I am embarrassed by this impeachment.

Homepage | Forums | Main Forums | General Discussion | I am embarrassed by this impeachment.

Viewing 8 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #394582
      jbnw
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 3,243

      In 2019, the impeachment process took from September through December.

      This time, the impeachment resolution was introduced on January 11 with the vote on January 13. I don’t know how long the actual debate was. Two days is an amazingly short time to vote to impeach a sitting President of the United States. I doubt a law staff could even investigate the legal issues of impeachment a President about to leave office in a week, let alone whether the Senate can vote to remove a President who is no longer in office.

      Still, the Democrats have their priorities – and it doesn’t appear to be their constituents. With this energy, we could have had a full healthcare system and coronavirus support for citizens in a week.

    • #394587
      JonLP
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 2,856

      Can’t do much anyway until the new legislative session takes over. It is a lame duck session and I doubt Trump would sign anything improving health care.

      Let this radicalize you rather than lead you to despair - Mariame Kaba

    • #394592
      Jan Boehmerman
      Moderator
      • Total Posts: 3,926

      I was fearing another half-ass attempt at impeachment like the last time. That would have left Trump in a more powerful position for a political comeback.

      Trump appears to be finished this time…… But it’s “not over until the fat lady sings!”

      • #394618
        jbnw
        Participant
        • Total Posts: 3,243

        that requires a 2/3 majority to convict.

        • #394622
          Mr. Mickeys Mom
          Moderator
          • Total Posts: 4,929

          @jbnw

          But, unless I’m missing something, the evidence that is before the entirety of the United States has been documented and will continue to BE documented (I viewed much of the livestream filmed by Status Coup) sufficient for a House vote.

          The trial by Senate will occur after the first 100 days, I think, and the outcome as outlined by members of the House would ensure that Trump is punished for inciting seditious acts of violence, along with the other members of Congress.

          I care that the punishment eliminates the entitlements many do not understand that is available to presidents leaving office, including the elimination of –

          1. $200,000 in yearly pension pay-out
          2. Secret Service for the rest of their life
          3. Ability to run again

          Hell, no... I'm not giving up...

          • #394630
            jbnw
            Participant
            • Total Posts: 3,243

            But can it be shown that Trump told them to do it?

            • #394636
              Mr. Mickeys Mom
              Moderator
              • Total Posts: 4,929

              ?

              Hell, no... I'm not giving up...

              • #394652
                jbnw
                Participant
                • Total Posts: 3,243

                Which is why I would’ve preferred to see the process followed, rather than just a couple of hours of debate.

                Imagine a grand jury delivering an indictment after a couple of hours – and this has significantly more national and international importance.

                • #394665
                  Mr. Mickeys Mom
                  Moderator
                  • Total Posts: 4,929

                  Pelosi wasted so much fucking time with the initial impeachment proceedings. These fucking people are serious about one true thing – their positions in perpetuity. They and their masters are the reason for Trump and his crimes.

                  Hell, no... I'm not giving up...

          • #394695
            chknltl
            Participant
            • Total Posts: 1,196

            @mrmickiesmon

            Maybe I missed something listed under the requirements necessary for an individual to run for the office of POTUS that disqualifies ex-President Trump from running again.

            IIRC, An earlier removal from office via impeachment is no hindrance to a future run.

            Now, I am not sure about being convicted of a felony or treason.(-both down the road possibilities for Trump).

            One would think that being convicted of a felony might be enough but I am not sure here.

            High Crimes and Misdemeanors against the U.S.? Treason?

            At some point there must be a limitation but I am fairly confident that impeachment all by itself is not sufficient grounds to prevent Trump from running again.

            Edited in: Article 2 of the Constitution states that the requirements are that the President must be a natural born citizen, lived here for the past 14 years and is at least 35 years old.

            That’s it.

            So if we adhere to those rules of the Constitution, (If he were alive today), Charles Manson could run for and if elected hold the office of POTUS!

            So yes, Trump can run again.

            • #394705
              jbnw
              Participant
              • Total Posts: 3,243

              @chknltl @mrmickeysmom

              ARTICLE I, SECTION 3, CLAUSE 7

              Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

            • #394707
              Mr. Mickeys Mom
              Moderator
              • Total Posts: 4,929

              @chknltl  This could get interesting if the Congress whose institution is so bad in terms of so many reasons…

              The Constitution, in accordance to Article I, Section 3. provides for only two potential punishments IF this president is convicted by the Senate: removal from office and disqualification from future “office of honor, trust or profit under the United States”.

              But, without performing an investigation or allowing any defense, the clock cuts against the possibility of conviction — because the Republican-led Senate will not act before President-elect Joe Biden is sworn in at noon Jan. 20. Well, that ends that because you can’t impeach him, once his time is up…

              So, here’s the kicker, which may sound bizarre, but what the fuck isn’t these days… If the inaugural time is offset (and it can be), we could be faced with a decision where we will have the Speaker of the House sitting in as president in order to produce the outcome of the impeachment process with those two assurances.

              I’d agree with it, even though it’s Pelosi.

               

               

              Hell, no... I'm not giving up...

              • #394713
                jbnw
                Participant
                • Total Posts: 3,243

                while still in office. It’s now up to the Senate – and that’s a legal mess.

                Hmm – though the impeachment hasn’t been delivered (again).

                I wonder if it’s still valid if he’s not in office? Fun times for lawyers and probably the Supreme Court!


                @mrmickeysmom
                @chknltl

              • #394872
                chknltl
                Participant
                • Total Posts: 1,196

                @mrmickiesmom

                @jbnw

                So now I know. Thank you both for that.

                Well now, our Senate closing the door for future Trump runs on our Presidency becomes quite interesting.

    • #394642
      Satan
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 4,177

      They had a whole shitload of crimes they COULD have gone after Cheeto for, but the only one they somehow found worthy was the one that involved Joe Biden and his crackhead son.

      By comparison – aside from the late date – this was a far more clear cut case than ImOrangement 1.0 was.

      "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable". - John F. Kennedy

      • #394663
        JonLP
        Participant
        • Total Posts: 2,856

        For political reasons.

        Trump’s Ukraine conspiracy theories were innaccurate.

        Rudy Giuliani Ally Sanctioned for Russian Influence Operation Against the U.S.

        The former Ukrainian diplomat at the center of outlandish Republican claims that Kyiv, not Moscow, had intervened in the 2016 presidential race has been formally sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury Department.

        Andrii Telizhenko spun a web of stories enthusiastically taken up by Donald Trump’s supporters, including his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, who used this alleged evidence in efforts to slime President-elect Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden ahead of the 2020 election.

        The Treasury accused Telizhenko of being “part of a Russia-linked foreign influence network” on Monday. Interestingly, the U.S. government also chose to state on the record that Trump’s beloved Ukraine scandals were “false.”

        Telizhenko tried to distance himself from a former collaborator and known Russian agent Andriy Derkach in an interview with The Daily Beast last September after Derkach himself had been sanctioned.

        https://www.thedailybeast.com/andrii-telizhenko-rudy-giuliani-ally-sanctioned-for-russian-influence-operation-against-the-us

         

        Let this radicalize you rather than lead you to despair - Mariame Kaba

        • #394664
          jbnw
          Participant
          • Total Posts: 3,243

          Here’s Biden gleefully describing how he blackmailed Ukraine for a billion dollar loan guarantee to get the Prosecutor General of Ukraine fired.

          • #394690
            Jan Boehmerman
            Moderator
            • Total Posts: 3,926

            Does that mean Trump should NOT BE IMPEACHED?
            Or with one a-hole out of the way…. time to get rid of another one!

            • #394700
              jbnw
              Participant
              • Total Posts: 3,243

              @janboehmermann I don’t think he should have been impeached the first time – Biden so blatantly had his quid-pro-quo.

              This time, maybe – but I wanted the same quality of investigation (well, better) and legal analysis of free speech.

              And Marjorie Taylor Greene, a new member of Congress, said today she’s introducing articles of impeachment for Joe Biden on January 21 based on the information in Hunter Biden’s laptop – and we know there’s a FBI investigation already. We’ll see what happens – but the Democrats have made an ugly situation worse.

              If I was paranoid, I’d wonder if that was the DNC’s plan all along to get Harris in office.

            • #394745
              The Red Menace
              Participant
              • Total Posts: 1,097

              It’s more hte issue of why.

              Trump had, by that point, “misplaced” fifteen hundred children that ICE had kidnapped fro mtheir parents at his command, in a program explicitly described as “creating fear” to prevent more immigrants from enterign hte country.

              But going after that doesn’t protect joe Biden, so it’s not impeachment-worthy.

              Trump had ALSO further assisted the Saudi regime in their genocide agaisnt the Shia of yemen, absolutely a criminal act by both international treaty we’re party to, AND Domestic US law.

              But goign after that wouldn’t do anything to protect Joe Biden, so the Democrats refused to impeach on it.

              Trump is also a well-known embezzler who’s ripped off banks plenty, hidden money from the IRS, and done all sorts of financial shitbaggery, all of which is certainly criminal.

              But going after that wouldn’t protect Joe Biden, so the Democrats decided to not impeach on it.

              Instead they decided to go after something that could have harmed Biden, based on hearsay, and run with it like a quarterback charging to hte wrong end of the field. They failed miserably and embarrassingly in achieving anything

    • #394653
      MackMarkstein
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 149

      The Congresscritters had been personally threatened. Not a very bright thing for the terra-rists to do, …maybe next time they will breach National Guard Headquarters.
      I think by proxy the Congresspeople want to punish Trump for the riot, though like any Mafia boss he didn’t give direct unambiguous orders to commit any crime, unless it was in private. Trump does always say the quiet part out loud so if there’s anyone who might have told Roger Stone or such, “Get a mob to break the windows and go to the House Chamber” it would be Trump.
      Anyway, hundreds of Congresscritters who were fearing for their lives last week, plus a long-term political posturing (by Dems) that Trump is evil, can now be turned into action, or the appearance of action! Trump actually *is* evil but I agree that Impeachment 1.0 a year ago, ended up an effort to avoid most of what he really is guilty of: obstruction of justice and ignoring subpoenas was definitely impeachable–it’s one of the things they got Nixon for and it didn’t become constitutional since then.

      • #394655
        jbnw
        Participant
        • Total Posts: 3,243

        arrested, tried, and punished if convicted.

        The challenge will be to determine through due process if they were doing it at Trump’s direction. If it’s determined to fall within free speech guidelines, or that they followed the examples of others who set this up, it’ll be another expensive, time-wasting embarrassment of a show trial rather than actually governing responsibly for their constituents, which is what’s needed now.

    • #394662
      doh1304
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 1,469

      The final senate vote will occur with the new “Democratic controlled” senate – thus placing the blame (in the minds of inflamed Republicans) on the Democrats and giving them an excuse to be even more inflamed. Also, by forcing the new Democratic senators to start by ruling on a hot topic first puts a tremendous pressure to go along with an extremely emotional flow. The vote will not be a question of guilt or innocence, it will be to go along with a rabid response to attack a rabid opponent – are you willing to join our mob or are you an apologist for their mob?  This is Paris 1793 and it doesn’t end well.

    • #394697
      snot
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 1,117

      there should at least have been some kind of hearing, instead of letting legislators decide based on what they think they already know.  I don’t like the precedent this sets.

      Destruction is easy; creation is hard, but more interesting.

      • #394701
        jbnw
        Participant
        • Total Posts: 3,243

        @snot It’s quite possible he should have been impeached – but I want facts we will likely never know now, and yes – we now have a precedent of a ridiculously fast impeachment without an investigation.

        I wonder what it would have turned up in people and organizations that put together the assault on the Capitol.

    • #394762
      Ohio Barbarian
      Moderator
      • Total Posts: 18,715

      But they won’t allow a floor vote on Medicare for All during a pandemic. What does that say?

      It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.--Eugene Debs

      Show me a man that gets rich by being a politician, and I'll show you a crook.--Harry Truman

    • #394790
      MizzGrizz
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 2,901

      ..kabuki theater.

      He’s leaving office in a week so who cares.

Viewing 8 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.