As of Dec. 18, the “Real Clear Politics Average” polling regarding the impeachment and removal of President Donald Trump points in the president’s favor.

What motivates Speaker Nancy Pelosi to push impeachment proceedings when the polls don’t support it? Doesn’t she want or need the support of a clear majority of Americans? She was in Congress during the Bill Clinton impeachment and remembers the results — catastrophic losses for the Republicans in the 1998 midterms.

Do the facts add up to an impeachable offense? The facts turn out to be a political Rorschach test. The same set of facts results in a completely opposite conclusion depending on one’s political leanings.

Or do they? Not only are opinion polls definitively undecided, but so are Democratic senators.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said, “And we Senate Democrats believe that the trial has to be fair, and it’s important that the American people judge it to be fair.”

“And so, there is lots of evidence that the House presented, but these four witnesses have direct knowledge of why the aid to Ukraine was delayed,” he said. “There is no reason not to have them.”

If “there is no reason not to have them,” why did the House of Representatives proceed without testimony from these four witnesses? President Trump did refuse to have certain witnesses testify or to produce requested documents. The House Judiciary Committee could’ve asked the courts to enforce the congressional subpoenas as they did in the Richard Nixon and Clinton impeachment efforts. Speaker Pelosi refused to do so.

It may be because the Democrats weren’t on solid legal ground. A congressional subpoena isn’t inviolable. If refusing to comply with a congressional subpoena makes a president guilty of obstruction of justice, every single president of the modern era is guilty.

The other charge, abuse of power, is opaque. Republicans must wonder if such a charge applies to executive actions. Republicans were justly outraged that President Barack Obama was conducting the people’s business outside the scope of the legislative process. Obama’s executive actions included the Iran deal, the Paris climate agreement, and Trans-Pacific Partnership — all done without congressional approval. Could the Republicans have charged President Obama with abuse of power?

It’s possible that the Democrats believe that, lacking impeachment, President Trump will thrash their own party’s presidential candidates in 2020. Michael Bloomberg is on record stating exactly that.

But Republicans should be vigilant and not rely on the Democrats’ ineptitude. Most voters believe the president’s call wasn’t “perfect” even if they believe impeachment is unjustified.

There’s also history. In 1991 President H. W. Bush was regarded as electorally invincible after the Gulf War victory. His approval rating, in mid-1991, topped 70 percent. Then the economy dipped. We know what happened next.

Norman Pappous lives in League City.

Locations

Recommended for you

(160) comments

David Hardee

Those wanting to apply logic, laws and evidence or reason to the impeachment will be locked in a circular argument. There is no rationality it is just a series of trapping events.

This is the explanation for Pelosi’s (trapped into) impeaching Trump. Overwhelming shock from the result of 2016 win by Trump created a psychotic event (psychosis - a severe mental disorder in which thought and emotions are so impaired that contact is lost with external reality) which stimulated the Democratic action – remove Trump. Once the action (call for removal of Trump) was popular it was unstoppable. It was easy to find pseudo-evidence because prior to the election a cache of investigate records had been prepared by FBI. That cache promoted a hyperbola-basis to sustain the emotional desire to impeach Trump. Trump was a political heathen without allies and reacted with the arrogance of a normal human – attacked his attackers. The battle was joined and now neither opponent could disengage with dignity. That’s the un-baffling chronology.

The only good result is that American society is seeing the SWAMP creatures exposed as they turn cannibal and devour each other. God is blessing America with that result from the Trump presidency.

Patricia C Newsom

👍

Gary Miller

David> Impeachment is an indictment. When a indictment isn't forwarded to the jury it is dismissed. If Pelosi doesn't send it to the Senate Trump's record will show he was "almost" impeached but the prosecuter, "Pelosi", dismissed the charges because she knew the charges were bogus.

Carlos Ponce

Pelosi has not selected impeachment managers to present their case to the Senate nor forwarded the impeachment to the Senate. And she sent the House home for the holidays. She knows she screwed up - BIG TIME!

Gary Scoggin

There’s an old saying about if you shoot at the King you’d better not miss. Pelosi’s instincts were not to proceed with impeachment but she got so much pressure from her caucus that she gave in. And I’ll bet she now regrets it. She fired her biggest weapon and missed and it will come back to haunt her.

I believe that from the Democrats’ perspective, this time would have been better spent sending the question of Executive Privilege and the White House ignoring of sub poenas back up to the Supreme Court. Only damaging, direct testimony of Mulvaney, Bolton, et al, could change Republican minds. (At least those minds willing to listen to facts, which may be in short supply, even with direct testimony.) The Democrats are in too big of a hurry and, thusly, have overplayed their hand.

Ray Taft

President Trump is still President.

For nearly 3 years, Democrats in Congress openly made plans to impeach Trump. Looking for a crime that couldn’t be found. So they invented a fake reason. While Pelosi claimed that “no one comes to Congress to impeach a president,” House Democrats did exactly that—and said so explicitly.

Pelosi knows America is appalled by what the Democrats are up to. And she knows the truth about impeachment: that it was always a partisan move to silence the voices of 63 million Americans. It never mattered what the facts were or what the Constitution or law said.

Democrats lectured the country about the gravity of impeachment and then turned right around and make a mockery of it for their leftist base.

Pelosi assured the public that the impeachment vote would be a “solemn” process and a prayerful day for America. Pelosi hoped Democrats could continue to fool America. Democrats had to be warned not to cheer during the final vote.

But some stepped out of Pelosi’s script.

Far-left Rep. Rashida Tlaib gleefully recorded a selfie video gearing up for the vote.

Democrat-supporting Washington Post reporters posted a celebratory group photo and wished everyone a “Merry Impeachmas.”

Pelosi made two shocking announcements just hours after the House vote.

The first is that she’s done talking about impeachment. “I’m not going to answer any more questions” about it, she said.

WH Press Secretary Grisham called Pelosi out, noting that the White House and President Trump have been answering questions about it. When you wrongfully impeach a President, people deserve answers. Pelosi has been talking nothing but impeachment for years. Now she doesn’t want to talk about it because she knows how wrong it was.

The second stunning move Pelosi announced is that after rushing to complete the fastest impeachment of a President in history, the House will now hold onto the Articles of Impeachment instead of passing them along to the Senate for trial. Every American deserves their day in court. But Democrat leaders know their case sucks. Democrats know the Senate will acquit President Trump—after all, their shoddy Articles don’t even allege that he committed a crime—and they don’t want the weakness of their case exposed.

Gleeful House Democrats got their historic day. They now own the first impeachment in American history that had no bipartisan support, only bipartisan opposition. They now own the first impeachment that contains no criminal violations, only political disputes.

It’s a terrible thing Democrats did. Pelosi knows it. America knows it. So, Pelosi doesn’t want to talk about it.

Here’s what President Trump said about it and it rings true:

They’re not after me. They’re after you.

I’m just in the way.

Bailey Jones

"They’re not after me. They’re after you. I’m just in the way." Wow - straight from the twitter feed onto the page. Be afraid, Ray - be VERY afraid.

"One thing's for sure, in the war between freedom and fear, our side is going to have better t-shirts." - Dave Winer

Bailey Jones

Your question answers itself.

"The facts turn out to be a political Rorschach test." Yes - the president's faults and impeachable actions are perfectly clear to me - yet seem to be invisible to you.

Trump's divine purpose on this earth gets bandied about these forums with some frequency, so it was a surprise to see that the evangelical magazine Christianity Today - founded by Billy Graham, no less - has come out for Trump's impeachment and removal.

"But the facts in this instance are unambiguous: The president of the United States attempted to use his political power to coerce a foreign leader to harass and discredit one of the president’s political opponents. That is not only a violation of the Constitution; more importantly, it is profoundly immoral.

The reason many are not shocked about this is that this president has dumbed down the idea of morality in his administration. He has hired and fired a number of people who are now convicted criminals. He himself has admitted to immoral actions in business and his relationship with women, about which he remains proud. His Twitter feed alone—with its habitual string of mischaracterizations, lies, and slanders—is a near perfect example of a human being who is morally lost and confused."

The truth is that Trump remains in power for two reasons. First, he inherited a booming economy and has, so far, managed not to screw it up. Second, as the editor of Christianity Today notes, he has dumbed down the idea of morality in his administration - throwing around money and power for his own selfish interests is the very definition of Donald Trump, there is literally nothing about his actions in Ukraine that is out of character and most Americans simply can't see the forest for the trees.

Mike Zeller

Bailey Jones [thumbup]

Carlos Ponce

Now I know who Mike reminds me of - Le Fou.

Carlos Ponce

"First, he inherited a booming economy ...." Inherited? Thanks for the laugh, Bailey!

Carlos Ponce

Remember Obama EXTENDED the GW Bush tax cuts which was why his economy was okay but lackluster because of his (Obama's) regulations.

Bailey Jones

I see that our favorite revisionist historian has airbrushed Bush's Great Recession from the photos of Obama's economy.

Carlos Ponce

Are you denying Obama extended Bush tax cuts? And the recession Bush tried to avert was because of the actions of the Democrat Party namely Barney Frank? Look it up!

Jeff Patterson

Yes, I always find it interesting that folks that derided the GDP growth numbers under the previous administration as anemic now tout the same GDP numbers as a”turnaround” and “best ever”.

Charles Douglas

Say what you will, Say what you may,....for this is a free country never paid for, but is continually being paid on by the red blood and sacrifice of those of this country who saw the value of a place where it's inhabitants and citizens could live and raise families in peace prosperity, with leaway to worship as they pleased. So much so they were willing to give their lives to protect what they had. People are tired of the same old BS coming from the party who instituted the worst system of abuse to it's owe citizen in history ( SLAVERY ), and still lies and acts to keep those citizens in other forms of the natural, visible chains and shackles which the civil war, and the Emancipation Proclamation eradicated.The great MLK once stated, "No man can ride you back unless you bend over and allow him to jump on! Somebody need to tell San Fran Nan that, because the Conservatives are done ...bending over! There is a difference between Donald Trump and Mitt Romney! Lastly, Proverbs 26:27 States, " He who digs a hole shall fall in it,..and he who throws a rock, it will return to hit him." This is happening daily now to those who behind closed doors and in the dark tried to redo the election of 2016, by lauching a secret counter-intelligence spying attack on a duely elected President by a the people. God help this nation so many served and died to preserve!

Emile Pope

The Democratic party was formed in 1828. Slavery didn't exist until then. Why don't you explain the Southern Strategy. Or how Reagan started his campaign with a speech on State's Rights (codeword for Jim Crow) delivered where three Civil Rights workers were killed. Or his "welfare queen" comments. Willie Horton anyone?

Carlos Ponce

"State's Rights (codeword for Jim Crow)" That's wrong. State's rights appeared in the 10th Amendment ratified December 15, 791. Jim Crow had NOTHING to do with it. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Emile Pope

Garbage. State's rights was used to promote Jim Crow since the southern states said that they had the right to do it because it wasn't mentioned in the Constitution.

Emile Pope

States' rights as code word[edit]

Since the 1940s, the term "states' rights" has often been considered a loaded term because of its use in opposition to federally mandated racial desegregation and more recently, same-sex marriage.[34][35]

During the heyday of the civil rights movement, defenders of segregation[34][36] used the term "states' rights" as a code word—in what is now referred to as dog-whistle politics—political messaging that appears to mean one thing to the general population but has an additional, different or more specific resonance for a targeted subgroup.[37][38][39] In 1948 it was the official name of the "Dixiecrat" party led by white supremacist presidential candidate Strom Thurmond.[40][41] Democratic governor George Wallace of Alabama, who famously declared in his inaugural address in 1963, "Segregation now! Segregation tomorrow! Segregation forever!"—later remarked that he should have said, "States' rights now! States' rights tomorrow! States' rights forever!"[42] Wallace, however, claimed that segregation was but one issue symbolic of a larger struggle for states' rights; in that view, which some historians dispute, his replacement of segregation with states' rights would be more of a clarification than a euphemism.[42]

In 2010, Texas governor Rick Perry's use of the expression "states' rights", to some, was reminiscent of "an earlier era when it was a rallying cry against civil rights".[43] During an interview with The Dallas Morning News, Perry made it clear that he supports the end of segregation, including passage of the Civil Rights Act. Texas president of the NAACP Gary Bledsoe stated that he understood that Perry wasn't speaking of "states' rights" in a racial context; but others still felt offended by the term because of its past misuse.[43]

Carlos Ponce

"Since the 1940s...." States' rights have been in discussion in this country since its inception on July 4, 1776. The first constitution produced after the Declaration of Independence was called the Articles of Confederation, passed by US Continental Congress - November 15, 1777, ratified by the required 13 States - February 2, 1781, enacted by the US Continental Congress - March 1, 1781. It contained the following provision: "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled."

https://www.articlesofconfederation.com/p/articles-text.html

But the AOC (not to be confused with the current Congresswoman) formed a weak central government and was replaced by the Constitution in 1787. But the issue of states' rights was still there manifested in the Bill of Rights Amendment Ten.

David Hardee

Bailey –Supposing one can divine the intentions of the man’s word and reactions are the flaws every human exhibits when judging others. This one-sided castigation reveals your partiality and animosity have diverted an intellect into paralysis and rigidity. To venture into qualifying a person’s morality who is engulfed in and performing in the political arena is where Jesus would not tread “render unto God what is God’s and to Caesar what is Caesar’s.” Look again at your posting. This one is uniquely beneath your norm. Whether it is palatable or not, it is to our benefit to have this eruption of flushing into observation the corruption among government/politicians and in America’s society. Hopefully, this flushing will make us cleaner.

Emile Pope

[thumbup][thumbup][thumbup]

Carlos Ponce

Very Interesting........

Remember Harvard's Noah Feldman, one of the Constitutional law professors called by the House Judiciary committee to interpret impeachment (hint- he's one of the three Democrats)? His Bloomberg Op-Ed is titled "Trump Isn’t Impeached Until the House Tells the Senate".

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-19/trump-impeachment-delay-could-be-serious-problem-for-democrats

Now if you disagree with him then that undermines his testimony during the House Judiciary Committee hearings. Now, is he a righteous Democrat Constitutional Law Professor or not? Yes - Trump has not been impeached unless Pelosi forwards it to the Senate. No impeachment by Christmas since they will not convene until January. No, and you question his veracity as a Constitutional Law Professor making his "testimony" questionable.

Bailey Jones

What nonsense. First of all, no one cares. Second, no one cares. And third, even if anyone did care enough to disagree with the good professor's opinion about the arcane machinery of impeachment, it is actually quite possible to disagree with one thing a person says without making everything else he says "questionable". I mean, that's really how Trumpsters get through the day, right? Or do you hold that because much of what Trump says is false, everything Trump says is "questionable"? (Because that would be awesome.)

Carlos Ponce

So Bailey disagrees with one of Nadler's handpicked Constitutional experts> How funny!

Bailey Jones

He swings! ...and he misses. Do you ever even read the articles you link to? His argument is the same as saying, "Well, you've had the ceremony but you're not really married until the license gets recorded." I don't disagree with it, I just find it irrelevant. But you agree with it, right? And by extension everything else the good professor said?

Carlos Ponce

Irrelevant, he posted. If true, Democrats never got their wish. Consider this. You have a marriage ceremony but after that you go your separate ways. No living together, no consummation, - NOTHING! Are you recognized as "married" in the eyes of the public? By the way - that's the way a lot of illegals think they can get legal status in this country. Legal authorities say "not a valid marriage".

Bailey Jones

Illegals??? Where did that come from? Your "go to" diversion is usually abortion....

Oh... I get it now - no birth certificate = no baby.

Carlos Ponce

It's a common practice, Bailey.

Paula Flinn

All of the Conservative answers here do not understand Speaker Pelosi. You are just as clueless as President Trump. Speaker Pelosi will not release the impeachment to the Senate for the trial until Sen. McConnell agrees to provide documents and call witnesses. It has to be a fair trial. Sen. McConnell needs to take this impeachment seriously. Speaker Pelosi will know when the time is right. Meanwhile, Sen. Lindsay Graham is livid that it will not be a quick “trial.”

All of the newspapers have stated that the House of Representatives has impeached Donald Trump.

One person’s opinion of whether its an impeachment before its turned over to the Senate, is not everyone’s opinion. Most think that discussion ended with the 2 votes on the Articles of Impeachment. But, it doesn’t destroy Dr. Feldman’s opinion on anything else. Dr. Feldman is a respected Constitutional Law Professor. A difference of opinion on one detail does not mean there is a difference of opinion on his whole testimony before the Judiciary Committee.

All of the Democrats that voted for impeachment believe President Trump is corrupt. Democrats believe that President Trump will continue to be corrupt unless he is stopped and removed. He, in fact, invited China to investigate the Bidens, ignoring our own intelligence agencies ability to do the same. The only reason for Trump to behave in an ethical way will be that this time he was caught and now faces consequences. Otherwise, he will continue his corrupt methods to win, inviting foreign countries to interfere in our elections, giving himself an unfair advantage, betraying his Oath of Office to the Constitution, and putting our country at risk for National Security. We do not want to be drawn into a war for/against Russia or the Ukraine. President Trump is already “too friendly” with Vladimir Putin, a known liar to, and killer of, his own people.

Carlos Ponce

Nancy Pelosi cannot dictate how the Senate will handle this - END OF STORY.

Jim Forsythe

Which way is it Carlos. You say that Nancy Pelosi can not dictate how the Senate will handle this, but you want the Republican's to dictate how the House handled the rules. Do you want to follow the constitution ,or just the parts you agree with!

Carlos Ponce

" but you want the Republican's to dictate how the House handled the rules" No Jim. I want the Democrats to follow their own rules. They did not

Jim Forsythe

Trump is impeached and you still are trying to convince people that the Democrats did not follow their own rules. As you just said their own rules, that were laid out for the impeachment of Trump. The majority makes the rules. If the Senate receives the charges, they will go by the rules the Senate votes on.

Carlos Ponce

The Democrat majority made the rules and did not follow them. I'm not trying to convince anybody. Anyone with ears that hear, eyes that can read and a brain to think can figure that out.

Carlos Ponce

And come November the American people will vote and show their disdain for what the Democrats did.

Carlos Ponce

Paula, supposed charges were filed against you for something you knew you did not do. The Grand Jury indicts you on those charges. But the presiding authority does not forward the indictment for trial. Would you worry knowing the conditions for forwarding the indictment will never be met?

Richard Moore

"If refusing to comply with a congressional subpoena makes a president guilty of obstruction of justice, every single president of the modern era is guilty."

It is easy to see why there is so much confusion here - the article of impeachment is for OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS. It is not Obstruction of Justice.

Emile Pope

Your president is a crook. Now he has to answer for his actions...

Carlos Ponce

He will not be removed from office, Emile because he did not do anything wrong.

Charles Douglas

I hope Pelosi holds on to those articles. Pelosi, and her followers need to be taught a lesson! I love this! The Republicans had forgotten how to fight in the gutter, until Trump came to town! If Pelosi and Crybaby Shumer want a fight, ....LETS GET IT ON! I want to know who I'm sharing a virtual foxhole with here. L ololo. So to San Fran NAN I say, "Hold onto those Trumped up charges," " Don't ever send them to the Senate!"How I love it so! If I was not so old I go back and rejoin the military!

Gary Miller

Emile> Trump "the crook" will be rewarded for his actions with a landslide re election. Pelosi " the failure" will be rewarded for her actions with a long vacation from congress. Considering the damage Pelosi has done to the Democrat party I wish she could continue working for conservative Americans.

Gary Miller

Emile> He will be rewarded.

Jeff Patterson

If there is truly a desire to get to the facts, the next step is pretty simple.....just have the folks who do have first hand knowledge - Mulvaney, Bolton, Guliaini, Duffey, Blair - testify under oath. It seems odd that if there is truly “nothing there” then why not just have the key folks who would know testify and clear everything up for us.

Carlos Ponce

The prosecution has to PROVE guilt. Under our American justice system one does not have to prove innocence.

Gary Scoggin

Carlos... this isn’t a criminal trial. Each juror (I.e., Senator) sets their own standard for conviction.

Carlos Ponce

Americans expect JUSTICE and the way the Democrats are treating Trump is NOT JUST. If a Congressman or Senator does not vote according to their constituent's view then out they go. Look for a large House turnover, Blue to Red.

Gary Scoggin

Moving the goalposts again, Carlos?

Bailey Jones

Jeff, Trump doesn't believe the American people deserve to hear the truth - only tweets.

Jeff Patterson

It easy to get distracted by all the rhetoric and opinions stated as "facts", but my litmus test here continues to be that if say Obama, or any President who was not a Republican, had had the same "perfect phone call" that Trump had, and had taken the same actions trying to stifle any questioning of it, would the people who are so emphatically defending Trump also now be so emphatically defending Obama? If their answer is no, or silence, then I would submit that their defense is based on partisanship and politics, not on a desire to support the Constitution and the rule of law. I voted for Trump and am a lifelong conservative, but you either support the Constitution and the rule of law, or you don't. And frankly I don't have an issue with someone being very partisan and supporting their party/position no matter what because they see politics as a "war" and anybody that doesn't agree with them as the "enemy", but at least be intellectually honest about what you are doing.

Bailey Jones

I agree, Jeff. During the Obama years I kept hearing about Obama the traitor, then it was Crooked Hillary, now it's Corrupt Biden. If there's proof - put them on trial and let's get rid of them. Trump owns the justice department and the senate - where's all the swamp draining we were promised? I'm not afraid of justice, or the rule of law, and I'm happy to put as many Democrats in jail as it takes. What I'm afraid of is corruption - my biggest fear ever since Citizen's United has been the total loss of our democracy to dark money corruption. And now with fake news being spread through thousands of fake foreign social media bots - and "deep fake" video technology just an election away - I have, for the first time in my 62 years, a real fear for the future of our country. Not a fear of Donald Trump or whoever comes next, but a fear that too many Americans can't tell real from fake, and right from wrong.

Carlos Ponce

"If there's proof - put them on trial and let's get rid of them." Gee, Bailey, were you this impatient as a child: "Are we there yet? Are we there yet?" Did you open your Christmas presents BEFORE it was Christmas?

Bailey Jones

Impatient??? It's been three years, Carlos. How long does it take Giuliani to drink up some fake conspiracy BS to hawk on One America News Network anyway?

Carlos Ponce

Patience is a virtue. Rush and you do a poor job like the House impeachment committees.

Dan Freeman

If we believe the analogy that impeachment is an indictment, then the House has voted only that there exists probable cause of two offenses: 1. Abuse of Power and 2.Obstruction of Congress.

The trial may occur in the Senate. If the analogy is continued, the prosecution would present facts to support the impeachment. It follows prosecutors should be allowed to call witnesses and subpoena documents. Only then would a defense would be presented.

At this point there are no facts in evidence beyond what the House used for its impeachment. If no additional defense is offered, the President has implicitly accepted the House’s indictment and pleaded nolo contendere. That leads to a conviction. The analogy of course is not perfect because the Senate Majority Leader can set the rules for the trial. We will need to wait to see what he decides and whether a trial will occur.

As a minor point Mr. Pappous is correct that RCP suggests statistically non-significant support against impeachment (0.8 percent) based on a simple average of 12 recent polls, which varied from 8 percent to keep to 7 percent to remove. A more subtle picture can be found at FiveThirtyEight that shows a non-significant 47.3 percent vs 46.2 percent favoring impeachment and removal. The proportion favoring impeachment and removal has generally favored impeachment since Speaker Pelosi announced the inquiry.

This slight difference parallels Mr. Trump’s flat approval rating which has varied from a high of 45.5 to a low of 36.7 since his election. It currently hovers between 41 and 44 percent. He continues to be the consistently least popular president since 1948.

Bailey Jones

"At this point there are no facts in evidence beyond what the House used for its impeachment. If no additional defense is offered, the President has implicitly accepted the House’s indictment and pleaded nolo contendere. That leads to a conviction." In a court of law, perhaps. But this is the court of public opinion.

Carlos Ponce

" But this is the court of public opinion." And when the November 2020 vote results come in and Trump wins re-election will you concede?

Carlos Ponce

Problem with Bailey and his clique, they believe the rest of Galveston County, Texas and the United States believe as they do. How funny!

Gary Scoggin

Well, he may have a point. More Americans voted against Donald Trump than voted for him.

Carlos Ponce

"If no additional defense is offered, the President has implicitly accepted the House’s indictment and pleaded nolo contendere." That contention is only in your mind.

Dan does not understand the American system of justice. You don't prove your innocence, the prosecution has to prove your guilt. And to date there is NO PROOF OF GUILT - ZERO, ZIP, NADA.

Mike Zeller

Trump has been Impeached, PERIOD! There is nothing Carlos Ponce can do or say to change that outcome. As Mulvaney would say "Get Over It". Nancy Pelosi will dictate when it is time to proceed, and there is nothing Mitch McConnell can do until she says, Mitch, you may proceed.

Carlos Ponce

It's that Constitutional Expert Democrats used in the Judiciary Committee Hearings that you have a problem with, Mike. Argue with him. I'm just the messenger

Dan Freeman

Mr. Ponce, if you are indicted or impeached then there is a reasonable evidence of guilt. After an indictment or impeachment you are entitled to a trial with the presumption of innocence, but if you ignore the right to trial after indictment that is nolo contendere and you are convicted. That is the American justice system.

Bailey Jones

If I was president and I was being impeached for something that I was perfectly innocent of, and I had 4 or 5 witnesses who could testify to my perfect innocence, you can believe that their sworn depositions would be on the front page of every newspaper in the country, months ago, and my political enemies would have been crushed under the weight of my awesome truth. If I was innocent.

Carlos Ponce

"if you are indicted or impeached then there is a reasonable evidence of guilt. " OHHHHHH ! So that explains all those "NOT GUILTY" verdicts! [rolleyes]That's why the judge in voir dire explains that the defendant is NOT GUILTY unless the prosecutor proves guilt. If you were ever on a jury and you assumed guilt by indictment you did the judicial process a HUGE disservice. SHAME ON YOU![angry]

Carlos Ponce

That's you, Bailey. But then again you're not a lawyer. Believe me - IT SHOWS! That's okay, I'm not one either but I trust REAL LAWYERS are advising the president.

Bailey Jones

Yes, Carlos, his tweets just reek of lawyerly advice.

Carlos Ponce

If you don't like his tweets - don't read them. I

Bill Cochrane

Mr Freeman. If you live in a neighborhood and all of your neighbors hate you and accuse you of something that isn’t true, and unanimously proclaim that you are guilty. Would you think there is reasonable evidence of guilt? Justice? That's funny.

Dan Freeman

Mr. Cochrane, I neither wrote nor implied that your neighbors can try you. A grand jury can indict you, but if you plead not guilty you are presumed innocent and entitled to a trial by a jury of your peers, usually voters. If you choose to not plea that is a no contest plea and you are convicted regardless of guilt.

Charles Douglas

Now I'm hearing one of the Democratic leaders running for President, Wants to provide REPARATIONS to Illegals who came to this country. Well, what else will they come up with?

Gary Scoggin

Where did you hear that, Charles? Which candidate was it?

Carlos Ponce

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWpfrxOuVSo

Gary Scoggin

Interesting. To be specific, Mayor Pete is endorsing reparations for children separated from their parents at the border, not illegal immigrants in general. A topic for another day, perhaps.

Carlos Ponce

Gary, they are still illegals. And in the same debate, Bernie Sanders called for medicare for all and free college tuition for illegals.

Jim Forsythe

Trump reaped the financial benefit of undocumented labor - the ability to pay his employees lower wages and fewer benefits - and the political benefit of attacking it.

Even while he was benefitting from cheap labor, Trump said the following. I guess he was talking about everyone else and not Trump.

During the 2016 campaign, Trump suggested that companies that employed undocumented immigrants should face "a huge financial penalty" - or that it even be "beyond a financial penalty."

Trump being cruel: Was he talking about Trump being cruel?

"Tolerance for illegal immigration is not compassionate," Trump said in his State of the Union address this year. "It is cruel."

He was still employing undocumented workers while campaigning against it.

For years - including during Trump's presidency - the Trump Organization employed undocumented workers as housekeepers, waiters, groundskeepers and stonemasons.

Trump has been had lawsuits against him for employing undocumented immigrants, one example:

In 1980, the future president employed several hundred undocumented immigrants from Poland to demolish a building on the future site of Trump Tower in New York. ." Trump settled a lawsuit regarding the Polish workers in 1998, paying $1.38 million.

Carlos Ponce

"Trump reaped the financial benefit of undocumented labor" Did you really think Donald Trump actually hired and managed them at his businesses?

Jim Forsythe

When a person owns a business, the people in his employment are a extension of the person in charge. Trump was in charge, so yes he is responsible.

He was sued for what he did at the future site of Trump Tower, no for doing manual work, but hiring people that were not documented immigrants . If you are going to complain about Sanders, Mayor Pete because they are only discussing this and not Trump in his hiring undocumented immigrants, something is wrong with the way you see this

Carlos Ponce

They had what appeared to be the proper documentation. Locally one used to obtain it at the Pearland Flea Markets. You could go cheap and get the same documentation as a dozen other illegals or you can go with items that are difficult to debunk for the right expense. So using your logic President Obama should be held responsible for the deaths of American agents with guns obtained through "Fast and Furious".

Jim Forsythe

Undocumented does not mean they had papers. They did not go to a flea market, because they had no document's.

President Donald Trump hired hundreds of undocumented Polish immigrants to demolish a New York City building in 1980 and paid them as little as $4 an hour without providing proper safety equipment to do the job, court documents show.

The workers and their contractor, William Kaszycki of Kaszycki & Sons, sued Trump for unfair labor practices in 1983.Trump paid $1.375 million to settle the case.

"We worked in horrid, terrible conditions," Wojciech Kozak, one of the undocumented Polish workers at the demolition site. "We were frightened illegal immigrants and did not know enough about our rights."

2019: Trump is now to use E-Verify, that has been part of business for the ones that want to comply with hiring practices for many years.

President Trump’s business empire will start to use the federal E-Verify program to weed out workers who are in the country illegally, the Trump Organization announced this week, after another set of workers came forward to say they had been employed at one of his golf courses.

It was reported last month that just five of the 565 companies in the president’s empire were signed up for the system. Now, the others say they’re finally going to get on board.

“The real issue is Trump’s hypocrisy. His illegal use of immigrants is just another example of Trump saying one thing and doing another." “His employment of illegal immigrants is simply a small part of a bigger picture. The big picture will cost him support with the middle-class voters who want him to play by the rules just like they do.”

“The excuse that Donald Trump is too busy to know about hiring at his ‘empire’ is ludicrous. First, it isn’t an empire. It’s a small family business. Particularly the golf clubs,” he said. “It’s clear that small numbers of people work at the clubs for many years and knew and interacted with Trump personally. That includes the undocumented workers such as Victorina Morales and Sandra Diaz.”

If Trump wanted business not to hire undocumented workers , he should set the example and not drag up the rear.

“The ‘everybody does it’ excuse is no excuse. Trump based his candidacy and now his presidency on stopping illegal immigration. It is the height of hypocrisy for Trump to exploit undocumented workers for personal gain while separating children at the border, destroying families in the U.S. and screaming for a border wall,” said Mr. Leopold. “Since when is breaking the law acceptable if everyone is doing it? The answer is either to hold them accountable for breaking the law or change the law to legalize the 11 million.”

Carlos Ponce

That's a stretch. Trump hires a CONTRACTOR, William Kaszycki of Kaszycki & Sons, for $775,000 to do demolition work before constructing Trump Towers. William Kaszycki hires the undocumented workers. Trump did visit the work site remarking they were good hard workers. He thought everything was on the up and up. He did not know they were were undocumented.

"Mr. Trump, however, testified that he did he not remember that there were undocumented Polish workers on the job, or signing paychecks for the crew. 'I really still don’t know that there were illegal aliens,' Mr. Trump said on the stand." THAT"S LEGAL ON THE WITNESS STAND TESTIMONY!!!!! New York Times November 27, 2017

Do you get it? Trump hires a contractor. The CONTRACTOR hires the undocumented workers. In testimony, Trump explained he had no idea the were undocumented. Now, almost 40 years later, Jim Forsythe makes a big deal out of this. When working with a contractor do you demand proof the workers the CONTRACTOR hires are documented?

Jim Forsythe

If I hire them, yes. The contract specifies that they are, and they must show proof. I hire very few contractors, and the ones I do are people I have know for over 30 years, in most cases.. Since I'm not a contractor, I do not deal with many workers.

Trump has not changed. as he had not used E-Verify at most of his companies until he was exposed hiring more undocumented workers, Up until this year, just five of the 565 companies were using E-Verify.

It's up to Trump to know that the workers are legal. When he complained about illegal workers and was still hiring undocumented workers, he was not leading by example but feeding from the trough of cheap labor. This is the reason most Presidents place companies in a blind trust until they are no longer President. He refused, and now he is having trouble, because he is still in charge.

2019: Trump may be using E-Verify, which has been part of business that want to comply with hiring practices, for many years. Trump was in trouble over 40 years ago and Trump did not learn that he must hire legal employees.

This year Trump announced his business empire will start to use the federal E-Verify program to weed out workers who are in the country illegally because another set of undocumented workers came forward to say they had been employed at one of his golf courses.

Carlos Ponce

"another set of undocumented workers came forward to say they had been employed at one of his golf courses." And those are the ones who bought documentation. Your argument is as inane as the one that thinks Trump is aware of who rents a room at one of his hotels.

Jim Forsythe

It not about who he rents a room to, but who Trump employee's. Trump has violated the law many times, even after being sued for it. Trump settled a lawsuit regarding the Polish workers in 1998, paying $1.38 million. Even if Trump did not know the first time, his going to court and loosing was his warning to get his companies in compliance.

Even after becoming President, Trump was still employing illegal immigrates. Trump has said that it is wrong, and at the same time had illegal immigrates working for him.

Trump suggested that companies that employed undocumented immigrants should face "a huge financial penalty" - or that it even be "beyond a financial penalty." Was he saying this for others only, or was he including himself ?

Why did he continue to do this illegal activity, because of greed? If he was concerned about not being in compliance with the law, he would have stopped it.

Carlos Ponce

The court case was Diduck v. Kaszycki & Sons Contractors, Inc. NOT Diduck v. Trump. Conclusion: Kaszycki & Sons Contractors, Inc paid the Polish workers. Trump was just the person who hired the contractor.

Jim Forsythe

Trump was part of it, and he paid a lot of money because of it. When you sited who was part of it you did not for to list all. Trump was also listed several times.

Harry J. DIDUCK, individually and as a participant in the Local 95 Insurance Trust Fund and the Local 95 Pension Fund, and on behalf of all other persons who are, will be, or have at any time since January 1, 1980 been participants or beneficiaries in the Funds, similarly situated, Plaintiff,

v.

KASZYCKI & SONS CONTRACTORS, INC., William Kaszycki, John Senyshyn, Trump-Equitable Fifth Avenue Company, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump d/b/a the Trump Organization, and the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States, Defendants.

CONCLUSION

We find for the plaintiff. We hold that John Senyshyn breached his fiduciary duty and that Trump-Equitable participated in the breach.

Plaintiff shall submit a judgment.

SO ORDERED

Jim Forsythe

If you think Trump should not have responsibility for who he hires, then no employer will ever face the penalty's that Trump called for.

All employers (Trump), by law, must complete Form I-9. E-Verify is closely linked to Form I-9, but participation in E-Verify is voluntary for most employers.

Trump was required to complete Form I-9 and at that time he knew who worked for him and Trump had no excuse not to know that they should be here or not.

Since Trump choose not to use E-Verify, in most cases until 2019, Trump had a duty to in make sure he was not hiring undocumented immigrants.

If he hires the wrong people ,Trump is the one that takes the reasonability .

Carlos Ponce

Let me put it in terms even Jim Forsythe can understand.

Suppose Jim's house sustained major damage during a hurricane requiring demolition before reconstruction. He hires a contractor to do the demo and site work. He checks on the onset and finds they are doing a good job. Unknown to him the contractor has hired illegals who are paid sub-minimum wages. Is Jim responsible? No, but the property in question is his and the job is at at standstill pending adjudication. He pays to get the dispute settled because time is money and he wants the job done. Also because the terms of the contract specify he must pay incidental costs. Would you hold this against Jim? What are the consequences? Would Jim recommend this contractor or would he spread the word what this man did?

Gary Scoggin

I remain amazed at Carlos' hierarchy of infallibility: Jesus > The Pope > Donald Trump. He seems afraid to concede even the slightest wrongdoing by the President. And when the facts aren't on his side he sets up these humorous little strawmen to convince himself otherwise. One reason I come to this forum is to see the depths to which blind Trumpeters will sink to justify every little thing. It's really amusing and quite educational.

Carlos Ponce

"And when the facts aren't on his side...." They are. But you rather listen to Mr. Lefty.

Carlos Ponce

Jim posts, "The workers and their contractor, William Kaszycki of Kaszycki & Sons, sued Trump for unfair labor practices in 1983." No, the CONTRACTOR was sued. The case was was Diduck v. Kaszycki & Sons Contractors, Inc..

CONTRACTOR WAS SUED! They only tossed in Trump because he owned the property being demoed and prepped. THAT'S ALL!

FACTS in the case: "Trump-Equitable hired William Kaszycki and his company Kaszycki and Sons Contractors, Inc. ("Kaszycki Corporation" and collectively "the Kaszycki defendants") to demolish the old Bonwit Teller building in midtown Manhattan at 56th Street and Fifth Avenue to make way for the Trump Towers. An agreement was signed on January 29, 1980.[3] Under the agreement Trump-Equitable was to pay the Kaszycki Corporation $775,000 for its demolition work. The Kaszycki Corporation was responsible for providing labor, equipment, and supplies."

"In late March 1980 union workers from Housewreckers Local 95 came on the job. The Polish workers were told they would be let go, but some continued to work until June 1980."

Accept the FACTS, Jim., The main component of Trump's involvement was HE OWNED THE PROPERTY. That's ALL!

Carlos Ponce

Gary Scoggin, let me put the same scenario I conjectured with JIm. Gary Scoggin's house is severely damaged during a hurricane. You hire a contractor to do demo and site prep before a new house is built to replace the old. The contractor hires illegals and pays them sub-minimum wages. You check on the progress and perceive everything is going smoothly. Once the status of the workers is discovered and a lawsuit is filed, that makes YOU, the property owner at fault, right? RIGHT?

Carlos Ponce

Now tell me Gary Scoggin, who is at fault here, the property owner or the contractor?

Jim Forsythe

Accept the fact that Trump is responsible. No employer can pass their lacking of following requirements, to someone else. He owned the propriety and also was involved in the day to day running the job. Other wise he would not have paid that HUGE amount for being found guilty.

This and other places Trump runs, have a history of hiring undocumented workers. The thing that all his places Trump owns has in common, is Trump.

How many times does Trump need to called on his hiring practices will it take for him to comply with the law?

Until he is 100% in his hiring practices, his telling other that they should not do what he has done,is just political talk.

Gary Scoggin

Carlos, If I owned the construction company, as Donald Trump did in this case, I would be responsible.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/if-youre-a-good-worker-papers-dont-matter-how-a-trump-construction-crew-has-relied-on-immigrants-without-legal-status/2019/08/09/cf59014a-b3ab-11e9-8e94-71a35969e4d8_story.html

But even if he had an independent contractor hiring undocumented workers, then he still bears some of the responsibility, especially if he, or his organization, is aware of the hiring practices of the contractor. Large sophisticated developers and their contractors are in a different world then the likes of you and me -- that's why your strawman argument is a false equivalency.

Having been around big scale contracting, an ETHICAL, RESPONSIBLE owner will have a stipulation in the contract that all the contractor's employees must be able to legally work in the US. An ETHICAL, RESPONSIBLE owner will follow up to insure that the terms of the contract are being met and will periodically audit compliance with this and other contract terms. This happens among ETHICAL, RESPONSIBLE businesses in this country every single day.

But then ETHICAL, RESPONSIBLE businesses don't repeatedly resort to bankruptcy and lawsuits to lay their mistakes onto the backs of others.

Gary Scoggin

""Trump reaped the financial benefit of undocumented labor" Did you really think Donald Trump actually hired and managed them at his businesses?" - As the owner and chief executive of his business he is responsible for the actions of his employees. If he can't directly oversee every aspect he should have policies with checks and balances to see that his business operates properly. No CEO gets a pass on this, even an infallible one.

Carlos Ponce

"especially if he, or his organization, is aware of the hiring practices of the contractor." According to sworn testimony, he was not aware.

Jim Forsythe

Let me put it in terms even Carlos can understand. A individual is not required to verify by using Form I-9, but business, like the business that Trump owns, are required. I'm in full compliance, can you say the same for Trump?

Carlos, as far as the demo question, l already have contractors in place, that have been my contractors for years. Each time that I have checked, they were complying with the reporting requirement. They do not bring anyone onto my propriety until I know about them. I stay on the job until they are finish each day, so they do not bring anyone that I do not OK. The last contract job lasted 3 months.

Trying to make excuses for Trump, when he does not want to be in compliance, is taking it to the extreme of backing him to the fullest.

Carlos Ponce

"but business, like the business that Trump owns, are required." Trump did not OWN the company used to demo and prep the job site.

Now, do you personally check the credentials of everyone your contractor hires or take his word for it like Trump did?

Jim Forsythe

Trump owns give or take a few, 565 companies. He is required and responsible that they comply with all laws.

As Gary has been around big scale contracting and I was responsible for transmitting requirements to employees, we know about what is required.

What part of companies requirements do you have experience in? If you want to know about contracts, ask Gary. If you want to know about what is required of job reps for a company, ask me as I instructed this for many employees. This covered contracts, safety, time sheets, OSHA requirements and much more.

Not being aware, has landed Plant Mangers and others in jail. "According to sworn testimony, he was not aware"

Jim Forsythe

As I control my job site, I check each one. I am in charge of what goes on at my house and a person that owns a business is responsible for what goes in at his job site. Taking the word of a contractor is a one way ticket to trouble. Check and Verify is a must. If a company does not, they are risking there business on the word of someone that they did not hire.

Only a fool that owns a company would not. A person that owns a business, could be in hot water for not doing so.

Carlos Ponce

"Trump owns give or take a few, 565 companies." Trump DOES NOT, DID NOT own the demolition company.

Jim Forsythe

Trump created a joint venture to demolish the old Bonwit Teller building . Trump sub it out to Kaszycki and Sons Contractors, which does not make Trump reasonability's disappear. Since The venture group was the main contractor on the job, the venture group was responsible for the compliance of laws. The Kaszycki Corporation was responsible for providing labor, equipment, and supplies but not the bookkeeping and accounting required to be in compliance.

Carlos Ponce

"Trump created a joint venture to demolish the old Bonwit Teller building ." Well, Trump bought the property then HIRED the demolition company Kaszycki & Sons whose demolition bid was accepted.

By the way, William Kaszycki and his wife had operated the scheme of importing Polish workers and exploiting them with poor living conditions and low wages for several years before he did work for or even met Trump in 1979. Sandusky [Ohio] Register April 23, 1990 p A-14.

"His wife recruited workers in Poland, offering transportation, housing and $4 to $6 an hour, by Polish standards, a princely wage. Once here Kaszycki assigned the workers to 12 and 18-hour shifts with no days off and no overtime. His promise of housing meant sleeping as many as eight to a room in slum apartments or motel rooms. When eight rose for work, they'd be replaced by eight more on the bed or floor. Kaszycki had been working this scheme for years when he was introduced to Trump in 1979 by Tom Mascari, Trumps vice president for operations."

Trump said, "I am not familiar with who was hired." "In court Trump testified if anyone was responsible it was the demolition contractor."

Jim Forsythe

When Trump created Trump-Equitable Fifth Avenue Company ("Trump-Equitable")--(collectively, with Donald J. Trump ("Trump"), the "Trump defendants") to demolish the old Bonwit Teller building on Fifth Avenue and construct the building now known as Trump Tower (the "Trump Tower Project") Trump was still responsible for compliance..

Trump said means nothing, as he was being sued and of course he did not remember.

Jim Forsythe

This is just one of the may places he own,that, hired people that were undocumented.

Carlos Ponce

Trump did not hire them. The demolition Contractor hired them. Doubtful Trump hired these "others". He leaves that up to managers. Now if you can point out a MANAGER that is illegal........

Gary Scoggin

Carlos, you are out of your depth here. You have no idea how accountability works in large corporations. But since you are unwilling to learn, I am moving on.

Carlos Ponce

I'm fully aware of the liability of large corporations. Forty years ago the big deal was the destruction of bas-reliefs depicting scantily clad women on the art deco building Trump had razed - bas-reliefs that had been covered up since 1930. Now forty years later Trump haters are looking at ANYTHING to destroy the man. Everyone else calls it "grasping at straws".

Jim Forsythe

Trumps managers are the voice of there boss, Trump. What ever they did, Trump was responsible.

Just by hiring managers, does not get Trump out of his responsibly.

If what you trying to say was true, no company would ever be responsible for anything, as they would just hire people to take the heat.

Have you ever worked for a company that was sued for someone that died. I have. They could not transfer liability to managers.

As of this year Trump was still having trouble with being in compliance with requirements, and you are still making excuses why he is not at fault, for not being in compliance. The general contractor makes a lot of money off of projects for a reason, because they are responsible. Some that do not do the job as the head person in charge, end up in court or go to jail. In this case Trump paid $1.38 million because he choose not to do what was required.

Carlos Ponce

This happened FORTY YEARS ago, Jim. No one cares, except Trump HATERS. The case was litigated and settled before millions of voters were born. As far as any "new" discoveries of illegal workers remember what I posted about obtaining documentation. There was a maid, an illegal, who worked at Mar-a-Lago. She produced documentation until she was ratted out by a co-worker. Now she's gone. End of story. What are you going to do, go to every Trump owned asset and rat out anyone who produced what looked proper but was actually paid for documents? There are already Trump haters doing precisely that. Join the mob.

Gary Scoggin

Carlos: “I'm fully aware of the liability of large corporations.”. Really? How? Being willing to admit that which you do not know is a strength, not a weakness, my friend. I suggest you embrace that concept in the new year.

Jim Forsythe

You have responded to a lot of post that no one cares about. This means you care.

Carlos, you need to listen to Gary before you embarrass yourself.

Carlos Ponce

"You have responded to a lot of post that no one cares about." As a teacher it is my duty to stomp out ignorance.

Jim Forsythe

And you keep responding! It must be important to you, even with you saying no one cares, you still respond..

All your posting, does not change the fact that Trump was and is Responsible. And this is the guy you choose to follow, even when he choose not to follow the law.

After Trump was sued he had no excuse that he did not know the rules. He has no excuse of not knowing what was and is required. But he keeps on not reporting his employees status and rants about other hiring the same undocumented individuals as he did. A leader leads by projecting a picture of what is required, and not saying one thing and do the exact opposite.

Carlos Ponce

Trump was mentioned in the lawsuit as owner. The Court ruled "not because we find they [The Trump Company] were the employer". The case was in litigation for 15 years and Trump agreed to pay $1.375 million ($500,000 of it going to a union benefits fund and the rest, $875,000, to pay lawyers’ fees and expenses) to settle the matter. So your contention that he hired illegals is WRONG since the court ruled he was NOT the employer. And the "Polish Brigade" didn't get the money - the Homewreckers Union did as well as the lawyers. Always glad to stomp out ignorance.

Jim Forsythe

Trump agreed to pay $1.375 million because he was forced to do so.

Carlos Ponce

He settled. Look it up. Talk of the lawsuit was deterring lease of floor space at Trump Tower. Only remedy was to settle the case to get rid of it. The lawyers (who wound up with most of the money- $875,000) wanted much much more. The Union of Homewreckers (appropriate name) wound up with $500,000. The "Polish Brigade" only benefited if they remained in country and joined the Union. I guess that seems fair to Jim.[rolleyes]

Jim Forsythe

Still posting.

Macari was Trump manger for the job. As such he was a extension of Trump, and as such what ever he did on the job was the same as Trump doing it. He knew the Polish workers were working "off the books," and sometimes paid them in CASH. Macari took over the finances of the demolition job from Kaszyckiwhich which now made Trump in charge of the money. Macari was involved in every aspect of the demolition job. It also made Trump and Macari responsible for reporting the immigration status of all the worker , including the Polish workers.

Thomas Macari was a vice president of Trump-Equitable and its manager in charge of the demolition of the Bonwit Teller Building.Macari was frequently on the Bonwit Teller job site to oversee the everyday progress of the work.

Macari was also personally involved in paying the Polish workers. On one occasion Macari brought cash to Goryn, the foreman for the Polish worker,

On May 9, 1980 on behalf of Trump-Equitable, Macari took over the finances of the demolition job from Kaszycki. On that date a special account was opened in the name of Kaszycki & Sons requiring Macari's signature on all checks and for any withdrawals.

Trump-Equitable paid the union workers' payroll and suppliers of materials for the demolition job from this special account. Tr. 683-684. In addition Trump-Equitable paid bills for the demolition job directly, apart from the special account.

Macari was involved in every aspect of the demolition job. He knew the Polish workers were working "off the books," that they were doing demolition work, that they were non-union, that they were paid substandard wages with no overtime pay, and that they were paid irregularly if at all.

Testimony established that Donald Trump visited the 57th Street site and observed Kaszycki's Polish workers, noting that they were "good hard workers." Tr. 2181. Workers also observed Trump visiting the job site of the Bonwit Teller demolition job.

Carlos Ponce

Demeaning Trump while giving evidence against Macari.... Can't shoot straight, can you?

Jeff Patterson

Carlos, I have to give you credit... you are a relentless defender of President Trump. But the definitiveness of your comments does raise the question in my mind.... how do you KNOW with such certainty that Trump didn’t know about the status of the workers on his project?

Carlos Ponce

"how do you KNOW with such certainty that Trump didn’t know about the status of the workers on his project?" It's in the court records corroborated by others.

Jim Forsythe

Carlos, it is from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruling. It ties Trump and Marcari together, which by your words ties Trump to Kaszycki. Tom Mascari, was Trumps vice president for operations which meant that he spoke for Trump and what he said was the same as Trump saying it..

It shows what happen at the job site, when Trump took over the day to day running of the project. It also shows that they were in charge of the Polish worker, and paying of them.

After The Kaszycki Corporation could not handle managing the project , Trump and Marcari took over the day to day running of it. This meant that they were in charge of reporting, just as they were before they took over the duties. Once Trump was in bed with Kaszycki he become responsible for the low wage, bad housing and no over time pay and such that they forced on the workers.

Below is your post which show the conditions that Trump, Marcri and Kaszycki force humans to endure.

"His wife recruited workers in Poland, offering transportation, housing and $4 to $6 an hour, by Polish standards, a princely wage. Once here Kaszycki assigned the workers to 12 and 18-hour shifts with no days off and no overtime. His promise of housing meant sleeping as many as eight to a room in slum apartments or motel rooms. When eight rose for work, they'd be replaced by eight more on the bed or floor. Kaszycki had been working this scheme for years when he was introduced to Trump in 1979 by Tom Mascari, Trumps vice president for operations."?

Carlos Ponce

Jim, we know the tie between them. Trump hired the firm to demolish. And I already posted the conditions the workers endured. So why repeat it? Emphasize that the contractor and his wife started this YEARS before any dealings with Trump.

Carlos Ponce

All we get from your repetitious post is Jim Forsythe hates President Trump.

Jim Forsythe

The relationship between those three is undeniable.

It ties Trump and Marcari to Kaszycki. When Marcari took over the day to day, Trump also was part of the day to day. Trump was Marcari boss. Even if you try to say otherwise, Trump was in charge. It not about what happen years before with the contractor and his wife, but the actions pertaining to this job. Marcari had a ongoing relationship with Kaszycki, which then become one with Trump when Marcari interduced Trump and Kaszycki. Since Tom Mascari, was Trumps vice president for operations he spoke for Trump with Trumps backing. This also had to do with Mascari running the project and Kaszycki become the sub, which made Kaszycki working under Marcari and Trump.

Charles Douglas

Gary, Gary, Gary. I'm surprised that you went that way. You know Buttigied is posturing for minority votes! Why is he not concerned with the safety and living condition of minority kids in his own state? I dislike a flake anything! Probably why BLACKS AND LATINOS do not like him. It is so Sooooo funny how LIBERALS can find a million ways to give other people's money away! Not you Gary, I'm talking about those other Liberals over yonder.

Gary Scoggin

Thanks for the compliment but I’m no liberal. I’m a moderate and a Libertarian wannabe that very much loves the Constitution. But a bunch of folks here are so far to the right they think anybody even an inch to the left of them is a Socialist Commie Liberal. It’s kinda funny

Jim Forsythe

Gary, if you are not right, you are left. Anytime people try and say that everyone that disagrees with them they are liberal, they leave out many people that are neither.

Also, most people are not just left or right, but a combination of many views. When a moderate is confused with a liberal, someone needs to adjust what they consider as such!

Charles Douglas

Jim, Gary, I would like for either of you to proof read my above comment and cut and paste where I called Gary a Leberal. If you cannot do it .....I'd be pleased to have yall to do the honest and gentleman like thing and post an APOLOGY, so my fans on this forum won't be offended. I would not ask if I did not think either of you were beneath the level of being honest enough to admit a mistake, then doing what's right.

Charles Douglas

No apology?,...well I'm not anything if not a SPORT! I will and I'm sure my fans will take your silence... as an apology. I did not look for big one anyway, but yall could have managed just a "Lil One." I look to see yall on the next big THREAD or Op-ED.

Gary Scoggin

Yep charles, you are right. You didn't call me a liberal. I'm sorry I incorrectly inferred that. (I am not in constant contact with my GCDN forum, so you have to gove me more than an hour to respond.)

Happy now?

Jim Forsythe

Charles, I was talking to Gary. Cut and paste where I called your name.

No I did not proof read your above comment, as I had no need to. If I hurt your felling I'm sorry. Next time someone hurts my felling I will expect a APOLOGY, but that will not happen as I have no need for someone to apologize for something that they said, that was not meant to hurt my felling's.. I did not realize that I had offended your fan base as they did not speak up. This makes it 10 times worse so as I'm now know that your fan base was upset., To YOUR fan base, I'M sorry, I'M sorry, I'M sorry, I'M sorry, I'M sorry, I'M sorry, I'M sorry, I'M sorry, I'M sorry, I'M sorry.

I never took you for someone that had thin skin, but now I will be careful about how I responded to you or anyone that responds to you. If you are not thin skin , I apologize for thinking so.

When I read your commit, "Not you Gary, I'm talking about those other Liberals over yonder." I saw it as you included Gary, when you said "those" other Liberals, meaning you considered Gary a Liberal ( one of the others) but not in that group of Liberals.

My thinking was that you were being tongue in check and was including Gary in the others over yonder, and that was the reason I was not responding to your post.

Gary Scoggin

So Charles, do you accept my apology?

Charles Douglas

How about better education, mandated goals, measurable attainments, dealing with educating children instead of caving and catering to unions and lobbying groups who tends to put kids second to their own ideas and motives! How about better jobs and job training like apprentices to crafts creations, something an individual can sink their teeth into for a career, instead ( Whataburger, Wal-Mart ) of a job meant for kids trying to get through high school and college. To facilitate these things requires a need to have such people. Therefore having blue collar jobs to return from other countries is a must! Forking other people's money over to people is not the ideal way to move a poor person out of the hole of poverty to be a productive citizen of prosperity! Yes, and I KNOW ..what I am talking about concerning this issue for sure!

Charles Douglas

Yes sir! I am happy as I can be!!! [thumbup]

Bailey Jones

I agree with you on this, Charles!!! Merry Christmas!

Carlos Ponce

Video of Democrats impeaching President Trump:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJJW7EF5aVk

Charles Douglas

Jim! Lolololo! ! Good enough! You got me laughing all over the place!

Hey! You probably have my fans laughing! Lolo. Thank you Mr. JONES! Another thing, to all the many people, who participates on this forums, making their ideas and feelings of life in America known, MERY CHRISTMAS to you, and yours! May the approaching New Year bring, nothing but long life, healing, divine health, happiness, peace and prosperity to you and your house! Jim still got me laughing about his comment on my fans!

Carlos Ponce

Now back to the topic of this forum:

I would like to see the Senate pass a resolution stating the president is not impeached unless Pelosi forwards it to them. Until then we can call it "Impeachous interruptus". [smile]

Charles Douglas

Gary, apology accepted brother! Mr. PONCE, looks like Schumer is digging in. How deep ...we will know soon. I think Schume is the key here, and not the Speaker, but who knows.

Jim Forsythe

"A rose by any other name is still a rose "

Charles Douglas

I agree, ...and it is easy to smell the roses if we,....MAGA & KAG!! Now in order to do that, You can't be in DEFEAT, with PETE! You can't be EMBARRASSED with HARRIS, You can't get STRANGE with YANG, and you can't go RIDING with BIDEN! To reap great benefits and prosperity, we have to RUMBLE with the DONALD!!!!!![beam]

Charles Douglas

"Ain't it so." Aaaaaaaaaaaamen![thumbup][thumbup]

Jim Forsythe

Impeached is impeached !

Carlos Ponce

And re-elected is re-elected!

Jim Forsythe

Impeachment of Trump has happened.

The election is next year, and no-one is re-elected, as the election has not happened.

The last president that was re-elected was Obama, so I guess you where talking about Obama!.

Carlos Ponce

"The election is next year, and no-one is re-elected, as the election has not happened." I am posting about Trump! Wait and see!

Carlos Ponce

Teacher says every time a Democrat uses the word "impeach", A new Trump voter is created! It's a WONDERFUL Life!

https://www.facebook.com/thriveamerica/photos/a.552202384872135

/2656934074398945/?type=1&theater

Thank you Jim for creating TWO new Trump voters![beam]

Jim Forsythe

Bastardizing a wonderful movie. What teacher would say such a thing.

A teacher can now say to the students, Trump is the third President to be impeached which is fact and not what Carlos thinks would be appropriate, which a teacher would never say to a student.

History books will always have this fact, that Trump was impeached, when talking about the presidents.

Trump now is in the impeachment club, that only had two other presidents as members, until Trump was impeached.

Now the impeachment club has three members.

Impeached, impeached, impeached, impeached, impeached , impeached, impeached, impeached, impeached, impeached,

,impeached, impeached, impeached, impeached , impeached, impeached, impeached, impeached, impeached,impeached, impeached.

Carlos Ponce

Wonderful! Jim just created over 20 Trump voters!

Charles Douglas

Jim, like the poor of society who Jesus said we would have with us always, also there will be the foolish too. Though we will always have the foolish, not everybody here will be a fool! Just like everybody is not the poor. Trump will go down in history as the President who beat the &#* out of the Establishment, Never Trumpers, SWAMP Creatures, The BUSH Dynasty, The Clinton Dynasty, the CIA, FBI, NSI, and the General Deep State all of which plotted against him, to facilitate his demise! The reason he is kicking their rear ends, and will come out smelling like a ROSE, ( BY ANY NAME ) is this: No individual can HURT who God is HELPING; and no individual can CURSE, who GOD is BLESSING! I refer you to King Cyrus The Great, who was not a holy man but it was written 150 years before he was born that God would use him to accomplish something he wanted to come to be in the earth for a particular time in history! Now I got a sneaky suspicion that you won't believe me, in which case I challenge you to wait and see who take the oath of office for the Presidency of America in 2020. Oh by the way, history will let everyone coming after us know what that FAKE impeachment tag was about. Scars and casualties occurs in a fight or war! Trump is a fighter, and Democrats were not ready for a fighter who would belly-down and sling back twice as hard! Not only that but he got all the SOFT Republicans who for the first time

Got belly down with him fighting like warriors! I love It!

Charles Douglas

Another thing, that impeachment tag which LIBERALS, THE FAKE NEWS, and others have so foolishly tagged Trump with, will be honored as a badge of courage, service &and love for America and it's people in history annals! Lastly, where I come from if you were in a fight, and had no scars or marks to show for the efforts you had to use to inflict pain on those who came against you, people looked at you like you were putting them on! So I am compelled to invite those on the losing side to "HAUL-DOFF" and come on over to the winning side! That includes my Democratic Associates[smile]

Jim Forsythe

Without looking it up, most people can not say why Clinton was impeached, just that he was. Fewer have any idea why Andrew Jackson was impeached.

The same will be true with Trump, history will show he was impeached and not go into the why. He may get reelected in 2020 and he may not. He may get impeached again, or not. Until times goes by, we have no idea how it will play out.

With the age of some of the candidates, including Trump, health may play a part in it. We still have about a year for the candidates including Trump to do or say something that could lose the race.

Charles Douglas

Jim, if history shows Trump to be impeached, ..then it is reasonable to think they will show WHY A ROGUE HOUSE void of a reasonable process or cause impeached him. You hang your hat on "most folks" ..I don't. I tend to observe what happens. Most folks don't know George Washington and several other Presidents of this country were SLAVE OWNERS, nor do they give a "RIP." One of their faces is enshrined on Mount Rushmore, but other than me, who has pointed that out lately? Your speculations, assumptions, and surmising about the legacy of President Trump will probably be the same. Some people right now, don't know who Mike Pence is!!!! That is because instead of teaching students higher education, in our higher institutions of Learnings in this country, they are now teaching students counterfeit ideas about life, and higher ways to HATE, others who do not agree with their ideologies taught! To sum it up, I did say you would not agree with me, and I knew that before I posted my last post! So why not just wait and see who get the last opportunity to say, "I TOLD YOU SO!" It won't be long, ...just a few more months! Personally, I must admit ...it will be a thrill to get you riled up about Trumps victory! I can see it Now, Trump standing there on the steps taking that oath of office as your President for four more YEARS, and you HATING it and saying WHY...WHY....WHY? Now let's wait, my last word! Lets do what? WAIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jim Forsythe

Charles. there is no IF in Trump being impeached. Just as you said most people are not going to give a Rip. Just because you do think he was impeached by a fare process, does not make it go away. The Constitution lays out that impeachment is done, but not how, and gives the the House the duty to proceed as they see fit at the time when the impeachment is happening. As it was down party lines, the Republicans were not going to like it no matter how it was conducted and the opposite is true for the Democrat's.

Waiting to see is what I said, as Trump being reelected is far from a done deal. He had a hard time last time winning the Electoral College and lost the popular vote by over 3 Million votes. Remember the votes against Hillary and not for Trump. As always 4 or 5 states will determine the winner, which could be determine by a 3ed party candidate this time. It's lining up as Florida, Arizona, and some rust belt states will make the difference. Do not forget the biggest number of voters are Independent voters.

Emile Pope

At the end of the day, the president is a crook. I know it, you know it, everyone knows it even if they deny it. And saying that he's innocent because he prevents the ones who can convict him from testifying is simply witness tampering. People go to prison for this. Ask Roger Stone. Just shows how far the right wing will go to protect one of their own and their blatant hypocrisy...

Carlos Ponce

Did the President steal your hear again, Emile? [love][love][love][love][love]

Carlos Ponce

Did the President steal your heart again, Emile? [love][love][love][love][love][love][love]

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.