Today has been a great day for American patriots

Apr 2019
4,198
719
America
He solicited campaign contributions from a foreign government using money congress allocated to military aid as a bribe.
Getting a foreign government to announce they are investigating your political rival is soliciting campaign contributions from a foreign source, and it's illegal.
No he did not. Saying it will never make it true. I know that will not stop you or the media. When he is re-elected you can take a break.
 
Jul 2014
15,659
9,759
massachusetts
No he did not. Saying it will never make it true. I know that will not stop you or the media. When he is re-elected you can take a break.
He ordered that aid be withheld.
He demanded that Ukraine announce an investigation of the Bidens.
He linked the aid to the investigation.

When it became apparent the the cat was out of the bag, the funds got released.
Attempted bribery is a crime, even if it doesn't work.
Trump fucks up everything, always has, always will, just because his plan blew up, doesn't make him innocent.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007 and se7en
Apr 2019
4,198
719
America
He ordered that aid be withheld.
He demanded that Ukraine announce an investigation of the Bidens.
He linked the aid to the investigation.

When it became apparent the the cat was out of the bag, the funds got released.
Attempted bribery is a crime, even if it doesn't work.
Trump fucks up everything, always has, always will, just because his plan blew up, doesn't make him innocent.
Too bad none of it can be proven.
 

RNG

Forum Staff
Apr 2013
40,276
28,156
La La Land North
Too bad none of it can be proven.
I think the hearings have already done so. And if you are still questioning, just watch the next few days. The actual hearings, not what Fox and Friends, Hannity, Dobbs or Carlson say about them or their maliciously edited video bites.
 
Feb 2007
5,859
3,464
USA
Maybe I'm not making it clear...my issue is with the the neutrality requirement that helps to guarantee that life, liberty, or property will not be taken on the basis of an erroneous or distorted conception of the facts or the law while at the same time, it preserves both the appearance and reality of fairness by ensuring that no person will be deprived of his interests in the absence of a proceeding in which he may present his case with assurance that the arbiter is not predisposed to find against him.

So who represented Trump's interests? There were some republicans in the room but they were not protecting his interests as much as their own. So why then wasn't he allowed to have his actual arbiter's like a lawyer representing him, in the room to cross examine the witness and determine if there were grounds to impeach and build a defense for?

This isn't about if found guilty Trump should or shouldn't be removed...he should if found guilty and at that time I'll wave goodbye as well. This is, to quote an article I recently read, that "the Democrats are openly admitting that their goal is to try this in the media and attempt to dishonestly convince us that somehow we too should hate Donald Trump. They are hoping to convince us not to vote for him. That is not a legitimate or constitutional purpose of an impeachment. It is rather ironic that they claim his “crime” is an alleged quid pro quo to gain political advantage, while they are manipulating the power of impeachment for their political advantage. It is Schiff and other Democrats like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who should be impeached. There is an actual constitutional basis for that."
You seemingly keep claiming or implying that life, liberty, or property would be or is being deprived from the president thru this impeachment process. However, you still haven't made it clear what life, liberty, or property he is being deprived of either currently or even if he were to be removed from office, specifically via the government.

Indeed, the due process clause and the corresponding variants of due process ONLY apply when life, liberty, or property is deprived from a person specifically by the government. But Trump, or any other public officer for that matter, would potentially just be removed from the office when impeached. He wouldn't be executed if he is removed from office. He would retain his constitutional liberties if he is removed from office. And no property would be taken from him if he is removed from office. Thus, the variants of due process simply do not apply regarding impeaching and removing a public officer, such as the president.

Furthermore, as per the US Constitution, Congress has "sole power" regarding impeaching and removing a public officer. And that includes the design of the impeachment process itself. And both the House and Senate members as a group independently decide what that process shall be for the House and Senate, respectively. So, if you believe the process being used is unfair, then complain to your Representative or Senator since it is respectively they who decide that process design.

Moreover, the impeachment and removal process is not a criminal or even civil trial whatsoever. Rather, it is ultimately a political decision. And it is a remedial process which maintains constitutional government that is to be used whenever it is objectively proven, or even merely subjectively believed, that the public trust has been violated in same way. So, the threshold for impeaching and removing a public officer-such as the president-from office is wherever Congress wants it to be, as long as there are enough votes for impeaching and removing said officer.

(Also, members of congress cannot be impeached. Rather, their potential removal from office is done via a different process.)
 
Last edited:
May 2018
7,920
5,805
none
You seemingly keep claiming or implying that life, liberty, or property would be or is being deprived from the president thru this impeachment process. However, you still haven't made it clear what life, liberty, or property he is being deprived of either currently or even if he were to be removed from office, specifically via the government.

Indeed, the due process clause and the corresponding variants of due process ONLY apply when life, liberty, or property is deprived from a person specifically by the government. But Trump, or any other public officer for that matter, would potentially just be removed from the office when impeached. He wouldn't be executed if he is removed from office. He would retain his constitutional liberties if he is removed from office. And no property would be taken from him if he is removed from office. Thus, the variants of due process simply do not apply regarding impeaching and removing a public officer, such as the president.

Furthermore, as per the US Constitution, Congress has "sole power" regarding impeaching and removing a public officer. And that includes the design of the impeachment process itself. And both the House and Senate members as a group independently decide what that process shall be for the House and Senate, respectively. So, if you believe the process being used is unfair, then complain to your Representative or Senator since it is respectively they who decide that process design.

Moreover, the impeachment and removal process is not a criminal or even civil trial whatsoever. Rather, it is ultimately a political decision. And it is a remedial process which maintains constitutional government that is to be used whenever it is objectively proven, or even merely subjectively believed, that the public trust has been violated in same way. So, the threshold for impeaching and removing a public officer-such as the president-from office is wherever Congress wants it to be, as long as there are enough votes for impeaching and removing said officer.

(Also, members of congress cannot be impeached. Rather, their potential removal from office is done via a different process.)
You're replying to a person who claims to know how things work in this country, he does not. Removing a president from office does not deprive them of anything. It just means they got fired. And Trump needs to be fired.
 
  • Like
Reactions: baloney_detector
Jul 2014
15,659
9,759
massachusetts
There is a major difference between fair and unfair. When Clinton was being impeached, Republican and democrats agreed on the terms and based on their agreement, and with all forthcoming information, the case was eventually dropped.

Democrats didn't offer the same this time. In fact, they conducted everything behind closed doors and continued to leak information as they wanted to help gain support rather than conduct a fair discussion over the details and agree to a formal term moving forward. That isn't the actions of a group wanting to do anything other than play to everyone's emotions and hope to sway support without any actual details or hope for impeachment. I don't care if Trump is or isn't impeached...I just want there to be a fair process so that if facts are presented that warrant impeachment, then let's impeach him. If there aren't, then stop wasting tax dollars and time that should be spent governing the country like they're supposed to. We wasted years already listening to dems spew hate and rhetoric and wasting so much time governing...it's utterly pathetic. stop already and either present the facts and agree to do it the right way or piss off and do you fricken jobs!
So you want Congress to appoint a special prosecutor, a person of the highest reputation, who's only job is to investigate Trump, and when that special prosecutor says there is nothing wrong, you'd like Congress to pick a highly partisan hack to replace him and pursue every crack pot theory out there until he finds something, like they did with Clinton?
 
Dec 2015
18,957
18,477
Arizona
He ordered that aid be withheld.
He demanded that Ukraine announce an investigation of the Bidens.
He linked the aid to the investigation.

When it became apparent the the cat was out of the bag, the funds got released.
Attempted bribery is a crime, even if it doesn't work.
Trump fucks up everything, always has, always will, just because his plan blew up, doesn't make him innocent.
Yeah, but Goober, Donny didn't mean to do it and didn't KNOW it was wrong. :rolleyes:
 
Jul 2014
15,659
9,759
massachusetts
Yeah, but Goober, Donny didn't mean to do it and didn't KNOW it was wrong. :rolleyes:
Oh, he knew it was wrong, that's why he tried to keep it secret, and that's why as soon as he learned there was a whistle blower, he released the money....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007
Dec 2015
18,957
18,477
Arizona
There is a major difference between fair and unfair. When Clinton was being impeached, Republican and democrats agreed on the terms and based on their agreement, and with all forthcoming information, the case was eventually dropped.

Democrats didn't offer the same this time. In fact, they conducted everything behind closed doors and continued to leak information as they wanted to help gain support rather than conduct a fair discussion over the details and agree to a formal term moving forward. That isn't the actions of a group wanting to do anything other than play to everyone's emotions and hope to sway support without any actual details or hope for impeachment. I don't care if Trump is or isn't impeached...I just want there to be a fair process so that if facts are presented that warrant impeachment, then let's impeach him. If there aren't, then stop wasting tax dollars and time that should be spent governing the country like they're supposed to. We wasted years already listening to dems spew hate and rhetoric and wasting so much time governing...it's utterly pathetic. stop already and either present the facts and agree to do it the right way or piss off and do you fricken jobs!
When Clinton was impeached the House voted to open an impeachment inquiry, with the support of 31 Democrats.
The case against Clinton hinged on the findings in Starr’s report. By contrast, today’s Democrats didn’t choose to orient their inquiry around findings in special counsel Robert Mueller’s report that examined misconduct by Trump: They are instead building a case against the president in real-time, with the full power of the constitution behind them. The HOUSE has complete and utter discretion on how they handle this impeachment inquiry.
The nay-sayers continue to whine "NOT FAIR" but haven't pointed out ONE SINGLE instance of unlawful, unconstitutional procedure. In fact, I think the Dems have been quite magnanimous. Republican lawmakers have been included in the private inquiries. When Republicans wanted a public forum--they got it.
You can make all the claims you want about not caring if Trump is impeached, but that facts are the facts and you are ignoring the FACTS.
So, once again. The U.S. Constitution gives the HOUSE complete control. Of. Everything. For now.
Elections have consequences, don't they?