Impeachment Thread

[KeithD]

He was also impeached for obstructing congress... which he did by keeping others from testifying after they had been lawfully subpoenaed. If you're going to try to tell me the subpoenas weren't lawful, please tell all of us who or what gets to decide that... hint... trump and barr do not... doing so is what we call, by definition, trampling the Constitution.

And for holding back the delivery of government documents that the House had legally requested to see--all to cover up crimes. His crimes. And he's still doing it.

 

[freakyguy41]

And for holding back the delivery of government documents that the House had legally requested to see--all to cover up crimes. His crimes. And he's still doing it.

Agreed... trump is nothing more than a cheap criminal with a big mouth... he says what trumpettes want to hear with no factual basis and they consume his koolaid to no end. Unfortunately, throughout human history, when the society doesn't demand truth and justice, such conduct doesn't go on forever without some kind of events bringing destruction... and the trumpettes will blame anyone and anything other than themselves.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Yes he was impeached for attempted extortion which was presented as a gross abuse of power.

He was also impeached for obstructing congress... which he did by keeping others from testifying after they had been lawfully subpoenaed. If you're going to try to tell me the subpoenas weren't lawful, please tell all of us who or what gets to decide that... hint... trump and barr do not... doing so is what we call, by definition, trampling the Constitution.

Wrong. Neither article of impeachment cites a criminal statute.

 

[icanhelp1]

Yes he was impeached for attempted extortion which was presented as a gross abuse of power.

He was also impeached for obstructing congress... which he did by keeping others from testifying after they had been lawfully subpoenaed. If you're going to try to tell me the subpoenas weren't lawful, please tell all of us who or what gets to decide that... hint... trump and barr do not... doing so is what we call, by definition, trampling the Constitution.

Obstruction of justice in both the Starr and Jones investigations.

The subpoenas were lawful documents but the executive branch is not subordinate to congress under article II powers and privilege.

 

[icanhelp1]

Wrong. Neither article of impeachment cites a criminal statute.

Keith and freaky have their own set of facts, there wrong.... but....

 

[YDB95]

Wrong. Neither article of impeachment cites a criminal statute.

Which does not invalidate them in any way. The constitution provides for impeachment for "high crimes and misdemeanours", an intentionally vague and expansive phrase. The House is not obligated to cite statutes, and the impeachment managers' decision not to was simply a strategy based on Trump's longstanding utter disregard for laws he doesn't like.

Besides, it is against federal law to “solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation” from a foreign national. This is defined as either money or a "thing of value", which dirt on one's opponent certainly could be. Campaigns frequently do pay for opposition research, after all. There is also a federal statute against bribery, which anyone who doesn't desperately want to believe otherwise knows Trump's actions comprised. There is also the Hobbs Act, which prohibits obstruction of commerce via extortion. Trump's clear intention of holding back aid to Ukraine pending the dirt on the Bidens is a pretty clear case of that.

So the House certainly could have cited statutes, and their decision not to was perfectly legitimate.

 

[KeithD]

The Government Accountability Office fingered Trump's Ukraine corruption as criminal.

 

[gunthernehmen]

So the House certainly could have cited statutes

But they didn't.

Which clearly shows the impeachment to be a political stunt having nothing to do with justice.

Since you know ALL the answers, you might ask yourself what Pelosi's quid pro quo was to get her to pursue an impeachment she KNEW would fail.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Wrong. Neither article of impeachment cites a criminal statute.

You are aware that the impeachment process is a political manifestation right?

There needs to be no crime to impeach a president.

There only needs to be high crimes or misdemeanors.

The definition of what constitutes "high crimes and misdemeanors" for purposes of impeachment is left to the judgment of Congress.

Not someone posting on a porn site.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

But they didn't.

Which clearly shows the impeachment to be a political stunt having nothing to do with justice.

So what? As far as I know or understand, wholly allowed under your constitution.

The definition of what constitutes "high crimes and misdemeanors" for purposes of impeachment is left to the judgment of Congress.

You can all bitch and complain all you want, but the Democrats ( or Republicans or whomever holds the majority in the House) have the constitutional right to investigate and impeach. Just as the Senate is given the constitutional right to have a trial and judge that impeachment.

PS I am only jumping into this, because you people are all running around in circles with this. Trump's impeached, and not found guilty, time to move on to something else...

 

[YDB95]

But they didn't.

Which clearly shows the impeachment to be a political stunt having nothing to do with justice.

No, it means they were entirely within their rights as set forth by the constitution, and they went with a particular strategy.

Since you know ALL the answers, you might ask yourself what Pelosi's quid pro quo was to get her to pursue an impeachment she KNEW would fail.

If I had to guess (and I do, since I don't know Pelosi personally)? I think she probably saw it as the right thing to do, regardless of the outcome, so future generations will understand we at least tried to hold Trump accountable for his likely illegal and definitely unethical actions. And that, at least, did not fail. For all time, he's the third president to be impeached.

 

[KeithD]

Impeachment of Trump hasn't failed. He's been called on his corruption and criminality and he's impeached and shown as dirty scum for ever and ever in history. And there isn't a damn thing that board Trumpettes can do about that.

 

[gunthernehmen]

So what? As far as I know or understand, wholly allowed under your constitution..

Pelosi's actions were themselves, a high crime.

And at the risk of repetition, Trump was found not guilty of those fabricated offenses. According to Phrodoh, that, by definition, means the "crime" never happened.

 

[gunthernehmen]

For all time, he's the third president to be impeached.

Abusing the political process simply encourages the other side to employ the same tactics.

Pelosi and her ilk have forever proven that impeachment no longer means a damned thing. Impeachment will likely become a common tool used by both sides, thanks to the high crimes Pelosi committed.

 

[allison22]

Two days after Senate Republicans acquitted President Trump on both counts of impeachment, the Trump administration fired a number of national-security officials: European Union ambassador Gordon Sondland and Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, the National Security Council staffer, for voluntarily testifying before the House, as well as the latter’s twin brother, Lieutenant Colonel Yevgeny Vindman, for being the crime of being related to Alexander.

Now, the “Friday Night Massacre” is extending into this week. The New York Post reports that the administration is retaliating against Elaine McCusker, whose nomination for Pentagon comptroller and chief financial officer has been pulled.

What’s especially chilling about this move is the reason for the retaliation. McCusker is losing her job because she attempted to follow the law.


https://nymag.com/intelligencer/202...49foajTKj47NmPIswgDv1eT62NWAOVRlYKgkBsmnubUaE

 

[YDB95]

Abusing the political process simply encourages the other side to employ the same tactics.

Nah, if impeaching Clinton over a blowjob didn't do that, nothing will.

 

[icanhelp1]

No, it means they were entirely within their rights as set forth by the constitution, and they went with a particular strategy.

Being entirely within their rights doesn't make it right. It will go down in history as a strictly partisan impeachment without statutory relevance, exactly what our framers feared the most. Yeah, something you dems can be proud of!

If I had to guess (and I do, since I don't know Pelosi personally)? I think she probably saw it as the right thing to do, regardless of the outcome, so future generations will understand we at least tried to hold Trump accountable for his likely illegal and definitely unethical actions. And that, at least, did not fail. For all time, he's the third president to be impeached.

You don't impeach on "probably's". You don't impeach for " likely illegal " The Dems get a certificate of completion for completing the process but get an F overall. The framers established the impeachment process as a mechanism to remove a corrupt individual, outside the judiciary ( political ), for high crimes and misdemeanors. It was purely partisan and the Dems knew it was partisan, which demonstrates the Dem party was reckless and unworthy to lead. Hopefully, future generations will understand what the true definition of " high crimes and misdemeanors" is and will impeach with absolute certainty of such crimes, crimes so egregious it will compel a majority in both houses and no party will use tyranny to satisfy a political agenda!

 

[phrodeau]

You don't impeach on "probably's". You don't impeach for " likely illegal " The Dems get a certificate of completion for completing the process but get an F overall. The framers established the impeachment process as a mechanism to remove a corrupt individual, outside the judiciary ( political ), for high crimes and misdemeanors. It was purely partisan and the Dems knew it was partisan, which demonstrates the Dem party was reckless and unworthy to lead. Hopefully, future generations will understand what the true definition of " high crimes and misdemeanors" is and will impeach with absolute certainty of such crimes, crimes so egregious it will compel a majority in both houses and no party will use tyranny to satisfy a political agenda!

The HoR produced a solid case, and Trump admitted to it. There is no question that Trump committed crimes.

 

[gunthernehmen]

The HoR produced a solid case, and Trump admitted to it. There is no question that Trump committed crimes.

You STILL haven't done the slightest homework on how the impeachment process works, I see.

Well, better luck next time.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Pelosi's actions were themselves, a high crime.

Please list the criminal statute, constitutional clause, or common law ruling to back this up. Otherwise it is only opinion.

And at the risk of repetition, Trump was found not guilty of those fabricated offenses.

Did you not read in my post that I clearly stated he was impeach,and not found guilty?

It just fails me to see why this particular thread keeps running. Trump was impeached, tried and found not guilty. No one here can change that "Fact". You may love the "fact" or despise the "fact", but nothing will ever change it.

 

[gunthernehmen]

Please list the criminal statute, constitutional clause, or common law ruling to back this up. Otherwise it is only opinion.



Did you not read in my post that I clearly stated he was impeach,and not found guilty?

It just fails me to see why this particular thread keeps running. Trump was impeached, tried and found not guilty. No one here can change that "Fact". You may love the "fact" or despise the "fact", but nothing will ever change it.

The thing is, the left continues to not really understand what that means and what they did to this country.

Impeachment isn't some mystical state of disgrace. It's basically the same as an indictment. There are tens of thousands of ham sandwiches rotting in jail that did NOTHING criminal whatsoever. There are ALSO tens of thousands of ham sandwiches that may or may not have committed crime, running around free because AFTER they were indicted, they were tried and found not guilty.

Just like Trump.

He was impeached. So what?

The left really needs to get past this.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

He was impeached. So what?

The left really needs to get past this.

I agree, and so does the Right.

The Democrat impeachment was a political statement, designed to get their views of Trumps actions as impeachable on record.

The Republican Senate trial was a political statement that Trump's actions in their view are acceptable and not an impeachable offence.


No different than the outcomes on Clinton or Johnson prior.

It's over people, move on, nothing to see here......

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Impeachment of Trump hasn't failed. He's been called on his corruption and criminality and he's impeached and shown as dirty scum for ever and ever in history. And there isn't a damn thing that board Trumpettes can do about that.

Yes, the impeachment was a huge success. The President was acquitted, remains in office, continues taunting TDS sufferers, and there’s not a damn thing us Trumpettes on this board can do about it!

 

[icanhelp1]

You STILL haven't done the slightest homework on how the impeachment process works, I see.

Well, better luck next time.

He's irrelevant!

 

[gunthernehmen]

He's irrelevant!

Oh, I know. Look, this is a porn site. I split my time between pushing papers and covering miles. It gets boring and when I need a break I pop in here and there and amuse myself for a bit. Once in while one of the knuckleheads does manage to get under my skin but usually, I'm just enjoying myself talking or bitching about politics or perusing the porn stories elsewhere on the site. I even tried to read Keith's and Y's stories a while back but fell asleep.

If I was taking this place seriously, I'd be posting on a site that had some relevance to mainstream voters. That's part of what makes their russian bot claims so absurd. Why would the BOTHER botting this site? The only people that actually read these politics forums are the dozen or so people that post here.