Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How was it a failure when Trump was IMPEACHED? Trump being IMPEACHED will go down in the record books as the 3rd President to be IMPEACHED. He will always be remember as being IMPEACHED!
And so will every single president from now on. Whenever we get a new president, people will be openly discussing impeachment before the polls even are closed and the votes are tallied.
Trump will go down in history for having the first hoax impeachment. I’m sure he doesn’t mind
Trump is a un-indicted co-conspirator with his lawyer Cohen and should be sharing a cell. The office is saving Trump.
Trump is a financial fraud and has committed many white collar crimes. The last 2 are:
1. Trump U- fined $35 million paid in 2017 after being in office. The office is saving Trump.
2. DJT Foundation: Fined $2 million just paid last week. Trump accepted money and used it for personal gain. Even transferring to his campaign. The office is again saving Trump.
Trump has other's in his past as well as contact and traveling with Jeffery Epstein the pedophile king. Sleeping with a porn star as his youngest was born. Attacking other woman over time.
Trump a crook who is not an honest man, has no character or morals.
Then the abuse of a low class NYC mob want-a-be by trying to bribe a foreign nation to interfere in our election.
The outright obstruction of Congress.
So Trump was Impeached and the Senate should remove him.
This House has seriously damaged the impeachment process. I'm afraid it will become the norm.
The democrats should have held their impeachment trial in Las Vegas with the rest of the comics, the theatrics, the melodrama, and the failed gamblers.
Impeachment is Constitutional, how has the House violated the Constitution?
They all take an oath of office "to support & defend the Constitution".
I'll break it down for you. The Constitution authorizes impeachment for treason, bribery, and high crimes or misdemeanors. NOTHING that the Democrats charged the president with is covered by Constitution.
Abuse of power isn't a high crime or misdemeanor (either at common law or via statute) and the obstruction charge is a joke. The only problem is that the federal courts will not hear an impeachment challenge as they view it as a purely political process.
Note, Pelosi and her lap dogs blabbered on about how the president committed "bribery," but they didn't charge him with that as they knew it was a crock of ****.
Last edited by prospectheightsresident; 12-26-2019 at 05:56 PM..
I'll break it down for you. The Constitution authorizes impeachment for treason, bribery, and high crimes or misdemeanors. NOTHING that the Democrats charged the president with is covered by Constitution.
Abuse of power isn't a high crime or misdemeanor (either at common law or via statute) and the obstruction charge is a joke.
These are not legal or Constitution-based arguments & were easily rebutted during the hearing:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trump and the Meaning of Impeachment: My Testimony Before Congress by Noah Feldman
The framers provided for impeachment of the president because they wanted the president, unlike the king, to be controlled by law, and because they feared that a president might abuse the power of his office to gain personal advantage, corrupt the electoral process, and keep himself in office.
“High crimes and misdemeanors” are abuses of power and public trust connected to the office of the presidency.
On the basis of the testimony presented to the House Intelligence Committee, President Trump has committed impeachable high crimes and misdemeanors by corruptly abusing the office of the presidency. Specifically, President Trump abused his office by corruptly soliciting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate his political rivals in order to gain personal advantage, including in the 2020 presidential election. https://www.nybooks.com/articles/201...f-impeachment/
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident
The only problem is that the federal courts will not hear an impeachment challenge as they view it as a purely political process.
What is an "impeachment challenge"? Does the Constitution provide for such a thing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident
Note, Pelosi and her lap dogs blabbered on about how the president committed "bribery," but they didn't charge him with that as they knew it was a crock of ****.
The White House presented no defense or rebuttal of the key findings of facts presented. How is that Ms. Pelosi's problem?
Ardent anti-Trump columnist for the WSJ Peggy Noonan has a way with words and is demonstrating it on the "Meet the Press" roundtable yesterday. She correctly observed that this impeachment exercise does not feel like the historically dramatic and grave event that one would expect it to be because of how blatantly partisan and politically motivated is seemed to be.
She believes that history will remember President Trump's Impeachment as "Politics by other means".
In other words, this has been a politically contrived abuse of power by the Democrats - as anyone who is not a die-hard partisan TDS afflicted anti-Trumper will realize.
This is a damning indictment of the Democrats by Peggy Noonan, the former Reagan speechwriter. It is also correct and likely to stick.
It sounds like Ms. Noonan 'changed her tune' since November although just slightly. It seems to me she should at least be a tad upset that his defenders have no defense?
Quote:
Look, the case has been made. Almost everything in the impeachment hearings this week fleshed out and backed up the charge that President Trump muscled Ukraine for political gain. The pending question is what precisely the House and its Democratic majority will decide to include in the articles of impeachment, what statutes or standards they will assert the president violated.
Trump’s Defenders Have No Defense
Witnesses were uneven, but even his closest allies don’t try to deny he did what he’s accused of doing.
These are not legal or Constitution-based arguments & were easily rebutted during the hearing
Those are legal and Constitutional arguments. The framers have impeachment as a means to hold a lawless president in check/serve as the starting process for removal. But the Framers laid out the foundation for such a process. That is impeachment is authorized for bribery, treason, and high crimes or misdemeanors. You only need to look to the text of the Constitution for the answer, not some law professor trying to get into the heads of the many founders. Again, the text speaks for itself. It is not for the House to go outside of the text of the Constitution because they feel like it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest
What is an "impeachment challenge"? Does the Constitution provide for such a thing?
I was referring to a judicial challenge alleging that the House is not adhering to the text of the Constitution with their impeachment effort. But, as the Supreme Court has previously held, impeachment and proceeding Senate impeachment trials are purely political (not judicial) processes. Thus, if the House blatantly violates the text of the Constitution regarding impeachment, there is nothing that the courts can do about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest
The White House presented no defense or rebuttal of the key findings of facts presented. How is that Ms. Pelosi's problem?
The burden of proof is on the prosecution, which the House effectively is. The fact that the White House offered no rebuttal to anything presented doesn't change this calculus. I'm curious to know what "key findings of facts presented" you are referring to as the "bombshell" testimony consisted of opinion of what people thought the president was doing. Sorry, that's not good enough and doesn't pass the laugh test.
And so will every single president from now on. Whenever we get a new president, people will be openly discussing impeachment before the polls even are closed and the votes are tallied.
Trump will go down in history for having the first hoax impeachment. I’m sure he doesn’t mind
You can't impeach a president for winning an election. If he hadn't abused his power, he wouldn't have been impeached. It's pretty simple really. BTW, Trump is plenty upset about being impeached if his tweets are any indication. He can't seem to get it off his mind. Shame he can't just enjoy his family and the holidays.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
