...And another Reasoned Case Against Impeachment

[GoldenBoy89]

All three have been vocal against the President from day one of his administration. They showed their partisanship in an impeachment inquiry. The very reason the founders made it difficult to impeach a president.

I don’t see how that has any bearing on the historical knowledge they were tasked with bringing to the impeachment inquiry. None of them we’re asked to give their opinions on Trump’s job performance or any specific policies. There was nothing particularly partisan in any of their testimonies. I think if they were all flat out anti-Trump they did a good job of avoiding it and sticking to what they know about the Constitution and it’s laws.

 

[civilwarbuff]

People who don't hate Trump are kind of hard to find, aren't they?

Yeah. Where are all the constitutional law professors that love and support Trump?

You guys do understand that the 3-1 was set up by the dems, right?...I mean JIC......

 

[essentialsaltes]

That's what we do in politics now--ridicule children

That didn't happen. The prof made a pun on the kid's name. There was no ridicule of the child (or his name).

 

[usexpat97]

The actions of both parties has undermined American's confidence in the entire system. Why do you think voter turnouts are so chronically low?

Because of low faith in the election system. Foreign-made balloting machines which seem to have an awful lot of trouble counting. Zero transparency in the ballot counting process. You know, the stuff absolutely nothing is being done about, save for this impeachment process.

"Go out and vote! Every vote counts!"

Sorry. It really doesn't.

 

[civilwarbuff]

A lesson learned from the republicans during Obama years

That justifies everything....thanks for making it clear.....

 

[GoldenBoy89]

You guys do understand that the 3-1 was set up by the dems, right?...I mean JIC......

Nothing’s stopping Fox or any other outlet not limited by the House majority from bringing in a whole panel of Trump loving Constitutional scholars to debate the other side of the argument. Curious they haven’t found any.

 

[Albion]

Reeeealy. Can you point one out from this past year?

I said "all the time." Just pay attention to such ongoing realities:

"NeverTrumpers" and their publications who favor impeachment and a different candidate in 2020.

Admitting that Nixon (their party's guy) was deserving of impeachment.

Many Republicans said then and say today that the Iraq war was a mistake.

That's just a start. BUT what do we find on the other side of the aisle? Hardly any deviation from the party's official stances, or that of the leadership, exists. Even Tulsi Gabbard, who some people think of as going upstream in her party, has (almost unnoticed) adopted one after another of the extreme positions of the rest of the candidates in the running so that she will be allowed on the debate stage by her own party!.

 

[Ricky M]

"Go out and vote! Every vote counts!"

Sorry. It really doesn't.

Exactly. If you vote anything but dems in California, your vote dies at the state border.

When candidates on both sides make promises they have no intention of keeping, you vote dies from lack of interest.

If you live in a populated state, your vote only has half the power of one cast in sparsely populated states.

One person one vote. What a farce!

 

[Ricky M]

I said "all the time." Just pay attention to such ongoing realities:

"NeverTrumpers" and their publications who favor impeachment and a different candidate in 2020.

Admitting that Nixon (their party's guy) was deserving of impeachment.

Many Republicans said then and say today that the Iraq war was a mistake.

That's just a start. BUT what do we find on the other side of the aisle? Hardly any deviation from the party's official stances, or that of the leadership, exists. Even Tulsi Gabbard, who some people think of as going upstream in her party, has (almost unnoticed) adopted one after another of the extreme positions of the rest of the candidates in the running so that she will be allowed on the debate stage by her own party!.

I was not aware that Nixon and Iraq were from this year. And yes I guess I missed the report on how republicans are lining up to oust their savior.

 

[usexpat97]

Nothing’s stopping Fox or any other outlet not limited by the House majority from bringing in a whole panel of Trump loving Constitutional scholars to debate the other side of the argument. Curious they haven’t found any.

But as you know, if you are vocal against Trump at any time, that makes you "biased", "partisan", and not credible. We need only "unbiased" people, who never said anything bad about him.

Boy, that's not loading the deck at all. I hear Trump casinos are hiring.

 

[civilwarbuff]

People with micro attention spans who vote based on nothing more than sound bites and memes.

Excellent list of sound bites.....I am sure your buddies on the left will make note for future use....

People who are so tired of the leftist agenda they think they're voting for a lesser evil.

People who are so desperate for change they'll take take change for the worse.

Fat cats who want a 100 foot yacht instead of a 50 foot one.

Those are the ones who vote for Trump.

Bill Maher did an excellent piece on why people vote against democrats. But I doubt many here would watch it.

 

[Ricky M]

Excellent list of sound bites.....I am sure your buddies on the left will make note for future use....

They do it too. Which is why I say, as Christians, WE NEED TO ABANDON BOTH OF THESE LYING, DECEIVING PARTIES.

 

[Albion]

I was not aware that Nixon and Iraq were from this year.

Don't try changing the subject after I've answered your question.

The question was about Republicans apologizing, backtracking, and etc. It was not about when the issues in question first happened.

 

[civilwarbuff]

If he loses this election, youll see the consequences

Well, don't let it keep you awake at night since it ain't likely to happen.....

 

[Ricky M]

.

 

[usexpat97]

Admitting that Nixon (their party's guy) was deserving of impeachment.

This is absurd that Watergate is worthy of impeachment, yet somehow going to the Ukraine and threatening to aid the U.S.' enemies unless they snoop on the Democrats is not.

 

[civilwarbuff]

There was no ridicule of the child (or his name).

Of course their was....associating Barron with a royalty title....how disingenuous....

 

[wing2000]

All three have been vocal against the President from day one of his administration. They showed their partisanship in an impeachment inquiry. The very reason the founders made it difficult to impeach a president.

It's not partisanship to object to the Executive branch abusing it's power. Congress has clear constitutional duties to check the power of the executive branch. Republicans who are faithful to their constitutional duty are missing in action. The House has sole authority to investigate and impeach. All four professors were in agreement that the Ukraine situation warrants an impeachment inquiry and the Executive branch must cooperate. It clearly has not.

 

[wing2000]

The actions of both parties has undermined American's confidence in the entire system. Why do you think voter turnouts are so chronically low?

What you speak to has been true for several decades. However, Trump has taken it to new levels, openly manipulated by the Russian state.

 

[Ricky M]

I was not aware that Nixon and Iraq were from this year. And yes I guess I missed the report on how republicans are lining up to oust their savior.

THAT GROUP OF REPUBS WHO BROKE DOWN THE DOORS OF THE IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS! Here I thought they were trying to stop it. They were just wanting to join in the effort to oust their savior!

How could I have been so blind and ignorant?