Meanwhile Trump is Guilty

No. The accusation of the inquiry being “behind closed doors” is nothing but a bogus attack on the process of the inquiry, because the T rumpists have nothing valid to say about T rump’s innocence. The special hearing that the T rump Republicans barged into, en mass (and illegally, by the way, with bringing their cell phones in atop secret environment) was just the regular process. AND it is a process that was established and voted on when the Repubs were in power. The barging in on that meeting was a STUNT designed to do something for a guilty POTUS, when there is not much really they can do. Initial closed door sessions is part of the due process. The Repubs had closed door mtgs during their unending investigations into Benghazi, and other investigations. AND that was WITHOUT announcing and Impeachment inquiry. In the hearing that the T rump congressmen barged in, many of those were already allowed to attend the closed door session. And the closed door hearings have as many Repubs as Dems anyway.

This phase is similar to the grand jury part of the criminal justice system. The potentially accused person is not allowed to barge in and try to undermine the grand jury process. But Dems are notorious wooses, so soon they will vote to formally establish the Impeachment Inquiry process (because the T rumpists complain about it), although there is absolutely no Constitutional requirement that this be done, to officially start the inquiry process. Also, the Dems will probably start open hearings very soon, because of all the howling by T rumpists. But ironically, they will probably not like it when it happens, because what the people who are testifying are saying, is making T rump look guiltier and guiltier.

Anyway, this part of the due process, will lead to the actual charges (in the case of Impeachment, this is called articles of impeachment) being sent to the Senate. That is where the trial occurs. That is where he gets all of the due process protections (probably much more so, since he is POTUS) as any accused person.

And seriously William, this is not about socialism and communism threatening our democracy. That is, I daresay, a weak outdated paranoid jingoistic meme. Our democracy is threatened right now by a POTUS who seems to have a relentless aspiration to become our DOTUS (Dictator of the United States).

 

But William, you are correct that T rump will not be technically guilty by law until there is some sort of conviction. Similar to how someone like, say, Jeffrey Dahmer was innocent until his trial was done. The general public probably didn’t consider him to be innocent, but legally he was.

And if you accuse me of spitting out accusations and hate towards T rump, I will plead no lo contendre. And I fervently admit that I hate what T rump has done, and is continuing to do, to my country.

If I follow the logic, you can’t talk about the evidence of his guilt because that’s accusing him of guilt before he’s convicted, but you want the investigation to be open. We can’t have investigations because he is not proven guilty yet, but there has to be a vote on his guilt, based on, what?

I might be exaggerating a bit here, but it’s not far from what you’re saying. Explain what process you think there should be. Something more than vague comparisons to dictators.

Lausten, are you addressing me? Because, if you want, I can be more specific about comparing T rump to dictators.

Nope, that was to William. I just read some Hannity, he sounds just like him.

 

  1. Certainly you have a right to vote your conscience. No one has indicated otherwise. I am not the thought police. Think what you want. I am saying Trump is simply under investigation. According to the rhetoric on this forum, Trump is already guilty. Think what you want, say what you want. As for me, I hope I never judge someone as guilty until they have a fair trial, no matter how much evidence is on the table, and no matter how despicable that person is.
  2. Would you want someone sitting on your jury with their mind already made up? You are not on Trump ‘s jury and can think what you please, say what you please, but Demos in Congress will be his jurors in the House impeachment proceedings. and more than a few had their minds made up the moment Trump won the election.
  3. In no way am I defending Trump. I fear that he may even be mentally unbalanced. Demos in Congress have every right to investigate anyone they please. The IRS does it all the time. It is the hate that bothers me. When Demos cry impeachment before a president is sworn in, that is hate; that is bias; that is prejudice. No federal judge in their right mind would allow such prejudice in a court of law, That judge would order a change of venue, but, of course, impeachment proceedings are different.
  4. I was trying to state that Clinton was treated the same way by Republicans, originally tried for crimes he supposedly committed before he took oath of office, and then nailed for lying under oath after months of relentless investigation. Republicans hated Clinton. The trial was never fair. I am not defending Clinton lying. I just do not like the way that hate relentlessly pursued the Clinton hearings.
  5. I know impeachment proceedings are different than a regular courtroom. But, it would be frightening to me to be on trial in any proceedings with biased jurors, judges, and prosecutors, and yes, even biased spectators, even though spectators have the legal right.
  6. The right to a fair and impartial trial should extend to Congressional trials too.
  7. I am not trying to evade answering any questions. I am simply saying Trump is not legally guilty until due process, and hate should not be in the equation, not in a courtroom, nor in Congress, or during investigation, especially when the accused is perceived as overwhelmingly guilty before a fair and impartial investigation even begins.
  8. Last but not least, if any of you on this forum were ever accused of a crime, innocent or guilty, you would want me on your jury.

So William what do you think of all those people trump tars and feathers to the glee of his audience?

Oh and by the way,

Tracking 30 Investigations

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/13/us/politics/trump-investigations.html

Related to Trump
By LARRY BUCHANAN and KAREN YOURISH UPDATED SEPT. 25, 2019
Federal, state and congressional authorities are scrutinizing many aspects of Donald J. Trump’s life through investigations related to his businesses, campaign, inauguration and presidency. We’ll be tracking them here. According to reporting by The New York Times, there are currently at least:
12
CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATIONS
10
FEDERAL CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS
8
STATE AND LOCAL INVESTIGATIONS


 

 

NOVEMBER 5, 2018

https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/the-complete-listing-so-far-atrocities-1-546

LEST WE FORGET THE HORRORS: A CATALOG OF TRUMP’S WORST CRUELTIES, COLLUSIONS, CORRUPTIONS, AND CRIMES
THE COMPLETE LISTING (SO FAR): ATROCITIES 1-546
by BEN PARKER, STEPHANIE STEINBRECHER,and KELSEY RONAN

KEY
– Sexual Misconduct & Harassment
– White Supremacy
– Public Statements / Tweets
– Collusion with Russia & Obstruction of Justice
– Trump Staff /Administration
– Trump Family Business Dealings
– Policy
– Environment


 

 

 

 

 

https://americasvoice.org/trumphatemap/

President-elect Donald Trump’s xenophobic rhetoric didn’t just push his fellow candidates to the right on immigration (in what has become known as the “Trump Effect”). It’s gone beyond the political world and injected itself into everyday life — and, in many instances across dozens of states, in a very violent ways.

This map shows documented instances where President-elect Donald Trump, his supporters, or his staff have harassed or attacked Latinos, immigrants, Muslim-American, African-Americans, and other minority and marginalized groups.

You can view individual incidents on the map by clicking directly on the Trump head “markers,” or you can click on the box-shaped symbol at the top left corner of the map to see a pull-down list of the incidents.


https://www.citizensforethics.org/a-campaign-to-defraud-2/

PRESIDENT TRUMP’S APPARENT CAMPAIGN FINANCE CRIMES, COVER-UP, AND CONSPIRACY
There is compelling evidence that Donald J. Trump may have personally committed up to eight criminal offenses while campaigning for president and during the first year of his presidency. The potential offenses include violations of laws regulating campaign contributions and their disclosure, making false records and statements, and a conspiracy to defraud (or to violate the laws of) the United States.

We take no pleasure in explaining why anyone, much less a sitting president, could face criminal liability for his conduct, but we hope to make two modest contributions to the public discourse on this subject: First, by collecting and setting forth the remarkable volume of facts that have been admitted by two of President Trump’s likely co-conspirators or established in press reports, we hope to recapture the narrative that is so easily lost in an era of ever-shortening news cycles. Second, by articulating how the criminal law could be applied to the facts as we know them, we hope to provide structure to the ongoing conversation about the gravity of President Trump’s conduct.

Five of Trump’s potential violations involved his apparent knowing and willful direction, receipt, and concealment of unlawful contributions to his presidential campaign in violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), 52 U.S.C. § 30101 et seq. While it is true that technical offenses of the FECA are penalized with civil fines, more serious offenses are subject to criminal penalties. Unlawful campaign contributions or expenditures in excess of $25,000, made knowingly and willfully, are felonies punishable by up to five years in prison.

THE EIGHT CRIMINAL OFFENSES, INCLUDING SEVEN FELONIES, POTENTIALLY COMMITTED BY TRUMP INCLUDE:

*Causing American Media Inc. (AMI) to make and/or accepting (or causing his then lawyer Michael Cohen to accept) an unlawful corporate contribution related to Karen McDougal.

**Two instances of causing Cohen to make and/or accepting an unlawful individual contributions related to Stephanie Clifford and February 2015 online polling.

**Two instances of causing Donald J. Trump for President LLC’s failure to report contributions from AMI and Cohen related to McDougal and Clifford.

*Causing Donald J. Trump for President LLC to file false reports with the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

*Making a false statement by failing to disclose liability to Cohen for the Clifford payment on his 2017 public financial disclosure form.

*Conspiracy to defraud the United States by undermining the lawful function of the FEC and/or violating federal campaign finance law related to “hush money” payments, false statements, and cover-ups of reimbursement payments to Cohen made by the Trump Organization.

Read the full report, A Campaign to Defraud, here.

I am simply saying Trump is not legally guilty until due process, and hate should not be in the equation, not in a courtroom, nor in Congress, or during investigation, especially when the accused is perceived as overwhelmingly guilty before a fair and impartial investigation even begins. Last but not least, if any of you on this forum were ever accused of a crime, innocent or guilty, you would want me on your jury.
Actually I doubt that. The man has left decades worths of broken promises and contracts, blaming others for everything. Now he's got you in his back pocket - treat trump with a little fairness, YEAH DAMNED STRAIGHT LETS TREAT HIM WITH THE FAIRNESS HE'S SHOWN OTHERS

A brief history of Trump's small-time swindles

Jeff Spross | July 11, 2018

<a href="https://theweek.com/articles/783976/brief-history-trumps-smalltime-swindles">https://theweek.com/articles/783976/brief-history-trumps-smalltime-swindles</a>

Contractor says Trump refusing to pay for work at DC hotel
By MICHAEL BIESECKER January 25, 2017

https://www.apnews.com/2862e2a6c5814eb981893bc6e381c2f9


Donald Trump’s Business Plan Left a Trail of Unpaid Bills

<a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-business-plan-left-a-trail-of-unpaid-bills-1465504454">https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-business-plan-left-a-trail-of-unpaid-bills-1465504454</a>

True to form, Trump finds a way to stiff contractors (again)
By Steve Benen - 02/14/19 08:40 AM

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/true-form-trump-finds-way-stiff-contractors-again


oh and <a href="https://americasvoice.org/trumphatemap/">https://americasvoice.org/trumphatemap/</a>  but than considering that vandalizing our government as much as possible has been his goal one, oh that and being our Russian Obligate President, he has been pretty damned successful.  .

Hey, you guys are right in saying what you believe. Dems hate Republicans and vise versa. I hate no one. That is why I am an independent voter. I will not take time to discuss the process I would like to see happen, because it is moot. Nothing you or I can say or do will change the outcome. Instead, I will tell you what I believe will come of all of this:

(1) Trump will be impeached in the House, without a doubt. No way to stop it.

(2) if Republicans remove trump in the Senate, it will be a disaster for the Party. Republicans will be removed from office next election, especially southern states. The Party will lay in ruins, maybe for good.

(3) Even though Republicans in the Senate know Trump is guilty, they will probably vote for Trump to remain in office. Their base will retaliate severely if Republicans vote against Trump. Most Rep will not vote Dem. They will just stay home and not vote. Like Dems, Republicans have always been cowards. They will cave to their base, regardless of right or wrong.

(4) But, if Trump is impeached in the House, and remains President, expect a severe retaliation and unification by Trump’s base. Even evangelicals, who are now highly suspicious of Trump, will vote Trump. Trump will most likely be elected in 2020.

(5) If no action is taken, Trump will most likely be defeated in 2020. Too many electorate now mistrusts Trump, especially independents, and many of his own base. Fired too many people. Cannot get along with his own party, probably not even his wife.

(6) Bottom line, hate all you want. Use no logic. Go for impeachment, Don’t wait to kick him out. Try to remove him quickly because he is dangerous, lose in the Senate, re-elect Trump in 2020. Four more years of Trump. Start impeachment all over. Spend 32 million dollars once more.

Peloshi knows this. That is why she was so reluctant for impeachment inquiry. She eventually caved to the left. Rest assured, even if the final charges are extremely serious, she will be worried. She may be the only Dem left that knows real logic.

 

 

Pelosi caved to the pressure of T rump continuing to commit crimes willy nilly. She knew as well as you that impeachment could play to T rump’s benefit in the coming election. And she knows that the chances of T rump being removed from office by impeachment are very very poor.

But what can you do when the POTUS is obviously committing a crime, AND that crime involves undermining the coming election to his advantage? Just poke your head in the sand?

Again, the jury part of impeachment is in the Senate. The Repubs have the majority. Worse than that, removal from office takes 2/3 of the Senate. Therefore, it is not a fair trial at all. The jury is stacked towards the T rumpists. It would take ALL of the Dems PLUS 20 Repubs to remove him from office.

And you keep bringing up $32 Million. Do you mean for the Mueller report? That was a sham from the get go. Mueller is a Repub. Rosenstein was the acting Attorney General for that whole deal. (Also a Republican). We eventually found out after they decided to end the investigation and after the new Attorney General (Bahr) flat out lied about what the report said, that Mueller was NEVER going to charge T rump for anything. Because the Republican Dept of Justice has a policy that a sitting President cannot be charged with any crime. You talk about fairness, but how is it fair that T rump can be above the law?

T rump has the undying loyalty of his MAGAheads. If any Repub speaks out against T rump, then their dear leader has threatened to have them primaried. That means, he gets a more obsequious candidate to run against that Repub, and then tells his MAGAheads to vote for the new guy. So any Repub who does not want to lose his job MUST toe the T rump line.

>> So it is NOT news that T rump will very probably NOT be removed from office. It is NOT news that when the sham vote in the Senate saves him, he WILL personally broadcast that he has been vindicated, that he was innocent all along, that it was all just a big witch hunt. Even with the Impeachment process, T rump is effectively, above the law with his control of the Senate.

So we all know, and have known all along, that Impeachment is likely to result in T rump’s political favor. Most of us smart liberals didn’t want to do it. But the public needs to know the truth about how T rump is abusing the power of his office. And the only way to get that out is thru the Impeachment process.

If that keeps you from voting for the Dem in 2020, then you could be partially responsible for keeping this pathetic excuse for a POTUS, who may then become our 1st DOTUS in a second term.

So, you’re afraid of him being mentally unbalanced, but the thing that upsets you most is that someone is predicting he is guilty? How is the one okay but the other not? There are 100 people who are eligible to be on that jury, and I ain’t one of them, so there’s no worry about what I think. “Hate” seems to be your other hot button. Well, gosh, I love everyone. The universe is perfect as it is. All god’s children will go to heaven. But, you know, sometimes, one of those children needs a time out. You are starting to sound that “Leave Brittany alone” video that came out a while back.

Most Rep will not vote Dem. They will just stay home and not vote. Like Dems, Republicans have always been cowards. They will cave to their base, regardless of right or wrong. - Will
So, not okay to look at evidence and determine what it means, but okay to read the minds of 60 million people call them cowards. Do you see why your statements are not being heard?

CC; I wish had the filing system you do. I have tons of links saved and a variety of folders, but I can lose something that I just wrote yesterday.

TimB

It is not “obvious” that Trump has committed a crime. How can it be obvious? The investigation is still ongoing. Why can’t people see this? If it is so obvious, why continue the investigation and waste money.

The only point “obvious” is that the news media says Trump is guilty, and some Dems say he was guilty before he took office. My “ gut-feeling” is that Trump is guilty. My gut- feeling is that Trump “may” be mentally imbalanced. I base this only on remarks from the news media. and Dems. remarks. The investigation is still on-going. People in this forum have already reached their verdict. Fine, but my verdict is slower, based on facts of the final report from the inquiry.

I am for a thorough, impartial investigation. Yes, it is legal for closed and locked-door investigation. Grand jurors do it. The investigation of the Catholic Church sex scandal was closed door by the grand jury. But, it was not political. Personally, not illegally, I do not like closed door investigation when political agendas are involved. I get real suspicious, especially when a man was already deemed guilty “before” the get-go.

I have seen nothing that says Mueller is Republican. Mueller had two FBI agents dismissed because of their anti- Trump remarks. That tells me Mueller was trying to be fair. I saw him testify before Congress, and even the news media said he came off as a dud. That may indicate Mueller is Republican.

 

 

If charges were in the Mueller report, and no charges were “pressed”, then 32 million dollars was thrown down a rat hole. It must not have been an investigation. It must have been a sham.

Why I have some feelings about our current man in the White House.

If it is so obvious, why continue the investigation and waste money.
I don't even know what you are arguing anymore. You want there to be a process, but don't want anyone to say anything about it until it is over? What world do you live in? If we shouldn't comment on it, why have it be open? Do we all just keep our mouth's shut until the government tells us what they decided? That sounds like 1930's Russia to me.
I have seen nothing that says Mueller is Republican.
Ah, you don't read. I think I see the problem here.

Lausten,

I never said people should not comment on Trump. You have first amendment rights. I simply say Trump is not guilty legally until due process. I live in a world where I will not declare a man guilty until all the facts are in. For you the news media has spoken, the Dems have spoken, and you have enough info from scanning the news to declare Trump guilty. Good for you.

Maybe I have more “ tolerance” than you. My father was a die- hard Dem. He was the most honest man I ever knew. My mom was a die-hard Republican. She was the most loving person I ever knew. Maybe that is why I am an independent thinker and think different. It is inherited.

 

William, Blind Justice does not mean being blind to the accumulating evidence.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-nadler/mueller-report-shows-evidence-trump-committed-crimes-house-judiciary-chairman-says-idUSKCN1UG0IK

Okay, now that you’ve backed yourself into this rather mundane corner, let’s review where you started. You said,

Remove Trump by hate, and his base will be fired up for revenge. They will go to the polls in mass next election. --Will
Lots of assumptions in there. The hate comes from the evidence of criminal activity. I don’t need a grand jury to tell me that’s going on. Nixon left once he saw the writing on the wall, for the good the country. Trump is going to fight this until the end and probably after that, country be damned. I’m confident that the investigations have already produced enough evidence for impeachment. I’m a little less confident that people like you will even look at that evidence, let alone make a rational conclusion based on it. But I’m confident there aren’t enough of you to make a difference.

You have shown here that you are willing to ignore everything you see and put some abstract value of judging a man without a technical verdict ahead of that.