Talk About Marriage banner

1 - 20 of 534 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,635 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The U. S. House of Representatives voted to impeach Donald Trump on two separate articles of impeachment involving abuse of power and obstruction of justice!

So where do you think we go from here?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Its a sham and the democrats are in a panic because he has the dirt on all of them. They just sealed his victory for 2020. They're all pedophiles and criminals. mark my words! they will all be either exposed or arrested. PAIN!!!

And this thread has nothing to do with Marriage
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
The Impeachment is ridiculous. The articles don't even allege any federal crimes were committed. Any President and future president could get impeached with their allegations. We would have endless sideshows of impeachments every time a President gets elected from a different party than the House.

And then Pelosi says she isn't going to send over the papers unless the Senate appoints hatchetmen of Democrats choosing to hold the trial. How? Why? She has no leverage to make such demands. There simply isn't a trial and he doesn't get impeached if the papers aren't sent. But I guess thats what she wants since it was never about proving a crime and removing him from office.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,186 Posts
The Impeachment is ridiculous. The articles don't even allege any federal crimes were committed. Any President and future president could get impeached with their allegations. We would have endless sideshows of impeachments every time a President gets elected from a different party than the House.
There were two charges. Perhaps you should actually read them before making the assertion that there wasn't?

And then Pelosi says she isn't going to send over the papers unless the Senate appoints hatchetmen of Democrats choosing to hold the trial. How? Why? She has no leverage to make such demands. There simply isn't a trial and he doesn't get impeached if the papers aren't sent. But I guess thats what she wants since it was never about proving a crime and removing him from office.
You have two republican senators openly admitting they will violate their oath to remain impartial on the public record to support Trump no matter what he did. Pelosi is showing she's quite the strategist with this play - Trump can remain impeached, they can continue to investigate, and the Senate can do nothing until they provide at least the pretence of a fair trial.

As to where this will go, I don't think he will be removed from office. He may even get a second term if the GOP is as insane as they are acting.

But I do think he will either stand trial when he leaves office, or flee the country - which is what I actually think will happen. He now cannot be pardoned for his crimes while in office.

The GOP is going to have to deal with that for a very long time, especially if he gets re-elected.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,061 Posts
Its a sham and the democrats are in a panic because he has the dirt on all of them. They just sealed his victory for 2020. They're all pedophiles and criminals. mark my words! they will all be either exposed or arrested. PAIN!!!

And this thread has nothing to do with Marriage
I'm a democrat and I'm not a criminal nor do I lust after underage people. That last person ousted from Congress for pedophilia was Dennis Hastert who IS a pedophile. In fact he was paying off one to stay quiet. Jim Jordan has been accused of taking a Joe Paterna role with the wrestling team at an Ohio university when has was an assistant coach. Who in the democraic party is a pedophile?

This thread was started on the politics section. You don't have to respond if you don't want to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
The Impeachment is ridiculous. The articles don't even allege any federal crimes were committed. Any President and future president could get impeached with their allegations. We would have endless sideshows of impeachments every time a President gets elected from a different party than the House.
There were two charges. Perhaps you should actually read them before making the assertion that there wasn't?


Abuse of power isn't a federal crime. Its an opinion. Any President (past or future) is possibly guilty.

Obstruction of Justice? How? House made the rules absent a court order. Its unclear what power they even have to subpoena. Besides the President has wide discretion on what he can and can't comply with for national interest. He released the transcripts, he doesn't have to help stage his own witchhunt. Again, any President can fall into this article.

I don't think Democrats want this to go to trial as long as Biden is the front runner.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,186 Posts
Abuse of power isn't a federal crime. Its an opinion. Any President (past or future) is possibly guilty.

Obstruction of Justice? How? House made the rules absent a court order. Its unclear what power they even have to subpoena. Besides the President has wide discretion on what he can and can't comply with for national interest. He released the transcripts, he doesn't have to help stage his own witchhunt. Again, any President can fall into this article.

I don't think Democrats want this to go to trial as long as Biden is the front runner.
Abuse of power, in the form of "malfeasance in office" or "official misconduct," is the commission of an unlawful act, done in an official capacity, which affects the performance of official duties. ... Abuse of power can also mean a person using the power they have for their own personal gain.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abuse_of_power


Obstruction of Congress:
Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so; or

Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—

Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1505
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Abuse of power isn't a federal crime. Its an opinion. Any President (past or future) is possibly guilty.

Obstruction of Justice? How? House made the rules absent a court order. Its unclear what power they even have to subpoena. Besides the President has wide discretion on what he can and can't comply with for national interest. He released the transcripts, he doesn't have to help stage his own witchhunt. Again, any President can fall into this article.

I don't think Democrats want this to go to trial as long as Biden is the front runner.
Abuse of power, in the form of "malfeasance in office" or "official misconduct," is the commission of an unlawful act, done in an official capacity, which affects the performance of official duties. ... Abuse of power can also mean a person using the power they have for their own personal gain.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abuse_of_power


Obstruction of Congress:
Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so; or

Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—

Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1505
And none of that meets the constitutional demands of impeachment. Abuse of power isn't a federal crime by itself. There must be a federal law he violated.

And Trumps use of executive priviledge is not obstruction. Its a legal right of the president. Congress is not a law enforcement agency, they cannot investigate someone purely to expose wrongdoing or damaging information about them for political gain. Which is all this trial amounted to. And any subpoena must further some 'legislative purpose' per the Supreme Court.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,186 Posts
And none of that meets the constitutional demands of impeachment. Abuse of power isn't a federal crime by itself. There must be a federal law he violated.

And Trumps use of executive priviledge is not obstruction. Its a legal right of the president. Congress is not a law enforcement agency, they cannot investigate someone purely to expose wrongdoing or damaging information about them for political gain. Which is all this trial amounted to. And any subpoena must further some 'legislative purpose' per the Supreme Court.
1. it doesn't have to be, to be impeachable.

2. it was what Nixon was also going to be impeached for, so there's precedent.

3. Trump's use of executive privilege is unparalleled, and has not been tested in court. However, he can exercise this privilege and still be held in obstruction of Congress.

This is all misdirection.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
924 Posts
And none of that meets the constitutional demands of impeachment. Abuse of power isn't a federal crime by itself. There must be a federal law he violated.

And Trumps use of executive priviledge is not obstruction. Its a legal right of the president. Congress is not a law enforcement agency, they cannot investigate someone purely to expose wrongdoing or damaging information about them for political gain. Which is all this trial amounted to. And any subpoena must further some 'legislative purpose' per the Supreme Court.
What is that other co-equal branch of gov. called again ? The one that they have to use if
the President challenges their subpoenas. The one that includes the Supreme Court that has
agreed to decide if another court gets his tax documents. The one that includes the FISA
court which they got caught using unverified information with. The warrants that they got
were illegal once the source or sub source was proven to be just hearsay. FISA court has even issued a
statement about that. Hearsay evidence is a big part of this. Sonland changed or added to his testimony
but which is true ?

My ex daughter in law cheated on my son but she is one helluva lawyer!!
She would chew them up and spit them out quickly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,635 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
The Impeachment is ridiculous. The articles don't even allege any federal crimes were committed. Any President and future president could get impeached with their allegations. We would have endless sideshows of impeachments every time a President gets elected from a different party than the House.

And then Pelosi says she isn't going to send over the papers unless the Senate appoints hatchetmen of Democrats choosing to hold the trial. How? Why? She has no leverage to make such demands. There simply isn't a trial and he doesn't get impeached if the papers aren't sent. But I guess thats what she wants since it was never about proving a crime and removing him from office.
Trump is already impeached and will always continue to remain in that most hallowed status along with Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton.

Until such time that the Articles of Impeachment are forwarded to the Senate by the Speaker and/or an administrative agreement between the House and Senate managers is reached, then Trump remains firmly indicted by the U. S. House of Representatives until such time that he can stand trial in the U. S. Senate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,635 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
I wonder if Trump has ever read

The Art of War,
Sun Tzu 5th century BC.
It should really come to no one's surprise that Trump is not very well read, period!

A great deal like his red-hatted followers!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
924 Posts
I think he has read The Art of War

Sun Tzu ideas apply to business and politics.

Like how to defeat your enemies non-physically
How to out smart them. Know their weakness
If he hasn't then he is using some of Sun Tzu
strategies really well.

I have read it also. I don't wear a hat though.
Just a helmet when I ride my motorcycle.
It isn't red it is black with an American Eagle
on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
924 Posts
Me and my wife have several chickens. We have a two year old
German Shepard and a truck. Should I start a mobile petting zoo
in 2020 when this impeachment blows up and Republicans re-take
the House and Senate and Trump gets re-elected ?

Money, Money, Money

Thanks Donald for contributing to my economic growth
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
And none of that meets the constitutional demands of impeachment. Abuse of power isn't a federal crime by itself. There must be a federal law he violated.

And Trumps use of executive priviledge is not obstruction. Its a legal right of the president. Congress is not a law enforcement agency, they cannot investigate someone purely to expose wrongdoing or damaging information about them for political gain. Which is all this trial amounted to. And any subpoena must further some 'legislative purpose' per the Supreme Court.
1. it doesn't have to be, to be impeachable.

2. it was what Nixon was also going to be impeached for, so there's precedent.

3. Trump's use of executive privilege is unparalleled, and has not been tested in court. However, he can exercise this privilege and still be held in obstruction of Congress.

This is all misdirection.
So what was the federal crime he violated?

Nixon had Burglary and Campaign Finance Laws to answer for. Trump asked the PM a question about corruption in his historically corrupt country.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
So what was the federal crime he violated?

Nixon had Burglary and Campaign Finance Laws to answer for. Trump asked the PM a question about corruption in his historically corrupt country.
I'm not even interested in Trump as a candidate. I didn't vote for him last time and I likely won't vote for him this time, not because of this impeachment circus. My only concern is the charges could be directed at any President. What president hasn't used executive privilege? What President hasn't been accused of abusing his power?

There needs to be a bar for high crimes. Thus, why Clinton was acquitted even though he lied under oath. Otherwise, the legislature will devolve into a theatre of impeachment proceedings instead of a body to make laws.

It really is comical, they consistently cede more and more power to the President (Patriot Act, FISA) and then charge him with abuse of power for using his constitutional powers!
 
1 - 20 of 534 Posts
Top