So you’re saying that the “favor” quote was part of what apocalypto posted??
Weird argument.
Link??
So you’re saying that the “favor” quote was part of what apocalypto posted??
Weird argument.
Link??
What is really stirring the pot is that this administration is getting too close to investigating what went on in the last administration. That is the unforgivable sin.
That is not what high crimes means.
We’ve been telling you about laws the man has broken for years now. The general response has been chortling because he can’t actually be charged with a crime thanks to being President.
Well then. It’s settled. What a shame Doug.
Well, that’s the thing. “High crimes” has a specific legal meaning.
It doesn’t necessarily mean an actual crime. It means abuse of authority/office.
Doesn’t that predate the call in question??
You need better sources for your twitter fury.
And better excuses for why this impeachment frenzy is just another dud.
Your argument is that because what he provided didn’t have the quote, it doesn’t exist?
Weird argument.
I gave a link and the entire document.
Those aren’t the same thing. No law needs to be broken for “high crimes” to of occurred.
I can only imagine what the calls between fat donald and Putin sound like.
I never said any such thing. Just more lies and nonsense.
Those aren’t the same thing. No law needs to be broken for “high crimes” to of occurred.
How do you have a “high crime” without breaking a law? One example will suffice.
“I would like you to us a favor though
“I would like you to do us a favor,” Trump said. “I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine — they say CrowdStrike.”
Allan
“I would like you to do us a favor,” Trump said. “I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine — they say CrowdStrike.”
Allan
Don’t forget the
though
though
though
though
though
sikofit:Those aren’t the same thing. No law needs to be broken for “high crimes” to of occurred.
How do you have a “high crime” without breaking a law? One example will suffice.
"High crimes and misdemeanors" is a phrase from Section 4 of Article Two of the United States Constitution: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." "High," in the legal and common vocabulary of the 17th and 18th centuries of "high crimes," is the activity by or against those who have special duties acquired by taking an oath of office t...
“High” in the legal and common parlance of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries of “high crimes” signifies activity by or against those who have special duties acquired by taking an oath of office that are not shared with common persons.[1] A high crime is one that can only be done by someone in a unique position of authority, which is political in character, who does things to circumvent justice. The phrase “high crimes and misdemeanors” when used together was a common phrase at the time the U.S. Constitution was written and did not require any stringent or difficult criteria for determining guilt; it meant the opposite. The phrase was historically used to cover a very broad range of crimes.[2] The Judiciary Committee’s 1974 report “The Historical Origins of Impeachment” stated: "‘High Crimes and Misdemeanors’ has traditionally been considered a ‘term of art’, like such other constitutional phrases as ‘levying war’ and ‘due process.’
sikofit:Those aren’t the same thing. No law needs to be broken for “high crimes” to of occurred.
How do you have a “high crime” without breaking a law? One example will suffice.
Asking the head of state of another nation to investigate your chief political rival in the upcoming election as a favor, and assigning your personal attorney who doesn’t work for the government as the point man is one HUGE example.
How do you have a “high crime” without breaking a law? One example will suffice.
Bill Clinton
SottoVoce:Your argument is that because what he provided didn’t have the quote, it doesn’t exist?
I never said any such thing. Just more lies and nonsense.
It exists and you have context. What exactly are you trying to achieve by continuing to ask those things from apocalypto? Why did you ask him this if you already knew it existed and know the context?
In reference to what specifically??
Post the entire exchange if you want to be honest.