Will Trump Be Impeached? If not, will all of this hurt his Chances for Reelection?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Janeaux

New member
Dec 6, 2018
20
14
3
#1
Kind of worried cause things are not looking too good for him.
 

Subhumanoidal

Well-known member
Sep 17, 2018
1,348
1,149
113
#2
He won't be reelected because the control freaks on the opposing side would sooner blow up the country than let someone so outspoken, on the opposing side, win again.
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
2,713
385
83
#3
Kind of worried cause things are not looking too good for him.
It takes both the Senate and House to impeach. I dont see a Republican held Senate who approves of Trump at 95% to vote on impeachment. And the Senate holds the conviction ability based on the Houses investigation.

Not worried. Even if it took place then Mike Pence will take over who is even more conservative.
 

NotmebutHim

Senior Member
May 17, 2015
1,971
640
113
#4
I don't know and I don't know. ;)
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
2,713
385
83
#5
He won't be reelected because the control freaks on the opposing side would sooner blow up the country than let someone so outspoken, on the opposing side, win again.
Thank God for my right to self defense. Remember when Trump got elected, the riots lasted for months.
 

Whispered

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2019
924
439
63
#6
Kind of worried cause things are not looking too good for him.
There is a man, I think he's a Rabbi, who says that scripture prophesies that he will be re-elected. I would hope he will be regardless of such prophecies. There are no grounds for impeachment really. The Democrats hate him because Trump is already a billionaire and unlike many of them will not allow himself to be bought by special interests such as the Dem's and even some Republicans concede to for the money and perks.
That's why I think the Left want Trump's tax returns so desperately. Which is not in the law or part of being a presidential candidate. It is just tradition that candidates reveal those. But really, it is no one's business.
Trump use to be a Democrat. I think that is the other reason they hate him. He turned from the party and went to the Right. During his campaign he even said that he knew how Washington worked. He gave politicians money for their campaigns for years. And when he wanted something done he called and they did it.
I don't think anyone on the Hill liked that coming out.

He's also a patriot. I think that makes them hate him even more.
What they appear not to get though is that he's egocentric. Which is what you want in a president, along with a great business acumen, which he also has. Because as they appear not to recognize, even when many of the Democrats in D.C enjoyed the accommodations of many a Trump property well prior to his taking office, is that he likes to put his name on things he builds.
Now he has made a name for himself that will last forever in America's history books. President of the United States of America, Donald Trump!
He's not going to sully the legacy he'll leave behind for his children and grandchildren or America.

What I think should be investigated is the blatant openly public rank of Seditionists serving on the Hill.
And while they're at it, investigate the behavior of the antisemitic persons that have gone on the record as such. One such person sits on the House Foreign Relations Committee.

This impeachment circus is just another act in the smoke and mirrors show that the Left has produced since Trump took office. Distract the American people from the real causes for concern by putting all the crimes and misdemeanors for whom there is evidence on the Left side of the aisle onto Trump and the Right side. "He did it!" Focus on that and say it long enough and the Left in the nose bleed seats start to believe it and spread the word. As the circus masters know.
After awhile when the He did it mantra resonates for months, even years, the truth becomes secondary because of the reverberation of, he did it still ringing across the country.
The truth is, he didn't do anything wrong. But , by now the truth is secondary. Getting a man that can't be intimidated or bought so as to further the legacy of BHO and sell out America, her people, and the future of this country, is primary. By any means necessary.

When, as I am an optimist and a voter, Trump is re-elected, I will pray especially so for his safety.

If they can't get him out one way, I have no doubt the worst of the worst among them will try the other route. A fair concern actually given the legacy HRC and WJC have carved out for themselves since entering politics in Arkansas.


 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
9,205
2,933
113
#7
Kind of worried cause things are not looking too good for him.
This is another Witch Hunt since the Mueller Witch Hunt failed. There will be no impeachment.

But Mr. Trump also has a habit of sabotaging himself, which is rather puzzling. The latest is his betrayal of the Kurds.
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
7,268
3,351
113
#8
It takes both the Senate and House to impeach. I dont see a Republican held Senate who approves of Trump at 95% to vote on impeachment. And the Senate holds the conviction ability based on the Houses investigation.

Not worried. Even if it took place then Mike Pence will take over who is even more conservative.
Actually the House ALONE impeaches a President, as they did with Bill Clinton who WAS impeached.

The Senate then decides if it will hold a trial. It did not hold a trial against Clinton, and though impeached, he wasn't removed from office. The Senate could also elect to have a trial, and even then 2/3rds of the Senate has to vote to remove a President from office.

So essentially, an impeachment by the House is the equivalent to an indictment. It carries no weight of conviction or punishment. NO President has ever been removed from office through impeachment.
 

Bingo

Well-known member
Feb 9, 2019
1,707
1,270
113
#9
"America has been traumatized by the actions of a hateful and resentful political party
that has wasted tax payer money and worse of all, are in dereliction of duty to American people.
They are in gross neglect of their responsibility.
America has lost it's integrity world wide by this display of hate and resentment.
Voters showed their power in 2016, and I believe it will happen again in 2020."
~Thought for today~
flag - Copy.gif
 
Mar 23, 2016
2,970
647
113
#11
October 8, 2019 letter from Pat A. Cipollone, Counsel for the President, to Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, Eliot Engel, Elijah Cummings concerning their "impeachment inquiry".

Letter


At this point, all Ms. Pelosi is doing is conducting an "impeachment inquiry". By handling the "impeachment" in this manner, Republicans in the House are not allowed to ask questions or subpoena the Democrats for any documentation revealing any involvement they may have had with the so-called "whistleblower" prior to the filing of the complaint.

If President Trump does not provide information requested Ms. Pelosi can then charge the president with obstruction if documentation is withheld and/or if subpoenaed witnesses do not appear.

They want to raid the White House, cherrypick the stuff that they can claim, silence any Republican countering with facts, silence Republican subpoena power, and run the whole thing themselves on solely their own terms.


The Letter from Mr. Cipollone is 8 pages and is well worth reading. Here are a couple of paragraphs from page 4 of the letter:

In addition, the House has not provided the Committees' Ranking Members with the authority to issue subpoenas. The right of the minority to issue subpoenas-subject to the same rules as the majority-has been the standard, bipartisan practice in all recent resolutions authorizing presidential impeachment inquiries. The House's failure to provide co-equal subpoena power in this case ensures that any inquiry will be nothing more than a one-sided effort by House Democrats to gather information favorable to their views and to selectively release it as only they determine. The House's utter disregard for the established procedural safeguards followed in past impeachment inquiries shows that the current proceedings are nothing more than an unconstitutional exercise in political theater.
As if denying the President basic procedural protections were not enough, the Committees have also resorted to threats and intimidation against potential Executive Branch witnesses. Threats by the Committees against Executive Branch witnesses who assert common and longstanding rights destroy the integrity of the process and brazenly violate fundamental due process. In letters to State Department employees, the Committees have ominously threatened without any legal basis and before the Committees even issued a subpoena that "[a]ny failure to appear" in response to a mere letter request for a deposition "shall constitute evidence of obstruction." Worse, the Committees have broadly threatened that if State Department officials attempt to insist upon the right for the Department to have an agency lawyer present at depositions to protect legitimate Executive Branch confidentiality interests-or apparently if they make any effort to protect those confidentiality interests at all-these officials will have their salaries withheld.


A couple of paragraphs from page 7 of the letter:

The real problem, as we are now learning, is that Chairman Schiff's office, and perhaps others-despite initial denials-were involved in advising the whistleblower before the complaint was filed. Initially, when asked on national television about interactions with the whistleblower, Chairman Schiff unequivocally stated that "[w]e have not spoken directly with the whistleblower. We would like to."
Now, however, it has been reported that the whistleblower approached the House Intelligence Committee with information-and received guidance from the Committee-before filing a complaint with the Inspector General. As a result, The Washington Post concluded that Chairman Schiff "clearly made a statement that was false." Anyone who was involved in the preparation or submission of the whistleblower's complaint cannot possibly act as a fair and impartial judge in the same matter-particularly after misleading the American people about his involvement.
All of this raises serious questions that must be investigated. However, the Committees are preventing anyone, including the minority, from looking into these critically important matters. At the very least, Chairman Schiff must immediately make available all documents relating to these issues. After all, the American people have a right to know about the Committees' own actions with respect to these matters.


My prayer is that our elected officials would quit wasting taxpayer dollars on these "inquiries" (the Mueller investigation cost $32 million). Makes me sick they're all receiving their salaries and benefits on my tax dollars over this farce.



 
Mar 23, 2016
2,970
647
113
#13
Intel Community IG Stonewalling Congress On Backdated Whistleblower Rule Changes

Michael Atkinson, the inspector general for U.S. intelligence agencies, acknowledged that his office secretly changed key whistleblower forms and rules in September, but refused to explain to lawmakers why those changes were backdated to August.

In tense testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) on Friday, the inspector general for federal spy agencies refused to disclose why his office backdated secret changes to key whistleblower forms and rules in the wake of an anti-Trump whistleblower complaint filed in August, sources told The Federalist.

As The Federalist reported and the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) confirmed, the spy watchdog secretly changed its whistleblower forms and internal rules in September to eliminate a requirement that whistleblowers provide first-hand evidence to support any allegations of wrongdoing. In a press release last week, the ICIG confessed that it changed its rules in response to an anti-Trump complaint filed on August 12. That complaint, which was declassified and released by President Donald Trump in September, was based entirely on second-hand information, much of which was shown to be false following the declassification and release of a telephone conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Michael Atkinson, the intelligence community inspector general, told HPSCI lawmakers during a committee oversight hearing on Friday that the whistleblower forms and rules changes were made in September, even though the new forms and guidance, which were not uploaded to the ICIG’s website until September 24, state that they were changed in August. Despite having a full week to come up with explanations for his office’s decisions to secretly change its forms to eliminate the requirement for first-hand evidence and to backdate those changes to August, Atkinson refused to provide any explanation to lawmakers baffled by his behavior.

...


The embattled ICIG also admitted on Friday that the anti-Trump complainant lied on his whistleblower complaint form by concealing the complainant’s previous secret interactions with House Democratic staff prior to submitting the complaint. Atkinson never even bothered investigating potential coordination between the complainant, whom DOJ said showed evidence of partisan political bias, and House Democrats prior to the filing of the anti-Trump complaint.


https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/0...stleblower-rule-changes/#.XZszX66amDA.twitter
 
Mar 23, 2016
2,970
647
113
#16
Burisma paid Joe Biden $900,000 for lobbying – Ukrainian MP

KYIV. Oct 9 (Interfax-Ukraine) – Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden received $900,000 for lobbying activities from Burisma Group, Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada member Andriy Derkach said citing investigation materials.

Derkach publicized documents which, as he said, "describe the mechanism of getting money by Biden Sr." at a press conference at Interfax-Ukraine's press center in Kyiv on Wednesday.

"This was the transfer of Burisma Group's funds for lobbying activities, as investigators believe, personally to Joe Biden through a lobbying company. Funds in the amount of $900,000 were transferred to the U.S.-based company Rosemont Seneca Partners, which according to open sources, in particular, the New York Times, is affiliated with Biden. The payment reference was payment for consultative services," Derkach said.

He also publicized sums that were transferred to Burisma Group representatives, in particular Hunter Biden, a son of the former U.S. vice president.

"According to the documents, Burisma paid no less than $16.5 million to [former Polish President, who became an independent director at Burisma Holdings in 2014] Aleksander Kwasniewski, [chairman of the Burisma board of independent directors] Alan Apter, [Burisma independent director] Devon Archer and Hunter Biden [who joined the Burisma board of directors in 2014]," Derkach said.
"Using political and economic levelers of influencing Ukrainian authorities and manipulating the issue of providing financial aid to Ukraine, Joe Biden actively assisted closing criminal cases into the activity of former Ukrainian Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, who is the founder and owner of Burisma Group," he said.

"Biden's fifth visit to Kyiv on December 7-8, 2015 was devoted to making a decision on the resignation of [then Ukrainian Prosecutor General] Viktor Shokin over the case of Zlochevsky and Burisma. Loan guarantees worth $1 billion that the United States was to give to Ukraine was the point of pressure. Biden himself admitted exerting pressure in his speech at the Council of Foreign Relations in January 2018, calling Shokin 'son of a bitch who was fired'," Derkach said.

The timeline of events proves that the U.S. linked the Zlochevsky case to loan guarantees, he said.

After the decree dismissing Shokin was published on April 3, 2016, the governments of the United States and Ukraine signed a loan guarantee agreement worth $1 billion, several months later, on June 3, he said.

"In this case, there are facts should be subject to investigation. There is an agency that has powers to investigate them; the U.S. Department of Justice. If the Ukrainian Prosecutor General signs documents and send them to U.S. Department of Justice without any requests, he will accomplish his mission," he said, adding that the Ukrainian Prosecutor General has such powers.

"Considering international corruption in public is a way-out for President Zelensky. I am certain that he is not involved in international corruption," Derkach said.

It was reported earlier that Derkach publicized correspondence between the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and officers of the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv. According to publicized correspondence, starting from July 14, 2017, the lists of criminal proceedings undertaken by NABU officers were sent from the electronic mailbox of Polina Chyzh, an assistant to NABU first deputy head Gizo Uglava, to the electronic mailbox of Hanna Yemelianova, a legal specialist of the anti-corruption program of the U.S. Justice Department at U.S. Embassy in Ukraine.

Derkach also said that NABU-leak materials will be published on his Facebook account and materials that he got from investigating journalists have already been passed to Ukraine's State Bureau of Investigations and the Prosecutor's General Office.
He also said he will initiate the creation of an ad hoc parliamentary investigative commission and has already requested launching a criminal case against Ukrainian officials into interference into U.S. elections. The court session is scheduled for October 21, he said.

Burisma Holdings is a Cyprus-registered gas producing company holding assets in Ukraine. It is one of Ukraine's top-three independent gas producers headquartered in Kyiv. Zlochevsky is the founder and the ultimate beneficiary owner of the company.



https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/press-conference/617936.html
 
Sep 28, 2019
382
187
43
#17
This is another Witch Hunt since the Mueller Witch Hunt failed. There will be no impeachment.

But Mr. Trump also has a habit of sabotaging himself, which is rather puzzling. The latest is his betrayal of the Kurds.
That one is going to hurt Trump. More than all the other gossipy scandals. It will hurt the Kurds too. And long term Europe with more refugees artiving.
 

Desdichado

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2014
7,550
222
63
#18
He won't be impeached. He will likely be reelected.

For the same reason Obama was not impeached and reelected.

Almost every President since Taft would have been impeached if Americans valued the rule of law more than they feared foreign and domestic boogiemen.

But the goalposts have shifted. Just as we shame people over their virtues, we will proceed with witch hunts over non-impeachable offenses.
 

Dude653

Senior Member
Mar 19, 2011
8,132
172
63
#20
He will be re-elected because there's never been a president with the most fanatical fan base. They're like a cult. He could probably murder someone on live television it wouldn't lose a single vote
Even after disrespecting a Vietnam veteran he still managed to get the conservative vote