Originally Posted by rporter314
Senator ... you are either very naive (and my experience with conservatives is they are) or ... well I can't say that in this forum!!!!!

Quote
Trump has NEVER made a demand for loyalty like LBJ did.
Your rebuttal is Mr Trump did not use the same type language as Pres Johnson. Really??? You should have said Mr Trump never asked in any manner for loyalty, otherwise you just admitted Mr Trump does demand loyalty ... just as I said.
No, it is not just as you said. You said that Trump had a "Trumpian ideological purity test" he did not and does not have an "ideological purity test." Does Trump ask for loyalty? Yes, as a business executive he did ask for loyalty to his business not himself. Did Trump ask those who would work in his Presidential administration to be loyal to him? Yes, he did, every President does. But mot in the crude, narcissistic, and grandiose way that LBJ did.
Originally Posted by Senator Hatrack
Wasn't The Mueller Report supposed to be the proof that Pres. Trump should be impeached? It didn't work so now you are claiming that what the "whistle-blower" said is the proof that Trump should be impeached. If the claim made by the "whistle-blower" is the proof of Trump's criminal behavior why haven't articles of impeachment been drawn up? The Democrats had some patience before calling Trump's impeachment, they waited almost 4 months before the first call for impeachment was made.
Originally Posted by rporter314
As usual the conservative delusion.

NO!!!!

SP Mueller was mandated to open "... an investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections and suspicious links between Trump associates and Russian officials". So where in that mandate do you find anything about impeachment???? No ... can't find it? because it's not there.

The meme "it didn't work" is another conservative delusion. The Report should you ever read it describes in detail what was found. I'll let you regurgitate Fox News for your source but highly recommend reading the primary source.
While the investigation that was summarized in the Mueller Report was being conducted those who want Trump impeached were convinced that the investigation and the report on it would provide the House grounds to draw up articles of impeachment. That did not happen. Since I did not form the same opinion from reading the Mueller Report that you did you make the erroneous claim that I did not read it. To expect others to have the same opinion you do from reading something is extremely partisan.

Originally Posted by rporter314
The whistleblower filed a claim in which he described abuse of power. The ICIG thought the report after his investigation was more than credible and sent it to proper authorities. The House is in the process of gathering facts to either substantiate or refute the claims made by the whistleblower. As is your usual MO, you have made claims which are figments of your imagination.

Unlike your comments of Democrats rushing to impeach for political purposes, they are actually running a slow methodical investigation to gather the facts (you do want to know the facts?) and make a determination.
Yet you have, as is your usual MO, repeatedly stated that the "whistle-blower's" complaint is proof positive that Trump broke the law. Who is rushing to impeach Trump? You are! Fortunately, that decision is to be made by the House of Representatives not rabid anti-Trump partisans not you.

Originally Posted by rporter314
When you abuse a singular person making a call and universalize it, you have lied. One person (and I seem to recall a couple of Democrats making the call) does not make the whole Democrat caucus making a call of impeachment. The call by a handful of people would be the same as the impeachment call of Pres Obama of a handful of Republicans, not the whole Republican caucus.
The call for impeachment was first made on May 17, 2017 by Rep. Al Green. (I posted a link to it from CNN, did you bother to look at it? I doubt it.) Since then a number of Democrats have joined him in calling for Trump's impeachment. I never said that the entire Democratic caucus in the House has called for impeachment. You have constantly referred to THE "whistleblower." As in one person. And only one person has filed a compliant about the call.

Originally Posted by Senator Hatrack
The phone call, which you claim is a "blatant criminal offense" was made back in August. Now almost two months later the House has not drawn up articles of impeachment. If the criminal behavior was that blatant articles of impeachment would have been drawn up by now.
Originally Posted by rporter314
I guess you want the Democrats to manufacture the evidence. Or maybe you want the Democrats to "lynch" Mr Trump without articles of impeachment being filed or a trial in the Senate. I have to ask ... what is wrong with you!!!!!
No, I do not want the Democrats to manufacture evidence. I want the process to take all the time that is necessary. Again, it is you who has been repeatedly saying that the "whistle-blower's" complaint is proof positive that Trump broke the law. It is you rporter314 that is impatient and wants Trump impeached as soon as possible! If you didn't you would not constantly insist that the "whistle-blower's" complaint is all that is required for articles of impeachment to be drawn up.

Originally Posted by Senator Hatrack
What he has done has not warranted drawing up articles of impeachment.
Originally Posted by rporter314
Now that is naive to have said that.
Again you are insisting that Trump be impeached based on your opinion, not what the House of Representatives might decide. Unlike you the House has not made a decision that Trump has done anything to warrant drawing up articles of impeachment.

Originally Posted by rporter314
Unlike Republicans who excoriated Sec Clinton without justification (remember Rep McCarthy? he said it best ... the Benghazi hearings were a way to impact her residential run in 2016) the Democrats are trying to get the facts (and so far they look bad for Mr trump) and make the determination to write the articles of impeachment. When the investigation is over, and only then, will articles be written.
Excoriated Sec. of State Clinton without justification? When she said that the attack on Benghazi was caused by an anti-Muslim video, which was a lie, she got what she deserved.

Originally Posted by rporter314
What is your rush? You would continue to support Mr Trump if he shot kids in a school.
And you say that is difficult to have a discussion with conservatives. With an insult like that I wonder why I bother to even attempt to have a discussion with you.

Originally Posted by rporter314
Because I don;t think you do any research (except to read right wing nut sites) for your edification here are some things.

Originally Posted by Daugherty v. Ellis
Malfeasance [is] a wrongful act which the actor has no legal right to do; as any wrongful conduct which affects, interrupts or interferes with the performance of official duty; as an act for which there is no authority or warrant of law; as an act which a person ought not to do; as an act which is wholly wrongful and unlawful; as that which an officer has no authority to do and is positively wrong or unlawful; and as the unjust performance of some act which the party performing it has no right, or has contracted not, to do.

so what did Mr Trump do?

Originally Posted by legaldictionary.net
In a more general context, quid pro quo refers to the basis for any contract, in which there must be consideration given for the goods, services, or other thing offered.

Mr Trump offered goods, military aid and a meeting, and ecpected in return a consideration from Ukraine, opening investigations into Burisma, Bidens, and DNC and make public statement to that effect.

FEC Laws
Originally Posted by 52 U.S.C. § 30121 and generally, 11 CFR 110.20
In general, foreign nationals are prohibited from the following activities:

Making any contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or making any expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement in connection with any federal, state or local election in the United States;

and further

Originally Posted by 52 U.S.C. § 30121 and generally, 11 CFR 110.20
The Act prohibits knowingly soliciting, accepting or receiving contributions or donations from foreign nationals. In this context, "knowingly" means that a person:

Has actual knowledge that the funds solicited, accepted, or received are from a foreign national;

I suspect, and only because I am not an attorney nor have I read the law, but can read and reasonably interpret what I read, the call and all supporting efforts by Sec Pompeo, Sec Perry, AG Barr, and rogue attorney for Mr Trump, Giuliani and associates to further Mr Trump's illegal acts, do in fact constitute legitimate reasons to impeach any president.

But I dunno ... maybe you need to find that DNC server
Again, you have made the decision that Trump broke the law. A decision based on a complaint of one whistle-blower. A whistle-blower who did hear the call himself but based his complaint on what he was told was said in the call.

Originally Posted by rporter314
Because I don;t think you do any research (except to read right wing nut sites)...
Since the research I do does not lead me to have the same opinions you do you denigrate my research. I did some research about you rporter314. In the 52 pages of discussion on the Obama administration here on the Rant not once do you ever call for Pres. Obama to be impeached. In the 520 topics about the Obama administration when any of the things he did that were discussed you either defended him or didn't say anything. During his administration Obama used the IRS to investigate conservative organizations. When Pres. Nixon did that it was one of the reasons articles of impeachment were drawn up against Nixon. Why didn't you demand that Pres. Obama be impeached for that? You have said many times if Obama had committed what might be an impeachable offense you would have called for him to be impeached as strongly as you have for that to happen to Trump. You did not do that. That you did not shows that your desire to have Trump impeached is based on your partisan hatred of Trump. Obama and the IRS attacks on conservative groups.

The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary