Justin Amash JUST became the FIRST Republican congressman to call for Trump’s IMPEACHMENT!

Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan just tweeted out that Trump should be impeached – he’s the first Republican to do so.

He goes through a long twitter thread to explain that according to his reading of the Mueller report, he believes that Attorney General Barr DID indeed misrepresent the report, and did it in a very careful and willful manner.



I won’t post the tweets, as Twitter has made it absurdly laborious for me to do so, but I’ll post his text:

I offer these conclusions only after having read Mueller’s redacted report carefully and completely, having read or watched pertinent statements and testimony, and having discussed this matter with my staff, who thoroughly reviewed materials and provided me with further analysis.

In comparing Barr’s principal conclusions, congressional testimony, and other statements to Mueller’s report, it is clear that Barr intended to mislead the public about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s analysis and findings.

Barr’s misrepresentations are significant but often subtle, frequently taking the form of sleight-of-hand qualifications or logical fallacies, which he hopes people will not notice.

Under our Constitution, the president “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” While “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is not defined, the context implies conduct that violates the public trust.

Contrary to Barr’s portrayal, Mueller’s report reveals that President Trump engaged in specific actions and a pattern of behavior that meet the threshold for impeachment.

In fact, Mueller’s report identifies multiple examples of conduct satisfying all the elements of obstruction of justice, and undoubtedly any person who is not the president of the United States would be indicted based on such evidence.

Impeachment, which is a special form of indictment, does not even require probable cause that a crime (e.g., obstruction of justice) has been committed; it simply requires a finding that an official has engaged in careless, abusive, corrupt, or otherwise dishonorable conduct.

While impeachment should be undertaken only in extraordinary circumstances, the risk we face in an environment of extreme partisanship is not that Congress will employ it as a remedy too often but rather that Congress will employ it so rarely that it cannot deter misconduct.

Our system of checks and balances relies on each branch’s jealously guarding its powers and upholding its duties under our Constitution. When loyalty to a political party or to an individual trumps loyalty to the Constitution, the Rule of Law—the foundation of liberty—crumbles.

We’ve witnessed members of Congress from both parties shift their views 180 degrees—on the importance of character, on the principles of obstruction of justice—depending on whether they’re discussing Bill Clinton or Donald Trump.

Few members of Congress even read Mueller’s report; their minds were made up based on partisan affiliation—and it showed, with representatives and senators from both parties issuing definitive statements on the 448-page report’s conclusions within just hours of its release.

I see some people saying he’s a fraud and attacking him. I don’t think that’s the case. Amash has shown to act on principle and to say what he really believes. That doesn’t mean he’s right or wrong, but to simply attack his character is silly. Consider the argument, and argue against it, if you disagree.

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

To our ad-free users: I apologize for the ad below but unfortunately DISQUS requires this ad in order to use their commenting system and I cannot make it go away.

273 thoughts on “Justin Amash JUST became the FIRST Republican congressman to call for Trump’s IMPEACHMENT!

  1. :facepalmg:
    There’s always one isn’t there. Although with all the RINO’s he won’t be the last traitor. Yes I’m looking at you Mittens.

  2. Justin Amash is an idiot. There, I criticized his character. :silly:

    I can’t believe I’m saying this but I haven’t seen one single thing that Trump did that was wrong or impeachable. So Justin Amash must have some ulterior motive for saying something so ludicrous. And frankly, I’m sick to death of any and all “impeachment” talk. It’s unfounded.

    1. You leave SooperMexican alone man! haha I’ve been a fan of his for a hot minute. He’s good people from what I can tell. Really glad that Scoop brought him on the site, personally.

  3. Just a coward Republican who is desperate for positive media attention. MSNBC and CNN are probably tripping over each other trying to bring him on.

  4. Perhaps Congress has started its own mind reeducation facility much like the Chinese are doing today.

  5. I’d like to thank TRS for always posting multiple opinion pieces and not just pro-administration viewpoints 24/7.
    I’m not saying I have an opinion either way on this article in particular but I am happy to be a regular reader of a site that isn’t part of a mouthpiece for anyone.
    It’s a rare thing these days.

  6. It is not the prosecutor’s job to exonerate anyone. A prosecutor is just suppose to charge those who they can prove committed a crime. Mueller admitted there was no collusion and the DOJ admitted there was no obstruction. It should have been end of story.

    If there was anything to charge the President with Mueller would have said so and just held the indictment until after President Trump’s term of office was over.

    Anything else in the report is just prosecutor BS and character assisination at its best. BTW: most prosecutors I have run into think everyone is guilty of something.

    You want to find what Mueller really has, just allow the Presdent to sue Mueller and his team for liable for everything in the report, at that point the report would be quickly reduced to a sentence or two. But, since prosecutors are immune from civil suits they can write such garbage against those they are investigating and not be held accountable. If there is no crime, why is the rest of the allegations addressed in the report anyone’s business, including the prosecutors?

    If Mr. Amash thinks there is anything credible in the report, he has lost at least one vote the next election.

  7. He was one of the reps I admired and respected the most, that he would buy into this hoax just leaves me disgusted.

  8. I doubt Trump will lose any sleep over this. However, Amash might have a new nickname by 6:30am Sunday.

  9. What does Amash have to hide? What is he afraid AG Barr, IG Horowitz, US Attorney Huber, and US AttorneyDurham are going to find? Did the Koch Brothers give him a call?

    This smells… not that it would surprise me some RINOs were also behind the Russia ruse… remember McCain?

  10. “I see some people saying he’s a fraud and attacking him. I don’t think that’s the case. Amash has shown to act on principle and to say what he really believes. That doesn’t mean he’s right or wrong, but to simply attack his character is silly.” Hahahahahaha

    His character? The man doesn’t have a spine! He voted AGAINST Kate’s Law and voted against No Sanctuary For Criminals Act — a bill that would prevent cities with sanctuary policies from getting certain federal grants. I hope someone primaries this piece of crap! Congresswoman Tlaib PRAISED him!

    1. He was also against the travel ban. He pretty much sides with the open borders crowd on everything.

  11. The tipoff is the claim that Barr misrepresented Mueller’s report and attempted to mislead the public. There is simply no way to square that claim with the facts. Barr accurately reported that the Mueller report had found no collusion, and that Mueller had decided not to make a “traditional prosecutorial decision” concerning obstruction. He was upfront that he was making that determination himself, because Mueller hadn’t, even though that was literally Mueller’s job. Nothing Barr said about the Mueller report was in any way inaccurate. I don’t know what kind of mind-reading Amash is doing to claim Barr was lying, but it’s not an objective evaluation.

    Mueller investigated the Trump campaign for nearly two years, after it had already been investigated by the FBI under Comey for at least seven months. ( I say, “at least,” because it’s clear that someone was sending spies and attempting to entrap members of the Trump campaign for several months before we’re told the investigation was officially opened.)

    After that exhaustive investigation, no collusion was ever found. Even after throwing Manafort in jail and into solitary confinement, and pushing him through two trials, no new evidence of collusion was found. Even after pressuring Flynn into a highly questionable guilty plea to force his cooperation, no collusion was found. Even after stripping Michael Cohen of attorney-client privilege to squeeze everything of value out of his considerable time with Donald Trump, no evidence of collusion was found.

    If an investigation that intense and aggressive can’t find a single bit of evidence of collusion, only a fool would fail to question whether the investigation was ever based on any real evidence in the first place.

    Granted, all the argument now is about the accusation of obstruction, but you can’t dismiss the simple fact that the claims of collusion were proven to be false. And that makes Trump an innocent man, who knew he was being falsely accused. Every statement by Trump has to take into account that he was being investigated for something he knew — and arguably was known by the FBI and Mueller long ago — that he was not guilty of.

    Amash and others seem to want to turn that around and start from the assumption of Trump’s guilt. If he railed against the investigation, it must be because Trump was trying to hide his guilt. If he told Don McGahn that Mueller should be removed from the case because of conflicts of interest, it must be that Trump was nervous about Mueller finding something. Every possible statement or action of Trump is interpreted in the light of a guilty man trying to avoid getting caught.

    And yet, that is the one thing we actually know to be false. The one thing that we should have clear is that there was no collusion or conspiracy, in spite of multiple attempts at entrapment.

    Bottom line: the investigation should never have happened in the first place. The FISA warrant on Carter Page should never have been granted. The FBI should never have been spying on the Trump campaign. The Steele dossier should never have been briefed to the president just so the fact of the briefing could be leaked to the media as an excuse to report on the dossier. The Special Counsel should never have been appointed, especially not to continue a counter-intelligence investigation that never had any evidence behind it, and became moot once the American people elected the man at the center of it to be president. If there was no probable cause for a criminal investigation, then there should have been no Special Counsel.

    As much as it may offend Amash, Trump was right that he was being spied on, he was right that there was no evidence of Russian collusion, he was right that Mueller should never have been appointed Special Counsel, and he was right about it being a witch hunt. This might not have been obvious at first, when there was still grounds for suspicion that there might have been some collusion by at least some people in the Trump campaign. But at this point, there is no longer an excuse for interpreting Trump’s statements as if he were a guilty man trying to hide a crime. We know better.

    Is this just more sanctimonious Comey-esque virtue signaling? Or is Amash himself concerned about the direction that Barr investigation might take? I don’t know if Amash was at all involved in the Russia collusion hoax, but if he’s going to attack the Attorney General just as the AG is finally trying to get to the bottom of how the Russian hoax started, then it’s fair to question whether Amash himself has something to hide.

  12. Just FYI, this guy is fine with illegals voting in elections and tax payer money being used to finance transgender surgery for military members.

    If Trump committed obstruction, then it was Mueller’s job to charge him with it. Instead he simply published a very long Op-ed on Trump and used it to create tension. Idiots like Amash fall for it hook line and sinker.

    Also i haven’t heard anything from this “libertarian” about the shinanigans and civil liberty violations that lead to the whole Russian investigation. I won’t hold my breath though.

  13. A lot of people hate Trump’s guts and want to see him gone so Justin Amash just joined a very long line.

    1. Yep, he sure did.. and come Nov 2020, he will also be joining the unemployment line.

      1. I hope so but I doubt it. Michigan isn’t the state we used to know. The voters aren’t the people we used to know. And Minnesota, once famous for Sven and Olie, is now worse.

    1. Are you guessing, or have you seen something about that? If that’s what it is, stupid move.

        1. I think it may have something to do with what you have posted above – the Chinese company. I wonder if that company is suffering from the tariffs. As we’ve learned, those in DC are self-serving if nothing else.

  14. Reading the RINO’s diatribe, if you notice everything this fraudulent Republican RINOcrat spoke, wrote-stated, not 1 iota piece of factual concrete evidence against Pres and AG Barr was stated to substantiate his lewd incendiary impeachment claim.

    Everything he stated, wrote against Pres Trump and AG Barr is 100% opinionated abstract conjecture, the same generalized hyperbolic rhetorical tripe leftist Democrats keep repeating, which their strategy and tactic is as always – If you say it enough, it will become true, and people will believe it – aka Hitlerism

    The good people of his district in Michigan must vote this piece of RINO trash out of office.

  15. He sounds like he is talking to too many Democrats.

    Barr didnt misrepresent the bottom line and impeaching the president for fighting against a fraud investigation is pure bs.

  16. If you take Amash at his word, then how I’m reading this, Amash has concluded the following:

    – Mueller himself is wrong in his concurrence with Barr’s findings in the first summary letter he released

    – Not just Trump, but the GOP as a whole are now covering up obvious crimes within a 2-year report that is available for public consumption & has been for close to a month now.

    – The GOP are now puppets of Russia in their attempt to cover up this “crime”

    – Because Trump wanted to fire Mueller but talked out of it, thought crime is now a prosecutable offence.

    Looks like he just lost his re-election campaign with this Alex Jones-esque conspiracy theory.

  17. Argue against what? All he’s done is bark accusation and recite the law without showing any evidence. Implies? You can’t impeach based on something Implied. I get a kick out of his last point “Few members of Congress have read the report”. Is that Barr’s and Trump’s fault as well? This is just an attempt to become relevant.

    1. Not to mention Mueller has already said he has no isuue with Barr’s findings & the report has been public for what, a month now? That’s one hell of a way to hide a coup lol

  18. Sorry, he’s wrong and Mark will give him a lesson on Monday…Also,Do t think Justin will like the consequences.

  19. OH Justin Amash why don’t you give us the true reason why you think Donald Trump should be IMPEACHED. Is it because you are for pro-abortion and a baby killer and you find that gradually more and more States are coming out to defend life and becoming too radical with some laws that protects babies from being killed and you feel the woman rights are being threaten? Is that is all about? Is it because you think is the only way you can get rid of him? I can tell you it will never work. His hands are more cleaner then yours. What an hypocrite and a traitor.

    1. His pro liberty votes are excellent. This is just a bad decision to come out against the president.
      Guess he feels he has to to stay true to his values but when you find yourself agreeing with conspiracy theory hoaxers then maybe you need to re evaluate your values.

      1. He might be a pro-life in 2014, he might not be one now. Just saying I could be wrong. I just find it suspicious. Time will tell. Politicians do change when they are under pressure so not to loose their job.

  20. Justin I have voted for you many times, and enjoyed your opening for Ted Cruz during the primary, however you have sipped the koolaid from big money donors, and are tainted.

  21. I don’t remember Justin calling for Obama’s impeachment went he broke the law. Maybe Justin should be primaried.

        1. I guess I’ve missed those stories. Where have I been? 😕 As far as anything I’ve ever seen or read about him, he’s a libertarian/conservative style pol. Admittedly, I can’y recall anything recently in the news about him and certainly had never anything like that.

  22. Amash didn’t cite specific examples and quotes from the Report to show why he thinks Barr is deceptive.

    1. Good point! I have yet to see anyone citing specific examples of anything Trump did which would be considered “impeachable.” The lefties in Congress are really good at running their mouths about impeaching Trump, but when you try to pin them down they have nothing to back up their position.

      1. I have yet to see anyone citing specific examples of anything Trump did which would be considered “impeachable.”

        NEA.

  23. Is he really calling for impeachment though? Or is he just asserting that some of the things King Don have done are impeachable? Because I don’t disagree that he’s flirting with actions that are reasonably able considered impeachable (and for all you tribal cultists, you know damn well if he were wearing a blue jersey and doing this sh*t towards blue goals, you’d be screeching it at the top of your lungs). The last guy, and the guy before that, and the guy before that did some impeachable stuff too.

    But should we impeach him? I wouldn’t have thought that healthy for the nation with Blue Prog Barack, and I don’t think it’s healthy for the nation with Red Prog Don.

    But they’ve both done absolutely impeachable things.

  24. Few members of Congress have read the report. You’re surprised? I like Amash but was never overly impressed. However, I think his proclamation is a back-stabbing one.

  25. "I see some people saying he's a fraud and attacking him. I don't think that's the case. Amash has shown to act on principle and to say what he really believes. That doesn't mean he's right or wrong, but to simply attack his character is silly. Consider the argument, and argue against it, if you disagree."

    With all due respect, the guy doesn’t even present an “argument”. It’s pure opinion! And he does the exact same thing he accuses Barr of. Notice not a single quote from Mueller report or Barr Summary in his opinion? He just paints for us a picture and since as he admits, most people haven’t read the report, he figures we can’t argue against him. And he compares Clinton with Trump, but fails to mention a few major distinctions. 1) Clinton committed crimes and obstructed to hide them. Trump NEVER committed any crime or collusion, so no obstruction! 2) Clinton claimed executive privilege like crazy while Trump DID NOT claim executive privilege during the investigation. That alone is astonishing as no other president has been this open about an investigation and it shows he had nothing to hide. He makes the claim that Barr misrepresented the Mueller report, but where’s his evidence!? And how stupid of him to accuse Barr of misleading the people when Barr released the redacted report for transparency and he didn’t even have to do that!

    The Mueller report which was written by a bunch of Democrats could not come to a conclusion on Obstruction. You know what that means in our justice system? “NOT GUILTY” PERIOD!

    1. Amash is specific in pointing out that there need not be actual “crimes” to impeach.

      Re:

      the guy doesn’t even present an “argument” It’s pure opinion.

      It’s TWITTER, for crying out loud!!! How much detail do you expect???

      This is what drives me crazy on Twitter: the degree to which some want to elevate its importance.

        1. I also agree with it.

          It lends itself to rash judgment and knee-jerk reactions, rather than intellectual discussion.

          And I find the degree to which policy matters are discussed and announced, led by the president, appalling.

      1. How do you square his desire to impeach because of personality defects and “impeachment should be undertaken only in extraordinary circumstances”? Or was he under the influence of something while tweeting?

        Re: lack of argument, I’m responding primarily to soop who says we shouldn’t attach the guy, but address his argument. Well, there is no argument to address! Plus, if he can tweet much non-sense, he should be able to give us at least a small example to backup his opinion.

        1. I don’t believe that argument should take place on Twitter. And the fact that many people expect it to, is disturbing.

    2. Well said but you may want to be careful on this site calling out anything the authors pen.

      1. I’ve done it often. And I’ve been stomped a little by other commenters – usually anti-Trump sycophants. But I’m a big girl and can take a little argumentation now and then.

        I’ve been called a Trump-Humper and a Trump-Hater among other things. What I am is a woman who has opinions of her own and doesn’t much care if others agree.

        And when I’m not in the mood for arguing – I leave.

        1. @kenoshamarge Yeah, whining about the other commenters, mods, and site runners is always a lame look. If I decided one day that I didn’t like it here, I would just shut up and go elsewhere.

        1. Your response sort of proves what I’m saying. Also, all my comments, and the responses, are easily found and also prove my point.

  26. What a worthless hack! Where were you when obama, holder, and Clinton were actually obstructing justice? Another hack liberal in the republican party. Vote this crap out Michigan!

  27. In that whole Twitter rant, he didn’t list one piece of evidence.

    If it’s so obvious, why can’t he name them?

    1. Just like Shifty Adam Schiff, he talks about obvious evidence but never gives any obvious examples.

  28. True reading comprehension is all but extinct (Along with common sense). Schools don’t teach individual reading comprehension and highlight group think interpretations. I ran into that in college in the early 1970’s. I am very disgusted with and disappointed in Amash!

  29. I see some people saying he’s a fraud and attacking him. I don’t think that’s the case. Amash has shown to act on principle and to say what he really believes. That doesn’t mean he’s right or wrong, but to simply attack his character is silly. Consider the argument, and argue against it, if you disagree.

    What argument and evidence has he presented? Trump should be impeached because he, Amash, believes William Barr deceived the people with his four page summary of the Mueller Report?

  30. Does he seriously believe he’ll pull Leftist voters away from voting for an authentic leftist merely by pandering to them?

  31. I know this is a kind of worn out response/question to the obstruction issue (maybe because it makes sense?), but if there is no crime, how can there be obstruction? Even though Amash has read the report, could he have waited until Mueller testifies to make this kind of announcement if it didn’t change his mind? I haven’t read the report and can say with certainty, I won’t, so I don’t know if Barr is misrepresenting anything. It seems to me if he were, Mueller would be asking to testify right away, but last I saw that is delayed indefinitely.

    1. What does it matter if Barr is in fact misrepresenting the Mueller report? A.) Barr is not Trump and B.) The report has been made public for everyone to read.

    2. Mueller can’t testify, because the Republicans on the committee will ask him questions that
      will force him to lie about his part in the coup or take the Fifth, either of which will have serious consequences down the road.

      As for Amash, that this site would treat this ridiculous Trump-hating idiot as credible shows how vulnerable right-wing positions are to leftward drift. You never find anyone on a leftist site siding with conservatives. Never.

      1. I think this site is just reporting it. That doesn’t mean it’s being treated as credible. If a Republican comes out pushing impeachment of Pres. Trump, it’s news.

  32. This sounds more personal that legal based. How does one obstruct by complaining the charges being investigated are meritless, when the budget isn’t cut, no one is fired even though the assembled investigation team is clearly biased and has blatant conflicts of interest, and the administration cooperates fully? The Mueller investigation was an incredibly shoddy piece of work for what it failed to investigate — the true crimes against the Trump campaign by gov’t insiders who wanted to torpedo his Presidency right out of the gate.

  33. This sounds more personal that legal based. How does one obstruct by complaining the charges being investigated are meritless, when the budget isn’t cut, no one is fired even though the assembled investigation team is clearly biased and has blatant conflicts of interest, and the administration cooperates fully? The Mueller investigation was an incredibly shoddy piece of work for what it failed to investigate — the true crimes against the Trump campaign by gov’t insiders who wanted to torpedo his Presidency right out of the gate.

  34. He isn’t a fraud. He’s just a die hard, neo-libertarian. The neo-libertarians are open borders utopians who are so deluded about “minarchy” that they can’t see how that destroys property ownership and enables tribalism.

    It’s nothing more than an attempt to turn leftism into benign communism.

    It’s complete fantasy, but the true believers are unable to let go of the delusion.

    For one thing, it enables them to be a momentary hero to the right on some fiscal issues, while winking at the left as they support the destruction of liberty.

    It’s a much worse delusion than the power-hungry, Clinton style fantasies of Big Government solutions to everything. It’s worse because it’s every bit as sick as any totalitarian who ever justified slaughter as a public good. The only difference is that these neo-libertarians think that enabling anarchy would only lead to small-scale slaughter.

    They are insane.

    So yeah, that’s way past mere fraud.

    1. When I first heard of libertarianism I thought it was kinda cool but then as I learned more about it and more libertarians became vocal about what they believe I realized that they are little more than dressed up anarchists. The more extreme of them want no societal rules or laws whatsoever. Their version of liberty is nothing more than absolute barbaric chaos underpinned by a Darwinian “survival of the fittest” philosophy. You are correct in that it is just another form of totalitarianism hiding behind a thin veneer of pseudo-liberty.

      1. @philliesthoughts
        Yep. The ones I identify as neo-libertarians came from the Ron Paul voter side of libertarianism. The old school LP folks used to talk about sovereignty a *lot*. It was crucial to the notion of smaller government. But the potheads got involved and dragged leftist ideas about religion, sex, and libertine lifestyles into it, and decided that sovereignty was just too right-wing or something.

        The stupid thing is that back then, Ron Paul was not an open borders guy, and was also pro life. But he really drew in the crowds of potheads.

  35. That’s too bad. I mostly like Justin Amash although he’s had some troubling votes on immigration and supporting the transgender agenda.

    Sticking his neck out to claim that Barr lied is just stupid, though. The whole notion that Barr would lie about a document he was pushing to release shortly anyway is ridiculous. Was he careful in his wording? You betcha. He had to be because the Democrats are looking for every excuse they can to take down this administration.

    As far as impeachment, I assume that his complaints are around Trump’s behavior described in the second part of Mueller’s report. It’s really sad that anyone not a raving progressive would even give consideration to the second part of the Mueller report. If there was no Russian conspiracy, obstruction of justice wasn’t even really possible. Amash should know better.

  36. Is he really calling for impeachment though? Or is he just asserting that some of the things King Don have done are impeachable? Because I don’t disagree that he’s flirting with actions that are reasonably able considered impeachable (and for all you tribal cultists, you know damn well if he were wearing a blue jersey and doing this sh*t towards blue goals, you’d be screeching it at the top of your lungs). The last guy, and the guy before that, and the guy before that did some impeachable stuff too.

    But should we impeach him? I wouldn’t have thought that healthy for the nation with Blue Prog Barack, and I don’t think it’s healthy for the nation with Red Prog Don.

    But they’ve both done absolutely impeachable things.

  37. Amash didn’t cite specific examples and quotes from the Report to show why he thinks Barr is deceptive.

    1. Good point! I have yet to see anyone citing specific examples of anything Trump did which would be considered “impeachable.” The lefties in Congress are really good at running their mouths about impeaching Trump, but when you try to pin them down they have nothing to back up their position.

      1. I have yet to see anyone citing specific examples of anything Trump did which would be considered “impeachable.”

        NEA.

          1. When Donald wanted to take a specific course of action, and Congress explicitly said no to that specific course, invoking the NEA to do it anyway.

            Totally impeachable. It may have been technically legal, and it may serve an important goal – but that doesn’t make it any less impeachable conduct.

            1. Now that I know what you’re referring to by the NEA, how is it impeachable to invoke that? Several other Presidents have done the same thing and there was never any talk of impeachment.

                1. Trump vetoed the bill which would have prevented him from using his executive power, therefore he was acting within his limits.

  38. “Consider the argument, and argue against it, if you disagree.”

    I’d love to. Unfortunately, he never presented one.

  39. Where was Amash on the politically motivated witch hunt based on a campaign of espionage begun over a work of fiction in order to essentially effect a coup?

    Nowhere, as far as I can tell. So, he can shove his talk about principles, when it’s obvious where the Constitutional conservative or libertarian should be on this coup.

    Amash’s TDS has made an idiot out of him. And a useful one for the democrats.

  40. He is entitled to his opinion. Was his opinion that Obama should be impeached too? Because nothing Trump has done, as yet, comes close to what Obama did.

    And will we now have some fools screaming about impeachment every time they aren’t happy about the results of an election? IMO – yes we will.

    Impeachment is supposed to be only under extraordinary circumstances. IMO other than the extraordinary exhibition of a left gone nuts it’s all just nonsense and even calling for impeachment isn’t justified.

    And Amash is, IMO, just wrong.

    1. He’s not just wrong, but this reeks of opportunism. The report has been out for a month now, with the details of it being known in mere days, if not hours. It seriously took this “man of principle” a month to discover certain parts of it which he doesn’t mention are impeachable offenses?

      1. If Barr didn’t represent Mueller’s report correctly why isn’t Mueller saying so? Did he pass that job onto Amash?

  41. He isn’t a fraud. He’s just a die hard, neo-libertarian. The neo-libertarians are open borders utopians who are so deluded about “minarchy” that they can’t see how that destroys property ownership and enables tribalism.

    It’s nothing more than an attempt to turn leftism into benign communism.

    It’s complete fantasy, but the true believers are unable to let go of the delusion.

    For one thing, it enables them to be a momentary hero to the right on some fiscal issues, while winking at the left as they support the destruction of liberty.

    It’s a much worse delusion than the power-hungry, Clinton style fantasies of Big Government solutions to everything. It’s worse because it’s every bit as sick as any totalitarian who ever justified slaughter as a public good. The only difference is that these neo-libertarians think that enabling anarchy would only lead to small-scale slaughter.

    They are insane.

    So yeah, that’s way past mere fraud.

    1. When I first heard of libertarianism I thought it was kinda cool but then as I learned more about it and more libertarians became vocal about what they believe I realized that they are little more than dressed up anarchists. The more extreme of them want no societal rules or laws whatsoever. Their version of liberty is nothing more than absolute barbaric chaos underpinned by a Darwinian “survival of the fittest” philosophy. You are correct in that it is just another form of totalitarianism hiding behind a thin veneer of pseudo-liberty.

      1. @philliesthoughts
        Yep. The ones I identify as neo-libertarians came from the Ron Paul voter side of libertarianism. The old school LP folks used to talk about sovereignty a *lot*. It was crucial to the notion of smaller government. But the potheads got involved and dragged leftist ideas about religion, sex, and libertine lifestyles into it, and decided that sovereignty was just too right-wing or something.

        The stupid thing is that back then, Ron Paul was not an open borders guy, and was also pro life. But he really drew in the crowds of potheads.

  42. That’s too bad. I mostly like Justin Amash although he’s had some troubling votes on immigration and supporting the transgender agenda.

    Sticking his neck out to claim that Barr lied is just stupid, though. The whole notion that Barr would lie about a document he was pushing to release shortly anyway is ridiculous. Was he careful in his wording? You betcha. He had to be because the Democrats are looking for every excuse they can to take down this administration.

    As far as impeachment, I assume that his complaints are around Trump’s behavior described in the second part of Mueller’s report. It’s really sad that anyone not a raving progressive would even give consideration to the second part of the Mueller report. If there was no Russian conspiracy, obstruction of justice wasn’t even really possible. Amash should know better.

  43. “Consider the argument, and argue against it, if you disagree.”

    I’d love to. Unfortunately, he never presented one.

  44. Where was Amash on the politically motivated witch hunt based on a campaign of espionage begun over a work of fiction in order to essentially effect a coup?

    Nowhere, as far as I can tell. So, he can shove his talk about principles, when it’s obvious where the Constitutional conservative or libertarian should be on this coup.

    Amash’s TDS has made an idiot out of him. And a useful one for the democrats.

  45. What a worthless hack! Where were you when obama, holder, and Clinton were actually obstructing justice? Another hack liberal in the republican party. Vote this crap out Michigan!

  46. He is entitled to his opinion. Was his opinion that Obama should be impeached too? Because nothing Trump has done, as yet, comes close to what Obama did.

    And will we now have some fools screaming about impeachment every time they aren’t happy about the results of an election? IMO – yes we will.

    Impeachment is supposed to be only under extraordinary circumstances. IMO other than the extraordinary exhibition of a left gone nuts it’s all just nonsense and even calling for impeachment isn’t justified.

    And Amash is, IMO, just wrong.

    1. He’s not just wrong, but this reeks of opportunism. The report has been out for a month now, with the details of it being known in mere days, if not hours. It seriously took this “man of principle” a month to discover certain parts of it which he doesn’t mention are impeachable offenses?

      1. If Barr didn’t represent Mueller’s report correctly why isn’t Mueller saying so? Did he pass that job onto Amash?

  47. "I see some people saying he’s a fraud and attacking him. I don’t think that’s the case. Amash has shown to act on principle and to say what he really believes. That doesn’t mean he’s right or wrong, but to simply attack his character is silly. Consider the argument, and argue against it, if you disagree."

    With all due respect, the guy doesn’t even present an “argument”. It’s pure opinion! And he does the exact same thing he accuses Barr of. Notice not a single quote from Mueller report or Barr Summary in his opinion? He just paints for us a picture and since as he admits, most people haven’t read the report, he figures we can’t argue against him. And he compares Clinton with Trump, but fails to mention a few major distinctions. 1) Clinton committed crimes and obstructed to hide them. Trump NEVER committed any crime or collusion, so no obstruction! 2) Clinton claimed executive privilege like crazy while Trump DID NOT claim executive privilege during the investigation. That alone is astonishing as no other president has been this open about an investigation and it shows he had nothing to hide. He makes the claim that Barr misrepresented the Mueller report, but where’s his evidence!? And how stupid of him to accuse Barr of misleading the people when Barr released the redacted report for transparency and he didn’t even have to do that!

    The Mueller report which was written by a bunch of Democrats could not come to a conclusion on Obstruction. You know what that means in our justice system? “NOT GUILTY” PERIOD!

    1. Amash is specific in pointing out that there need not be actual “crimes” to impeach.

      Re:

      the guy doesn’t even present an “argument” It’s pure opinion.

      It’s TWITTER, for crying out loud!!! How much detail do you expect???

      This is what drives me crazy on Twitter: the degree to which some want to elevate its importance.

      1. How do you square his desire to impeach because of personality defects and “impeachment should be undertaken only in extraordinary circumstances”? Or was he under the influence of something while tweeting?

        Re: lack of argument, I’m responding primarily to soop who says we shouldn’t attach the guy, but address his argument. Well, there is no argument to address! Plus, if he can tweet much non-sense, he should be able to give us at least a small example to backup his opinion.

        1. I don’t believe that argument should take place on Twitter. And the fact that many people expect it to, is disturbing.

        1. I also agree with it.

          It lends itself to rash judgment and knee-jerk reactions, rather than intellectual discussion.

          And I find the degree to which policy matters are discussed and announced, led by the president, appalling.

    2. Well said but you may want to be careful on this site calling out anything the authors pen.

        1. That may be true but too many of the “loyal” posters are not. One reason this site is no longer a good source for conservative opinion for me. If one disagrees with a Right Scoop “author” you are attacked for being a liberal and worse. It’s happened to me and others.

          1. @humansrus Disagree with the authors all you like. It happens all the time. I’ve done it lots of times and gotten into it with SooperMexican.

            Are you expecting that everyone will agree with you? Are you expecting to not get push-back on some of your opinions?

          2. @humansrus, I haven’t run across that here, but I certainly have at Trumpstate…..oops,….I mean Redstate!

      1. I’ve done it often. And I’ve been stomped a little by other commenters – usually anti-Trump sycophants. But I’m a big girl and can take a little argumentation now and then.

        I’ve been called a Trump-Humper and a Trump-Hater among other things. What I am is a woman who has opinions of her own and doesn’t much care if others agree.

        And when I’m not in the mood for arguing – I leave.

        1. @kenoshamarge Yeah, whining about the other commenters, mods, and site runners is always a lame look. If I decided one day that I didn’t like it here, I would just shut up and go elsewhere.

        1. Your response sort of proves what I’m saying. Also, all my comments, and the responses, are easily found and also prove my point.

          1. @humansrus Ryan-o is a longtime poster here. He has a pretty good feel for the environment and the kind of commenters present. He simply doesn’t believe your complaint is justified.

            And no, we’re not going to go through your comment history in order to figure out where your feelings got hurt.

            1. 1) I don’t get my feelings hurt by people I don’t even know. 2) Not asking you or any of your co “right scoopers” to go through my comment history because I can easily go through it to prove my point. I hope people aren’t allowed to go through other people’s posting history but this is such a select group of people who knows.

              1. @humansrus It’s difficult to communicate when you insist on your own language rules. Being overly sensitive while refusing to consider the responses to your comments is the very definitiin of being stuck in a bubble.

                1. Who are you? This is absurd and petty. I already deleted this site from my favorites. There are other sites I can get my Conservative commentary and opinion.

  48. Where, in this screed posted on Twitter, does Amash make the case that there were misrepresentations made by Barr? From what I’ve read here, I see no case, just saying that there were misrepresentations. If you’re going to make the case for impeachment, you should be rock solid. I would expect that from someone that calls themselves a libertarian.

    1. You leave SooperMexican alone man! haha I’ve been a fan of his for a hot minute. He’s good people from what I can tell. Really glad that Scoop brought him on the site, personally.

  49. I generally like Libertarianism, but find I increasingly dislike Libertarians. They’re lax at enforcing their “principles” when it comes to their political enemies and extremely overzealous when it comes to enforcing upon their allies.

    They’re either manipulated by the Left to be that way or they’re dishonest about what they really stand for.

    1. Yes, Libertarians are quite annoying even though I do have sympathies with Libertarianism. Its just not ever going to be a working philosophy for the same reason Communism fails – it ignores human nature.

    1. His parents are of arab decent, but he’s supposedly Christian. But Michigan has a huge Muslim population, so I don’t doubt a large number of his constituents are anti-Trump Muslims.

      1. I suspect there are quite a few Muslims infiltrating different groups in America that are representative of our culture like political parties, churches, NGOs, education system etc. The Leftist and communist have done it for years and it has successfully delivered the Democrat Party into their hands and a lot of our mainstream churches.

      2. Obama was reportedly a Christian as well. I find it exceedingly unlikely, as you suggest, that a predominately Muslim electorate would choose a Christian to represent them. Muslim loyalty is unswerving. Any political party that best demonstrates a common desire to ‘kill the beast’ [America], is the one they support.

  50. Few members of Congress have read the report. You’re surprised? I like Amash but was never overly impressed. However, I think his proclamation is a back-stabbing one.

  51. I doubt Trump will lose any sleep over this. However, Amash might have a new nickname by 6:30am Sunday.

  52. “I see some people saying he’s a fraud and attacking him. I don’t think that’s the case. Amash has shown to act on principle and to say what he really believes. That doesn’t mean he’s right or wrong, but to simply attack his character is silly.” Hahahahahaha

    His character? The man doesn’t have a spine! He voted AGAINST Kate’s Law and voted against No Sanctuary For Criminals Act — a bill that would prevent cities with sanctuary policies from getting certain federal grants. I hope someone primaries this piece of crap! Congresswoman Tlaib PRAISED him!

    1. He was also against the travel ban. He pretty much sides with the open borders crowd on everything.

  53. He was one of the reps I admired and respected the most, that he would buy into this hoax just leaves me disgusted.

  54. It is not the prosecutor’s job to exonerate anyone. A prosecutor is just suppose to charge those who they can prove committed a crime. Mueller admitted there was no collusion and the DOJ admitted there was no obstruction. It should have been end of story.

    If there was anything to charge the President with Mueller would have said so and just held the indictment until after President Trump’s term of office was over.

    Anything else in the report is just prosecutor BS and character assisination at its best. BTW: most prosecutors I have run into think everyone is guilty of something.

    You want to find what Mueller really has, just allow the Presdent to sue Mueller and his team for liable for everything in the report, at that point the report would be quickly reduced to a sentence or two. But, since prosecutors are immune from civil suits they can write such garbage against those they are investigating and not be held accountable. If there is no crime, why is the rest of the allegations addressed in the report anyone’s business, including the prosecutors?

    If Mr. Amash thinks there is anything credible in the report, he has lost at least one vote the next election.

  55. What does Amash have to hide? What is he afraid AG Barr, IG Horowitz, US Attorney Huber, and US AttorneyDurham are going to find? Did the Koch Brothers give him a call?

    This smells… not that it would surprise me some RINOs were also behind the Russia ruse… remember McCain?

  56. BenTallmadge
    @BenKTallmadge
    According to Justin Amash’s financial disclosure forms, Amash is a co-owner of Dynamic Source International, a Chinese company that supplies Michigan Industrial Tools.

    Dynamic Source Int is located in Hangzhou, China.

    No wonder Justin Amash’s been attacking Trump’s Tariffs! ‼️

  57. Brian Cates
    @drawandstrike
    Remember what I’ve been saying: a whole lot of the stuff done to launch the Trump/Russia hoax among a phalanx of co-dependent DC elitists spread among Congress, FBI, CIA , St. Dept., DNC Media has to do with *protecting the MONEY they make from overseas*.

    Foreign lobbying.
    5:42 PM · May 18, 2019 · Twitter Web Client

  58. Justin Amash is an idiot. There, I criticized his character. :silly:

    I can’t believe I’m saying this but I haven’t seen one single thing that Trump did that was wrong or impeachable. So Justin Amash must have some ulterior motive for saying something so ludicrous. And frankly, I’m sick to death of any and all “impeachment” talk. It’s unfounded.

    1. @tracy Wow. That would not be a surprise. Didn’t John McCain help pass that dossier along? Did John do anything that Lindsey wasn’t part of? Lindsey has been quite vocal about getting to the bottom of this all (even though he doesn’t want anyone to be punished for it). I thought that was odd. Anyway, I thought Amash was one of the good guys. I guess I didn’t know enough about him judging by some comments I’ve seen made here. Some of you have got my wheels turning, too, like this tweet you’ve posted. There’s a reason it’s called The Swamp.

  59. Justin Amash is only doing what his likely biggest financial backers want him to do. That would be the Koch Bros. They are against closing the border, and are incensed at the tariffs. They have long supported the gay agenda, because one of the Koch Bros is gay. The Kochs are not good conservative people. They can take their billions and shove it as far as I’m concerned.

  60. I knew Amash had TDS but not at this level… this likely has to do with Trump’s immigration plan; Amash is for open borders and amnesty. The hatred is palpable… sad!

    “I see some people saying he’s a fraud and attacking him. I don’t think that’s the case.” What a surprise!

  61. :facepalmg:
    There’s always one isn’t there. Although with all the RINO’s he won’t be the last traitor. Yes I’m looking at you Mittens.

  62. Just FYI, this guy is fine with illegals voting in elections and tax payer money being used to finance transgender surgery for military members.

    If Trump committed obstruction, then it was Mueller’s job to charge him with it. Instead he simply published a very long Op-ed on Trump and used it to create tension. Idiots like Amash fall for it hook line and sinker.

    Also i haven’t heard anything from this “libertarian” about the shinanigans and civil liberty violations that lead to the whole Russian investigation. I won’t hold my breath though.

  63. Where, in this screed posted on Twitter, does Amash make the case that there were misrepresentations made by Barr? From what I’ve read here, I see no case, just saying that there were misrepresentations. If you’re going to make the case for impeachment, you should be rock solid. I would expect that from someone that calls themselves a libertarian.

  64. The tipoff is the claim that Barr misrepresented Mueller’s report and attempted to mislead the public. There is simply no way to square that claim with the facts. Barr accurately reported that the Mueller report had found no collusion, and that Mueller had decided not to make a “traditional prosecutorial decision” concerning obstruction. He was upfront that he was making that determination himself, because Mueller hadn’t, even though that was literally Mueller’s job. Nothing Barr said about the Mueller report was in any way inaccurate. I don’t know what kind of mind-reading Amash is doing to claim Barr was lying, but it’s not an objective evaluation.

    Mueller investigated the Trump campaign for nearly two years, after it had already been investigated by the FBI under Comey for at least seven months. ( I say, “at least,” because it’s clear that someone was sending spies and attempting to entrap members of the Trump campaign for several months before we’re told the investigation was officially opened.)

    After that exhaustive investigation, no collusion was ever found. Even after throwing Manafort in jail and into solitary confinement, and pushing him through two trials, no new evidence of collusion was found. Even after pressuring Flynn into a highly questionable guilty plea to force his cooperation, no collusion was found. Even after stripping Michael Cohen of attorney-client privilege to squeeze everything of value out of his considerable time with Donald Trump, no evidence of collusion was found.

    If an investigation that intense and aggressive can’t find a single bit of evidence of collusion, only a fool would fail to question whether the investigation was ever based on any real evidence in the first place.

    Granted, all the argument now is about the accusation of obstruction, but you can’t dismiss the simple fact that the claims of collusion were proven to be false. And that makes Trump an innocent man, who knew he was being falsely accused. Every statement by Trump has to take into account that he was being investigated for something he knew — and arguably was known by the FBI and Mueller long ago — that he was not guilty of.

    Amash and others seem to want to turn that around and start from the assumption of Trump’s guilt. If he railed against the investigation, it must be because Trump was trying to hide his guilt. If he told Don McGahn that Mueller should be removed from the case because of conflicts of interest, it must be that Trump was nervous about Mueller finding something. Every possible statement or action of Trump is interpreted in the light of a guilty man trying to avoid getting caught.

    And yet, that is the one thing we actually know to be false. The one thing that we should have clear is that there was no collusion or conspiracy, in spite of multiple attempts at entrapment.

    Bottom line: the investigation should never have happened in the first place. The FISA warrant on Carter Page should never have been granted. The FBI should never have been spying on the Trump campaign. The Steele dossier should never have been briefed to the president just so the fact of the briefing could be leaked to the media as an excuse to report on the dossier. The Special Counsel should never have been appointed, especially not to continue a counter-intelligence investigation that never had any evidence behind it, and became moot once the American people elected the man at the center of it to be president. If there was no probable cause for a criminal investigation, then there should have been no Special Counsel.

    As much as it may offend Amash, Trump was right that he was being spied on, he was right that there was no evidence of Russian collusion, he was right that Mueller should never have been appointed Special Counsel, and he was right about it being a witch hunt. This might not have been obvious at first, when there was still grounds for suspicion that there might have been some collusion by at least some people in the Trump campaign. But at this point, there is no longer an excuse for interpreting Trump’s statements as if he were a guilty man trying to hide a crime. We know better.

    Is this just more sanctimonious Comey-esque virtue signaling? Or is Amash himself concerned about the direction that Barr investigation might take? I don’t know if Amash was at all involved in the Russia collusion hoax, but if he’s going to attack the Attorney General just as the AG is finally trying to get to the bottom of how the Russian hoax started, then it’s fair to question whether Amash himself has something to hide.

    1. Are you guessing, or have you seen something about that? If that’s what it is, stupid move.

        1. I think it may have something to do with what you have posted above – the Chinese company. I wonder if that company is suffering from the tariffs. As we’ve learned, those in DC are self-serving if nothing else.

  65. Reading the RINO’s diatribe, if you notice everything this fraudulent Republican RINOcrat spoke, wrote-stated, not 1 iota piece of factual concrete evidence against Pres and AG Barr was stated to substantiate his lewd incendiary impeachment claim.

    Everything he stated, wrote against Pres Trump and AG Barr is 100% opinionated abstract conjecture, the same generalized hyperbolic rhetorical tripe leftist Democrats keep repeating, which their strategy and tactic is as always – If you say it enough, it will become true, and people will believe it – aka Hitlerism

    The good people of his district in Michigan must vote this piece of RINO trash out of office.

  66. A lot of people hate Trump’s guts and want to see him gone so Justin Amash just joined a very long line.

    1. Yep, he sure did.. and come Nov 2020, he will also be joining the unemployment line.

      1. I hope so but I doubt it. Michigan isn’t the state we used to know. The voters aren’t the people we used to know. And Minnesota, once famous for Sven and Olie, is now worse.

  67. He sounds like he is talking to too many Democrats.

    Barr didnt misrepresent the bottom line and impeaching the president for fighting against a fraud investigation is pure bs.

  68. If you take Amash at his word, then how I’m reading this, Amash has concluded the following:

    – Mueller himself is wrong in his concurrence with Barr’s findings in the first summary letter he released

    – Not just Trump, but the GOP as a whole are now covering up obvious crimes within a 2-year report that is available for public consumption & has been for close to a month now.

    – The GOP are now puppets of Russia in their attempt to cover up this “crime”

    – Because Trump wanted to fire Mueller but talked out of it, thought crime is now a prosecutable offence.

    Looks like he just lost his re-election campaign with this Alex Jones-esque conspiracy theory.

  69. Methinks there must be another underlying reason Amash is acting like this now. I don’t really know a lot about him, but this seems odd to me. I hope the truth about this comes to light. What does he want out of doing this?

  70. I’d like to thank TRS for always posting multiple opinion pieces and not just pro-administration viewpoints 24/7.
    I’m not saying I have an opinion either way on this article in particular but I am happy to be a regular reader of a site that isn’t part of a mouthpiece for anyone.
    It’s a rare thing these days.

  71. Just a coward Republican who is desperate for positive media attention. MSNBC and CNN are probably tripping over each other trying to bring him on.

  72. I generally like Libertarianism, but find I increasingly dislike Libertarians. They’re lax at enforcing their “principles” when it comes to their political enemies and extremely overzealous when it comes to enforcing upon their allies.

    They’re either manipulated by the Left to be that way or they’re dishonest about what they really stand for.

    1. Yes, Libertarians are quite annoying even though I do have sympathies with Libertarianism. Its just not ever going to be a working philosophy for the same reason Communism fails – it ignores human nature.

  73. Perhaps Congress has started its own mind reeducation facility much like the Chinese are doing today.

  74. True reading comprehension is all but extinct (Along with common sense). Schools don’t teach individual reading comprehension and highlight group think interpretations. I ran into that in college in the early 1970’s. I am very disgusted with and disappointed in Amash!

  75. I see some people saying he’s a fraud and attacking him. I don’t think that’s the case. Amash has shown to act on principle and to say what he really believes. That doesn’t mean he’s right or wrong, but to simply attack his character is silly. Consider the argument, and argue against it, if you disagree.

    What argument and evidence has he presented? Trump should be impeached because he, Amash, believes William Barr deceived the people with his four page summary of the Mueller Report?

  76. In that whole Twitter rant, he didn’t list one piece of evidence.

    If it’s so obvious, why can’t he name them?

    1. Just like Shifty Adam Schiff, he talks about obvious evidence but never gives any obvious examples.

  77. Does he seriously believe he’ll pull Leftist voters away from voting for an authentic leftist merely by pandering to them?

  78. I know this is a kind of worn out response/question to the obstruction issue (maybe because it makes sense?), but if there is no crime, how can there be obstruction? Even though Amash has read the report, could he have waited until Mueller testifies to make this kind of announcement if it didn’t change his mind? I haven’t read the report and can say with certainty, I won’t, so I don’t know if Barr is misrepresenting anything. It seems to me if he were, Mueller would be asking to testify right away, but last I saw that is delayed indefinitely.

    1. What does it matter if Barr is in fact misrepresenting the Mueller report? A.) Barr is not Trump and B.) The report has been made public for everyone to read.

    2. Mueller can’t testify, because the Republicans on the committee will ask him questions that
      will force him to lie about his part in the coup or take the Fifth, either of which will have serious consequences down the road.

      As for Amash, that this site would treat this ridiculous Trump-hating idiot as credible shows how vulnerable right-wing positions are to leftward drift. You never find anyone on a leftist site siding with conservatives. Never.

      1. I think this site is just reporting it. That doesn’t mean it’s being treated as credible. If a Republican comes out pushing impeachment of Pres. Trump, it’s news.

  79. What’s up with reason number four? Most of Congress hasn’t even read the Mueller report so Trump should be impeached for that?

    The fact they haven’t read it tells me that they don’t give a crap what Mueller said and they’re going to convict Trump anyway.

  80. Argue against what? All he’s done is bark accusation and recite the law without showing any evidence. Implies? You can’t impeach based on something Implied. I get a kick out of his last point “Few members of Congress have read the report”. Is that Barr’s and Trump’s fault as well? This is just an attempt to become relevant.

    1. Not to mention Mueller has already said he has no isuue with Barr’s findings & the report has been public for what, a month now? That’s one hell of a way to hide a coup lol

  81. Justin I have voted for you many times, and enjoyed your opening for Ted Cruz during the primary, however you have sipped the koolaid from big money donors, and are tainted.

  82. For what?

    The reasons I see him giving are because Trump doesn’t act Presidential and because Democrats don’t like him. This somehow reaches the standard of high crimes and misdemeanors.

    I’m embarrassed we have anyone in Congress this pathetically stupid and petty, even more so that some are Republican.

  83. OH Justin Amash why don’t you give us the true reason why you think Donald Trump should be IMPEACHED. Is it because you are for pro-abortion and a baby killer and you find that gradually more and more States are coming out to defend life and becoming too radical with some laws that protects babies from being killed and you feel the woman rights are being threaten? Is that is all about? Is it because you think is the only way you can get rid of him? I can tell you it will never work. His hands are more cleaner then yours. What an hypocrite and a traitor.

      1. He might be a pro-life in 2014, he might not be one now. Just saying I could be wrong. I just find it suspicious. Time will tell. Politicians do change when they are under pressure so not to loose their job.

    1. His pro liberty votes are excellent. This is just a bad decision to come out against the president.
      Guess he feels he has to to stay true to his values but when you find yourself agreeing with conspiracy theory hoaxers then maybe you need to re evaluate your values.

  84. I don’t remember Justin calling for Obama’s impeachment went he broke the law. Maybe Justin should be primaried.

        1. I guess I’ve missed those stories. Where have I been? 😕 As far as anything I’ve ever seen or read about him, he’s a libertarian/conservative style pol. Admittedly, I can’y recall anything recently in the news about him and certainly had never anything like that.

            1. So I went to Wikipedia because it’s the only place I could think to get some bio on him. His father, a Palestinian Christian, and mother, a Syrian Christian, were sponsored by a pastor and his family to immigrate here. @Tracy has posted above that he is a co-owner of a Chinese company. That is also on his Wiki page. I wonder if his company is suffering from Trump’s policies, and he is just another self-serving prick. I’ve seen a lot here about him that I didn’t know and don’t like – like being for illegals and allowing them to vote. I’m going to try to read up on him tomorrow so I can get a better picture of who he is because it certainly isn’t what I thought if this is all true, but I can’t base it on hearsay over the comment board. Sorry about the long reply.

              1. I’ve known some middle eastern Christians and they were all anti-Israel. It’s like Stockholm syndrome. That’s where they live. I think it’s partly that they blame Israel for Muslims becoming more radicalized in recent decades.

    1. His parents are of arab decent, but he’s supposedly Christian. But Michigan has a huge Muslim population, so I don’t doubt a large number of his constituents are anti-Trump Muslims.

      1. I suspect there are quite a few Muslims infiltrating different groups in America that are representative of our culture like political parties, churches, NGOs, education system etc. The Leftist and communist have done it for years and it has successfully delivered the Democrat Party into their hands and a lot of our mainstream churches.

  85. Sorry, he’s wrong and Mark will give him a lesson on Monday…Also,Do t think Justin will like the consequences.

    1. @new-west I think Rand is pretty solidly behind Trump. Rand wants Brennan investigated.

  86. BenTallmadge
    @BenKTallmadge
    According to Justin Amash’s financial disclosure forms, Amash is a co-owner of Dynamic Source International, a Chinese company that supplies Michigan Industrial Tools.

    Dynamic Source Int is located in Hangzhou, China.

    No wonder Justin Amash’s been attacking Trump’s Tariffs! ‼️

  87. Brian Cates
    @drawandstrike
    Remember what I’ve been saying: a whole lot of the stuff done to launch the Trump/Russia hoax among a phalanx of co-dependent DC elitists spread among Congress, FBI, CIA , St. Dept., DNC Media has to do with *protecting the MONEY they make from overseas*.

    Foreign lobbying.
    5:42 PM · May 18, 2019 · Twitter Web Client

    1. @tracy Wow. That would not be a surprise. Didn’t John McCain help pass that dossier along? Did John do anything that Lindsey wasn’t part of? Lindsey has been quite vocal about getting to the bottom of this all (even though he doesn’t want anyone to be punished for it). I thought that was odd. Anyway, I thought Amash was one of the good guys. I guess I didn’t know enough about him judging by some comments I’ve seen made here. Some of you have got my wheels turning, too, like this tweet you’ve posted. There’s a reason it’s called The Swamp.

  88. Justin Amash is only doing what his likely biggest financial backers want him to do. That would be the Koch Bros. They are against closing the border, and are incensed at the tariffs. They have long supported the gay agenda, because one of the Koch Bros is gay. The Kochs are not good conservative people. They can take their billions and shove it as far as I’m concerned.

  89. I knew Amash had TDS but not at this level… this likely has to do with Trump’s immigration plan; Amash is for open borders and amnesty. The hatred is palpable… sad!

    “I see some people saying he’s a fraud and attacking him. I don’t think that’s the case.” What a surprise!

  90. Methinks there must be another underlying reason Amash is acting like this now. I don’t really know a lot about him, but this seems odd to me. I hope the truth about this comes to light. What does he want out of doing this?

  91. What’s up with reason number four? Most of Congress hasn’t even read the Mueller report so Trump should be impeached for that?

    The fact they haven’t read it tells me that they don’t give a crap what Mueller said and they’re going to convict Trump anyway.

  92. For what?

    The reasons I see him giving are because Trump doesn’t act Presidential and because Democrats don’t like him. This somehow reaches the standard of high crimes and misdemeanors.

    I’m embarrassed we have anyone in Congress this pathetically stupid and petty, even more so that some are Republican.

Comments are closed.