Nothing More Needs to be Said!

[Moderate Right]

Impeachment is by definition a political tool. The House has always had this power.

It's never been abused so badly. Democrats are setting a precedent that every president will be impeached from now on.

 

[Acadia]

The withholding of benefits based on abuse of his office. He asked Ukraine to investigate Biden and Cloudstrike to benefit him personally.

There is no evidence to support this allegation. Again, no crime. If the President wants to investigate corruption, he damn well can.

 

[Condor060]

Go back to Nixon. He was supported until he wasn't.

There was support for Nixon until the evidence buried him. THis isn't the case with Trump. We have had the hearings, all evidence provided was presumptions and opinions and not one single Republican is supporting impeachment after these hearings. That wasn't the case with Nixon.

In addition, it is not necessary for bipartisan support in Congress

There is if you don't want it to look like a partisan political attack

 

[mrjurrs]

You're right but you also seem to be considering facts not in evidence.

The only way you can say that is if you are a Republican congressman. djt asked for help on Cloudstrike and Biden investigations. The military aid was withheld. He asked for something to benefit himself, and he used the power of his office to withhold benefit. Do you believe either of those things? Because they were both in the summary of the call, and djt admitted they were.

 

[poweRob]

As the saying goes.,.

"****, or get off the pot."

Where was this enthusiasm for wrapping up investigations during the Benghazi hearings?

 

[mrjurrs]

There is no evidence to support this allegation. Again, no crime. If the President wants to investigate corruption, he damn well can.

The evidence came from the president's mouth, it is on the transcript of the call summary he describes as perfect. While the executive is able to investigate corruption, he is not able to use that investigative power to benefit him personally, it must benefit the union. Since he is so concerned about corruption, do you think he will withhold military aid to Israel this year? Their leader is under indictment for corruption.

 

[mrjurrs]

It's never been abused so badly. Democrats are setting a precedent that every president will be impeached from now on.

Nice opinion, no proof. Talking about precedent, how about Rep. Nunes sitting in on investigations that he appears to have been a part of what he is investigating. No precedent there!

 

[Acadia]

The evidence came from the president's mouth, it is on the transcript of the call summary he describes as perfect. While the executive is able to investigate corruption, he is not able to use that investigative power to benefit him personally, it must benefit the union. Since he is so concerned about corruption, do you think he will withhold military aid to Israel this year? Their leader is under indictment for corruption.

Evidence of what?

 

[mrjurrs]

There was support for Nixon until the evidence buried him. THis isn't the case with Trump. We have had the hearings, all evidence provided was presumptions and opinions and not one single Republican is supporting impeachment after these hearings. That wasn't the case with Nixon.



There is if you don't want it to look like a partisan political attack

Nixon cooperated after court cases. djt has not cooperated once. How do you feel about Mulvaney, Pompeo and Barr testifying?

 

[iguanaman]

I do not support voting for articles of impeachment yet.

Bolton has to come testify.

The administration and its officials need to be forced to cough up documents first.

This will not work.

So you want to wait until after the election?

 

[Craig234]

That is EXACTLY what this has become. If this process is successful for the Democrats it will have set a precedent wherein the Legislative branch can impose their will on the Executive, through obstruction of that branch or outright impeachment, for absolutely any reason. The balance between the branches will be irretrievably broken and the Legislative will become the superior branch of government thus turning us from a Constitutional Republic into a de facto Parliamentary one.

The legislature has ALWAYS had that power. What was to stop any Congress from removing any president for any reason? If they got a majority in the House to impeach and 2/3 in the Senate to remove, the president is removed, period, and the Congress defines ANY reason it wants as high crimes and misdemeanors to do so.

But Congress hasn't abused its power to do that yet - though it did sort of trump up reasons and come up with one vote short on Andrew Johnson; and they did impeach for weak reason but not remove on Clinton. The reason Congress had to do the investigation on trump is the removal of special/independent prosecutor laws, which Republicans won't agree to restore (while there's a Republican president).

Given how much the right likes to praise the founding fathers, I'm surprised how ill-informed they are about the constitution.

The founding fathers always meant for Congress to be the leading branch of government, their first principle being power for the people, to not have a king - they'd be aghast at some of the power grabs of the modern presidency, and they'd hang the proponents of the 'unitary executive' under Bush and trump.

 

[Craig234]

More on the founding fathers' thinking on the presidency:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...d-to-be-the-most-powerful-part-of-government/

 

[Moon]

Simply playing out the scenario. People would say Trump rigged the election via his quid pro quo against Biden...but the truth is, should he be the dem nom, and lose...it'll be for the same reasons Hillary lost.


I swear to god, the only dem candidate, thus far, that is evenly remotely in touch with every day folks, remotely electable, is Sanders, and for SOME strange reason, dems seem to just hate the guy.

Well, he’s only a Democrat every four years when he’s running for President. The Dems let him wear the Jersey, but he’s not really part of the team.

 

[Moon]

It's never been abused so badly. Democrats are setting a precedent that every president will be impeached from now on.

Can you imagine in 20 years or so looking back and fondly remembering the last quality presidential candidates we had were Clinton and Trump?

 

[Unitedwestand13]

If the democrats think they have enough then they can vote for it. I support impeachment and removal over this. However, the 1.8% spread in favor of my perspective is concerning, meaning the democrats SHOULD take their foot off the gas, and get some more things in line. More court cases ruling against Trump (even though the precident is there on obstruction); more testimony from the likes of Bolton, subpoena for Pompeo AND BARR to testify.

The rot in this administration is thorough. Shouldn't be hard. The only obstacle is an "originalist" court.

Short attention span of the American public is the problem

 

[CaughtInThe]

Republicans love this Trump corruption. Hell, they want more.

 

[Luckyone]

We all know that the Democrats impeached due to partisanship. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that if a president is impeached by the House that the Senate must concur. In fact, just the opposite. The Constitution sets a high bar (2/3'ds) to actually remove a president from office. In the beginning of all of this nonsense there were a few Republicans in both the House and the Senate who had open minds concerning this issue. Democrats have shown such uber partisanship that the House vote will not have one Republican convert and the same will be true of the Senate. And, both the House and the Senate votes will have some Democratic defectors.

In your fantasy world you are king and anything you say in that world must be true. Kings in their own realm are always right.

The day that reality bites you, you will feel it.

Have fun in your world. Mine is reality and reality says Trump will be exposed for the would-be-monarch he is thinking he is and he will be dethroned.

 

[Luckyone]

You're right but you also seem to be considering facts not in evidence.

Facts have been presented and clearly seen. It is not more evident because Trump has used his power to prevent other principles in the criminal act to testify. It is exactly what any guilty party that does not want to be exposed would do. Evidently since Trump is God in you world, you don't agree. Fortunately the real world always destroys fantasy sooner or later.

 

[Luckyone]

There is no evidence to support this allegation. Again, no crime. If the President wants to investigate corruption, he damn well can.

then why is he not investigating himself and those around him? You cannot find more corruption that what is found at his own home.

 

[The AntiDonald]

If the democrats think they have enough then they can vote for it. I support impeachment and removal over this. However, the 1.8% spread in favor of my perspective is concerning, meaning the democrats SHOULD take their foot off the gas, and get some more things in line. More court cases ruling against Trump (even though the precident is there on obstruction); more testimony from the likes of Bolton, subpoena for Pompeo AND BARR to testify.

The rot in this administration is thorough. Shouldn't be hard. The only obstacle is an "originalist" court.

I tend to agree with this to a certain extent. They need to issue subpoena's to all the presidents men and allow them one week to show. If they don't show, it's time for inherent contempt. They can hold them all at the Alexandria jail for a while. My guess is you get instant testimony that way.