A Time For Choosing

[FireDragon76]

Telling people who they can or can't support is anti-free speech and anti-constitution and anti-democracy. If it's between a Democrat or Donald Trump, I will choose Donald Trump every single time. I do hope a better candidate emerges. I'm praying for DeSantis, but if Trump is the nominee, he gets my vote. Democrats are even more dangerous.

There's a reason why this so-called committee didn't invite any pro-Trump members. They only wanted anti-Trump opponents so they can lambast him without giving any opportunity for rebuttal. This is 100% political and considering the dismal ratings, not taken too seriously.

The inquiry was bipartisan.

 

[Fantine]

Impeachment hearings?

The ones that ultimately decided not to impeach?

In both cases the impeachment proceeded to the Senate.

A 2/3 majority to convict is a high threshold, even when the defendant is so deserving of conviction.

 

[Ana the Ist]

In both cases the impeachment proceeded to the Senate.

A 2/3 majority to convict is a high threshold, even when the defendant is so deserving of conviction.

Yeah....so as I said, they ultimately decided not to impeach.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Yeah....so as I said, they ultimately decided not to impeach.

The Senate decided not to convict Trump and remove him from office. The House did impeach him.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The Senate decided not to convict Trump and remove him from office. The House did impeach him.

I'm sorry, is there some substantive difference between this and what I said?

 

[essentialsaltes]

I'm sorry, is there some substantive difference between this and what I said?

Not really, but the verbiage is very particular. Per Wiki:

In the United States, impeachment is the first of two stages; an official may be impeached by a majority vote of the House, but conviction and removal from office in the Senate requires "the concurrence of two thirds of the members present".[62] Impeachment is analogous to an indictment.[63]

The House did indeed impeach Trump, but the Senate vote did not remove him from office.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Last night in California, the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation & Institute hosted the latest event in its “Time for Choosing Speaker Series,” which has brought big-name Republicans to Southern California to “address critical questions facing the future of the Republican Party.” Previous speakers are mostly 2024 presidential aspirants, including former VP MIKE PENCE, former Secretary of State MIKE POMPEO, former New Jersey Gov. CHRIS CHRISTIE, South Dakota Gov. KRISTI NOEM, Maryland Gov. LARRY HOGAN, former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. NIKKI HALEY, and Sens. TIM SCOTT (R-S.C.) and BEN SASSE (R-Neb.).
One name not on the Reagan Library’s guest list: Donald Trump.“Trump has not been invited because he’s a former president, and we’re looking to hear from leading voices that haven’t held that level of office,” a spokesman for the Reagan Library told me. I think the library also wants to avoid the danger of Air Force One rolling over in its hangar.

Inside the Feud Between Donald Trump and the Reagan Library​

There’s more than one reason the ex-president doesn’t want to attend the GOP debate at the Reagan presidential library.

[Talking about that earlier series of speeches] But Trump himself — now the frontrunner for the Republican nomination in 2024 — was never invited to address the future of the party here. And it wasn’t hard to guess why.

One member of the foundation’s board of trustees, granted anonymity to discuss internal foundation matters, called Trump a “spoiled brat in a sandbox.” “So many of the things that Trump did, and what he stood for, are just not consistent with the Reagan philosophy,” the board member said.

As for the foundation’s publicly stated explanation that the decision not to invite Trump wasn’t about Trump at all — that it wasn’t extending invitations to any former president — an adviser to a third member of the foundation board said, “Yeah, right. Let’s go with that one.”

“The legacy of Reagan, fair or unfair, right or wrong, was ‘shining city on a hill’ — upbeat and positive and have a beer with Tip O’Neill,” the adviser said. “And Trump is Voldemort. He was the opposite. He wanted to burn everything to the ground, attack people.”

 

[Ana the Ist]

First sign of a weak argument is to question another's motive. Cheney has made it clear why she is opposed to Trump. He is a threat to our democratic republic.

You don't find that an odd accusation?

The Democratic Party rigged its own primary in 2016.

The Democratic Party teamed up with the mainstream media and big tech to suppress free speech (fact, not opinion) and teamed up with the former (and current) intelligence community (which also happens to work for the mainstream media) to spread disinformation pre-election in 2020.

They put a feeble-minded corrupt charlatan who can't even keep track of his own lies in office to run an agenda no one voted for....and they appear to be covering for his unprecedented corruption to keep him in office (though I can't tell if it's because they have no one else to run or because someone so corrupt is essentially hostage to their agenda). They seem willing to deny voters any choice either within their own or in the opposition. They've helped no one but their corporate donors and human smuggling narco cartels and perhaps the war pigs making money off death in Ukraine....and oh yeah, big pharma.

I'm curious what possible threat to democracy is posed by Trump that even comes close to the threat to democracy we're facing from Biden?

It's hard to even count all the ways this administration is destroying our democratic republic.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Not really, but the verbiage is very particular. Per Wiki:

In the United States, impeachment is the first of two stages; an official may be impeached by a majority vote of the House, but conviction and removal from office in the Senate requires "the concurrence of two thirds of the members present".[62] Impeachment is analogous to an indictment.[63]

The House did indeed impeach Trump, but the Senate vote did not remove him from office.

Ok....fair enough. I always thought the House essentially voted on whether or not the Senate had to hold an impeachment trial....then the Senate votes on impeachment.

That's a weird description from Wikipedia. Impeachment isn't a process that comes with a punishment for a crime. The bar is much lower...and the consequences are just removal from office. It's entirely possible to be impeached and not tried for a crime.

Consider Paxton's impeachment (didn't you make a thread on him? I've been waiting for one of your famous updates...) where apparently accusations were made against him without any evidence at all.

 

[wing2000]

"We are confronting a domestic threat that we have never faced before – and that is a former President who is attempting to unravel the foundations of our constitutional Republic," Cheney said. "And he is aided by Republican leaders and elected officials who have made themselves willing hostages to this dangerous and irrational man."

She told the audience that Republicans "cannot both be loyal to Donald Trump and loyal to the Constitution," to a round of applause after she recounted the allegations the Jan. 6 committee, of which she is a member, has brought against Trump surrounding his actions on that day in 2021.

Quoting Reagan:
“No party and no people and no nation can defend and perpetuate a constitutional republic if they accept a leader who’s gone to war with the rule of law, with the democratic process, or with the peaceful transition of power, with the Constitution itself.”

 

[Ana the Ist]

Quoting Reagan:
“No party and no people and no nation can defend and perpetuate a constitutional republic if they accept a leader who’s gone to war with the rule of law, with the democratic process, or with the peaceful transition of power, with the Constitution itself.”

All of these things literally apply to the current administration.

 

[wing2000]

All of these things literally apply to the current administration.

In your mistaken opinion.
The fact is, no President has refused to respect my vote and the peaceful transfer of power until Donald Trump. If you don't (or won't) see how that is a threat to our democratic republic, then we have nothing to discuss.