• 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!

Trumps Slither to Authoritariansim

bubbabgone said:
There needs to be a statute that covers it.
Click to expand...

Where in the Constitution does it state that?

What does your obsession with statutory law have to do with impeachment in the first place?
 
haymarket said:
Where in the Constitution does it state that?

What does your obsession with statutory law have to do with impeachment in the first place?
Click to expand...

Come back when you can quote a Republican Senator saying Trump broke a law.
Until you can do that you're just trying to salvage self-respect.
 
bubbabgone said:
Come back when you can quote a Republican Senator saying Trump broke a law.
Click to expand...

Already did that many many many many many times. Senator Romney voted Trump was GUILTY of the crime of Abuse of Power - something that had been previously recognized and cited in several impeachment cases before the Senate throughout their history.

Why do you keep bringing up statutory law when we are talking about impeachment?
 
haymarket said:
Already did that many many many many many times. Senator Romney voted Trump was GUILTY of the crime of Abuse of Power - something that had been previously recognized and cited in several impeachment cases before the Senate throughout their history.

Why do you keep bringing up statutory law when we are talking about impeachment?
Click to expand...

You know the whole “violating criminal law” is beyond stupid.

A violation of criminal law can only be determined by a jury, or a judge in the case of a bench trial, after a trial. Since the President apparently cannot be indicted while in office he also cannot be tried so you cannot establish a criminal violation while the President is in office which renders Impeachment useless.

Of course some would say that the Senate trial would suffice but that’s equally nonsensical. The Senate trial isn’t a criminal proceeding, it doesn’t follow anything remotely like criminal procedure and using it brand someone a criminal offender and punish them for it seems like a due process and equal protection violation to me.

The entire history of impeachment stretching back 500 or so years was about removing a ruler who abused their power to such an extent that it required their immediate removal for the sake of the realm.

It’s arguable whether Trump represents that kind of a threat to the nation. It really isn’t arguable that he needs to have violated criminal law to be removed.
 
Gaius46 said:
You know the whole “violating criminal law” is beyond stupid.

A violation of criminal law can only be determined by a jury, or a judge in the case of a bench trial, after a trial. Since the President apparently cannot be indicted while in office he also cannot be tried so you cannot establish a criminal violation while the President is in office which renders Impeachment useless.

Of course some would say that the Senate trial would suffice but that’s equally nonsensical. The Senate trial isn’t a criminal proceeding, it doesn’t follow anything remotely like criminal procedure and using it brand someone a criminal offender and punish them for it seems like a due process and equal protection violation to me.

The entire history of impeachment stretching back 500 or so years was about removing a ruler who abused their power to such an extent that it required their immediate removal for the sake of the realm.

It’s arguable whether Trump represents that kind of a threat to the nation. It really isn’t arguable that he needs to have violated criminal law to be removed.
Click to expand...

Yes- we have ample precedent for the charge of ABUSE OF POWER. That has been long ago established and sets the precedent here in the Trump charges and trial.
 
haymarket said:
Yes- we have ample precedent for the charge of ABUSE OF POWER. That has been long ago established and sets the precedent here in the Trump charges and trial.
Click to expand...

Holy moly! You're saying that state officials have committed abuse of power. No way! Really?

But aren't you the one who says that the state can do whatever it says it can do?
 
Samwise said:
Holy moly! You're saying that state officials have committed abuse of power. No way! Really?

But aren't you the one who says that the state can do whatever it says it can do?
Click to expand...

The masquerade is over.
 
haymarket said:
Already did that many many many many many times. Senator Romney voted Trump was GUILTY of the crime of Abuse of Power - something that had been previously recognized and cited in several impeachment cases before the Senate throughout their history.

Why do you keep bringing up statutory law when we are talking about impeachment?
Click to expand...

Come back when you can quote a Republican Senator saying Trump broke a law. That was your claim.
Until you can do that you're just trying to salvage self-respect.
 
bubbabgone said:
Come back when you can quote a Republican Senator saying Trump broke a law.
Click to expand...

Already did that many many times. Repubican Senator Romney of Utah voted GUILTY of abuse of power - a crime that has been previously recognized in several impeachment trials before the Senate.

But then you know that.
 
haymarket said:
Already did that many many times. Repubican Senator Romney of Utah voted GUILTY of abuse of power - a crime that has been previously recognized in several impeachment trials before the Senate.

But then you know that.
Click to expand...
Romney - "...a president can indeed commit acts against the public trust that are so egregious that while they’re not statutory crimes,..."
Come back when you can quote a Republican Senator saying Trump actually broke a law. That was your claim.
Until you can do that you're just trying to salvage self-respect.
 
bubbabgone said:
Romney - "...a president can indeed commit acts against the public trust that are so egregious that while they’re not statutory crimes,..."
Come back when you can quote a Republican Senator saying Trump actually broke a law. That was your claim.
Until you can do that you're just trying to salvage self-respect.
Click to expand...

All you are doing is chasing your tail in an endless circle of pointless repetition which has been repeatedly answered and your ideas thoroughly refuted.

Senator Romney said Trump was guilty of a crime. Period.

That proves your statement wrong.
 
haymarket said:
All you are doing is chasing your tail in an endless circle of pointless repetition which has been repeatedly answered and your ideas thoroughly refuted.

Senator Romney said Trump was guilty of a crime. Period.

That proves your statement wrong.
Click to expand...

Romney - "...a president can indeed commit acts against the public trust that are so egregious that while they’re not statutory crimes,..."
Come back when you can quote a Republican Senator saying Trump actually broke a law. That was your claim.
Period.
 
bubbabgone said:
Romney - "...a president can indeed commit acts against the public trust that are so egregious that while they’re not statutory crimes,..."
Come back when you can quote a Republican Senator saying Trump actually broke a law. That was your claim.
Period.
Click to expand...

Already did and it was Senator Romney of Utah.

But then you know that.
 
haymarket said:
Already did and it was Senator Romney of Utah.

But then you know that.
Click to expand...

Romney - "...a president can indeed commit acts against the public trust that are so egregious that while they’re not statutory crimes,..."
Produce a quote by a Republican Senator saying Trump actually broke a law ... that isn't one.
Your claim. Produce the quote.
 
bubbabgone said:
Romney - "...a president can indeed commit acts against the public trust that are so egregious that while they’re not statutory crimes,..."
Produce a quote by a Republican Senator saying Trump actually broke a law ... that isn't one.
Your claim. Produce the quote.
Click to expand...

already did that - repeatedly in many posts. This is just your own peculiar sense of reality in which ABUSE OF POWER is not a crime.
 
haymarket said:
already did that - repeatedly in many posts. This is just your own peculiar sense of reality in which ABUSE OF POWER is not a crime.
Click to expand...

No Republican Senator said Trump broke a law. You lied.
 
bubbabgone said:
No Republican Senator said Trump broke a law. You lied.
Click to expand...

Republican Senator Mitt Romney voted GULTY that Trump was guilty of abuse of power.

You would not know a lie if it proverbially bit you.

The best way to defeat anybody without having to actually speak to their argument is to destroy their credibility. If you can do that - nothing the say matters. Their facts do not matter. Their evidence does not matter. Their proof does not matter. Their argument does not matter.


This tactic is used to save you lots of work that you cannot do anyways.


The best way to destroy a persons credibility here on this site is to accuse them of being a LIAR. Get others to repeat it as often as possible. Get this false charge believed by others who are motivated by politics and differing ideology and who are also unable to actually argue their case so they resort to this shortcut method of personal destruction without foundation.


What is a difference of opinion - call that a LIE.


When your enemy comes to a different conclusion than you do - call that a LIE also.


If your opponent makes a mistake in a date or fact - call that a LIE also.


If you simply see things differently than they do - tell them they are LYING.


If their interpretation of facts or history or anything is different than your interpretation - tell them they LIE when they present their views that are different than yours.


Using the label of LIE and LIAR often and getting it accepted and repeated by your allies will save you lots of effort and work and spinning you tires getting nowhere. It is a shortcut to destroying that person even though you cannot touch their actual argument.

That is the tactic you are employing when no lie is actually involved. It is very sad to witness.
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
Republican Senator Mitt Romney voted GULTY that Trump was guilty of abuse of power.

You would not know a lie if it proverbially bit you.

The best way to defeat anybody without having to actually speak to their argument is to destroy their credibility. If you can do that - nothing the say matters. Their facts do not matter. Their evidence does not matter. Their proof does not matter. Their argument does not matter.


This tactic is used to save you lots of work that you cannot do anyways.


The best way to destroy a persons credibility here on this site is to accuse them of being a LIAR. Get others to repeat it as often as possible. Get this false charge believed by others who are motivated by politics and differing ideology and who are also unable to actually argue their case so they resort to this shortcut method of personal destruction without foundation.


What is a difference of opinion - call that a LIE.


When your enemy comes to a different conclusion than you do - call that a LIE also.


If your opponent makes a mistake in a date or fact - call that a LIE also.


If you simply see things differently than they do - tell them they are LYING.


If their interpretation of facts or history or anything is different than your interpretation - tell them they LIE when they present their views that are different than yours.


Using the label of LIE and LIAR often and getting it accepted and repeated by your allies will save you lots of effort and work and spinning you tires getting nowhere. It is a shortcut to destroying that person even though you cannot touch their actual argument.

That is the tactic you are employing when no lie is actually involved. It is very sad to witness.
Click to expand...

You told an untruth and then doubled down many times. You lied.
 
haymarket said:
And you keep on digging. Excellent.

When you hit China please get some egg roll.
Click to expand...

Did Republican Senators say Trump broke a law? No. You lied when you said they did.
 
haymarket said:
already did that - repeatedly in many posts. This is just your own peculiar sense of reality in which ABUSE OF POWER is not a crime.
Click to expand...

No power was abused, AFAIK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom