The Impeachment Thread

#34,179
#34,179
vols40 said:
It should also be noted that the above statement doesn't mean crap. Trump got what was required plus some. I'll do the math for you 46.2% or 306= 45th president of the United States.
Click to expand...
It also equals the most divisive and unpopular president in modern day history.
 
#34,180
#34,180
luthervol said:
You are so predictable.
And.........who ratified the constitution?
I think the senators, especially the many who are already uneasy with publicly sacrificing their morals to cover for Trump, are going to be reluctant to change the rules in an obvious attempt to keep Roberts from having a fairer trial.
Click to expand...

Last I heard was they were going with the same rules of the Clinton trial.

AND, there are no established rules (set by the constitution) that the senate must follow in conducting the trial so any rules they set would not be “changing the rules”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#34,181
#34,181
vols40 said:
Specific crime. Clinton was charged with specific crimes perjury suborning perjury. Nixon resigned or would have been charged with a specific crime. Abuse of power? Looking into corruption in a nation and a new president whose country is known for corruption? A politician of 40 plus years can not be guilty of corruption? But a guy with less than 3 years political experience must be corrupt? Say that again to yourself and hear how stupid that sounds. If we follow your logic to it's conclusion then Hunter should throw his hat in the ring for president and Senate Republicans can't call him as a witness? Again read that logic out loud to yourself. Abuse of power... Next level of intellectual light weights. GTFOH if we want the Dem talking points there is CNN and MSNBC for that.
Click to expand...
One of the articles of impeachment against Nixon was also Abuse of Power. Trump wasn't interested in rooting out corruption in the Ukraine. He was only interested in President Zelensky announcing an investigation into the Bidens... in order to damage Joe Biden politically.
 
#34,184
#34,184
hog88 said:
If it’s the senate who authorizes his power by the rules they pass they can at any time alter or strip him of any power they granted him.

If someone of some party is granting you authority/power it’s not you that has the authority/power it’s the people/person that gave it to you that has the power. How do you not understand this?
Click to expand...
The presiding officer is charged with maintaining order and decorum, recognizing members to speak, and interpreting the Senate's rules, practices, and precedents.

You're not making a good case for the presiding officer to be handicapped by the senate majority. I didn't pay much attention to the last impeachment to get the nuances of the Presiding officers roll. It will be interesting to see how it play out when a President actually needs to be removed from office.
 
#34,185
#34,185
hog88 said:
If it’s the senate who authorizes his power by the rules they pass they can at any time alter or strip him of any power they granted him.
Click to expand...
hog88 said:
Last I heard was they were going with the same rules of the Clinton trial.

AND, there are no established rules (set by the constitution) that the senate must follow in conducting the trial so any rules they set would not be “changing the rules”.
Click to expand...
Alter, change.....same thing.
Once you start contradicting yourself, you know you're talking in circles.
 
#34,187
#34,187
hog88 said:
If it’s the senate who authorizes his power by the rules they pass they can at any time alter or strip him of any power they granted him.

If someone of some party is granting you authority/power it’s not you that has the authority/power it’s the people/person that gave it to you that has the power. How do you not understand this?
Click to expand...
The Constitution does not allow for the stripping of his power. His power is inherent to the process. They cannot replace him without impeaching him. That is just my take.
 
#34,188
#34,188
Mick said:
The Constitution does not allow for the stripping of his power. His power is inherent to the process. They cannot replace him without impeaching him. That is just my take.
Click to expand...
No they can’t replace him. But they can vote to change the rules if they don’t like a decision he makes. Again the Senate sets the rules. He is the arbiter of challenges to those rules.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vols40
#34,189
#34,189
Orange defense said:
Once again, Trump proves these guys all wrong, and the backtracks of lies on them and the demon raps.
Click to expand...
How do you explain the e-mail from Sekulow to Dowd? It clearly shows that Trump had discussed Parnas's legal representation with Sekulow. The only thing it proved is that Donald Trump is a flat out liar.
 
#34,190
#34,190
BowlBrother85 said:
Not following you at all... the percentage who vote Democratic regardless of the candidate, is actually larger. It's about 45%, but it's more concentrated in our nation's largest cities. I simply disagree with the last sentence and that has everything to do with Trump's character. It will not be hard to convince independents that Trump is a liar, and unfit to lead the country for a 2nd term. Finally, I would point to Trump's approval ratings on Real Clear Politics. In spite of having a strong economy to promote, Trump's Real Clear Politics average approval rating has still never been above the 46.2% that he was elected with. Trump has a low ceiling because he has failed to expand his base of support beyond the people who voted for him in 2016. That has everything to do with his character and morals (or lack thereof). He is a uniquely weak candidate in that regard. No other incumbent President with such a favorable economy would be below 50%.
Click to expand...

RCP who got 2016 election wrong.
 
#34,191
#34,191
volfanhill said:
No they can’t replace him. But they can vote to change the rules if they don’t like a decision he makes. Again the Senate sets the rules. He is the arbiter of challenges to those rules.
Click to expand...
They are not going to set rules and then change them to undermine Roberts. Many are already sick of having to act like they support Trump. Most would love nothing more than to be rid of Trump without having to sacrifice their own career.
 
#34,195
#34,195
luthervol said:
They are not going to set rules and then change them to undermine Roberts. Many are already sick of having to act like they support Trump. Most would love nothing more than to be rid of Trump without having to sacrifice their own career.
Click to expand...

You sure are talking for a lot of senators right here . You getting some text messages that the rest of the country isn’t ? Who are these “ many “ you speak of ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#34,196
#34,196
vols40 said:
RCP who got 2016 election wrong.
Click to expand...
RCP is obviously not just one poll.... it's the composite of several and the best way I know to account for an outlier. Look, you can point to 2016 as many times as you want, polls will be right more than they will be wrong. They were spot on in 2008 and 2012. I will always prefer they show my candidate with a lead.
 
#34,198
#34,198
Mick said:
The Constitution does not allow for the stripping of his power. His power is inherent to the process. They cannot replace him without impeaching him. That is just my take.
Click to expand...

Correct, they cannot replace Roberts without impeaching and convicting him. But what you continue to ignore is that during the impeachment trial, the only authority/power he has is what the senate grants him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and vols40
#34,199
#34,199
newarkvol said:
"Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law."

The truth is worse. The funds were not withheld for a policy reason, but for the personal, corrupt gain of "Drump Quid Pro Quo," who tried to clumsily bribe and extort his way in a second election.

G.A.O. Report Says Trump Administration Broke Law in Withholding Ukraine Aid
Click to expand...

Then why are the words Quid pro quo nor bribery not in the articles of impeachment ? And they said Obama broke the law with the deserter Burgdohl and nothing happened
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top