Not Impeachment, But a Coup: a Disgusting Defense of Collapsing Imperial Order

[dannno]

Good to know we got some bootlickers here who will kiss up to the President no matter what he does. What happened to "government should be afraid of their people, not vice versa"?

Since you aren’t a regular here, you have probably never watched this clip. I would be curious to know your thoughts and if it has changed what you think about the situation.

[Swordsmyth]

Since you aren’t a regular here, you have probably never watched this clip. I would be curious to know your thoughts and if it has changed what you think about the situation.

His red bars tell me he is reading from a script and that the facts won't make any difference.

[Gumba of Liberty]

Deepstate is your fake boogeyman to justify everything tyrants do. I thought we were a non-democracy, somehow people like you always complain about unelected power when you're on the losing end.

Fake boogeyman my ass. The CIA has overthrown 50+ governments since WWII. This is common knowledge. Only difference this time is they are doing it to the United States of America. Trump is the target of an ongoing CIA/M16 (British Empire Inc) coup. The fact that he is still standing is impressive regardless of whether you agree with his style or policies.

[Swordsmyth]

Fake boogeyman my ass. The CIA has overthrown 50+ governments since WWII. This is common knowledge. Only difference this time is they are doing it to the United States of America. Trump is the target of an ongoing CIA/M16 (British Empire Inc) coup. The fact that he is still standing is impressive regardless of whether you agree with his style or policies.

It seems obvious that you are talking to a low ranking member of the regime change operation.

[Swordsmyth]

The House began public hearings this week, furthering the partisan move by the Democrats to impeach President Trump in a blatant abuse of constitutional authority. Representative Adam Schiff said in a press conference, “These open hearings will be an opportunity for the American people to evaluate the witnesses for themselves and also to learn firsthand about the facts of the president’s misconduct.”

There are several problems with this statement.

First, Schiff is already characterizing the outcome of the investigation. As the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, he serves as a key arbiter of the inquiry under the resolution. As such, he is in a position that demands an unbiased irreproachable ethic in evaluating requests for subpoenas and testimony. Any judge in a similar position would be required to recuse himself with even a hint of the pure bias Schiff has displayed, including coordination with the Ukraine whistleblower and other actions.
The Democrats do not even pretend that their impeachment game is fair or actually about fact finding. This is simply about using a grant of power in the Constitution arbitrarily and politically, outside the bounds of due process and the purpose of that authority. Although the House does have the “sole power” of impeachment, that is a grant of jurisdiction, not a license to proceed on purely partisan motivation. Article One must work coordinately and not inconsistently with Article Two, which provides the legal basis upon which a sitting president may be impeached.
Second, Schiff demonstrates this is all about media play in the court of public opinion. Voters have no power or responsibility in an impeachment proceeding. The drafters of the Constitution intended the impeachment and removal process to be exercised only when there was sufficient evidence that the subject of the impeachment had committed a legally qualifying offense. This is not about whether impeachment is popular in the polls or whether a majority of Americans prefer it. Transparency in the context of this quasi judicial process is to provide fundamental fairness and due process for the president. Why are the Democrats so hellbent on blatantly refusing to allow Republican subpoenas and witnesses?
It is because it is a sham. Yet the Democrats are openly admitting that their goal is to try this in the media and attempt to dishonestly convince us that somehow we too should hate Donald Trump. They are hoping to convince us not to vote for him. That is not a legitimate or constitutional purpose of an impeachment. It is rather ironic that they claim his “crime” is an alleged quid pro quo to gain political advantage, while they are manipulating the power of impeachment for their political advantage. It is Schiff and other Democrats like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who should be impeached. There is an actual constitutional basis for that.
Third, Schiff is proving beyond doubt that this entire impeachment is merely a coordinated partisan attack against President Trump and, even more importantly, against the government of the United States. There was a bipartisan effort was against impeachment, with two Democrats and all Republicans in the House voting against the inquiry. The Democrats are abusing the power of impeachment and, if they are allowed to move forward, they are not only setting a terrible precedent that impeachment can be wielded as a political weapon that it was never intended to be, but also attacking the Constitution and undermining the rule of law.

In the Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton explained the problem of political motivation with the power of impeachment. He wrote,

“A well constituted court for the trial of impeachments, is an object not more to be desired than difficult to be obtained in a government wholly elective. The subjects of its jurisdiction are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself. The prosecution of them, for this reason, will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community, and to divide it into parties, more or less friendly or inimical, to the accused.”

He was right. Schiff and Pelosi are not interested in real demonstrations of innocence or guilt. Their only interest is staging a political coup against their adversaries. But this is even bigger than the president. This is an attempt to overthrow the federal government from the inside.


https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...ernment-within

[PRB]

Since you aren’t a regular here, you have probably never watched this clip. I would be curious to know your thoughts and if it has changed what you think about the situation.

Throw Biden in prison for all I care. never said he was innocent or a good guy, but the possibly Biden is a criminal, doesn't make Trump's solicitation somehow legal.

[Philhelm]

Fake boogeyman my ass. The CIA has overthrown 50+ governments since WWII. This is common knowledge. Only difference this time is they are doing it to the United States of America. Trump is the target of an ongoing CIA/M16 (British Empire Inc) coup. The fact that he is still standing is impressive regardless of whether you agree with his style or policies.

I think that the Deep State can mean a combination of things, and it's great that it's being discussed openly.

It's not just the CIA, but all of the intelligence agencies that betray and conspire against us, government entities such as the IRS that have been weaponized against political opponents, and pretty much the entire unelected bureaucracy that remains in power regardless of the will of the people.

[PRB]

in a blatant abuse of constitutional authority.

Good God.

I wish our founders could see this.

Republicans are getting really creative about complaining about checks and balances.

From "judicial activism" or "legislating from the bench" to "imagination of non existent rights" and now "abuse of constitutional authority"

Funny how no Republicans are ever willing to consider their President could do anything wrong.

Here's a challenge for you, answer me this, just to see if you're serious about truth and law, or just a bootlicker who will defend the President no matter what

1. What would a President need to do to warrant impeachment, or removal?
2. If such a thing was actually done, and proven, or admitted beyond reasonable doubt, what would the actual process of impeachment and removal look like? (and why can't I cry "coup" by then?)
3. If we held previous Presidents to the same standards as Trump is now, which President got away with impeachable offenses?

I dare you to tell me I'll wait for your ass kissing.

[PRB]

I think that the Deep State can mean a combination of things, and it's great that it's being discussed openly.

It costs nothing to make up a boogey man that doesn't exist. Scapegoating is cheap.

It's not just the CIA, but all of the intelligence agencies that betray and conspire against us, government entities such as the IRS that have been weaponized against political opponents, and pretty much the entire unelected bureaucracy that remains in power regardless of the will of the people.

Therefore the solution is what? Direct democracy? A coup against the deep state?

[Philhelm]

Good God.

I wish our founders could see this.

Republicans are getting really creative about complaining about checks and balances.

From "judicial activism" or "legislating from the bench" to "imagination of non existent rights" and now "abuse of constitutional authority"

Funny how no Republicans are ever willing to consider their President could do anything wrong.

Here's a challenge for you, answer me this, just to see if you're serious about truth and law, or just a bootlicker who will defend the President no matter what

1. What would a President need to do to warrant impeachment, or removal?
2. If such a thing was actually done, and proven, or admitted beyond reasonable doubt, what would the actual process of impeachment and removal look like? (and why can't I cry "coup" by then?)
3. If we held previous Presidents to the same standards as Trump is now, which President got away with impeachable offenses?

I dare you to tell me I'll wait for your ass kissing.

1. High crimes and misdemeanors.
2. I would expect an investigation of a crime, not a person.
3. Most of them? Obama can drone strike U.S. citizens without trial and nobody gives a $#@!.

[PRB]

Fake boogeyman my ass. The CIA has overthrown 50+ governments since WWII. This is common knowledge. Only difference this time is they are doing it to the United States of America. Trump is the target of an ongoing CIA/M16 (British Empire Inc) coup. The fact that he is still standing is impressive regardless of whether you agree with his style or policies.

Real coups use violence, not legal processes. To call our constitutional process a coup is to actually undermine our law. THAT is the real danger and coup. Holding our elected people accountable according to the law, in open, by other elected representatives, is the opposite of abuse of power. It's the simplest, easiest, most legal, most peaceful way to discuss our President's actions.

It's laughable how nervous Trumpbots are getting over this. This started as "Democrats have nothing so this will all backfire and help Trump win 2020" to now "This is so scary they're going to find him guuilty no matter what and it's a coup! we need to stall!"

Nunes is the worst liar.

[PRB]

1. High crimes and misdemeanors.
2. I would expect an investigation of a crime, not a person.
3. Most of them? Obama can drone strike U.S. citizens without trial and nobody gives a $#@!.

1. be specific. Go ahead, give me an example.

2. investigation by whom? how? what's to stop you from calling it a coup again?

3. most of our Presidents deserve to be impeached but this is a coup?

[Philhelm]

It costs nothing to make up a boogey man that doesn't exist. Scapegoating is cheap.

Unelected, long-standing government entities that have operated in violation of our Bill of Rights do exist, in plain sight, so they're not exactly boogeymen. To me, these entities, even the seemingly innocuous ones, are every bit a part of the "Deep State" as the CIA.

Therefore the solution is what? Direct democracy? A coup against the deep state?

Ron Paul has long suggested abolishing certain government agencies, such as the IRS, Department of Education, etc. What other solution would you expect on the Ron Paul forum?

[PRB]

Ron Paul has long suggested abolishing certain government agencies, such as the IRS, Department of Education, etc. What other solution would you expect on the Ron Paul forum?

Ron's suggestion of abolishing unnecessary government is at best being fiscally responsible and reducing waste, that does jack $#@! to get rid of shadow government or unelected officials that are holding elected ones accountable.

"Unelected, long-standing government entities that have operated in violation of our Bill of Rights do exist, in plain sight, so they're not exactly boogeymen. To me, these entities, even the seemingly innocuous ones, are every bit a part of the "Deep State" as the CIA."

Sounds like you just move the goal post and make up $#@! as we go along.

[Philhelm]

1. be specific. Go ahead, give me an example.

2. investigation by whom? how? what's to stop you from calling it a coup again?

3. most of our Presidents deserve to be impeached but this is a coup?

1. Specific Example: Extrajudicial assassination of two U.S. citizens via drone strike.
2. Crimes are meant to be investigated, not people. I cannot take the current impeachment proceeding in a vacuum without also considering the entire Mueller "investigation." The result? That Mueller did not "exonerate" Trump even though it is absolutely not the role of a prosecutor to exonerate anyone. Whether Trump be one thing or another is irrelevant; if they can get away with railroading the elected President of the United States of America, they can do much, much worse to the rest of us.
3. I would state that it is a soft coup since there were operators conspiring within government seeking to oust Trump before the motherfucker was even inaugurated.

Actually, I kind of regret responding, because from your questions you come across as a ding dong. We're on the Ron Paul forum and your suggestion is that to counter unelected government we might change to a direct democracy (lol) or stage a coup against the deep state. Are you retarded?

[PRB]

1. Specific Example: Extrajudicial assassination of two U.S. citizens via drone strike.

not possible. The President is the law, so what he does is judicial by definition. Try again. What part of "shoot somebody on 5th Avenue" didn't you get?

2. Crimes are meant to be investigated, not people.

How do you investigate a crime without the criminal? Sounds like either semantics or a farce.

I cannot take the current impeachment proceeding in a vacuum without also considering the entire Mueller "investigation."

Why?

The result? That Mueller did not "exonerate" Trump even though it is absolutely not the role of a prosecutor to exonerate anyone.

Yeah, who asked you?

Whether Trump be one thing or another is irrelevant; if they can get away with railroading the elected President of the United States of America, they can do much, much worse to the rest of us.

Who is they and what exactly is railroading?

3. I would state that it is a soft coup since there were operators conspiring within government seeking to oust Trump before the motherfucker was even inaugurated.

none of which you can prove have anything to do with either Mueller or Ukraine.

Actually, I kind of regret responding, because from your questions you come across as a ding dong.

Bootlickers love their ad hominems

We're on the Ron Paul forum and your suggestion is that to counter unelected government we might change to a direct democracy (lol) or stage a coup against the deep state. Are you retarded?

Nope. You are.

[Swordsmyth]

Actually, I kind of regret responding

I agree, don't feed the troll.

His fallacies are obvious enough that they don't need a response.

[PRB]

I agree, don't feed the troll.

His fallacies are obvious enough that they don't need a response.

Every bootlicker has an excuse to evade the questions. Keep defending our tyrant. don't cry when one day people like me can't save you.

[PRB]

[]

[pcosmar]

I'm waiting for a Trump Pedo Tape to emerge,,and watch all these Ttards Heads to explode.

[jmdrake]

Real coups use violence, not legal processes. To call our constitutional process a coup is to actually undermine our law. THAT is the real danger and coup. Holding our elected people accountable according to the law, in open, by other elected representatives, is the opposite of abuse of power. It's the simplest, easiest, most legal, most peaceful way to discuss our President's actions.

It's laughable how nervous Trumpbots are getting over this. This started as "Democrats have nothing so this will all backfire and help Trump win 2020" to now "This is so scary they're going to find him guuilty no matter what and it's a coup! we need to stall!"

Nunes is the worst liar.

For the record, "Trumpbots" are not the only ones who find these impeachment hearings a farce. Here is a leftwing Bernie Sanders supporter ripping them apart.



I am 100% certain that Trump will not be found guilty. The numbers just aren't there. And the evidence isn't strong enough to push the numbers there. That said, I agree with your assessment that the impeachment itself isn't a coup, but the Russiagate investigation and how it started was a coup though a non violent one. There are such things as "bloodless coups." FBI agents tweeting each other about "insurance" to overturn the election if Trump won was not part of the "constitutional process." That said, we are where we are.

[PRB]

I'm waiting for a Trump Pedo Tape to emerge,,and watch all these Ttards Heads to explode.

Damn, and I thought I was the troll.

[PRB]

For the record, "Trumpbots" are not the only ones who find these impeachment hearings a farce. Here is a leftwing Bernie Sanders supporter ripping them apart.



I am 100% certain that Trump will not be found guilty. The numbers just aren't there. And the evidence isn't strong enough to push the numbers there. That said, I agree with your assessment that the impeachment itself isn't a coup, but the Russiagate investigation and how it started was a coup though a non violent one. There are such things as "bloodless coups." FBI agents tweeting each other about "insurance" to overturn the election if Trump won was not part of the "constitutional process." That said, we are where we are.

I agree, he won't be found guilty. Whether he is is another question, but he won't be found guilty.

How was Russiagate a coup?

Kyle's a funny guy, but Sondland isn't the only person who says there was quid pro quo.

Also, if aid wasn't help up for that reason, what was it held up for?

Are we just going to repeat the republican lie that because it was eventually released, it wasn't actually held up?

[jmdrake]

I agree, he won't be found guilty. Whether he is is another question, but he won't be found guilty.

How was Russiagate a coup?

You said it yourself. A coup is something that goes outside constitutional means. Two FBI agents texting each other about "insurance" if Trump happens to become president is unconstitutional on its face. And there is evidence coming out that FBI agents falsified documents to get the investigation started.

Kyle's a funny guy, but Sondland isn't the only person who says there was quid pro quo.

I'm sure you've said it. Donald Duck may have said it too. And? So?

Also, if aid wasn't help up for that reason, what was it held up for?

Are we just going to repeat the republican lie that because it was eventually released, it wasn't actually held up?

It was released without there being an investigation. So you have a quid but no pro quo. On the flip side, Joe Biden got a pro quo for his quid.

[PRB]

You said it yourself. A coup is something that goes outside constitutional means. Two FBI agents texting each other about "insurance" if Trump happens to become president is unconstitutional on its face.

Strzok and Page were not how Russiagate started, and the investigations hardly depended on them. Mueller fired them immediately when he found out about their texts.

And there is evidence coming out that FBI agents falsified documents to get the investigation started.

What evidence?

I'm sure you've said it. Donald Duck may have said it too. And? So?

Got it, we'll just ignore anybody who don't want to listen to. That's your opinion in a nutshell, screw testimonies, because who cares who said anything.

It was released without there being an investigation. So you have a quid but no pro quo.

Wait. There was a quid? Meaning there was an attempt?

On the flip side, Joe Biden got a pro quo for his quid.

never said he was innocent, throw him in prison for all I care.

[enhanced_deficit]

Simultanous Coup Attempts against a Globalist Neoconservative funded Trump & Netanyahu

Who is behind simultanous Coup attempts taking place currently against two rising stars of cause of liberty , Trump and Netanyhu, funded by same Globalist Neoconservative, the widely respected Sheldon Adelson?

Have some so called 'America-First' factions of Deep State turned against 'Deep Zionism' funded politicians?

Or timing just coincidence and no connection between the two simultanoues coup attempts?

[PRB]

Simultanous Coup Attempts against a Globalist Neoconservative funded Trump & Netanyahu

Who is behind simultanous Coup attempts taking place currently against two rising stars of cause of liberty , Trump and Netanyhu, funded by same Globalist Neoconservative, the widely respected Sheldon Adelson?

Have some so called 'America-First' factions of Deep State turned against 'Deep Zionism' funded politicians?

Or timing just coincidence and no connection between the two simultanoues coup attempts?

Trump is not America first. Just ask Tulsi.

[jmdrake]

Strzok and Page were not how Russiagate started, and the investigations hardly depended on them. Mueller fired them immediately when he found out about their texts.

The Steele dossier is how it got started. That doesn't make it any better. They were certainly part of the machinery though. And Mueller firing them after they helped get the ball rolling doesn't help your argument in the least.

What evidence?

https://www.vox.com/2019/11/22/20977...-investigation
An inspector general reportedly finds that FBI employee altered a document in Russia investigation

Got it, we'll just ignore anybody who don't want to listen to. That's your opinion in a nutshell, screw testimonies, because who cares who said anything.

I don't have you on ignore. Maybe I should? And for the record, Mr. Troll, I'm one of the most anti-Trump people on this forum. But I still call BS when I see it. Just because people say "Quid pro quo" without evidence doesn't prove quid pro quo.

Wait. There was a quid? Meaning there was an attempt?

Are you as stupid as you are pretending to be? I hope not. "Quid" doesn't mean "attempt." Quid pro quo means something given for something else. There was something given, aid. There is no evidence that it was given for anything. Certainly it didn't result in anything being received.

never said he was innocent, throw him in prison for all I care.

If he's not innocent....then there should be an investigation of what he did in Ukraine. If there should be an investigation of what he did in Ukraine, then the Ukrainian government should help in that investigation. If the Ukrainian government should help in that investigation....

[Zippyjuan]

The Steele dossier is how it got started. That doesn't make it any better. They were certainly part of the machinery though. And Mueller firing them after they helped get the ball rolling doesn't help your argument in the least.

The Steel Dossier actually originated with a conservative group.

https://www.npr.org/2018/04/25/58604...ns-the-dossier

Where'd it come from?

During the 2016 Republican presidential primaries, the leaders of the conservative news outlet Washington Free Beacon hired a private intelligence company, Fusion GPS, to conduct research into the candidates, including Trump. Early in the year, the Free Beacon's interest in the work lapsed.

So by "early March," Fusion GPS approached the law firm Perkins Coie, which represents the Democratic National Committee, offering to continue its investigations into Trump. In April, the law firm agreed, and it began to underwrite the investigation.

Why is this important? After Fusion GPS was initially hired by conservatives, Democrats paid for the phase of the work that included the compilation of the dossier.

[parocks]

The Electoral College kept a tyrant Hillary out of office which is what it was supposed to do.

It's the United STATES. The STATES play an important role in the selection of the President.