-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Trump additional impeachment charge witness tampering
- Thread starter Riders
- Start date
Shad
Veteran Member
Nope. She works for POTUS not Congress. There is no obstruction. The same argument was attempted with Comey and it failed to pass the smell test.
Nope as per Comey. Congress is not a court of law either.
Riders
Well-Known Member
WOW! You just said its ok for the President of the USA to use and abuse his power to threaten people. I am shocked by responses I get from Trumpers. Maybe he ought to hire you to commit some of his dastardly crimes for him. Are you in the mafia?
Shad
Veteran Member
No I said Trump can fire her as he is her boss not Congress.
That is because you have issues reading so you fill in the blanks.
Babble.
See Comey.
You didn't read his tweets did you?
If he uses - or threatens to use - his power in a way that constitutes a crime, it's still illegal.
Shad
Veteran Member
He didn't though. He criticized her on twitter. Criticism isn't a threat. Pointing out the ambassador is answerable to POTUS is law.
Since I did a lot of driving yesterday, I heard many hours of NPR.
They tried to make the case for Trump's having threatened her
by playing clips of her saying that she felt threatened. But alas,
there was no actual threat cited during my 8 hour of listening.
Feelings are evidence now? Whoodathunkit.
Caution:
I'm not saying that Trump doesn't threaten people.
But claims should be backed up with more than plaintive feelings.
Last edited:
Shad
Veteran Member
More so Trumps tweets were not knowledge to her until Schiff told her.
So she had to feel threatened retroactively?
Trump's opponents have great imagination.
Riders
Well-Known Member
He did not criticize, he threatened ti fire her.
Threatening to fire her is a threat.
She was already removed, so I guess it wasn't a threat.
BSM1
What? Me worry?
Unfortunately that wasn't the case. You really should check your facts....
Riders
Well-Known Member
That was the case and threatening to get her fired while she was testifying? He should not have said a word to her while she was testifying nothing. Hes a bully and he threw his power around by doing it.
Why? She can still be fired.
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
Whether it is determined his tweets were criminal or not, they are in bad taste and it continues this trend of Trump blurring the line between reality TV and politics.
BSM1
What? Me worry?
What are you even talking about? She was already fired...besides, she was an employee of the US State Dept which is headed by the President of the US.
Shad
Veteran Member
Yup. She had no knowledge of his tweets until Schiff told her in the hearing. Then Schiff asked her how she feels. She said "threaten"
Shad
Veteran Member
Bad taste isn't a crime