The Impeachment of President Donald J. Trump

So you are saying the actual tape of him doing the crime does not exist despite him admitting he was on the call and releasing witness accounts of the phone call that tell of him breaking the law?

So trump admits to it, the witnesses admit to it, and there is a recording of it on a secret secure NSA server, but @Zombie is saying they are all lying and it does not exist. Well, you better start getting your ass in front of congress because you know things completely different than reality and even the guy who made the phone call admits to.

How dishonest can a person get?

"BUT THE PROCESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

THEY CHANGED THE FORM!

Um, I don't think there's really too much doubt at this stage, the question is merely whether enough Republicans would be willing to risk their careers over it.

Will steve miller presidency make snl greater!

Is rick perry an Asian F like datkon3

Rick Perry denies discussing Bidens with Trump or Ukraine officials: reports

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...trump-or-ukraine-officials-reports/ar-AAIlPlK

I really dont understand why this is the focus NOW. Yes, Trump is a horrid president...no, he should not be in office.

However, on reading and listening to the transcript, while disgusted at the blatant level of manipulation that he is comically denying, I wonder why now?

What's the point? By the time this impeachment goes through, it will be time for the election again...now I'm wading through NOTHING BUT IMPEACHMENT TALK. I dont mind digging to find updates and information on the upcoming candidates, but this impeachment inquiry really seems like a very obvious distraction tactic from all the other more important things going on in the world. And none of it has stayed at the top of my news feed or hot topics like this has. It's honestly bonkers.

And if "holding up the constitution" and principle of the matter is THE point of the impeachment inquiry, I think they should have thought about that before they elected the narcissistic scumbag in the first place.

Second whistleblower apparently with firsthand info has come forward and is being represented by same lawyer as the first.

Did he use the right form?

I'm told he did, but forgot to use a comma properly, so the GOP are calling his testimony invalid and demanding that his balls be stuck into the intake of a B-52's engine.

both are "power bottoms!" Thank you, I'll be here all week!

We have no idea how long the impeachment inquiry will last, nor what will be revealed during the process. In the meantime, this will hamstring Trump's efforts to do much of anything and will, hopefully, limit the amount of damage he does before he's out of office (regardless of how he leaves).

And the reason it's being stuck in your newsfeed has to do with the way that Facebook's algorithm works, there are ways to counter it, however. If you install the browser plug-in Social Fixer, you can override many of the defaults and/or block out topics you don't want to see (it lets you create a filter to block all posts containing the word impeachment, for example). On mobile, if you've got an Android phone, you can install the plug-in on the Firefox browser and use that to check Facebook. It has limitations over the FB app, of course, but you won't see the junk cluttering your feed that you don't want. If you spend most of your time on FB using a web browser, you'll eventually notice that when you use the app there's fewer instances of things that you don't want to see anyway. I got tired of Facebook showing me post after post which were old, or were by someone I wasn't friends with, but that had been commented on by someone I was friends with, that I set up a filter which blocked anything with the word "commented" and it's made a massive difference in my feed, both on the web and in the app. When I first started using it, literally hundreds of posts would vanish (and a random sampling of those posts showed that the filter was blocking the kinds that I wanted it to block), now I'm not seeing a marker indicating that Social Fixer is blocking posts, indicating that FB has decided to stop showing those to me, and I rarely get any on the FB app.

Except that the people holding the inquiry didn't vote for him in the first place.

Flaming liberal Chris Wallace (who famously worried his dad was suffering from Alzheimer's because he voted for Obama) says it looks like "quid pro quo" to him.

I like Chris Wallace but you do understand that his is hardly the last word on this so called "scandal".

And? If Rachel Maddow came out and said that it looked to her that the Obama administration had repeatedly broken the law, would you not find that interesting?

Feel free to give us some actual last words, D.

No

President Trump should consider something while he seems to be urging impeachment on.

Assuming that the House votes to impeach him and that the GOP in the U.S. Senate refused to convict him, it will inevitably shift political power from the president to the Senate. The GOP Senators can (with justification) say unofficially to President Trump that "we saved your ass, now you're going to do what we want".

Does President Trump really want to feel beholden to the Senators of the GOP for years?

You REALLY need to flip that question. Do you want the Senate afraid of losing power because they did their duty and held a corrupt President to account?

Not a surprising answer from a habitual liar such as yourself, but not necessarily a false one, given how narcissistic and short-sighted you are.

If you think that Trump feels he owes a debt to anyone, you really don't understand him. He, like a certain poster I can think of, simply thinks that's what the Senate is supposed to do, and if any members try to call in the favor, they'll quickly discover that he's not interested in returning it.

Ladies and Gentlemen.....the self-described "Excellent history teacher"!

Can you believe that this guy is unemployed???

Wait wait wait....

Why are we assuming my one and only news source is from Facebook? Anyone that just gets their news from facebook is extraordinarily ill informed.

I'm talking about every news website and app I go through: BBC, Fox, CNN, and all the other collective sources I have access to...its also 80-90% of what NPR is talking about.

In fact, NPR has gone from weekly full episodes and a short daily update to full episodes daily SOLELY because of the plethora of updates just on this topic. AND these allegations seem to be all Trump is focused on these days: defending himself and justifying his behaviors. All in all, that part is not surprising considering he is a narcissist and will take any opportunity he can to talk about how great he is.

My concerns have nothing to do with FB algorithms and everything to do with overall media coverage: all of the world's serious issues are being buried by this.

How is my post you are referring to related to teaching history?

Because you said "newsfeed." Generally, most people use that term when they're talking about social media, and since most people use FB in some fashion, it's not much of a stretch.

Well, yes.

It's not a new problem. If you compare US news sources to those from the UK, EU, and other parts of the world, you'll find that they focus on international issues (not including ones involving the US) far more than US media does. If you use a VPN that makes it appear that you're coming from the UK, when you go to sites like the BBC, you'll see an even greater difference in their news coverage (they tend to slant stuff they show to Americans more towards stories involving America than they do the locals).

And, to be fair, this is big news (though not so big that it should shove everything else off the page). We're the most powerful nation on Earth, and it's entirely possible that we could collapse as a result of this. Given that we have lots of nuclear weapons and a lunatic with control of the button, it kind of has the aspect of focusing one's attention like having a gun pointed at your head does.

The solution to this is to cultivate news sources that are focused on specialized areas, so they're less likely to devote a lot of attention to impeachment. None of the science news sites I follow have posted anything about impeachment, for example.

Additionally, despite all the news coverage that's out there on impeachment, there's a stunning number of people who don't know anything about it, I've discovered. I don't mean that they're spouting falsehoods about impeachment, I mean they've got literally no concept that the House is considering it, or what it even means.

BBC Linkage: Second Whistleblower