Do you support the Democrats trying to Impeach the President

GoldenBoy89 · May 31, 2019

Pommer said:
Cohen “taped” things...many things.

Probably because he knew better than anyone else that his client has a hard time keeping his story straight.

rambot · May 31, 2019

I'm really glad I'm not American after reading this thread.

There are a lot of disconcerting points being raised flippantly (rounding up people and deporting them). About people who would like to see evidence but haven't bothered to read the appropriate parts of the Mueller report.

I don't get a sense of freedom down there.

If Russia's main goal was to destabilize American society their strategists were 100% bang on.

jardiniere · May 31, 2019

Albion said:
Lets be straightforward about this. ANYTHING that the activists in Congress don't like is sufficient for them to impeach.

It really has nothing to do with any obstruction or undiplomatic behavior or calling people impolite names or any of that stuff that has been cited by some members of Congress as meriting impeachment. It is totally about not being willing to accept the results of the 2016 presidential election.

I'll be just as straightforward. Anything that Trump supporters don't agree with is labeled with "just politics" and thus irrelevant. Gaslighting like that is unworthy of response.

Were Nixon impeachment investigations totally "just politics"? Is covering up attempts to obstruct justice "just politics"? No, it's not "just politics". It's more than rivalry, it's justice, something we as a nation were supposed to uphold as a moral virtue.

Albion · May 31, 2019

jardiniere said:
I'll be just as straightforward. Anything that Trump supporters don't agree with is labeled with "just politics" and thus irrelevant. Gaslighting like that is unworthy of response.

Were Nixon impeachment investigations totally "just politics"? Is covering up attempts to obstruct justice "just politics"? No, it's not "just politics". It's more than rivalry, it's justice, something we as a nation were supposed to uphold as a moral virtue.

I don't see anything here that conflicts with--or even relates to--my comments concerning a possible impeachment of President Trump.

KCfromNC · May 31, 2019

Albion said:
I don't see anything here that conflicts with--or even relates to--my comments concerning a possible impeachment of President Trump.

Nixon was forced to resign after a report showing instances of him obstructing an investigation. No relationship to Trump being impeached? Seems like wishful thinking.

Der Alte · May 31, 2019

Pommer said:
Cohen “taped” things...many things.

We shall see.

jardiniere · May 31, 2019

Albion said:
I don't see anything here that conflicts with--or even relates to--my comments concerning a possible impeachment of President Trump.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." -George Santayana

iluvatar5150 · May 31, 2019

Der Alter said:
And you know this how?

Know what how? That he's in jail for campaign finance violations? That's public information.

Even if Cohen claims that Trump told him to commit the violations that would be his word against the president's.

Ah, so you're questioning that he did it at the president's behest. Well, Cohen worked for Trump and the payments were intended to help Trump's campaign by silencing Trump's ex-mistress from talking about an affair she had with Trump. Trump then signed at least some of the checks, coming from his private account, reimbursing Cohen for the hush money.

Is that as good as having a tape recording of Trump telling Cohen to pay the hush money? No, I suppose not. But it's still a pretty good indication that this direction came from him.

If Trump committed impeachable acts it is the sworn duty of the house to impeach.

No, it is not. It is their right to take that action; it is not their duty to do so.

If they don't they are complicit.

Baloney.

Go Braves · May 31, 2019

hislegacy said:
And Joe Biden will be 82.

Exactly right, which is why it's stupid as all get out to make a fuss of age when Donald is right up there alongside him in old age. VP Biden, Senator Sanders & Donald are generational peers. Gracious knows Donald has repeatedly demonstrated more signs of mental decline in old age than VP Biden. Folks were so dang desperate to try to make it out like VP Biden was slipping they were all gleeful when he misspoke even though he corrected himself right quick. Meanwhile Donald repeatedly makes such errors and cannot spell basic words properly.

durangodawood · May 31, 2019

Bumble Bee said:
If a person doesn’t want a republican president, they should vote for another party in the next election. Impeaching the president for being of the wrong party or to try to prevent future presidents of that party is a waste of time and an abuse of the system.

I agree.

But impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors is perfectly valid.

Thats why I support an impeachment inquiry.... but am not yet on board with articles of impeachment.

DaisyDay · May 31, 2019

Could be their best bet after all: Professor who has correctly predicted 9 presidential elections says Trump will win in 2020 unless Democrats impeach

Of course, I don't think the Democrats should impeach Donald willy-nilly, without getting their ducks lined up. They should find incontrovertible evidence of his malfeasance - I believe he is corrupt and arrogant enough that it exists.

DaisyDay · May 31, 2019

Bumble Bee said:
If a person doesn’t want a republican president, they should vote for another party in the next election. Impeaching the president for being of the wrong party or to try to prevent future presidents of that party is a waste of time and an abuse of the system.

Well, yeah, being as if the president were impeached, the vice-president would take his place - same party, same policies (more or less). That's not why Donald would be impeached - that can only be on his own merits.

basilbear76 · May 31, 2019

TLK Valentine said:
It wouldn't be pleasant, certainly... but what harm would come to the nation if Donald were impeached?

It's a big distraction from more important things.

What do you think the grounds for impeaching Trump are?

BTW--many people thing "impeachment" means removal from office. It isn't. In this case, it's the formal accusation by the House. The Senate then tries the President on the charges.

It's doubtful that a Republican senate will find Trump guilty.

basilbear76 · May 31, 2019

DaisyDay said:
Could be their best bet after all: Professor who has correctly predicted 9 presidential elections says Trump will win in 2020 unless Democrats impeach

Of course, I don't think the Democrats should impeach Donald willy-nilly, without getting their ducks lined up. They should find incontrovertible evidence of his malfeasance - I believe he is corrupt and arrogant enough that it exists.

Arrogance is not an impeachable offence.

TLK Valentine · May 31, 2019

basilbear76 said:
It's a big distraction from more important things.

What do you think the grounds for impeaching Trump are?

Obstruction of justice and violation of the Emoluments clause of the Constitution.

BTW--many people thing "impeachment" means removal from office. It isn't. In this case, it's the formal accusation by the House. The Senate then tries the President on the charges.

It's doubtful that a Republican senate will find Trump guilty.

A Republican Senate didn't even find Clinton guilty when they had the chance -- and that was over lying about some extramarital shenanigans.

Der Alte · May 31, 2019

iluvatar5150 said:
Know what how? That he's in jail for campaign finance violations? That's public information.

"at the direction of the president?"

begin

<IL>Ah, so you're questioning that [Allegedly. DA] he did it at the president's behest. Well, Cohen worked for Trump and the payments were [Allegedly. DA] intended to help Trump's campaign by [Allegedly. DA] silencing Trump's ex-mistress from talking about an [Alleged. DA] affair she had with Trump. Trump then [Allegedly. DA] signed at least some of the checks, [Allegedly. DA] coming from his private account, reimbursing Cohen for the hush money.<IL>

end

See notes above.

Is that as good as having a tape recording of Trump telling Cohen to pay the hush money? No, I suppose not. But it's still a pretty good indication that this direction came from him.

Allegedly.

No, it is not. It is their right to take that action; it is not their duty to do so.

Have you ever read the constitution?

Article II, Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Baloney.

See above it does not say "may be removed."

iluvatar5150 · May 31, 2019

Der Alter said:
Well, Cohen worked for Trump and the payments were [Allegedly. DA] intended to help Trump's campaign by [Allegedly. DA] silencing Trump's ex-mistress from talking about an [Alleged. DA] affair she had with Trump. Trump then [Allegedly. DA] signed at least some of the checks, [Allegedly. DA] coming from his private account, reimbursing Cohen for the hush money.<IL>
See notes above.

Those aren't alleged anymore. That's what Cohen went to jail for. As for the checks - Cohen presented those checks in his public congressional testimony.

Have you ever read the constitution?

Article II, Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

See above it does not say "may be removed."

That doesn't say what you think it does. What that says is that when they are impeached and convicted, they shall be removed from office. It doesn't require that the House bring impeachment proceedings.

By your logic, that section also says that the senate is duty-bound to convict, which would seem a rather odd requirement.

Aldebaran · May 31, 2019

TLK Valentine said:
Furthermore, we should remember that should he be impeached and convicted

He hasn't been charged with anything, even after a 2 year investigation, and there has been no trial. How would YOU know that he should be impeached and convicted? Even when tried by media, a person should at least get due process, don't ya think?

Aldebaran · May 31, 2019

TLK Valentine said:
Obstruction of justice and violation of the Emoluments clause of the Constitution.

What specific action did he commit that qualifies as obstruction of justice?

GoldenBoy89 · May 31, 2019

Aldebaran said:
He hasn't been charged with anything, even after a 2 year investigation, and there has been no trial. How would YOU know that he should be impeached and convicted? Even when tried by media, a person should at least get due process, don't ya think?

The impeachment is due process.

Do you support the Democrats trying to Impeach the President

Do you support the Democrats trying to Impeach the President

Yes

No

We're Still Here

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Facilitator

Regular Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

I miss Senator McCain

Dis Member

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

Active Member

Active Member

I've already read the books you want burned.

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

NCC-1701-A

NCC-1701-A

We're Still Here

Similar threads