• 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!

2 GOP senators say McConnell will move to acquit Trump, not merely dismiss charges

lurchadams said:
"You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if this body determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role. Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office" - Lindsey Graham, arguing the case to impeach Clinton - 1999.

Like all the cowardly GOP elected officials, Graham is a two-faced coward.
Click to expand...

Seriously? The difference is that Clinton was proven guilty of 2 crimes; Perjury and Obstruction of Justice. Trump hasn't even been charged with a crime.
And to your "2 faced coward" point:
“It’s about a punishment searching for a crime that doesn’t exist,” she continued, adding that the impeachment was a “hatchet job,” aka a witch hunt. - Nancy Pelosi
"An impeachment of a President is an undoing of a National Election” - Jerry Nadler
 
DiAnna said:
Yep, but they've already been to court, won their case, won their appeal, and the GOP then went to SCOTUS, where it will languish for weeks and/or months. The GOP made it clear that every single issue would be appealed all the way to SCOTUS, which was just a time-sink to drag the entire process through 2020 and into the actual election process. That, of course, leaves Trump free to continue Obstructing Congress and Abusing his Power for another ten months.
Click to expand...

Could be for the best. Impeachment past the house is never going to happen. I hope Trump thinks he is safe until after 2020 election. I don't want Trump to step down at the 11th hour so Pence can pardon him. Or pardon himself. I want him to be charged with real crimes, not just political ones. He needs to be in prison for the last of his years.
 
Michael Cole said:
Credibility? You think the Supreme Court is going to hear a case to determine credibility? Kennedy's acid is getting around. :)

Your reasoning is peculiar. Because the FBI abused its power, the president doesn't have to comply with lawful requests from Congress. Is that it?

By the same abstract "reasoning," I could claim that because Blagojevich is in prison, no one in the state of Illinois can ever again be arrested, for anything, because, you know, who would give credibility to the whole sham?
Click to expand...

POTUS can claim executive privilege, and congress may appeal to the courts. You may not like it, but that's law.
Your Blagojevich analogy is apples and oranges.
 
mrdeltoid said:
Seriously? The difference is that Clinton was proven guilty of 2 crimes; Perjury and Obstruction of Justice. Trump hasn't even been charged with a crime.
And to your "2 faced coward" point:
“It’s about a punishment searching for a crime that doesn’t exist,” she continued, adding that the impeachment was a “hatchet job,” aka a witch hunt. - Nancy Pelosi
"An impeachment of a President is an undoing of a National Election” - Jerry Nadler
Click to expand...
My God.

You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic...

And your reply is "The difference is that Clinton was proven guilty of 2 crimes?"

That makes absolutely no sense.
 
Michael Cole said:
Historically, the Executive has never claimed absolute immunity/privilege. This is the only reason there aren't any statutory crimes included in the articles.
Click to expand...

There aren't any crimes in the articles because there is no evidence of a crime. If the dems had any, you can bet it would be included. BTW, Trump hasn't claimed "absolute immunity".
 
mrdeltoid said:
There aren't any crimes in the articles because there is no evidence of a crime. If the dems had any, you can bet it would be included. BTW, Trump hasn't claimed "absolute immunity".
Click to expand...
Yes he has. The ruling was only a few weeks ago. The judge lambasted Trump and his attorneys in a lengthy decision - hundreds of pages.

There is plenty of evidence of many crimes, but the kind of direct evidence you're looking for is being withheld by Trump. If you were seriously interested in truth, you'd be demanding the WH provide the documents and testimony requested by Congress
 
Michael Cole said:
C'mon, you can't be this naïve. Trump has lost every single case. His claim of absolute privilege is a mockery of our republic. Absolute privilege does not exist. Anyone who stayed awake in civics class knows this. No judge will ever rule in Trump's favor regarding this issue. The appeals are tactical; and I know you're not so innocent to believe that Trump has some deep concern for the rule of law.
Click to expand...

My post is accurate. I don't have to divine his motive, to state the law. If you don't like it, start a movement to change it. All 17 so called "mistakes" went against POTUS, and every inference drawn by you and everybody else from the democrat party as to his motive, is nefarious. If you think that is a coincidence, I'm not the one being naïve. Also, the dems are claiming he should be impeached for what he "may do", in the future. lol
 
mrdeltoid said:
POTUS can claim executive privilege, and congress may appeal to the courts. You may not like it, but that's law.
Your Blagojevich analogy is apples and oranges.
Click to expand...

You should look up executive privilege. It doesn't mean what you apparently think it means.

Regardless, the post you're responding to had nothing to do with executive privilege, so my analogy holds strong, as a rock.
 
mrdeltoid said:
My post is accurate. I don't have to divine his motive, to state the law. If you don't like it, start a movement to change it. All 17 so called "mistakes" went against POTUS, and every inference drawn by you and everybody else from the democrat party as to his motive, is nefarious. If you think that is a coincidence, I'm not the one being naïve.
Click to expand...

LOL. Yeah buddy. It's much easier to write, "I'm right and you're wrong." Save yourself some time, weenie. LOL.
 
mrdeltoid said:
Seriously? The difference is that Clinton was proven guilty of 2 crimes; Perjury and Obstruction of Justice. Trump hasn't even been charged with a crime.
And to your "2 faced coward" point:
“It’s about a punishment searching for a crime that doesn’t exist,” she continued, adding that the impeachment was a “hatchet job,” aka a witch hunt. - Nancy Pelosi
"An impeachment of a President is an undoing of a National Election” - Jerry Nadler
Click to expand...

FYI, Clinton was acquitted on the charges of perjury to a grand jury and obstruction of justice. I think a rational person would say he was absolutely guilty of perjury. A rational person would also have to accept the case for obstruction of justice is fairly muddled. I supported his removal both then and now, but I understand the argument that that because perjury in a personal matter was not part of his official duties that it's not germane to impeachment

Trump is being impeached for two of the three articles Nixon was impeached for. Nixon withheld some information from congress, Trump withheld all. Why do we have the budget control act of 74? Because Nixon impounded appropriated funds. The parallels are striking.

You seem like a pretty rational Trump defender. So I think it's completely fair to argue that the Democrats haven't proven their case. And feel free to argue that the actions Trump took are properly within presidential powers. But you can't argue that what we're talking about here is some novel attack by the Democrats against the president. It's what Nixon was accused of, only worse.
 
Torus34 said:
Both political parties, it appears, are interested in ending this phase [the impeachment brouhaha] of their existential warfare. The battle will shift to another arena.

Meanwhile, public confidence in our American institutions apparently continues to erode. Perhaps this is the way some democracies end -- not with a bang, but a whimper.

I have lived through what, arguably, was America's finest hour. At the end of WWII, we stood astride the world militarily. We could have demanded and enforced a Pax Americana. We chose not to, and instead helped other countries, including our vanquished enemies, recover from the war.
Click to expand...

Great point, true regarding our WWII adversaries but only partially true elsewhere. US also supported tyranny in Latin America.
 
mrdeltoid said:
Seriously? The difference is that Clinton was proven guilty of 2 crimes; Perjury and Obstruction of Justice. Trump hasn't even been charged with a crime.
And to your "2 faced coward" point:
“It’s about a punishment searching for a crime that doesn’t exist,” she continued, adding that the impeachment was a “hatchet job,” aka a witch hunt. - Nancy Pelosi
"An impeachment of a President is an undoing of a National Election” - Jerry Nadler
Click to expand...

Not sure what you're on about. clinton had articles impeachment filed against him as will trump. And like clinton, there will be a senate trial where trump will be acquitted by the criminally, cowardly , GOP Senate.

As far is Pelosi and Nadler's statements re clinton, would you might shooting me those links? I've tried googling to confirm them and can't find them. Thanks.
 
What if...? said:
Special case with a president.

A drug dealer or child pornographer doesn't get to defy a search warrant "Nope, can't come in here!".

I don't think a private citizen can just defy a subpoeana either. Take it all the way to the supreme court, for example.
Click to expand...

You're missing something here...a search warrant gets approved by a judge so the courts are involved and anyone can most certainly challenge a subpoena in court.
 
US&THEM said:
No it is stonewalling. Impeachment is solely the responsibility of the Congress. Trump is doing what he has always done, sue and try to wait out the true victims of his nonsense.
Click to expand...

That's a bunch of words just to say you agree with my statement.
 
Fishking said:
That's a bunch of words just to say you agree with my statement.
Click to expand...

Not exactly everyone who voted for Trump is getting exactly who has been, a guy who only worries about himself.
 
Fletch said:
Totally false and stupid. You really need to stop the projection and the mindless repetition of left wing media talking points.
Click to expand...

It's a fact we haven't seen all the evidence.

It's a fact Trump has blocked the House from seeing all the evidence, and has refused to allow important witnesses to testify, and has refused to allow documents to be handed over.

It's obvious you agree with Trump's strategy, otherwise, you wouldn't be putting forward the mindless repetition of right-wing talking points.

Was I wrong? Do you think people like Rudy, Pompeo, Bolton, and Mulvaney should testify?
 
US&THEM said:
Not exactly everyone who voted for Trump is getting exactly who has been, a guy who only worries about himself.
Click to expand...

Which isn't obstruction of Congress. Again, thanks for agreeing with me.
 
Fishking said:
Which isn't obstruction of Congress. Again, thanks for agreeing with me.
Click to expand...

What is obstruction in your eyes? Trump has not agreed or cooperated with any subpoena or requests.
 
mrdeltoid said:
The constitution states impeachment would remedy “ Treason, or other high crimes and misdemeanors “. Bribery is a crime.Treason is a crime. Obstruction of justice is a crime. Obstruction of Congress is not a crime. With out connection to a crime, it doesn’t rise to the level of impeachment. BTW, appealing subpoena from one branch to another to the court, is not obstruction of justice. The 3 branches are co-equal. Disputes between branches may be referred to the court. If the court denies the appeal, then they must cooperate with the subpoena.
Click to expand...
At the constitutional convention this was argued in detail. During those times high crimes and misdemeanors was well known and included more than just statutory crimes. It also includes abuse of power and actions that abuse the office. Being in league with a foreign power to aid in reelection was an actual example.
 
US&THEM said:
What is obstruction in your eyes? Trump has not agreed or cooperated with any subpoena or requests.
Click to expand...

Refusing a court order after the process has run it's course. So long as the next higher court accepts the case it will keep on going unresolved until the Supreme Court. If the next higher court refuses to accept the case then the last ruling stands. This isn't a new or shocking process. This is standard and very basic governmental systems at work here.
 
Fishking said:
Again, using the courts is not obstruction. That's proper procedure.
Click to expand...

Trump is saying that he determined the impeachment is illegitimate and he won’t comply. Problem is the president doesn’t get to decide his own impeachment. The constitution is clear: the House has sole power of impeachment.

As such, Trump shouldn’t be unduly enriched by denying the very evidence that would prove his misdeeds.

Sane people know that if the evidence favored Trump, he’d provide it. We can thus presume it hurts his case.
 
Fishking said:
Refusing a court order after the process has run it's course. So long as the next higher court accepts the case it will keep on going unresolved until the Supreme Court. If the next higher court refuses to accept the case then the last ruling stands. This isn't a new or shocking process. This is standard and very basic governmental systems at work here.
Click to expand...

Article 1 Section of the Constitution disagrees with your argument. Congress has SOLE POWER TO IMPEACH.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
News flash... yes they have been busy! Yup they have been very busy! And don't forget the Supreme court! :peace

Almost 30 Percent Of All U.S. Circuit Judges Are Now Trump Appointees
Sen. Mitch McConnell's new motto, “Leave no vacancy behind," has stacked the federal judiciary with young Trump-appointed judges.

Almost Thirty Percent Of All U.S. Circuit Judges Are Now Trump Appointees
Click to expand...
They have appointed 50 Circuit Judges so far in 3 year And the Obama administration appointed 55 in 8 years. Trump has at least one more year and likely 5 years.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom