The Trump election and administration along with the total sell-out of the Republican Party are cancers on the United States liberal democratic tradition.The Will of the People and their General Welfare has been subverted by moral-less money. Science, fact, empathy and humanity, the basis of the American Idea, are losing ground to lies, manipulation and propaganda. Every means of governmental and social reform should be enacted to counter this creeping fascism. Every day Trump and his unapproved temporary bureaucratic cronies are killing our future with a thousand regulatory paper cuts, exposing us to dangers, diminishing our standing in the world, promoting hate and division and entrenching non-democratic power. Impeachment is the way the Founding Fathers intended to curtail the powers of a Imperial President, so yes, this is exactly the times they foresaw. Resistance everyday every way
You should ask yourself "are we the bad guys?" Should regulation be written by lobbyist? Should voting rights be curtailed? Are gerrymandered districts in the public interest? Is the denial of scientific consensus good governmental policy? Does the President have any obligation to truth? Was the denial of a fair hearing for Merrick Garland in the democratic tradition? Did Brett Kavanaugh look like the type of person we should have as a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land? Are trade wars and tariffs reasonable international negotiations? Should sovereign agreements be abandoned? What does that say about future treaties? Should governmental bureaucracies be run by the proponents of the industries they regulate? Without Senate confirmation? Should the bully pulpit be occupied by a man with no morality? I could go on.....
What does it say about you that instead of replying with an objective argument why he shouldn’t be impeached, you just reply with stupid memes? Just answer the question on impeachment if you are a serious supporter and not just a right wing troll who backs trump just because you have some hole in your life and the only thing that fills that hole is owning the libs on the Internet. So tell us? Answer these core questions? -Why is it okay to keep a President in office who has committed obstruction? -Why are you okay with welcoming help winning an election from a hostile foreign power? -Why (especially as a Christian who has a picture of Christ on your profile pic) are you okay with blatant lying? -Why are you (as a Christian) okay with paying off pornstars in an illegal hush money election fraud conspiracy? -Why are you okay with tax fraud? -Why couldn’t Mike Pence run a conservative presidency with the same right wing policies without the criminality? -What is Trump doing to make the world a better place? So instead of just replying with your snide memes and 4chan gifs, why not make a case as to why we are all wrong about the president and why our concerns about where the country is going (towards autocracy and consolidated power in the presidency) actually aren’t warranted? Make that case instead of just being a snarky hypocritical troll. Tell us why he should remain in office and why you are okay with an obvious move towards autocracy where the president is above the law?
I will... Should the security clearance process for keeping the nations secrets be circumvented? Should family members be unapproved members of an administration? Should background, training and professional interest be important in selecting departmental heads? Should the person with the most money have the largest voice in election campaigning? Does a strong middle class or a strong elite class make for a more prosperous nation? Should the US support authoritarian regimes? Should monetary policy be outside of politics? Should US political debate take the form of 144 character Tweets? Should the US Attorney General publicly and politically defend the President? Should Foreign influences on our elections be tolerated? I could go on....
I am going out on a limb here and say that the POTUS has at best read no more than one paragraph of the MR. Thus, the POTUS in depth analysis of the MR is pure BS.
He should not be impeached because there is zero chance that the senate will remove him, it is just an exercise in futility, and it could help him in the 2020 election. The most important thing is remove him from the WH, impeachment will not get the job done, so forget about it.
There are plenty of roads. There is more than one way to get to the destination. Volume II of the Mueller Report makes blisteringly clear the facts of Trump's obstruction. But then we know it because so much of it took place in public view. Committee investigations, in addition to walking the public again through the obstruction arc, will reveal through his finances his obligations to Russia and Saudi Arabia and illustrate how he is operating not to "faithfully execute the office of president of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States", but to hold up his end of quid pro quo deals with Russian oligarchs (like Agalarov and Deripaska) and with Saudi Arabia/Qatar/UAE to the detriment of US national security, in the process paving the road for the Saudis--who, illustrating their capacity for measured restraint, only just publicly executed 37 people who voiced criticism of Saudi rule--to produce nuclear weaponry. What is important, whichever course is taken, is to televise the testimony and presentation of evidence so that the bulk of Americans--who don't read, don't research, but get whatever information they do from TV--will learn the extent of his corruption and abuse. If the course is ultimately impeachment, then when Senate Republicans acquit despite the publicly aired evidence, placing party over country, they should be hammered relentlessly for it in their 2020 campaigns. There is value to this path if used correctly.
Ehh. I don't think failure to report a payoff to a p*rn star to keep quiet about their interlude is a high crime. It might be indictable as a campaign finance infraction, but I don't really want to remove presidents for breaking campaign finance law unless it's really severe. Interesting historical example. Listening to the saga of the fight over records did make me think of impeachment. Wouldn't go there quickly, obviously, but at some point the House has to insist on its authority and pretty much the only big hammer it has is impeachment -- if not of Trump, than of Mnuchin or any other civil officer who won't obey a lawful order from the Congress. Is that a dare? Say double-dog dare and we're on! That's just a circus. What's the point of hearings if you won't act?
What was the point of benghazi hearings? To get the lazy people to know what president Trump did, isn't that obvious?
Larry Sabato and Kyle Kondik argue "It's easy to see how Trump can be reelected." Do we need a separate Trump Re-Election Campaign thread perhaps? https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...29b90efa879_story.html?utm_term=.3214f9269fe1
The benghazi hearings were decried as political theatre. As much as Republicans tried to hang the murder of the ambassador on Clinton, it didn't appear to be very effective in the elections either. Is that what you want to repeat?
President actually did something, he is unfit to be the president, unfortunately many people do not know exactly what he did, so hearings will air all his misdeeds in the public. However, impeachment is useless, so no need to go there. I just hope he gets voted out in 2020.
The house should move forward and start impeachment. What else can they accomplish in a majority held house? Senate and the Supreme Court stands in the way though.
It will become a constitutional crisis. That the Supreme Court will “ be able to rule on a motion to dismiss legally invalid charges, Dershowitz writes.” https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...rt-could-overturn-trump-impeachment?_amp=true
Have no clue what trump's unofficial lawyer and the washington examiner is getting at... first, its from July 2018, and refers to "collusion isn't against the law". trump wouldn't be impeached for "collusion" so the outdated article is already off track. Then it refers to Bush vs Gore for who knows what reason since it has nothing to do with impeachment and the House of Representative's constitutional role.
