• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W;622]Please... Be honest. Do you really think a second impeachment is good for the country?

There are better things to do, but I could go either way IF there was a real reason to do so. Currently what we have are SUBJECTIVE readings of some twitter feed ... That ain't gonna cut it to get a conviction so IMO, it's a waste of time.

There is no real reason to impeach Trump since he is out on his ass in a few days. It's impotent rage at this point and wasted political capital, not to mention time. Him running for office again ever is a pipe dream.
Either he committed an impeachable offense, or offenses, or he didn't. If he did, he shouldn't get the benefit of running out the clock. And what political capital are they wasting?
 
There is only one reason to try Trump in the Senate after Jan. 20. Upon conviction, the Senate in a separate vote can bar Trump from running for office. Many deem that unnecessary. Trump has already done that to himself.
According to 538, as of yesterday, 40% of Americans still approve of the job Trump is doing. The President will be back online soon, either on GAB, which saved all his tweets before Twitter pulled them down, or he will build his own network with his own servers. He will go apeshit about the impeachment and the social media ban and every Republican who criticized him. His fans will follow him.
 
I can guess they thought the election was stolen. I can also guess that these general lockdowns and mask wearings, for example, cost them their personal livelihoods. I can also guess they had frustration for the fascist Pelosi who was bent on not doing the people's business but, rather, punishing Trump for speaking out against socialism.:rolleyes:

Trump was not speaking out against socialism. And he is being punished for inciting his rabid followers to invade the capitol building, and for trying to fraudulently get votes for himself in Georgia. In fact, Trump wanted to give everyone more money in Covid relief, so he was actively engaged in socialism. But mostly, he was stirring up trouble by claiming the the election was stolen when it was not. The only evidence of trying to steal it is Trump's own phone call! He is as dopey as his followers. Another "perfect" call!
 
According to 538, as of yesterday, 40% of Americans still approve of the job Trump is doing. The President will be back online soon, either on GAB, which saved all his tweets before Twitter pulled them down, or he will build his own network with his own servers. He will go apeshit about the impeachment and the social media ban and every Republican who criticized him. His fans will follow him.
I guess you can probably find a poll somewhere to support just about anything. But of those I've seen, about 65% view his job performance as poor and about the same number believes he should not remain a national political figure moving forward. So he can go apeshit on whatever platform he wants but not very many people will really care. But if he wants to continue tearing Republicans' down and hinder their chances in 2022 as he did in the Georgia senate, god speed.
 
What does this post mean, then? What needs to happen to ensure a peaceful transfer of power from an election result?

A peaceful transfer of power, thankfully, is occurring. The center held, despite the President's ill-advised and dangerous efforts to spark a constitutional crises in a desperate attempt to illegally retain power. That what you get, I suppose, when you listen to crackpots - bad advice.

In the future, we may not be so lucky in the incompetence of those who would toss our system over in order to retain power. Setting this precedent now is both wise and appropriate.

It's also conservative - it recognizes the inherent broken nature of man, anticipates that man's nature will not change, and seeks to restrain his worst impulses through the use of mediating institutions, limitations on the use of power, and rule of law. That's why the Trump people don't like it, much, I guess. Populism left and right has always preferred the radical and authoritarian.
 
Either he committed an impeachable offense, or offenses, or he didn't. If he did, he shouldn't get the benefit of running out the clock. And what political capital are they wasting?

But here is the thing, "impeachable offenses" are whatever they say they are since it is entirely a political process. They will get a yes vote in the house, and a no vote in the Senate.

The capital I feel they are wasting is the common ground they currently have with the House Republicans, they could get other things done, right now.
 
Bridge too far, and the primary reason that punishment won't come.

I know its tough for those who dearly want punishment, but punishment requires proof, lots of it.

What we currently have is a subjective reading of some posts ...


Well, that's for the senate to decide, isn't it?
 
But here is the thing, "impeachable offenses" are whatever they say they are since it is entirely a political process. They will get a yes vote in the house, and a no vote in the Senate.

The capital I feel they are wasting is the common ground they currently have with the House Republicans, they could get other things done, right now.


RUSSIA INVESTIGATIONPublished 5 hours agoLast Update 4 hours ago
Graham releases Russia probe docs, slams original investigation as 'incompetent, corrupt

He releases the above now, in the midst of the dc insurrection


WASHINGTON — A majority of House Republicans, as well as six senators, voted to try to overturn President-elect Joe Biden’s win in Arizona after a mob of President Donald Trump’s supporters stormed the US Capitol, attempting a coup that forced lawmakers to evacuate.


Facts don't support your theory
 
Trump was not speaking out against socialism. And he is being punished for inciting his rabid followers to invade the capitol building, and for trying to fraudulently get votes for himself in Georgia. In fact, Trump wanted to give everyone more money in Covid relief, so he was actively engaged in socialism. But mostly, he was stirring up trouble by claiming the the election was stolen when it was not. The only evidence of trying to steal it is Trump's own phone call! He is as dopey as his followers. Another "perfect" call!
If incitement of violence by a political figure were punishable, then Pelosi (and her compatriots) would be guilty of incitement of violence for their statements during the riots last summer.:rolleyes:

I guess I'm also concerned with the rule of law concept which when encapsulated is that all laws apply to all Americans...Rule of law is definitely not being followed in America.

This impeachment is purely political. No judge would/should touch this impeachment based on its judicial merits.

I can only guess Pelosi decreed that impeachment be first on the list of things to do in the house because Pelosi hates Trump's hatred for socialism.
Sidenote: I have to belly laugh every time I see a sign in someone's yard saying to the effect that 'hate has no place in this home.' One thought is: What are your feelings for Trump?? Love??:ROFLMAO:

I can only guess Pelosi decreed that impeachment be first on the list of things to do in the house because Pelosi wants to tarnish Trump so he won't be able to run for president in 2024.

Whatever the reasoning for this latest impeachment, impeaching trump isn't the people's business. It's the socialist's business.:rolleyes:
 
Well, do you?

Yes, and simply because there has to be a consequence for a sitting president to conduct himself in the manner Trump did during this entire election process. If there's no consequence, it can easily become a tactic that's used by future presidents or candidates to adversely affect the election process. If we accept the rationale that it will further divide the country, we're accepting the behavior witnessed simply out of fear of alienating its supporters.
 
What irregularities? Do you mean the irregularities in the states that Trump won?
Voting irregularities like no signature verification. Like an extended period to accept mail in ballots. Like not allowing someone to witness the vote counting process.

I mean, the mere statistics of the election are skewed compared to other elections.

Then there's the 'Prove this election wasn't a democratic election' statement.:rolleyes: You know, every tin pot dictator says the same: 'Prove that my reelection wasn't democratic.' Jimmy Carter, for one, would disagree that a ballot voting constitutes a democratic election.

The gov't should ensure that all elections are democratic and, when there's a question of a lack of democracy in that vote, that election should be investigated. I mean, hypocritical dems used hearsay evidence to investigate the Trump campaign after the results of the 2016 election...Oh well, I'm asking for rule of law to be followed, again...but, sadly, it isn't.:(
 
A peaceful transfer of power, thankfully, is occurring. The center held, despite the President's ill-advised and dangerous efforts to spark a constitutional crises in a desperate attempt to illegally retain power. That what you get, I suppose, when you listen to crackpots - bad advice.

In the future, we may not be so lucky in the incompetence of those who would toss our system over in order to retain power. Setting this precedent now is both wise and appropriate.

It's also conservative - it recognizes the inherent broken nature of man, anticipates that man's nature will not change, and seeks to restrain his worst impulses through the use of mediating institutions, limitations on the use of power, and rule of law. That's why the Trump people don't like it, much, I guess. Populism left and right has always preferred the radical and authoritarian.
You are mistaken. Trump never said he wanted to illegally retain power. Trump said he wanted to ensure the 2020 election was a free and fair election and there are numerous indications that the 2020 wasn't a free and fair election.
 
If incitement of violence by a political figure were punishable, then Pelosi (and her compatriots) would be guilty of incitement of violence for their statements during the riots last summer.

Eh. I don't accept "But so-and-so did it" as an excuse from my children, and, it's even less convincing as an excuse for a grown man, much less a President.

I guess I'm also concerned with the rule of law concept which when encapsulated is that all laws apply to all Americans...Rule of law is definitely not being followed in America.

This impeachment is purely political. No judge would/should touch this impeachment based on its judicial merits.

:) Then be at ease - it's supposed to be political, and rule of law isn't a concern as a result. :) Trump isn't going on trial for his life or his property. The Senate can't throw him in jail. Impeachment is an inherently political process by design, and the worst that can happen is therefore also political: Trump loses the ability to hold federal office in the future.

I can only guess Pelosi decreed that impeachment be first on the list of things to do in the house because Pelosi hates Trump's hatred for socialism.

Well that suggests you are a bad guesser, but, that's no sin. :)
 
Eh. I don't accept "But so-and-so did it" as an excuse from my children, and, it's even less convincing as an excuse for a grown man, much less a President.



:) Then be at ease - it's supposed to be political, and rule of law isn't a concern as a result. :) Trump isn't going on trial for his life or his property. The Senate can't throw him in jail. Impeachment is an inherently political process by design, and the worst that can happen is therefore also political: Trump loses the ability to hold federal office in the future.



Well that suggests you are a bad guesser, but, that's no sin. :)
Do you accept the rule of law concept?? It appears that you don't.:(
 
Do you accept the rule of law concept?? It appears that you don't.:(
Rule of Law is not only something I accept, it's something I expect. That's part of why impeachment here is appropriate. But you seem to be confusing "impeachment" with "judicial enforcement of the law". They are different things ;).
 
Who is it that won't accept the findings of 60 court cases?
That's not rule of law. That's the consensus of 60 judges who don't want to investigate an election based on hearsay evidence.

The rule of law departure is that the Trump administration was investigated based on hearsay evidence after the result of the 2016 election but there was no investigation of the 2020 election based on hearsay evidence.:rolleyes:
 
Rule of Law is not only something I accept, it's something I expect. That's part of why impeachment here is appropriate. But you seem to be confusing "impeachment" with "judicial enforcement of the law". They are different things ;).
Get it right. Rule of law means applying the law equally to all Americans.:rolleyes:
 
That's not rule of law. That's the consensus of 60 judges who don't want to investigate an election based on hearsay evidence.

The rule of law departure is that the Trump administration was investigated based on hearsay evidence after the result of the 2016 election but there was no investigation of the 2020 election based on hearsay evidence.:rolleyes:
You guys didn't choose to investigate but went with the 'rule of law' path through the courts. You lost. Next time you try to cheat you'll know better. The rule of law was not on your side.
 
You guys didn't choose to investigate but went with the 'rule of law' path through the courts. You lost. Next time you try to cheat you'll know better. The rule of law was not on your side.
To cite the rule of law, it's best that you know what the rule of law means.:ROFLMAO:
 
To cite the rule of law, it's best that you know what the rule of law means.:ROFLMAO:

I would think not inciting a mob into storming the capitol and murdering a cop would be part of that definition.
 
I would think not inciting a mob into storming the capitol and murdering a cop would be part of that definition.
Well, members of the house think they can get away with inciting violence so members of the house don't believe in rule of law.:rolleyes:
 
To cite the rule of law, it's best that you know what the rule of law means.:ROFLMAO:
I can't disagree with that. Rule of Law is determined in the courts. Trump tried to make the case the election didn't follow the rule of law. The courts disagreed. You lost. Biden will be President. You should have started your investigation instead.
 
Back
Top Bottom