• 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!

Democrats introduce two articles of impeachment against Trump

Mithros said:
Trump is not the last US president. A Democrat will almost certainly be in the White House in either 2020 or 2024.

Don't expect the Democrats to play by a different set of rules indefinitely. If Trump wins in 2020 then *THIS* is the new norm. The next Democratic administration will be equally corrupt because without consequences, all of the incentives will be on the side of corruption. How will you stop them from doing the same thing? When a democrat is actively engaged in election fraud you're going to have to be fine with doing nothing, watching an election with widespread cheating, and then stewing over the inevitable result when your side loses. The only people who think that's a good plan are New England Patriots fans.
Click to expand...

Dammmmmmm :lol:

Ambition tempers ambition. Checks and balances only work so long as each branch has leverage over the other.
Click to expand...
 
Obscurity said:
Imagine a future president, like Bernie Sanders, hitching congressional apportioned funding to investigations into Ted Cruz, Sean Hannity, and anyone else he disagrees with.
Click to expand...

1) Imagine if Ted Cruz was corruptly taking $50,000 a month and laundering it through his son?
2) Trump didn't hitch anything really since his only charge was to delivery the money by a date certain, which he did. Most likely he was bluffing in order to expose one of the Biden Mafia's operations and do the nation a great service.
 
Last edited:
Mach said:
They will vote on this in Judiciary later this week, before it's potentially brought to a full House vote.

Democrats introduce two articles of impeachment against Trump - CNNPolitics

I thought Schiff's speech was well done and compelling at the end. Of course, I believe part of the country figures this is all true...but as long as Trump also gives them something in the deal, it's OK.
Click to expand...

Open wonder if the Democrats are trying to smear Joe Biden. Nobody would have ever known about Hunter Biden and his dealings in Ukraine if it hadn't been for the Democrats. So it makes me wonder if there is an ulterior motive here are they trying to get Elizabeth Warren shuffled to the front?
 
Athanasius68 said:
They are about this dispute-- Congress wants certain documents; the president doesn't want to give them, Congress says impeach.
So yes, it is about making every dispute impeachable.
Click to expand...

Congress wants the president to cooperate with its investigation. Those are parts of both of their jobs.
 
jmotivator said:
You don't know what you are talking about.

First: A Congressional subpoena is entirely optional. The Congress has no legal authority to enforce a subpoena. If the Congress refuses to seek enforcement through the court then the person who received the subpoena is under no legal obligation to appear.

Second: Executive Privilege is in fact a thing, and the President can claim executive privilege when subpoenaed. If the needs of Congress exceed the President's executive privilege then the court would decide that, not congress.

As I have said from the moment they announced these idiotic articles: The Democrats in issuing these articles have done more to exceed their authority than the supposed offense by Trump. They literally denied Trump the opportunity to defend his executive privilege in court and then are attempting to impeach him as if they had won a court case... which they haven't. They have done everything they can to ensure as little opposing argumnet can be made, and refuse allowing the impartial court to decide.
Click to expand...

Yes, the speed of that claim is puzzling. The president and some staff members have contested the requests in court, and those legal challenges haven't been resolved. The cases are still in progress - the administration hasn't actually refused anything yet. Trump is essentially being impeached for challenging the validity of the subpoenas.

It's interesting to compare this to the last administration, which consistently slow walked information to congress.
 
Mach said:
Turley, the Republican's pick for defending POTUS, disagrees with the impeachment? Say it isn't so.
Clinton was already investigated by Republican partisans for 4 years and impeached for a BJ...but you're sensitive to the madness that will follow when Trump is impeached for abuse of power?

Turley is a ****ing idiot. That you can't post in your own words, is unfortunate.
Click to expand...

This is not about Clinton... In fact Turley voted for her hubby and Obama and the queen herself......
Turley wiped the floor with the other partisan idiots the democrats called. Another bad day for the democrats! :peace
 
James972 said:
well not really; if they impeach for something other than treason bribery etc it is clearly unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know that it is unconstitutional, "high crimes and misdemeanors" has never really been challenged in court because all previous impeachments have been connected to obvious crimes.

That being said, it would be in the nation's best interest if we had adults running the House who adhered to the commonly understood bar set for impeachable offenses. We clearly don't currently have such leadership in the House.
 
Nalu said:
That's a huge red flag. Trump isn't being charged for obstructing Democrats. He's being charged with obstructing Congress. So think about what you're saying. Imagine that Republicans control the House, Trump is found to have placed a bomb in the subway system, and that Republicans decide it's time to impeach him. Trump orders the executive branch to put Congress on block and not cooperate with the Republican investigation into the bombing. You're ok with that? Now imagine that Joe Biden becomes president and Republicans take the House. They decide to investigate Hunter Biden or whatever CT is convenient. Biden says nope and tells the executive branch the same thing. You're ok with that too?
Click to expand...


I stopped reading after you asked me to imagine Trump placed a bomb in the subway system.




I'm sorry but I just don't see any point in giving your fairy tale type thinking the time of day.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Well, yes. The president can do that.
Its called separation of powers.
Its probably not the wisest move (and judging from the agreement made on free trade today, its fair to say Trump is not ignoring Congress).
Click to expand...

Separation of powers is what gives Congress its oversight functions. If there are enough people like you in this country that see no problem with Trump doing what you just explicitely condoned, then we don't deserve a democracy anyway.
 
James972 said:
1) Imagine if Ted Cruz was corruptly taking $50,000 a month and laundering it through his son?
2) Trump didn't hitch anything really since his only charge was to delivery the money by a date certain, which he did. Most likely he was bluffing in order to expose one of the Biden Mafia's operations and do the nation a great service.
Click to expand...

1. LOL.
2. Yeah, he did. Sorry, you can't tell me what to unsee and unhear.
 
Athanasius68 said:
But imagine a President Sanders investigating his 2024 opponent. We just had a report describing the investigation by #44 into the Trump campaign.
None of the usual suspects seem particularly horrified that such an investigation took place.
Click to expand...

The report shows there was no political bias. Plus, Obama wasn't trump's opponent.

Sorry, you're off kilter here.
 
Obscurity said:
1. LOL.
2. Yeah, he did. Sorry, you can't tell me what to unsee and unhear.
Click to expand...

1) dear, you clean forgot to tell us why you disagree with 1. How will you learn if you are afraid to try???
2) what do you have to unsee?????? You clean forgot to tell us!!!!!!!!!!
 
Obscurity said:
The report shows there was no political bias.
Click to expand...

no it doesn't!! It clearly says there was no sufficient explanation for all illegalities associated with the FISA applications!! Likely Comey is headed to prison for the obvious abuses.
 
SheWolf said:
I am too young to remember the Clinton impeachment, so I have nothing to compare. I heard Trump say the Senate will exonerate him, but is that accurate? The Senate is probably not going to remove him, but it’s not an actual criminal trial. Secondly, I am anticipating the Senate to call in witnesses like Giuliani. I am anticipating the Senate to promote pro Russian conspiracy theories throughout the process.
Click to expand...
That's a good question.
I looked the terms up and it looks like if we use the justice system analogy, the Senate can convict or acquit Trump if the articles of impeachment.
Exoneration appears to be when someone is already convicted, and the conviction is overturned, which isn't technically the case here. But in every-day language, Republicans will of course claim he's "totally exonerated". Similary, if he were convicted, they would cry foul. Just like the IG report, it "totally exonerated" the FBI, but Barr is crying foul because it's not the result he wanted.

I really have no idea what the Senate is gonna do. In this Trump-stupid era, it could be a complete clown show for sure. I think any witness called will be open to cross examination though, so I personally suspect Republicans will not call *anyone* that could really shed light on the allegations, except in the periphery. I didn't see the Clinton stuff either, so I have yet to see a Senate trial.
 
Nalu said:
Congress wants the president to cooperate with its investigation. Those are parts of both of their jobs.
Click to expand...

So then why is Congress proposing to impeach Trump because the president wanted to investigate H. Biden? Ought it not work both ways? Shouldn't the House committees have been happy to work with the president to understand why H Biden received the job he received shortly after his father was made pointman on Obama Admin Ukraine policy?
 
Obscurity said:
The report shows there was no political bias. Plus, Obama wasn't trump's opponent.

Sorry, you're off kilter here.
Click to expand...

Obama supported Clinton.
But it doesn't matter. The example I gave is more accurate to the scenario that you gave.
Can a President Sanders investigate his 2024 opponent or does that candidate have de facto immunity?
 
dobieg said:
I stopped reading after you asked me to imagine Trump placed a bomb in the subway system.




I'm sorry but I just don't see any point in giving your fairy tale type thinking the time of day.
Click to expand...

Ok, thanks for being honest.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Can a President Sanders investigate his 2024 opponent or does that candidate have de facto immunity?
Click to expand...

its called oppo research; its routine. 1+1=2

( like when Chulapa went to Ukraine to investigate Trump for Democrats)
 
Nalu said:
Separation of powers is what gives Congress its oversight functions. If there are enough people like you in this country that see no problem with Trump doing what you just explicitely condoned, then we don't deserve a democracy anyway.
Click to expand...

Congress is proposing to impeach the presdient.
Its not clear why you think a president has to accept that.
 
Athanasius68 said:
So then why is Congress proposing to impeach Trump because the president wanted to investigate H. Biden? Ought it not work both ways? Shouldn't the House committees have been happy to work with the president to understand why H Biden received the job he received shortly after his father was made pointman on Obama Admin Ukraine policy?
Click to expand...

Is that a serious question? If Hunter Biden needs to be investigated, Trumlp has the entire executive bureaucracy at his disposal.
 
Nalu said:
Is that a serious question? If Hunter Biden needs to be investigated, Trumlp has the entire executive bureaucracy at his disposal.
Click to expand...

But not in Ukraine. They would need the assistance of that country.
 
Mach said:
They will vote on this in Judiciary later this week, before it's potentially brought to a full House vote.

Democrats introduce two articles of impeachment against Trump - CNNPolitics

I thought Schiff's speech was well done and compelling at the end. Of course, I believe part of the country figures this is all true...but as long as Trump also gives them something in the deal, it's OK.
Click to expand...

And what would that be, this gift of Trump's? A booming economy, low unemployment, finally an administration who will stand up to the tyrants? DONE!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom