- Joined
- Oct 5, 2020
- Messages
- 11,795
- Reaction score
- 11,411
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
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 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.
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.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.
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.
All the irregularities in this election also gave them an idea this election was stolen.
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.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.
What does this post mean, then? What needs to happen to ensure a peaceful transfer of power from an election result?
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?
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 ...
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.
Yes, you are supporting them.It's amazing how many people are supporting the bad guy's.
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.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!
Well, do you?
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.What irregularities? Do you mean the irregularities in the states that Trump won?
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.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.
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.
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.
Do you accept the rule of law concept?? It appears that you don't.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.
Who is it that won't accept the findings of 60 court cases?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 thingsDo you accept the rule of law concept?? It appears that you don't.
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.Who is it that won't accept the findings of 60 court cases?
Get it right. Rule of law means applying the law equally to all Americans.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.
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.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.
To cite the rule of law, it's best that you know what the rule of law means.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.
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.I would think not inciting a mob into storming the capitol and murdering a cop would be part of that definition.
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.To cite the rule of law, it's best that you know what the rule of law means.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?