please, feel free to keep making up *****. Sure, he can be impeached but not convicted...BUT, your point is that I would not admit a law broken. WHAT LAW? Impeaching in the house and sent to the senate still doesn't mean ANY law was broken at all.
Like I said, the specific law/code was already noted here. I don't care if a law was broken.  Trump has out lived his usefulness. I want a different, potentially viable, person to get the R nomination. Can you name it? I missed it. Thankx
If I had memorized the code, I would have already posted it.
Posts: 37,751
Threads: 3,260
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
58
(10-05-2019, 08:16 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 08:11 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 08:09 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 07:40 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 07:33 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: Of course you're waiting. Dwelling on a minor detail is a great way to avoid the actual issue.
I never said impeachment means removal from office but, please, feel free to keep making up *****. Sure, he can be impeached but not convicted...BUT, your point is that I would not admit a law broken. WHAT LAW? Impeaching in the house and sent to the senate still doesn't mean ANY law was broken at all.
Like I said, the specific law/code was already noted here. I don't care if a law was broken.  Trump has out lived his usefulness. I want a different, potentially viable, person to get the R nomination. Can you name it? I missed it. Thankx
If I had memorized the code, I would have already posted it. Google is your friend bubbers....just give me the code/law etc. So far you are failing miserably.
Make America Honest Again
Posts: 1,356
Threads: 49
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
17
How has Trump outlived his usefulness? You're not making much sense. Now you don't care if he broke a law or not? You don't like Trump, we know that. Why can't you leave it at that and quit making an ass of yourself.
(10-05-2019, 08:18 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 08:16 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 08:11 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 08:09 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 07:40 PM)zigbee Wrote: Sure, he can be impeached but not convicted...BUT, your point is that I would not admit a law broken. WHAT LAW? Impeaching in the house and sent to the senate still doesn't mean ANY law was broken at all.
Like I said, the specific law/code was already noted here. I don't care if a law was broken.  Trump has out lived his usefulness. I want a different, potentially viable, person to get the R nomination. Can you name it? I missed it. Thankx
If I had memorized the code, I would have already posted it. Google is your friend bubbers....just give me the code/law etc. So far you are failing miserably.
Google is great but, as we all know, specific legal codes are never referenced here. However, please keep dwelling on details.
Posts: 37,751
Threads: 3,260
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
58
(10-05-2019, 08:29 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 08:18 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 08:16 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 08:11 PM)zigbee Wrote: (10-05-2019, 08:09 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: Like I said, the specific law/code was already noted here. I don't care if a law was broken.  Trump has out lived his usefulness. I want a different, potentially viable, person to get the R nomination. Can you name it? I missed it. Thankx
If I had memorized the code, I would have already posted it. Google is your friend bubbers....just give me the code/law etc. So far you are failing miserably.
Google is great but, as we all know, specific legal codes are never referenced here. However, please keep dwelling on details. ![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media.giphy.com/media/xThuWtyb1yMlKIrz0c/giphy.gif)
Yes, you got hammered by me.  SWEET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Make America Honest Again
(10-05-2019, 08:25 PM)sparky454 Wrote: How has Trump outlived his usefulness? You're not making much sense. Now you don't care if he broke a law or not? You don't like Trump, we know that. Why can't you leave it at that and quit making an ass of yourself.
The only reason I wanted him to win was for SCOTUS justices.  He's a dolt and a moron.  I'd love for something to prevent him from running so an adult would have a chance at the R nomination.
Posts: 37,751
Threads: 3,260
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
58
(10-05-2019, 08:39 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: (10-05-2019, 08:25 PM)sparky454 Wrote: How has Trump outlived his usefulness? You're not making much sense. Now you don't care if he broke a law or not? You don't like Trump, we know that. Why can't you leave it at that and quit making an ass of yourself.
The only reason I wanted him to win was for SCOTUS justices.  He's a dolt and a moron.  I'd love for something to prevent him from running so an adult would have a chance at the R nomination. So you pretend he did something that was breaking the law? HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
Make America Honest Again
|
