Has Trump really done something dodgy or is this all a Democrat conspiracy to remove him from office?

Will he even get impeached or is it unlikely?

The Democrats are still pissed off that he beat their favorite corrupt politician Hitlery. Therefore they are cooking up all manner of bullfluff to impede Trump's administration. The only person to place the blame on for this whole circus is Donald J. Trump, since he failed to exercise his constitutional authority upon taking office and firing all of Obama's appointees instead of leaving their 5th columnists asses to stink up the joint and make trouble for him.

So there are no actual grounds for impeachment and this whole thing is a farce?

there are grounds but reps will save trump's ass.

everything they brought forth was second had knowledge
The real news here is how dirty the Bidens are. I want an investigation into money laundering in the Ukraine, i think several from both parties would go down

farmer: you bought into Trumps strategy. Hiding his own failings and dodgy behaviour by attacking someone else.
By all means, Investigate the bidens, but do it yourself, don't coerce other countries into it by withholding approved aid spending.
Isn't it funny that Trumps objections and claims of dodginess by biden ONLY came up during the primaries though? If he really had a problem, why did he not start investigating them as soon as he got into office?
How much of an investigation into "crooked Hilary" has occurred that he promised?
Why is it ok that his own kids have been using private email servers in exactly the same way Hilary was?
Why is it ok that Trump is giving clearances to people who definitely shouldn't have them?
Why is it ok that many of Trumps Political appointees are currently facing the courts, or have been convicted already of crimes, making his government and administration proven to be the most corrupt in history? (Others may have been more corrupt, his have been openly caught at it however)
Would you support a democrat president literally acting the way Trump is?

There are grounds, however the Dems have rushed things from their end, weakening their case, trying to get the process completed before it falls into election year, and the Republicans have deliberately looked the other way and stuck their fingers in their ears to the actual evidence, and their members of the senate, who control it, have already said they will NOT vote to convict regardless of any evidence.
Add to that, the white house has actively prevented people from giving evidence, at least some of which is now being tested in the courts, and at least one person has been compelled to testify BY the courts, which the White House is appealing, on the basis that they are claiming that the courts have no power. Effectively the White House is trying to establish itself as above the law, and above congress, and therefore immune to any prosecution. This despite the fact that congress is supposed to have oversight over the white house, and the courts are supposed to act as arbitrators in the case of a dispute between congress and the white house.

He has been impeached, which is the act of bringing the articles in the house, however the dems have not moved the articles to the Senate yet, because they are trying to politick for a "fair trial".
It is unlikely that he will be convicted on the impeachment, because the republicans have the majority in senate, and 2/3 of the senate must vote to convict for a guilty verdict to be found.
Unfortunately, at this point, Trump's brag that he could shoot a man on 5th avenue and get away with it, is truth. The republicans will not convict him on anything. Instead, they'd claim justification or self defence or some fluff and acquit based on that.
Indeed, you can guarantee that senate voting will be 100% down party lines come senate trial.

If you have 50% plus 1 in the house you can impeach the duly elected president because his favourite colour colour is green and yours is blue.
Then you need 67% senate in which case it gets sent to scotus snd they decide.

Pelosi isn't moving forward becsuse she's a coward and knows she'll play the fool.


Never listen to anything marshal says.

The us doesn't owe the world aid. The us gives aid and they get something in return. That isn't trump foreign policy. That is murcan foreign policy.
Pakistan got jets which are 24/365 monitored by us military. You can have but we get to is english for quid pro quo.

And foreign policy for any country worth talking about.

Is drow right or am I? After senate it goes to scotus or is the senate the decider?

(I'm asking not telling- I'm canadian and never took a us civics course)

If Joe Biden refuses to testify in front of the Senate then we begin impeachment now as he is obstructing congress and is owned by Eastern Europe.

If hunter did nothing wrong and Joseph didn't then subpeaned testimony under oath only exonerates them.. no?

https://www.history.com/...impeachment-in-us-history

i could tell what reads there but braden wouldn't believe me.

What I am given to understand is that it is a trial held in senate with the Chief Justice of the supreme court presiding, and the senate acting as Jury, and that a 66 2/3% majority is required to be found guilty.

Braden: what does Biden have to do with trump actively withholding congress approved aid 90 minutes before a phone call where he demands favours from the new Ukrainian president?

Again, if Biden has done something wrong, then by all means investigate, but do it yourselves, don't get another country to do it in the middle of primaries.

It was a bad drunken joke as most of them seem to be.

Does the fbi have jurisdiction over Ukrainian businessmen working with an American on Ukrainian soil?

Again I'm asking not telling..

They can investigate, and follow the paper trail. They can make requests for questioning.

This is bullfluff, Marshall and you know it. They have ZERO proof of anything, so, Pelosi aka Skeletor, is going to delay submitting the impeachment charges as long as she can so that they can keep the drama going long into the campaign in the hope that it will make the inevitable weak ass communist candidate look better.

This is yet another bullfluff post containing bullfluff. I can prove that creepy old Joe was the one that was actually doing what they are accusing the president of doing. They even have old Joe admitting to it on video tape. You can surely find this on your own if you weren't blinded and brainwashed by the left.

You have no idea what you are talking about, and I'm not going to waste any of my time trying to educate your dumb ass since I already know that you can't reason with a leftist.

So, just to sum up:

Trump and people close to him believe that there is some dodgy dealings in Ukraine regarding Hunter Biden and a criminal investigation that was eventually dropped, where they believe his father Joe had something to do with it.

And a whistleblower has made a complaint about Trump allegedly withholding aid from Ukraine until the Government moved to investigate the dodgy Hunter Biden stuff - which, according to the House Democrats, is illegal.

Trump has been impeached by the House but needs the Senate to also agree to remove him, but it's unlikely because the Senate is full of Republicans.

Is this right?

yes

Biden did everything Trump is being impeached for, look it up, get educated.

Is what Trump (and Biden) did illegal?

Edit: Or, another way, is what they did appropriate behaviour for a President?

The thing is the aid was not withheld nor was the aid even mentioned in the phone call. The witnesses are pure heresay and secondhand information.

I think in this regard the Democrats don't really have anything and are just trying to execute a political maneuver that appears to be backfiring on them.

Coup etat attempt #2

Yes it is illegal and the difference between them, Biden did it, Trump hinted he was gonna, big difference between executing and not executing a task, how many people are on death row for saying "I'm gonna murder you"? Are we rewriting laws now and applying them on people we don't like?

Sov, unfortunately it's not all hearsay. there are witnesses who have spoken p who WERE in on the actual decisions, and the aid WAS withheld, and then eventually released.
Mulvaney also actively admitted to it on national television.

I'd ask whether misleading congress about the reasons for military action counts as an impeachable offence, but Bush and Cheney already established that it isn't :/

KoH: no mate, he didn't. Look up your own sources. it was investigated at the time, and there is no evidence that Biden did anything illegal in regard to Burisma. Yes, Biden was part of an international effort to have the Ukranian prosecutor fired, but, clarification is important. 1. the prosecutor wasn't doing enough to deal with corruption. and more importantly, 2. the investigation into Burisma had already been long closed by the time he was fired.

the Dems have screwed up solely in rushing their process in the lower house. They would have been better off taking the extra time through the courts, to get the rulings to force the white house to hand over the documents they were requesting, and for the induviduals to testify to congress, rather than pushing through and trying to spring it at the senate trial itself. However, part of the reason for the rush of the procedure was to try and prevent the trial occurring close to the election, so it's a tough one either way.

SMH

Yeah I think you’ve been watching too much CNN and MSNBC.

Yup, if you want the real stories you need to dig them up, the news networks only dictate their agendas, it's not news.

Isn't it pretty solidly supported that the US did withhold the aid but released it eventually? As for no "first-hand" accounts of the phone call, I think that's a fair statement to make.



I don't think murder is the right comparison.

I imagine there are enough people sitting in prison for having threatened to do something illegal to someone else unless they did something for them in return.



I don't understand; why should the election have any impact on how long or how quickly the impeachment case is wrapped up?



If we're not supposed to get news from networks, that leaves... what? Twitter? Social media?

Or am I supposed to go and knock on Zelensky's door and ask him myself?

It is obvious then that you did not watch the testimonies in full. Watch them unedited and not part of a news report.

There is a reason why the charge was not of bribery which is what they were all talking about before impeachment. They went for “abuse of power” instead because there was no solid evidence to warrant the bribery charge which they really really wanted.

Like Sov stated, there are unedited testimony videos and transcripts free of media spin, sorry you're too lazy to view them and opt to buy the media's spin and lies, BRO.

I absolutely have not watched the testimonies in full; I would have thought that obvious from the start.

Seeing as you guys have, and I have no reason to believe you'd lie to me, I'm happy to take your word for it that the full testimonies don't have any evidence to prove any form of bribery occurred.

So:

1. There has been no testimony or evidence to prove that Trump withheld aid for the purpose of forcing the Ukranian government to investigate the Bidens (though, the aid was withheld past the date it was intended to be given).

That correct?

Yeah, it's not clear what the red tape was, neither side has direct answers thus creating more drama, governments are slow moving to begin with when allocation of currency is involved, doesn't take much for something to get delayed over a misunderstanding, the mainstream media is trying to make hay out of that, negative stories and anything anti-trump gets views, views = money.

I'm with you until you get to the mainstream media part. If only anti-Trump media made money, Fox News would be out of business - but they're the leading cable news network in the country with approx. 1.5m viewers a day. MSNBC, who I see many anti-MSM people hate with a passion, come in second with only 1.1m viewers. ESPN is third.

There's only one reason Fox is #1, it is the only semi conservative mainstream media outlet, conservatives make up a very large % of our population, just like everyone else they need to watch news, they trust the only outlet that doesn't ridicule Republicans all day everyday.

Actually, that's a fair point. I suppose if you add up all of the MSNBC, CNN, etc viewers, they'd outnumber the total FOX viewers.