Democrats introduce two articles of impeachment against Trump

[Erod]

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.

A little pre-Christmas gift for all the people who don't believe in Jesus.

LOL

This is actually the greatest gift you could hand Republicans. This cements Trump's re-election. Even a big number of people in your own party don't support this.

 

[Mycroft]

Face the facts my conservative Trumpster Diver, Your cult leader is being impeached. Elections have consequences.:2wave:

"being impeached" means nothing to Trump.

The House Dems going through with this impeachment on flimsy grounds means everything.

 

[jimbo]

I’m not sure they could have picked two weaker offenses than what they did. Honestly, I think Obstruction of Congress is a non-starter if you support the concept of co-equal branches of government and separation of powers. If allowed to stand, that would set the precedent for future administrations that they have to do what Congress demands or be impeached. I don’t want an imperial presidency, but I certainly don’t want an imperial clown car, either.

If that was their best case, I think they came up short.

I think it is, and I think they did.

In the process, they screwed their chances in 2020. Impeachment as a tool to overturn legitimate elections cannot be allowed to happen.

 

[jimbo]

Impeachment relies on an informed electorate. “Clinton was impeached for a B.J.” No he was not. He was impeached for lying to a Grand Jury.

Trumps charges are nothing burgers in the minds of the majority of people, just like Bills B.J., except Bill lied to a G.J. Trump pissed of the bureaucracy of the deep state.

Pissing on this bureaucracy only enhances President Trump.

 

[dobieg]

The bribery/extortion is included in the Abuse of Power article. That's what the whole thing is about. But then, Hannity said it didn't happen, so that's all you can understand.

Sniffle, are we a little upset our little impeachment gambit fell flat so we have to make things up?


Point out 'Bribery' in the articles of impeachment,

 

[dobieg]

Trump has to sitting in his office with his aides laughing their asses off at this weak ass ****.


Good Lord, all this hoopla and this is the best those whiny assed liberals could come up with? Obstructing Congress?


I've been having a good laugh all morning.

 

[Moon]

I think it is, and I think they did.

In the process, they screwed their chances in 2020. Impeachment as a tool to overturn legitimate elections cannot be allowed to happen.

We’ll see about the election, it’s way too early to tell what’s going to happen.

 

[Moon]

Trump has to sitting in his office with his aides laughing their asses off at this weak ass ****.


Good Lord, all this hoopla and this is the best those whiny assed liberals could come up with? Obstructing Congress?


I've been having a good laugh all morning.

Regardless of what happens now, Trump is, at the bare minimum, making questionable decisions and comments when it comes to these activities. If he really intends to “drain the swamp” he needs to stop acting so comfortable in the slime.

 

[Grand Mal]

Impeachment relies on an informed electorate. “Clinton was impeached for a B.J.” No he was not. He was impeached for lying to a Grand Jury.

Trumps charges are nothing burgers in the minds of the majority of people, just like Bills B.J., except Bill lied to a G.J. Trump pissed of the bureaucracy of the deep state.

Are you an example of an informed electorate, telling us Trump will be impeached for pissing off the deep state?
Thanks. I love irony.

 

[CaughtInThe]

I’m not sure they could have picked two weaker offenses than what they did. Honestly, I think Obstruction of Congress is a non-starter if you support the concept of co-equal branches of government and separation of powers. If allowed to stand, that would set the precedent for future administrations that they have to do what Congress demands or be impeached. I don’t want an imperial presidency, but I certainly don’t want an imperial clown car, either.

If that was their best case, I think they came up short.

damn. that sounds like what a king's court would say. or a mafia's legal representatives.

 

[Acadia]

A little pre-Christmas gift for all the people who don't believe in Jesus.

LOL

This is actually the greatest gift you could hand Republicans. This cements Trump's re-election. Even a big number of people in your own party don't support this.

These things usually wind up being a gift. Kavanaugh witch hunt? Gift. Wrapped with a bow, even.


Big bow.

Huge.

 

[Moon]

damn. that sounds like what a king's court would say. or a mafia's legal representatives.

Damn, what a nonsensical post. Just trying to fluff your post count today?

 

[Acadia]

Trump has to sitting in his office with his aides laughing their asses off at this weak ass ****.


Good Lord, all this hoopla and this is the best those whiny assed liberals could come up with? Obstructing Congress?


I've been having a good laugh all morning.

The words "weak ass" modify ****.


Just being a supercilious Democrat lawyer:lamo

 

[Acadia]

Trump has to sitting in his office with his aides laughing their asses off at this weak ass ****.


Good Lord, all this hoopla and this is the best those whiny assed liberals could come up with? Obstructing Congress?


I've been having a good laugh all morning.

Those Dems on the stage this morning had their serious, game faces on, but I got the sense they really felt defeated and wanted to exit asap.

 

[CaughtInThe]

You need to go back and retake your civics class their buddy. Each branch of government exists for a specific purpose. One of the core purposes for Congress is the power of oversight into the Executive Branch. If the Executive Branch is blocking Congress from doing what it is specifically designed to do they are attempting to take power away from the Legislative branch and consolidate it into the Executive which is a massive abuse of power that requires the President's removal.

This. A thousand times.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Yes, the Democrats most certainly will, because Donald Trump is very very clearly guilty of all the crimes they have charged him with and then some. When a President is guilty of egregious abuses of power, particularly using that power in attempt to undermine our Democracy you don't take a poll of registered voters to decide if it's okay to remove him. You do your job and remove him.

If the Senate doesn't convict then it's the Democratic Nominees job to use the debate stage and the attention given to the campaign to brow beat Senate Republicans for their lawlessness and insure Democrats take back the Senate as well as the White House.

This. A thousand more times.

Some people are arguing that Congress shouldn't do it's job, when a President is corrupt/obstructs justice/etc, because of something, something parties, haircuts, TV and the cost of tea in Moscow.

 

[Grand Mal]

I’m not sure they could have picked two weaker offenses than what they did. Honestly, I think Obstruction of Congress is a non-starter if you support the concept of co-equal branches of government and separation of powers. If allowed to stand, that would set the precedent for future administrations that they have to do what Congress demands or be impeached. I don’t want an imperial presidency, but I certainly don’t want an imperial clown car, either.

If that was their best case, I think they came up short.

If you support the concept of co-equal branches of government and separation of powers, you have to support the concept of each branch not interfering in another branch exercising It's powers. Obstruction of Congress is only a non-starter if you think the President is senior to the legislative and judicial branches.
Trump has already demonstrated that he doesn't hesitate to interfere in the other branchs. Maybe It's time he was called on it.

 

[ludin]

I’m not sure they could have picked two weaker offenses than what they did. Honestly, I think Obstruction of Congress is a non-starter if you support the concept of co-equal branches of government and separation of powers. If allowed to stand, that would set the precedent for future administrations that they have to do what Congress demands or be impeached. I don’t want an imperial presidency, but I certainly don’t want an imperial clown car, either.

If that was their best case, I think they came up short.

100% correct. There is no such thing as obstruction of Congrass. It is another made up law that doesn't exist anywhere in any statute.

You are correct that they are co-equal. If the president can obstruct congress then the congress can be charged with the same thing g for not doing exactly what the president wants.

Abuse of power is meaningless nonsense.
This means that anytime the president doesn't do what congress thinks he can be charged with abuse of power.

You are right. You notice that they didn't charge him with bribery or extortion or quid pro quo or anything else that they were claiming that are actual impeachment qualifications.

New buzz words from focus groups is where they got their impeachment charges.

 

[Moon]

If you support the concept of co-equal branches of government and separation of powers, you have to support the concept of each branch not interfering in another branch exercising It's powers. Obstruction of Congress is only a non-starter if you think the President is senior to the legislative and judicial branches.
Trump has already demonstrated that he doesn't hesitate to interfere in the other branchs. Maybe It's time he was called on it.

When one branch disagrees with another, there are basically two ways to sort it out. The first is through negotiation which happened during previous disputes and impeachment proceedings, but was never going to be an option this time due to the animosity between the parties, which both are responsible for.

The second is through the courts, which Congress chose not to thoroughly pursue.

I think it’s a non-starter because Congress did not work through the process. As I said, if this stands, that places Congress in a position far superior to the Executive, and that would be disastrous for our form of government. I don’t want any Congress to be able to run roughshod over any future President because of the low bar set by this article of impeachment.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Damn, what a nonsensical post. Just trying to fluff your post count today?

what are you talking about? you made the argument that our Executive Branch is above oversight by our Congress. That's like a monarchy and what a King's supporters would argue.

it's also not a bad way for a Mob Boss' attorney to get a case thrown out (argue that the investigators/prosecutors don't have jurisdiction).

so, bravo. i guess.

 

[Deuce]

I’m not sure they could have picked two weaker offenses than what they did. Honestly, I think Obstruction of Congress is a non-starter if you support the concept of co-equal branches of government and separation of powers. If allowed to stand, that would set the precedent for future administrations that they have to do what Congress demands or be impeached. I don’t want an imperial presidency, but I certainly don’t want an imperial clown car, either.

If that was their best case, I think they came up short.

No, it would set the precedent that Congress is a co-equal branch and that’s why you can’t deliberately obstruct their investigations of a crime.

 

[Moon]

what are you talking about? you made the argument that our Executive Branch is above oversight by our Congress. That's like a monarchy and what a King's supporters would argue.

it's also not a bad way for a Mob Boss' attorney to get a case thrown out (argue that the investigators/prosecutors don't have jurisdiction).

so, bravo. i guess.

No, that’s not what I said.

 

[Deuce]

When one branch disagrees with another, there are basically two ways to sort it out. The first is through negotiation which happened during previous disputes and impeachment proceedings, but was never going to be an option this time due to the animosity between the parties, which both are responsible for.

The second is through the courts, which Congress chose not to thoroughly pursue.

I think it’s a non-starter because Congress did not work through the process. As I said, if this stands, that places Congress in a position far superior to the Executive, and that would be disastrous for our form of government. I don’t want any Congress to be able to run roughshod over any future President because of the low bar set by this article of impeachment.

Calling this “disagreement between branches” is absurd.

 

[Mithros]

I’m not sure they could have picked two weaker offenses than what they did. Honestly, I think Obstruction of Congress is a non-starter if you support the concept of co-equal branches of government and separation of powers. If allowed to stand, that would set the precedent for future administrations that they have to do what Congress demands or be impeached. I don’t want an imperial presidency, but I certainly don’t want an imperial clown car, either.

If that was their best case, I think they came up short.

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.

Ambition tempers ambition. Checks and balances only work so long as each branch has leverage over the other.

 

[mrdeltoid]

This “ impeachment “ is a partisan exercise to effect the 2020 election. There were 7 republicans in the judiciary committee that voted to impeach Nixon, so he resigned. There are no republicans in favor of impeachment of Trump, and 2 Democrats that voted with republicans. There’s no chance the senate will convict. This, along with the indictments that Durhams probe will bring, will ensure Trumps re-election.