Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Entire “Success” of Democrats Depends on Keeping the American People Wildly Ignorant

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    20,861

    Default Entire “Success” of Democrats Depends on Keeping the American People Wildly Ignorant

    Entire “Success” of Democrats Depends on Keeping the American People Wildly Ignorant of Reality

    JD Heyes
    November 4th, 2019



    The entire “success” of Democrats depends on keeping the American people wildly ignorant of reality, facts, history, and even current events.
    The few times in our history when Congress has either voted to impeach a president or considered returning articles of impeachment, the process was handled very publicly.

    Hearings were not held in secret. Testimony was not taken behind closed doors. Witnesses and evidence were presented out in the open so the American people, through various media of the day, were well aware of what was happening.

    The reasons for the openness should be obvious, but alas, they are not for far too many Americans.

    First of all, allowing someone accused of criminal activity to face his or her accuser is a fundamental legal principle of our founding.

    Secondly, secret trials were banned hundreds of years ago because they are the legal instruments of tyrants: Kings and dictators holding secret proceedings can present phony “evidence” in order to achieve convictions.

    Third, the accused are permitted legal representation of their own so they can challenge the prosecution’s witnesses and alleged “evidence.”
    None of these founding principles are being applied to the current “impeachment inquiry” involving President Donald Trump.

    Democrats, led by Rep. Adam Schiff of California, are holding the inquiry behind closed doors. They are bringing in ‘witnesses’ whose testimony is being sequestered — even as Schiff has been accused of leaking the contents of some witness testimony completely out of context.

    Also, no one on the president’s legal team has been able to question any of the witnesses Democrats have called in to testify. So he doesn’t know what’s being said — other than what Schiff is leaking to the “mainstream media,” which is dutifully reporting what they’ve been provided, sans corroboration.

    It’s the most un-American legal process one could ever have envisioned. Worse, this is supposedly involving an impeachment process — one that, theoretically, could involve the removal of a duly elected president 63 million Americans voted for. (Related: “Ukraine” whistleblower suddenly not going to testify before Adam Schiff’s secret committee — so what’s the “impeachment inquiry” really for?)

    We will rue the day we allow our country to be stolen from us

    In short, nothing about this process should be held in secret. Communist countries and others who are run by dictators have secret ‘legal’ proceedings, but clearly none that would involve the leader of the country.

    Democracies don’t operate that way and our unique American republic was never supposed to operate in the dark.

    Granted, if the Democrat-controlled House ever does return actual articles of impeachment against President Trump, that will be conducted in the open. But knowing how secretive Democrats have been thus far, it’s a safe bet they’ll attempt to present as “evidence” the “testimony” of so-called “witnesses” who, thus far, have only appeared behind closed doors.

    It’s been said that ‘impeachable offenses’ are whatever the House of Representatives say they are in order to satisfy the Constitution’s “high crimes and misdemeanors” impeachment requirement. But clearly the processes employed against Trump are partisan in nature and not based on any semblance of historical precedent.

    As Americans, we can’t allow this process to be warped — by one political party and the media. The future of our country is far too important.

    “President Trump is a disruptor. That makes some people very happy, and it makes some people very mad,” former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley said during a Friday speech at the American Enterprise Institute. “But if we are a country that lives by the rule of law, we must all accept that we have one president at a time, and that president attained his office by the choice of the American people.

    “No policy disagreement with him, no matter how heartfelt, justifies undermining the lawful authority that is vested in his office by the Constitution. … What’s at stake is not President Trump’s policies. What’s at stake is the Constitution,” she added.

    She’s exactly right. Nothing is worth losing our country. As long as we continue to have unimpeded free elections, there is always a chance to fix things.

    https://www.shtfplan.com/headline-ne...ality_11042019
    ”The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” - Margaret Thatcher

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    5,771

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,298

    Default

    I am pretty confident that even under the tyrannical rule of Kings, well before any modern republics or governments with democratic rule, the accused still had a right to an open trial with council to defend him. Not in all locals, but definitely after 1215 in England.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Fly-over country
    Posts
    8,189

    Default

    Now the private transcripts of the House hearings are being released, that will become a part of argument: show trial, they'll claim.

    No doubt that if the House votes to pass a bill of impeachment, the Senate trial will be painfully public.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,737

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Green Man View Post
    Now the private transcripts of the House hearings are being released, that will become a part of argument: show trial, they'll claim.

    No doubt that if the House votes to pass a bill of impeachment, the Senate trial will be painfully public.

    How can you have a trial without a crime?

    You mean they will actually show USC being violated?

    Next................

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    teh intarweb
    Posts
    5,665

    Default

    I hope these fools understand they’re entirely trashing their credibility.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

    George Orwell



    Police dog 1, bad guy nothin':

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slave Region 10
    Posts
    113,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bear View Post
    I hope these fools understand they’re entirely trashing their credibility.

    I think they are WAAAAAY past caring about their public persona, they are ramping-up for open warfare against American citizens
    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    “As a general rule, the earlier you recognize someone is trying to kill you, the better off you’ll be.”

    "You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."



  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Lapland, TN
    Posts
    13,400

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bear View Post
    I hope these fools understand they’re entirely trashing their credibility.

    Bear, that horse sailed a good while back ....

    O.W.


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Fly-over country
    Posts
    8,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PatDaly View Post
    How can you have a trial without a crime?

    You mean they will actually show USC being violated?

    Next................
    Crime is demanded? Here are a few:

    Campaign finance violation

    Trump pressured a foreign country to interfere in the 2020 election to benefit him politically.

    • Federal law and regulation, under 52 U.S.C. § 30121 and 11 C.F.R. § 110.20(g), prohibit soliciting campaign assistance from a foreign national. Solicitation includes not only a “contribution or donation of money” but also any “other thing of value,” including opposition research.
    • The Federal Election Commission has recognized the broad scope of the prohibition and found that even where the value of a good or service may be“nominal or difficult to ascertain,” this sort of contribution is illegal.

    Honest services fraud

    Trump used the power of the presidency to aid in his reelection efforts, including by dangling a potential meeting with Zelensky and withholding vital military aid to Ukraine.

    • Federal law, under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 and 18 U.S.C. § 1346, prohibits fraud offenses that include a “scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services.” This crime has parallels to bribery and extortion.
    • The fraudulent denial of honest services occurs when a public official performs an “official act” in exchange for personal gain and, in the process, defrauds their constituents of honest services to make decisions and take actions that are in the public’s best interests.
    • In public corruption cases—including honest services fraud—it is rare that the parties speak openly about the illegal transaction; it is much more common for them to speak in vague terms and communicate veiled threats.
    • Behavior of the sort exhibited by Trump would appear to violate the honest services fraud statute, even in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in McDonnell v. United States and related subsequent decisions by other courts.

    Misappropriation of funds

    The nearly $400 million of foreign assistance funding withheld by President Trump and his aides consisted of taxpayer funds appropriated by Congress. The funds included: “$250 million from the Defense Department’s Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative and $141 million from the State Department’s foreign military financing program … [which] were intended to help train and equip Ukrainian forces in their fight to stave off Russian incursion.” In addition, Trump used extensive government resources to advance his scheme, including staff time, which was not the intended manner of use for these taxpayer resources.


    Witness tampering

    Trump openly issued what appeared to be a threat against the government officials who spoke to the whistleblower, and he sought to discover the whistleblower’s identity. This is part of an ongoing pattern of behavior by Trump of attacking people who wish to provide Congress or law enforcement authorities with information about Trump-related misconduct.

    • Federal law, under 18 U.S.C. § 1512, prohibits any individual from knowingly using intimidation, threats, or corrupt means to induce another person to withhold or destroy information or evade a legal process.
    • Federal law provides protections for whistleblowers reporting instances of wrongdoing within the U.S. government. The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 provides general protections for federal employees and contractors, and the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1988 outlines a special process for those in the intelligence community to provide information to Congress and be protected from retaliation or threats of reprisals.

    Coercion of political activity

    Trump used government agencies and employees as part of his campaign to pressure Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 election.

    • Federal law, under 18 U.S. Code § 610, prohibits any individual from forcing an employee of the federal government to engage in political activity, including by “working or refusing to work on behalf of any candidate.”
    • Current officeholders, such as the president of the United States, are also considered candidates when acting to advance their reelection.

    Obstruction of justice

    Trump and his administration have gone to extreme lengths to stymie the House’s ongoing impeachment investigation, including by refusing to comply with lawful subpoenas or participate in the investigation in any way. In addition, Trump has been condemned for past efforts that many view as witness intimidation.

    • Obstruction of justice is a serious crime defined in federal statutes in various ways, including as the corrupt interference with “the due and proper administration of the law” or the “due administration of justice.” The statutes governing federal obstruction of justice, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1501*–1521, identify more than 20 types of obstruction crimes, including obstruction of oversight investigations before any committee of Congress.
    • Obstruction of justice formed the basis of the first article of impeachment during Watergate.

    Criminal conspiracy

    Trump’s pressure campaign involved a wide range of top government officials who aided him in his efforts.

    • When two or more people act together to commit any offense against the United States, federal law, under 18 U.S.C. § 371, defines that action as conspiracy.

    https://www.americanprogress.org/iss...-rule-law-pt2/

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    7,746

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Green Man View Post
    Crime is demanded? Here are a few:

    Campaign finance violation

    Trump pressured a foreign country to interfere in the 2020 election to benefit him politically.

    • Federal law and regulation, under 52 U.S.C. § 30121 and 11 C.F.R. § 110.20(g), prohibit soliciting campaign assistance from a foreign national. Solicitation includes not only a “contribution or donation of money” but also any “other thing of value,” including opposition research.
    • The Federal Election Commission has recognized the broad scope of the prohibition and found that even where the value of a good or service may be“nominal or difficult to ascertain,” this sort of contribution is illegal.

    Honest services fraud

    Trump used the power of the presidency to aid in his reelection efforts, including by dangling a potential meeting with Zelensky and withholding vital military aid to Ukraine.

    • Federal law, under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 and 18 U.S.C. § 1346, prohibits fraud offenses that include a “scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services.” This crime has parallels to bribery and extortion.
    • The fraudulent denial of honest services occurs when a public official performs an “official act” in exchange for personal gain and, in the process, defrauds their constituents of honest services to make decisions and take actions that are in the public’s best interests.
    • In public corruption cases—including honest services fraud—it is rare that the parties speak openly about the illegal transaction; it is much more common for them to speak in vague terms and communicate veiled threats.
    • Behavior of the sort exhibited by Trump would appear to violate the honest services fraud statute, even in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in McDonnell v. United States and related subsequent decisions by other courts.

    Misappropriation of funds

    The nearly $400 million of foreign assistance funding withheld by President Trump and his aides consisted of taxpayer funds appropriated by Congress. The funds included: “$250 million from the Defense Department’s Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative and $141 million from the State Department’s foreign military financing program … [which] were intended to help train and equip Ukrainian forces in their fight to stave off Russian incursion.” In addition, Trump used extensive government resources to advance his scheme, including staff time, which was not the intended manner of use for these taxpayer resources.


    Witness tampering

    Trump openly issued what appeared to be a threat against the government officials who spoke to the whistleblower, and he sought to discover the whistleblower’s identity. This is part of an ongoing pattern of behavior by Trump of attacking people who wish to provide Congress or law enforcement authorities with information about Trump-related misconduct.

    • Federal law, under 18 U.S.C. § 1512, prohibits any individual from knowingly using intimidation, threats, or corrupt means to induce another person to withhold or destroy information or evade a legal process.
    • Federal law provides protections for whistleblowers reporting instances of wrongdoing within the U.S. government. The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 provides general protections for federal employees and contractors, and the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1988 outlines a special process for those in the intelligence community to provide information to Congress and be protected from retaliation or threats of reprisals.

    Coercion of political activity

    Trump used government agencies and employees as part of his campaign to pressure Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 election.

    • Federal law, under 18 U.S. Code § 610, prohibits any individual from forcing an employee of the federal government to engage in political activity, including by “working or refusing to work on behalf of any candidate.”
    • Current officeholders, such as the president of the United States, are also considered candidates when acting to advance their reelection.

    Obstruction of justice

    Trump and his administration have gone to extreme lengths to stymie the House’s ongoing impeachment investigation, including by refusing to comply with lawful subpoenas or participate in the investigation in any way. In addition, Trump has been condemned for past efforts that many view as witness intimidation.

    • Obstruction of justice is a serious crime defined in federal statutes in various ways, including as the corrupt interference with “the due and proper administration of the law” or the “due administration of justice.” The statutes governing federal obstruction of justice, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1501*–1521, identify more than 20 types of obstruction crimes, including obstruction of oversight investigations before any committee of Congress.
    • Obstruction of justice formed the basis of the first article of impeachment during Watergate.

    Criminal conspiracy

    Trump’s pressure campaign involved a wide range of top government officials who aided him in his efforts.

    • When two or more people act together to commit any offense against the United States, federal law, under 18 U.S.C. § 371, defines that action as conspiracy.

    https://www.americanprogress.org/iss...-rule-law-pt2/

    So explain to me how trying to investigate possible crimes of the last administration can be turned into helping win this election..
    If Trump had set his ego aside and took some advice from those around him this would have ended long ago.There is nothing wrong with investigating criminal activity even if it involves democrats.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •