• 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

Obscurity said:
Frankly, do you see any other way for this to be handled in an impartial way? What if the Senate willingly -voted- for this?
Click to expand...

Not sure how you'd get the Senate to agree on anything nowadays, but what if the Senate willing voted to abolish free speech or establish a national religion? It would still be unconstitutional.
 
Oborosen said:
+

Too many people are choosing to ignore it now because of how the democrats are handling it. I'd rather they bring forward everything they can, and supply their best evidence, with all the necessary reasoning that they can manage.

The last two hearings that I was able to watch as they happened, did not really give me any hope that the democrats were going at this in the correct fashion.
Click to expand...

I find it interesting that is the claim from those people who have been unwavering supporters of Trump. no matter how stupid he acted.
 
eman623 said:
Not sure how you'd get the Senate to agree on anything nowadays, but what if the Senate willing voted to abolish free speech or establish a national religion? It would still be unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

The senate has supremacy in how it handles the trial, you do realize this, correct?
 
RAMOSS said:
I find it interesting that is the claim from those people who have been unwavering supporters of Trump. no matter how stupid he acted.
Click to expand...

Here's the problem, the left wing radicals have been trying to overturn the election results of 2016 and continue to try and find ways to divert from the failure of their candidates to sell their agenda and policies. There is way too much effort spent on Trump's rhetoric rather than Trump's results and it will be Trump's results on trial in November 2020 and that doesn't bode well for Democrats.

Right now the poll numbers are totally focused on Trump but when the Democrats nominate a candidate the tide will change as the American people will see that the alternative to Trump is much, much worse as we cannot afford Democratic socialist policies funded by only 50% of the population that actual pays Federal Income Taxes

This witch hunt will end but another will begin as that is all the Democrats have today. They have lost the issues debate and instead of Trump being a Russian agent that appears to be the Democrats supporting the Russian efforts to undermine the U.S. elections by creating doubt, chaos, and division.
 
Obscurity said:
I said grand jury. And yes, I think scotus should break the rules of impeachment and rule the two warring branches of government in contempt of the constitution.

I think an impartial jury can be assembled, and the senate can sit the **** out.

Bunch of partisan hacks. There are no heroes on either side.
Click to expand...
SCOTUS is responsible for upholding the Constitution, not shredding it. Remember all the RWers who complained about “activist judges”? SCOTUS doing as you state would make them “activist judges”.
 
Conservative said:
Here's the problem, the left wing radicals have been trying to overturn the election results of 2016 and continue to try and find ways to divert from the failure of their candidates to sell their agenda and policies. There is way too much effort spent on Trump's rhetoric rather than Trump's results and it will be Trump's results on trial in November 2020 and that doesn't bode well for Democrats.

Right now the poll numbers are totally focused on Trump but when the Democrats nominate a candidate the tide will change as the American people will see that the alternative to Trump is much, much worse as we cannot afford Democratic socialist policies funded by only 50% of the population that actual pays Federal Income Taxes

This witch hunt will end but another will begin as that is all the Democrats have today. They have lost the issues debate and instead of Trump being a Russian agent that appears to be the Democrats supporting the Russian efforts to undermine the U.S. elections by creating doubt, chaos, and division.
Click to expand...
The irony here is that this is exactly what happened in 2008 by right wing radicals against Obama. This is the state of our national politics; politically partisan radicals doing everything they can to overturn an election and seeking to cause the current President’s administration to fail.
 
Fletch said:
Have those people been subpoenaed? Have the courts determined that they must testify? Or have the democrats simply decided that they arent going to wait for the legal process to play itself out.
Click to expand...

Many of the witnesses haven't been subpoenaed because the White House and those particular witnesses have signaled they would fight it tooth and nail, so what's the point?

Also, the resolution of the McGahan case would likely force the White House to cave on the other witnesses related to the Ukraine scandal. So it's not essential to subpoena every single person and enforce every single subpoena through a lengthy legal process intended only to delay the inquiry.

Keep in mind, Trump's argument has no basis in our laws, our Constitution, our history, our tradition. It is a stupid, crazy, fascist/authoritarian legal argument that intends to put the President above the Rule of Law. And you support it because you don't care about the Constitution. You care only about the policies that you seek to promote. You are not a Libertarian. If you were a Libertarian you would be aghast at the mere assertion of absolute immunity.

Or have the democrats simply decided that they arent going to wait for the legal process to play itself out.
Click to expand...

If the Republicans joined with the Democrats and participated in the inquiry instead of blocking it they could do things to help force the White House to comply.

For instance, if the Republicans also demanded that Trump comply, Trump would be in a far weaker political position.

The fact of the matter is the Republican Party supporters the White House legal strategy.

Trump supporters like yourself support this strategy as well. I take your refusal to answer my question as tacit approval of Trump's legal strategy.
 
Rising Sun said:
SCOTUS is responsible for upholding the Constitution, not shredding it. Remember all the RWers who complained about “activist judges”? SCOTUS doing as you state would make them “activist judges”.
Click to expand...

Of course it would. But that's irrelevant. My point isn't that it can happen, simply that I believe with how partisan both sides are we can't trust any outcome.
 
Obscurity said:
Of course it would. But that's irrelevant. My point isn't that it can happen, simply that I believe with how partisan both sides are we can't trust any outcome.
Click to expand...
This isn’t the first time in our history that Congress has been so partisan. Let’s not forget there’ve been duels and beatings to death between our representatives in Washington, DC. If we’re going to fantasize about what will never happen, then I’d like to toss in “Bring back dueling, no substitutions”. Pistols or swords.

As for how to resolve the partisanship of Congress, we should take a poll in November about it. :)
 
MTAtech said:
He linked Ukrainian aid and a meeting in the WH with investigating Biden, who wasn't implicated in any wrongdoing. He then went on TV and said the Chinese should investigate too. Then, his Chief of Staff admitted it was a quid pro quo -- but that's ok.
Click to expand...

Just like he went on TV and ordered Russia to find Hillary's 30000 emails that the FBI let her destroy. I can't believe how easy it is to dupe humans into a belief, whether it be religion or politics.
 
AProudLefty said:
2 GOP senators say McConnell will move to acquit Trump, not merely dismiss charges - CNNPolitics

The plot thickens.
Click to expand...

He has to be criminally charged before he can be acquited
GOP senators aren't acquitting Trump by refusing to hold a trial in the Senate. They're refusing to play along with this latest Democrat stunt.

I get that the Democrats are desperate to shift focus away from .the IG report, but following through with a partisan impeachment process isn't going to work

According to the abysmal ratings Schiffs show trial received, Americans just aren't interested.
 
Paradoxical said:
Just like he went on TV and ordered Russia to find Hillary's 30000 emails that the FBI let her destroy. I can't believe how easy it is to dupe humans into a belief, whether it be religion or politics.
Click to expand...

You're side is the duped -- just like Trump U students. What's even worse is that you believe the Mueller report vindicated Trump. It didn't. It outlined numerous instances of Trump campaign/Russian connections. It just didn't meet the level for indictment -- mainly because, unlike in Watergate, the parties destroyed damning evidence. The report also showed obstruction of justice but Mueller couldn't do anything because the DoJ ruled that sitting presidents can't be indicted. That is hardly vindication.
 
Fenton said:
He has to be criminally charged before he can be acquited
GOP senators aren't acquitting Trump by refusing to hold a trial in the Senate. They're refusing to play along with this latest Democrat stunt.

I get that the Democrats are desperate to shift focus away from .the IG report, but following through with a partisan impeachment process isn't going to work

According to the abysmal ratings Schiffs show trial received, Americans just aren't interested.
Click to expand...

I guess when people like you only get their news from right-wing sources you didn't learn that the IG report completely refutes Trump's claim that there was an FBI conspiracy against his campaign.
 
MTAtech said:
You're side is the duped -- just like Trump U students. What's even worse is that you believe the Mueller report vindicated Trump. It didn't. It outlined numerous instances of Trump campaign/Russian connections. It just didn't meet the level for indictment -- mainly because, unlike in Watergate, the parties destroyed damning evidence. The report also showed obstruction of justice but Mueller couldn't do anything because the DoJ ruled that sitting presidents can't be indicted. That is hardly vindication.
Click to expand...

Ok, so then ask yourself, WHY wouldn't the Democrats include that in their articles of impeachment? I mean, they literally have Obstruction of Congress.....why wouldn't they put in obstruction of Justice if it was so clear?
 
sjmay said:
Ok, so then ask yourself, WHY wouldn't the Democrats include that in their articles of impeachment? I mean, they literally have Obstruction of Congress.....why wouldn't they put in obstruction of Justice if it was so clear?
Click to expand...
That was a decision the leadership made, that I' not sure I agree with. Some more liberal Democrats wanted to include in charges against the president, Russian interference in the 2016 election to help Trump defeat Hillary Clinton. Such disagreement was voiced by Judiciary Committee member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.),“the real question is whether we want to focus on a singular, discrete episode or focus on patterns of misconduct. And I do think we need to focus on patterns of misconduct, I think that the Constitution directs us to examine that.”
 
RAMOSS said:
I find it interesting that is the claim from those people who have been unwavering supporters of Trump. no matter how stupid he acted.
Click to expand...

That's not the issue. I think everyone can agree that Trump has done a lot of stupid things.

The issue here is whether (1) he did the specific things alleged by House Democrats, and (2) whether those things rise to the level that it justifies removing him from office.

In my opinion, the 'obstruction of congress' article is laughable. It should be dismissed, but I'd love to see the House managers try to justify it.
 
MTAtech said:
That was a decision the leadership made, that I' not sure I agree with. Some more liberal Democrats wanted to include in charges against the president, Russian interference in the 2016 election to help Trump defeat Hillary Clinton. Such disagreement was voiced by Judiciary Committee member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.),“the real question is whether we want to focus on a singular, discrete episode or focus on patterns of misconduct. And I do think we need to focus on patterns of misconduct, I think that the Constitution directs us to examine that.”
Click to expand...

And yet....they chose not to do that....to me, it's telling....they don't think it's the smoking gun that you think it is.....unless you are telling me that they would intentionally not put up a STRONGER argument for impeachment etc? Which makes no sense...
 
MTAtech said:
I guess when people like you only get their news from right-wing sources you didn't learn that the IG report completely refutes Trump's claim that there was an FBI conspiracy against his campaign.
Click to expand...

Lol !!
The irony. Stop watching MSNBC and CNN and go read the IG report.

THIS is what the IG report confirmed. It confirmed that the dossier was crucial and central to obtaining Page's FISA warrant.

It confirmed that the FBI wanted a FISA warrant on Page in August but FISC rejected their application. On September 19, they received the dossier and re-submitted the application with a reference to Michael Issikoffs Yahoo article.

That article came out on September 23....:lamo

It confirmed that the FBI never verified the dossier and knew several of the allegations in the dossier were bunk, but they submitted it to FISC anyway.

It confirmed that the FBI altered documents and submitted them to FISC to obtain Page's FISA warrant.

It confirmed that the FBI knew all along that the dossier was funded by the Clinton campaign.

It confirmed that the FBI didn't inform FISC of Steele's contacts with the media until a year after the last FISA application was filed.

It confirmed that the FBI used a defensive briefing to collect dirt on Trump, and it confirmed that Adam Schiff's counter memo to Nunes's memo was filled with lies

It also confirmed that Nunes's memo was accurate all along. The fact that Adam Schiff had access to the same documents Nunes had access to shows what a scum bag he is
 
MTAtech said:
You're side is the duped -- just like Trump U students. What's even worse is that you believe the Mueller report vindicated Trump. It didn't. It outlined numerous instances of Trump campaign/Russian connections. It just didn't meet the level for indictment -- mainly because, unlike in Watergate, the parties destroyed damning evidence. The report also showed obstruction of justice but Mueller couldn't do anything because the DoJ ruled that sitting presidents can't be indicted. That is hardly vindication.
Click to expand...

Stop trying to rewrite history. As biased and evil as they are, they concluded that Trump did NOT collude with Russia.
 
AProudLefty said:
2 GOP senators say McConnell will move to acquit Trump, not merely dismiss charges - CNNPolitics

The plot thickens.
Click to expand...

The "Impeachment Debate" is over:

  1. The House of Representatives WILL (essentially on a "Party Line" vote [and regardless of the evidence]) approve the "Bill of Impeachment" and send it to the Senate for trial;
    *
    and
    *
  2. The Senate WILL (essentially on a "Party Line" vote [and regardless of the evidence]) NOT vote to convict.

What that says about the state of the political climate in the United States of America I leave to you to decide.
 
Mithros said:
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.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind I didn't vote for Trump, and for selfish reasons I was hoping HRC would win. I've only gotten more strident after all this "resistance, Antifa, and constant MSM "get Trump" drum beat. It seems that Trump's fragile ego was bruised at what he feel's is the attempt to delegitimize his election. He has people in his ear telling him people in Ukraine, in this instance, and the FBI in the "Trump is a Russian asset" hoax, are pushing that narrative. Predictably, the Burisma/Biden scandal came across his desk like a wrapped Christmas gift that he couldn't resist opening. If Biden hadn't declared in April as a candidate, there wouldn't have been a "whistle blower" to begin with. For me, that's to fine of a hair to split. I supported the Nixon impeachment. I did not support the Clinton impeachment. In this case, if the "phone call" was the way Schiff read it, I would support it. I also think the dems, at least the seasoned dems regret this impeachment, and are going to loose more democrat vote in the final house vote. I'm not saying I'm right or wrong, it's all JMHO.:peace
 
RAMOSS said:
It's a matter of not wanting to complicate things. Yes, there are VERY many issues that are impeachable, but the more items on the plate, the less people will understand and be focused on. Make it overly complicated, and people will just ignore it, because it's too much to process.
Click to expand...

Indeed abuse of power and obstruction are catch-alls that if they’re smart they can illustrate with all manner of examples including Ukraine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom