1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Impeachment???

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by cml750, Nov 6, 2018.

?

Impeach Trump?

  1. Yes

  2. No

Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. biff17

    biff17 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    Messages:
    2,901
    Likes Received:
    1,382
    Showing a potential candidate is not a tangible outcome.

    Impeachment does nothing tangible it will not in any way curtail behavior or remove Trump from office.

    Impeachment by only the house is not a punishment it's akin to scolding a bad dog.
     
  2. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,669
    Likes Received:
    17,295
    But it lays the framework for future tangible outcomes. If a President is in office when one party controls both houses then they will know they can be removed.

    Sending the right message is worthwhile.

    It will be recorded history that the President will be impeached. It is a punishment. Furthermore, if Trump committed high crimes and misdemeanors then it is the duty of Congress to impeach. There is always a reason to uphold one's responsibilities.
     
  3. biff17

    biff17 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    Messages:
    2,901
    Likes Received:
    1,382
    It does not lay any new framework that is not already there, did you miss the 2 previous impeachments?

    History is already recording what Trump is doing and has done.

    If even you are saying if he committed high crimes and treason that alone is a reason impeachment should not be started.

    Congress is upholding their responsibilities they are continuing investigations, what is the difference you think that impeachment will be.

    A mark on Trumps permanent record?
     
  4. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,669
    Likes Received:
    17,295
    Yes, there were two previous impeachments. But not impeaching signals that time has changed and Congress has abdicated their position as a co-equal branch of the govt.

    They should impeach and continue their investigations. The two things are not mutually exclusive.
     
  5. krosfyah

    krosfyah Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    7,435
    Likes Received:
    1,094
    Impeachment is the required first step to removing him from office. If the Dems don't take the first step, it's a 100% guarantee he won't be removed. What happens after impeachment is not in their control.
     
  6. biff17

    biff17 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    Messages:
    2,901
    Likes Received:
    1,382
    You are supposed to impeach after you investigate so that you have all evidence relevant to strengthen your case.

    I just think impeachment should have a chance of a tangible outcome and that impeachment should be based on high crimes and I don't think they have shown that high crimes have occurred.
     
    FranchiseBlade likes this.
  7. Os Trigonum

    Os Trigonum Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2014
    Messages:
    72,464
    Likes Received:
    110,410
    "The Bad History Informing the Impeachment Debate" at the American Prospect:

    We now live in a very different era culturally and politically, faced with an entirely new category of presidential lawlessness. First and foremost, impeachment isn’t merely a political consideration: As Greg Sargent notes, it’s a matter of moral imperative regardless of the political consequences. Given what was revealed in just the redacted Mueller report, the gaze of history will not look kindly upon a Democratic Party that so clearly shirks its moral and constitutional duties. Even if it’s true that Senate Republicans will refuse to convict—and it is—future generations are unlikely to forgive House Democrats for using such an excuse to avoid impeachment.​

    https://prospect.org/article/bad-history-informing-impeachment-debate
     
  8. biff17

    biff17 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    Messages:
    2,901
    Likes Received:
    1,382
    it's 100% guaranteed that he will not be removed from office through impeachment.

    You know what will remove him from office sooner?

    Vote him out.
     
  9. biff17

    biff17 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    Messages:
    2,901
    Likes Received:
    1,382
    This make no sense nobody is gonna care 2 years from now that the Democrats did not impeach Trump.

    Since do we care morally about politics.
     
  10. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,669
    Likes Received:
    17,295
    Fair enough. I disagree, but I won't fault you for your stance and your reasoning.

    The only thing I will say is that investigations could result in charges being filed after he leaves office so it is worthwhile to keep investigating.
     
    biff17 likes this.
  11. krosfyah

    krosfyah Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    7,435
    Likes Received:
    1,094
    Fact: He can be removed one of two ways:
    1. Voted out in 2020
    2a. Congress impeaches him
    2b. Senate removes him

    Opinion: 1 will happen "sooner" than 2b.

    It's a good opinion but an opinion, non-the-less. Let's have an honest conversation and not present it as fact.
     
  12. biff17

    biff17 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    Messages:
    2,901
    Likes Received:
    1,382
    And I don't fault you.

    Nice to have a reasonable conversation.
     
    mdrowe00 and FranchiseBlade like this.
  13. biff17

    biff17 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    Messages:
    2,901
    Likes Received:
    1,382
    i agree it is a matter of opinion.
     
  14. biff17

    biff17 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    Messages:
    2,901
    Likes Received:
    1,382
    It's amazing how times have changed.







    https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...83A678C3ED575C2A4D0183A678C3ED57&&FORM=VRDGAR

    SOUNDBITE: (English



    Earlier in the day, House prosecutors argued against dismissing the articles of impeachment.



    Representative Lindsey Graham asked Senators to let him prove his case against Clinton.



    SOUNDBITE: (English)

    "I have told you the best I can, there is no doubt these are high crimes in my opinion. This is a hard decision for our country, but when I first spoke to you I thought we'd be better off if Bill Clinton left office. I want a chance to prove to you why. Give me a chance to prove to you why I believe this. Why my colleagues voted our conscience to get this case to where it should be - not swept under a rug, but in a trial to disposition. I have lost no sleep worrying about the fact that Bill Clinton may have to be removed from office because of his conduct. I have lost tons of sleep thinking he may get away with what he did."

    SUPER CAPTION: Representative Lindsey Graham, Republican, House Manager








    Still think it's a waste of time but we know Republicans would full speed ahead
     
    #314 biff17, Apr 22, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2019
    FranchiseBlade likes this.
  15. NewRoxFan

    NewRoxFan Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2002
    Messages:
    53,802
    Likes Received:
    53,591
  16. Os Trigonum

    Os Trigonum Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2014
    Messages:
    72,464
    Likes Received:
    110,410
    "The Democratic Party is currently engaged in a battle between its head and its heart — between a thirst for the power that has eluded it in recent years and a real sense that impeaching Trump is simply the right thing to do. Warren and Harris are now giving Democrats’ license to pursue the latter course — to make this a moral calculation rather than the political one Pelosi has argued in favor of."



    excerpt:

    Monday was the day House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had to know might be coming but did her best to forestall. It was the day the dam she had erected against the Democrats’ impeachment fervor was breached.

    Despite polls long showing about three-quarters of Democratic voters favor impeachment, Pelosi and her fellow leaders had done a good job keeping their party’s congressional contingent unified behind a more cautious approach. While a handful of mostly backbenchers have kept beating the impeachment drum, it hadn’t really filtered up into the ranks of top leaders and presidential candidates.

    After the release of the Mueller report, that’s changing. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) was the first big-name 2020 candidate to come out in favor of impeachment, and on Monday Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) joined her.

    In some ways, it’s a wonder it’s taken this long. The 2020 Democratic field has already lurched to the left on a number of issues the party used to avoid for fear of looking too extreme: single-payer health care, jobs guarantees, mar1juana legalization, free or debt-free college and reparations for slavery. For members like Warren and Harris, supporting impeachment while other 2020 Democrats remain reluctant is a great way to get to the left of your opponents. And there’s very little downside in the primaries, given this is a 75-25 issue.

    But while the vast majority of Democratic voters have told pollsters they favor impeachment, there hasn’t really been a national movement. Part of that was because everyone was waiting to see the Mueller report, and part of that was that there really hasn’t been a national leader for the movement.

    Neither of those reasons applies any more. The Democratic base feels righteously peeved about what they see in the Mueller report and in Attorney General William P. Barr’s questionable actions in releasing it. They now have a document with which they can make the case that President Trump committed crimes. Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III himself didn’t reach that conclusion but only because he didn’t view it as his place to do so. If you look closely at his report, there are four or five areas in which Mueller seems to believe there is substantial evidence Trump’s actions meet the criteria for obstruction of justice.​
     
  17. NewRoxFan

    NewRoxFan Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2002
    Messages:
    53,802
    Likes Received:
    53,591
  18. krosfyah

    krosfyah Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    7,435
    Likes Received:
    1,094
    Here are a few more fun facts to consider:
    1. Trump was in deep negotiations with the Russians over Trump Tower Moscow prior to the election. (demonstrated in the Mueller report)
    2. The Mueller report did not reveal any financial findings.
    3. The Mueller report referred all counter intelligence findings to the FBI and those investigations are still ongoing.
    4. The dems have issued a subpoena for Trumps financial records (and Trump is suing to block the subpoena but he will lose that. It's settled law, congress has the authority to investigate as a co-equal branch.)
    5. Paul Manafort's job (meaning he got paid for it) for the 10 years prior to working for Trump's campaign was working to install pro-Russian officials into the Ukrainian government.

    These are indisputable facts.

    Opinion: WHEN the dems get a hold of Trumps financial records, they definitely will find dirt. As the saying goes, "follow the money". Impeachment investigations will not be limited to the findings in the Mueller report. We'll most certainly learn more about questionable behavior which could include financial charges for things like money laundering and campaign finance violations. The ride has just begun, will be interesting.
     
  19. Os Trigonum

    Os Trigonum Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2014
    Messages:
    72,464
    Likes Received:
    110,410
    and to non-political junkies, all of that will look like a fishing expedition. Keep Hope Alive
     
  20. JuanValdez

    JuanValdez Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    34,059
    Likes Received:
    13,408
    I think I've decided impeachment is imperative. I'd earlier (probably in this thread) said I didn't want to have an impeachment just on obstruction without any other high crime. The reasoning there being that the obstruction was already obvious but I wanted it done the right way and charge him with all the relevant crimes instead of just grabbing what was currently available. There's some pretty concerning circumstantial evidence in the public record now about conspiracy but still no smoking gun. So, maybe you can't put that in the impeachment charge, which would leave you with 'just' obstruction. But, I think we can go forward with 'just' obstruction because:

    1. Precedent. Obstruction is apparently sufficiently high a crime to warrant an impeachment, if not necessarily removal. And for the record, I had supported and still support the impeachment of Clinton.
    2. Trump's obstruction was extensive and brazen.
    3. His obstruction includes the cooperation and coordination with other political actors (unlike Clinton's) by having them lie and perjure on his behalf.
    4. Trump's obstruction damaged our ability to adequately respond to Russia's infiltration.
    5. Trump's obstruction included eroding many democratic institutions by undermining the public confidence in our investigatory bodies, attacks on the media (some deserved, honestly, but also many based on Trump's lies in order to hide the truth from the public), and attacks on the system of checks and balances that are supposed to prevent these abuses.
    6. His obstruction included abuses of the power of the office, most notably in firing the autonomous head of the FBI in order to disrupt his investigation. But also doing things like intimating the promise of pardons for co-conspirators who don't flip.

    So, it's 'just' obstruction, but obstruction of the worst sort. So bad that I'd call that a high crime in a way that Clinton's crimes couldn't hope to sniff. I need Pelosi to stop being a Democrat and be a leader here. If it ends up hurting Democrats to do it, you still have to do it.

    Your list is not collectively exhaustive. It looks more like this:

    1. Voted out in 2020
    2. Congress impeaches him and Senate removes him
    3. Term limited in 2024
    4. Dies in office
    5. Steps down
    6. Removed by the cabinet evoking the 25th

    We can give up on the Cabinet removing him, and betting on death doesn't seem like much of a strategy. He might step down as an orderly retreat if removal by the Senate seems unavoidable, but not otherwise. Congress might not manage to remove him before the 2020 election, but it might still be worthwhile if he's going to continue being president until 2024. And you kinda gotta beat the Nov 2020 deadline because if he wins that election, the American voters would have laundered his crimes and impeachment would be impossible. If biff is right that we'd sooner vote him out than the Senate would remove him, that's a pretty big gamble. Lose that gamble, and he's gotten off scott free.
     
    krosfyah and FranchiseBlade like this.

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now