will trump really be impeached? (1 Viewer)

isladogs

CID Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 14, 2017
Messages
12,306
AB
I just want to go on record that I completely agree with your last two posts!
 

The_Doc_Man

Happy Retired Curmudgeon
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
15,465
Isladogs said:
Are you seriously suggesting Trump has done nothing meriting impeachment?
Whether anyone says that, I say that it is possible that he really hasn't. Not certain - but possible.

Isladogs said:
I'm saying both Presidents were flawed and acted as though they were above the law.
You left out BHO, who used executive orders as a substitute for legislation even though he flagrantly crossed the line on "separation of powers." You are right about both men being badly flawed, though. Above the law? See my earlier explanation. Constitutionally, the Pres, whoever holds the office, really IS above most laws. But not above Congress.

My current issue is this one. It will take a moment to get through it, so bear with me.

DJT, as the Pres, is also the chief law enforcement officer of the USA since Homeland Security is a cabinet office that answers to him. He has the right to suggest to his people in DHS to check into various specific crimes. He took an oath to uphold the laws of the USA. For better or worse, he took the oath. What he did with it is sort of the subject of this thread, isn't it?

There are substantial rumors that Joe Biden offered a 7-figure bribe to the president of the Ukraine to remove a prosecutor from office because that prosecutor was at the time investigating Hunter Biden, Joe's son, for criminal wrongdoing. There are those who will say, "Oh, that has been dismissed" or "that is unsubstantiated." Don't CARE because at the time of that phone call, the suspicion was still active and hadn't yet been addressed. Nor am I satisfied that it has been fully addressed in any case.

DJT cannot investigate a crime of public bribery committed by an American citizen in another country. Our laws allow certain extra-territorial prosecution (e.g. a U.S. citizen in another country can be prosecuted in the USA for human trafficking) but bribery? No. On the other hand, the president of the Ukraine SURELY has the authority to investigate wrongdoing within his own country - such as the actions for which Hunter Biden was under suspicion.

Therefore, DJT - as an international courtesy - can ask the Pres of the Ukraine to look into this nasty rumor about a US citizen's actions that fall under Ukrainian jurisdiction. BUT... if the bribery rumor is actually true, then the Ukraine guy already has "skin in the game" that he would lose if he follows up on that rumor. So to counteract the bribery, DJT can say (in effect) "if you take his money, you lose this other money." I.e. level the paying field (oops, Freudian slip, I sort of meant "playing field." Maybe.)

So unless the Dems are willing to investigate that rumor IN FULL, they have no basis for claiming an abuse of power other than that he's got it and they don't and he reminds them of that every day. That's as abusive as it gets, I guess, by their standards. And of course they don't DARE investigate wrong-doing by their own front-runner candidate, right?... Right. Pure politics.

OK, DJT can be a consummate ass at times. In this thread, I made it clear that he was a case of "lesser of two evils" when I voted for him. But the Democrats went berserk on this one and have materially interfered with the normal business of the government. They have passed some bills, true, but they have been so consumed by this fiasco that they have passed only a small fraction of the normal amount of legislation.

The only benefit of that is that because of being distracted, they have not gotten around to their usual antics - the kind that once caused Mark Twain to comment "Nobody's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session."

P.S.- It is hard to find the proper attribution of that quote, but it is commonly associated with him, and it is CERTAINLY within his style. You'll find the quote easily enough by looking up "Mark Twain Quote on Legislature." But it won't give a proper formal reference to book, chapter, and verse.
 

Steve R.

Retired
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
1,788
Think Trump was impeached by the US House of Representatives? Well think again!

Yes, the House voted to impeach Trump, but one of the pro-impeachment Democratic Constitutional experts (Noah Feldman) wrote that the impeachment process has not yet been "consummated" since it has not been officially transmitted by the House to the US Senate. Trump Isn’t Impeached Until the House Tells the Senate.

Since I am lay person in terms of the byzantine complexities of Constitutional law, I am not going to delve into the issue of whether Trump was or was not actually impeached.

Instead I am using this pending disagreement to point out that the law is not as obvious as to meaning and that facts can be interpreted in a subjective manner. This can result in both (opposition) parties, in viewing the same facts, to interpret them as only supporting their position. Witness the fact that the House voted on the impeachment resolution along party lines.

What I have lead up-to (in that facts are subject to interpretation) is that the Democrats have claimed that Trump has acted as a "King" and that he had proposed a quid pro quo.

The Democrats can be equally accused. Nancy Pelosi is acting as a "Queen". She has stated that she will not forward the articles of impeachment unless Mitch McConnell agrees to certain demands. She has no authority over the US Senate. Her demands are therefore outside of her "realm" of control since the Senate is an independent body.

Nancy Pelosi is demanding a quid pro quo from McConnell. She states that the articles of impeachment will not be sent to the Senate for trial unless her demands are met. The very definition of quid pro quo.

The Democrats may have a lot of facts that can be interpreted to support their contention that Trump must be impeached. But the Democrats have set the burden-of-proof bar very low and have used vague ambiguous accusations. That has left the Democrats open to being accused, by the Republicans though the same abusive use of facts that Democrats have used.

PS: The Democrats have a credibility issue. They claimed that the impeachment process had to be rushed since time-was-of-the-essence. They passed the articles of impeachment, but are now apparently delaying forwarding the articles of impeachment to the Senate. Why?
 

NauticalGent

Pristine Curmudgeon
Joined
Apr 27, 2015
Messages
2,370
A damn fine mess this is. The Democraps are trying to give their constituents the illusion of action. All they have do e is strengthen the resolve of the Republitards and pushed any fence sitters to the other side.

We are truly a joke to the rest of the world...
 

The_Doc_Man

Happy Retired Curmudgeon
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
15,465
Let's be honest: The antics of Parliament with regard to Boris Johnson and Brexit were byzantine and entertaining for a while, too. Though it looks like the British people have had enough and gave Johnson his mandate.

DJT has yet to reach that point. The ULTIMATE gotcha would be if the House finally forwarded the articles of impeachment to the Senate, it got voted down by the Senate (in other words, acquittal), and then DJT got re-elected with an even larger vote, not only in the Electoral College but in terms of popular vote as well. And in the process, the Dems would lose a few seats in the House so that their power advantage vanishes. THEN is when the REAL Democratic panic would set it.
 

Steve R.

Retired
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
1,788
This impeachment insanity is most likely, not over, unfortunately. The Democrats started raising the impeachment process even before Trump took office. So this has been going on for three years. The Democrats have now failed three times in their effort to implement a coup. The Democrats may well be sufficiently enraged with TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) to try a fourth time.
 

Jon

Access World Site Owner
Staff member
Joined
Sep 28, 1999
Messages
1,725
It wouldn't surprise me if they tried to impeach The Donald again just before the elections.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
28,528
Hopefully when Trump is reelected and the Republications retake the house, they will see the need to do some work on our defamation laws. The Constitution protects members of Congress from slander/libel charges when speaking in their respective chambers but I don't see that extending to what they say in public. To me, the perpetual lies about Trump on national television - "I have the evidence of collusion", "Trump is a racist", "Trump is anti-immigration", and on and on and on are tantamount to an attempted coup. Since the press only covers negative Trump news, the half of the country and most of the world who rely on CNN and the NYT for their "news" don't have a clue that these people are lying.

Trump was not convicted but the coup will continue until the conservatives take to the streets with their guns and bibles and smelly Walmart shirts. The revolution has arrived.
 

Jon

Access World Site Owner
Staff member
Joined
Sep 28, 1999
Messages
1,725
I can't see the petulant tearing up of Donald's speech by Pelosi to be anything but turning off those in the middle-ground, and helping his election cause. It is so disrespectful and the occasion is about the president and the country, not the hate and bile coming from the opposition. I would say the same regardless of which party did it.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
28,528
I agree. Pelosi's behavior was totally disrespectful. This is especially galling because she is second in line for the presidency. If the Democrats had managed to remove Trump, could Pence be far behind? Manufacturing evidence is certainly in their toolbox. But actually evidence isn't necessary. All you really need are opinions. Wearing a red tie with a brown suit is criminal. Does that mean that the man needs to be put away for life?

Once Pence is gone, Nancy is next. I think she was counting her chickens before they hatched and that's why she was so p***** :)
 
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
1,386
Just from a practical stand point, shouldn't the Dem's conduct themselves in a manner that is Superior to the person they are impeaching.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
28,528
You'd think, but hypocrites don't have the ability to look at themselves with any clarity. Pelosi's response to the reporters who bothered to ask was that the document was full of lies and so tearing the speech up was the best action she could take. Michelle Obama's classy response of when they go low, we go high apparently didn't get any traction with the rest of the Democrats. Of course the Republicans don't go low (Trump isn't actually a Republican. He's a closet Democrat and he goes reallllly low) and they don't even know how to fight back when the Dems fight dirty. If a Democrat disagrees with you, you are immediately blasted with a name calling rant. They can't argue their positions on the facts. If you don't think free healthcare for illegal immigrants is the right thing to do, you're just a racist and anti-immigrant. I'm not sure what they call people who are against forgiving college debt. We may have to come up with a new epithet.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top Bottom