• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pelosi directs House Democrats to proceed with articles of impeachment against Trump

Chomsky said:
Well said. In fact, it's classic Putin. But I do not share the blame equally. Putin found a willing shill in President Trump, along with a complicit Republican party. It's what happens when ethics are tossed aside, in favor of greed & power.
Click to expand...

Agreed. And that's why this is a constitutional issue.
 
Chomsky said:
Well said. In fact, it's classic Putin. But I do not share the blame equally. Putin found a willing shill in President Trump, along with a complicit Republican party. It's what happens when ethics are tossed aside, in favor of greed & power.
Click to expand...

The problem is that the ethical foundation of our countries government has been rotted out from within
 
Perotista said:
Hmm, I think you're correct. I've been told numerous times by some very good in the know folks that the Russians didn't interfere in our elections in 2016 to get Trump elected. They did so to sow doubt and mistrust in our election process. That is precisely what you hit upon.
Click to expand...

Exactly. No one will accept the outcome positive for the other side. This is an egregious destruction of the trust of the public.
 
GDViking said:
Nearly twice as many Americans are in favor of impeachment than at this point in Nixons.

That number will explode as more and more information becomes general knowledge...
Click to expand...
We've only had an extremely limited number of impeachments, and each was unique. I do not believe there's enough instances to statistically extrapolate conclusions. That was a wordy way of saying I believe you are wrong in your conclusion. I think the numbers will remain hard and in the current stasis. No offense, intended.
 
Conservative said:
How can there be a legitimate discussion when you ignore the actual words spoken by Sondland and claim his testimony convicted Trump of a crime?

How can there be a legitimate discussion when you stick to the belief that an impeachable offense based solely on politics will be accepted by the American people?

How can there be a legitimate discussion when you claim over 53% of Americans support Impeachment when the number is somewhere between 42-48 at Realclear politics?

I don't think there ever will be a legitimate discussion until you and others admit when wrong and move on to more pressing issues

Oh by the way if you want to post the Mulvaney video then do so in context regarding the 2016 election and the Ukraine corruption, not anything about Biden
Click to expand...

1. I admitted I erred in posting the 53 percent number, but I guess you missed that.

2. There won't he a legitimate discussion until you stop using ad hominem and generalizing and have a discussion about it instead of telling me what I think and believe.

Does that clear it up for you?
 
Chomsky said:
Well said. In fact, it's classic Putin. But I do not share the blame equally. Putin found a willing shill in President Trump, along with a complicit Republican party. It's what happens when ethics are tossed aside, in favor of greed & power.
Click to expand...

its what happens when McCarthyism takes over the democRat party and spreads lies like wildfire
 
Obscurity said:
Exactly. No one will accept the outcome positive for the other side. This is an egregious destruction of the trust of the public.
Click to expand...

There has to be principles in government that everyone recognizes or else there will be no ethical standards
 
RedAkston said:
I'd have better luck getting blood from a turnip than I would getting you to watch his testimony where he was questioned and stated clearly that Trump said no QPQ. The transcript of the call doesn't contain QPQ. The only one of the two of us that seems to be lacking common sense isn't me.

You can go on and on about how Sondland proved there was QPQ, even though not a single witness called before the House, including Sondland, stated that QPQ existed and you'd be wrong every single time. You're the one who is either lying or living in an alternate reality than the rest of the world because no QPQ has been proven, no QPQ was stated by Trump - according to Trump, Zelensky and Sondland (and the transcript proves there was no QPQ) and the Dem's "smoking gun" is hearsay, which is inadmissible in court BTW.

Your complete schtick has been an abysmal failure from the beginning. It's based on lies, half-truths and ignorance of the facts. What a sad and pathetic way to go about "debating". You can keep believing the lies you're telling, but no matter how many times you say them, they will never be true.
Click to expand...

Ok.

Tell me. What was Mulvaney talking about, then?

Buying cupcakes?

Delusions.
 
Obscurity said:
Agreed. And that's why this is a constitutional issue.
Click to expand...

Isn't the integrity of the election and potential Ukraine corruption the heart of the Mulvaney video and claim and not anything to do with Biden? What you and the Democrats are doing is exactly what Putin wanted undermining the credibility of our elections and creating chaos and hatred. Would Trump be correct in tying Ukraine aid to investigation into election abuses as isn't that a national security issue?
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
The problem is that the ethical foundation of our countries government has been rotted out from within
Click to expand...

Agreed. It's been going on for awhile, but I can't help but feel Citizen's United has opened the doors to increase the rate of destruction.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
There has to be principles in government that everyone recognizes or else there will be no ethical standards
Click to expand...

Well of course there does. But let's look at this logically.

If trump loses the trump base will revolt and declare it a false election that was rigged by the deep state.

If trump wins the Democrats will revolt and declare the election illegitimate because trump welcomed foreign aid with his election.

The problem here is instead of trying to cool this fire, instead of trying to act responsibly, trump has made it worse. Hes thrown gasoline on a fire and blamed the Democrats for it.

This is an egregious abuse of his office and a violation of the public trust.
 
Chomsky said:
Steele may be an a Brit, but he is a private citizen. That's a far cry from the President of the United States using the weight of the U.S. government to bring another government into our electoral process to influence an election.

I can see the qualms about Steele being a foreign national. I'm not crazy about it myself. But I see no equivalence here.
Click to expand...

However:

1. Trump didn't use the weight of the USA to bring a foreign country into the USA,
The aid was released. No investigation required

2. As we learned in 2016, bringing a foreign into the election is okay. The Obama Admin brought in Australia (Downer) and the FBI went to the UK, to see what their intelligence guys had on Trump.
 
Obscurity said:
Agreed. And that's why this is a constitutional issue.
Click to expand...
Indeed. We may yet get to the point where Trump refuses to comply with a SCOTUS decision. Then we will truly be in Constitutional crisis. I believe this would be more likely to occur if Trump succeeds in attaining a second term.
 
Obscurity said:
Well of course there does. But let's look at this logically.

If trump loses the trump base will revolt and declare it a false election that was rigged by the deep state.

If trump wins the Democrats will revolt and declare the election illegitimate because trump welcomed foreign aid with his election.

The problem here is instead of trying to cool this fire, instead of trying to act responsibly, trump has made it worse. Hes thrown gasoline on a fire and blamed the Democrats for it.

This is an egregious abuse of his office and a violation of the public trust.
Click to expand...

And this is why I think there are standards that should be recognizable to everyone.
 
Obscurity said:
Athanasius68 said:
I wanted Obama impeached over the drone strikes, yes. I also want Trump impeached over the ukraine scandal.

Trump got caught. So we should do NOTHING about it, since he was too inept to complete his illicit deal?
Click to expand...

So doing something rotten and thinking about doing something rotten are equivalent and should be treated the same?
Click to expand...
 
Chomsky said:
Indeed. We may yet get to the point where Trump refuses to comply with a SCOTUS decision. Then we will truly be in Constitutional crisis. I believe this would be more likely to occur if Trump succeeds in attaining a second term.
Click to expand...


We are already in a constitutional crisis.
 
Chomsky said:
Agreed. It's been going on for awhile, but I can't help but feel Citizen's United has opened the doors to increase the rate of destruction.
Click to expand...

Citizens United was a clarion call that unleashed the Roberts court, yes.
 
Obscurity said:
Trump INVITED that weaponization with his big ass mouth. Did he or did he not jokingly ask for Russia to hack, and then they did so?
Click to expand...

Russia began targeting the election in 2014.
They didn't need Trump to start their plan.
Nor did they need him to pull it off.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Obscurity said:
So doing something rotten and thinking about doing something rotten are equivalent and should be treated the same?
Click to expand...

Trump tried to do it and got caught. So yes, he needs to be held accountable for it.

At this stage, a majority vote is all that's needed to disqualify him from running in 2020 and that would be enough for me.

There is precedent for it. 2/3rds needed to oust him. Simply majority to stop him from running on 2020.
Click to expand...
 
Athanasius68 said:
Russia began targeting the election in 2014.
They didn't need Trump to start their plan.
Nor did they need him to pull it off.
Click to expand...

No, you're correct. But I mean openly flaunting the public's trust bu making stupid, braindead statements like asking China to investigate Elizabeth Warren, or asking Ukraine to investigate joe bidens son.
 
Obscurity said:
Athanasius68 said:
Trump tried to do it and got caught. So yes, he needs to be held accountable for it.

At this stage, a majority vote is all that's needed to disqualify him from running in 2020 and that would be enough for me.

There is precedent for it. 2/3rds needed to oust him. Simply majority to stop him from running on 2020.
Click to expand...

Trump is eligible to run for election if the House votes to impeach.
Its should the Senate vote to remove him is when he's out.
Click to expand...
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
We are already in a constitutional crisis.
Click to expand...
Technically, I'm not sure. We are having conflict between the branches that is working it's way through the courts. This has occurred before. However, I would not call it a true Constitutional Crisis until SCOTUS weighs-in, and is rebuffed. We still may get there, though.
 
MovingPictures said:
They were getting direct orders from the WH and State Department to push the Ukrainians to open the investigations into the Bidens and the DNC. That's not hearsay, that's what they all testified to, and supported through emails and text messages.

That this was all done in the context of a sudden hold on military aid and a WH meeting, pretty much speaks for itself. The Ukrainians figured it out, or they wouldn't have drafted a public announcement, and then asked if that would satisfy Trump.
Click to expand...


Again, where's the evidence there was a quid pro quo in connection with the Ukrainian aid?

Do you have a document, a recording, or testimony from anyone that firmly establishes that Trump made demands of the Ukrainians, and refused to release the aid until those demand were met?

Yes or No?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom