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!

  2. Live Rockets Discussion
    Jalen Green looks like a legit star, Amen Thompson is shining and the Rockets have found something without Alperen Sengun. Clutch is talking about the 10-game winning streak at 11:00am as we talk Rockets live!

    Talking Rockets - LIVE!

[Atlantic] The Case for Impeachment...Now.

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by SamFisher, Jan 17, 2019.

  1. biff17

    biff17 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    Messages:
    2,901
    Likes Received:
    1,382
    i am not asking for your agreement and I am not looking for a battle.

    i just want to understand why people who obviously want Trump gone would not go out and vote to do that because they did not get their historical footnote.

    it's the definition of virtue signalling.

    Not saying this is you, just saying.

    i don't really care if they impeach or not, I think it's a waste of time but I don't think it's a negative.

    i just want the impeachment to have a laser focus and not just base it on an interpretation of the Mueller report.
     
  2. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,669
    Likes Received:
    17,295
    I don't think it would be an interpretation of the Mueller report. Mueller laid out the criteria to meet Obstruction of justice. He laid out the evidence. The evidence clearly meets all three parts of the criteria on multiple counts. Mueller's own testimony said that the Trump campaign was actively working with and seeking help from a hostile foreign intelligence agency.
     
  3. Sweet Lou 4 2

    Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    37,714
    Likes Received:
    18,912
    It only says the House has the power to do so, not that it is obligated to do so
     
  4. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182
    It doesn't say "may, if politically expedient according to a bunch of commentating dipshits"

    It doesn't say "may not, if there's an election coming up"

    The word in the impeachment powers is "shall". Look at other things that are designated using "shall" in section 2 or 3. They are not exactly optional requirements like building post offices.

    The President is violating his duties, by repeatedl committing textbook high crimes and misdemeanors.

    In the case of high crimes and misdemeanors- he shall be impeached and removed.

    It is plainly the duty of the house act in this circumstance. Their duty is to pursue impeachment.

    This duty is not dischargeable.
     
  5. NewRoxFan

    NewRoxFan Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2002
    Messages:
    53,805
    Likes Received:
    53,592
  6. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182
    https://slate.com/news-and-politics...mp-house-of-representatives-consequences.html

    This kick-the-can-down-the-road play may or may not be a wise tactical move. I am not a tactician. But it borders on insanity not to realize that ignoring all of the president’s past bad acts encourages and indeed rewards even worse new ones. Each time Trump sees Pelosi and the House Democratic leadership blink in the face of a challenge, he redoubles his illegal behaviors. House Democrats are, in their acquiescence, in fact training him to go ever further the next time. There are good moral and strategic arguments for the House to do the one thing it is empowered to do in the face of repeated criminality and misconduct and incompetence of this president. But mine is an argument more deeply rooted in the general laws of physics: To do nothing in the face of repeated lawlessness is to court yet more lawlessness in the future.

    The net outcome of doing nothing is not politically or morally neutral. The net outcome is future loss after future loss.​
     
    DaDakota and FranchiseBlade like this.
  7. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    53,658
    Likes Received:
    41,539
    You’re making my point though. Support for Trump isn’t that flexible and whether impeachment happens are not the numbers might not change much regarding approval ratings.
    If it does seem like it’s not going to matter much then there is even less reason to not do your Constitutional duty.

    There is another danger here though to Pelosi and The Democrats. One of the biggest criticisms of the Democrats is that they are too timid to act and base actions too much on polling. This is one case where that very much seems like Pelosi is being timid and worried about polling. While this get more people to vote for trump it could turn off voters who otherwise might’ve come out to vote for the Democrats. When there is so much scandal coming out of this Administration yet leading Democrats do not exercise their Constitutional prerogatives that can lead to more cynicism and possibly a fractured get of the party.
     
  8. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    53,658
    Likes Received:
    41,539
    I still consider myself an independent as someone who while consider Trump and the GOP as being corrupt am very leery of the direction that people like Sanders and Warren are taking the Democrats too. That said you don’t need to consider me. Consider people like Justin Amash, Howard Schultz, and Michael Bloomberg. All of them are for very much for impeachment. I don’t think it is true that most independents oppose impeachment and support for impeachment among independents might be higher than you think.
     
  9. Rashmon

    Rashmon Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2000
    Messages:
    19,153
    Likes Received:
    14,303
    Enjoyable article...

    Column: Trump pulls ‘reverse-Nixon’ over Ukraine call: ‘I AM A CROOK!’
    By REX HUPPKE
    CHICAGO TRIBUNE |
    SEP 23, 2019 | 10:23 AM

    As expected, liberals spent most of the weekend screaming “IMPEACH!” over news that President Donald Trump had again done something that is likely an impeachable offense.

    This time around it involves a phone call with the incoming Ukranian president, a whistleblower report regarding that phone call that a Trump appointee found to be of “urgent concern” and a blatant attempt by the president of the United States to get a foreign country to interfere in the 2020 election.

    Will these libs ever just give it a rest?

    Because he’s super good at doing crimes, Trump and his attorney, Rudy Giuliani, spent the weekend effectively acknowledging that they did, in fact, try to get a foreign power to launch an investigation into widely debunked allegations against Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.

    That’s just good presidenting right there: You know there’s a debunked scandal against your potential opponent. You know facts are stupid. So you lean on a foreign country to reincarnate a dead scandal and then let that zombie scandal eat what’s left of your supporters’ brains.

    What president wouldn’t do that, aside from all presidents who came before Trump?

    To make this easy for the weak-minded lefties, I’m going to detail five iron-clad reasons Trump should not be impeached for committing — and admitting to committing — an impeachable offense.

    1) Trump is pulling a reverse-Nixon, and you can’t impeach a president who pulls a reverse-Nixon.

    In 1973, President Richard Nixon famously denied involvement in the Watergate cover-up by saying, “I am not a crook!” Articles of impeachment would’ve been filed against Nixon had he remained in office.

    But Trump’s reverse-Nixon has him effectively saying, “I am a crook!”

    On Sunday, in perfectly normal and easy-to-understand English, the president spoke about the call in which he reportedly pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to relaunch a closed investigation into Biden: “The conversation I had was largely congratulatory, was largely corruption, all of the corruption taking place, was largely the fact that we don’t want our people, like Vice President Biden and his son, creating to the corruption already in the Ukraine.”

    So there it is. Did the president of the United States ask the president of a foreign country that was eagerly awaiting $250 million in U.S. aid to target a political opponent? Yes. Is that a clear attempt by Trump to use the power of his office to benefit himself and put self-interest above the interest of the nation? Heck yeah! Is the administration breaking the law and engaging in a cover-up by keeping the whistleblower report relating to this matter from congressional oversight committees? Yeppers.

    But because Trump up and admitted it all — successfully pulling off the never-before-achieved reverse-Nixon — there’s no way Congress can impeach. Look it up, it’s in the Constitution. Probably.

    2) Trump is having fun committing impeachable offenses, and it would be mean to stop him now.

    On Sunday, New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman tweeted about the Ukraine scandal: “The president, per people close to him, is enjoying all this as it plays out.”

    Clearly, Trump gets a real kick out of “triggering the libs” by mowing down the fundamental standards of our democracy and “faithfully executing the Office of President of the United States” only in the literal, murdering it sense.

    Don’t take that away from him. Maybe he’s the self-proclaimed most successful president ever because he gets to commit impeachable offenses without consequence. Everyone deserves some joy in life.

    3) You can’t impeach Trump for doing bad things because other people may also have done bad things, possibly.

    The minute you bring up any alleged misdeed by Donald Trump, his supporters scream, “OH YEAH, WELL WHAT ABOUT THAT TIME (INSERT NAME OF EVIL LIBERAL) DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING?!?”

    They will have no factual basis for their argument, but that doesn’t matter because they say it forcefully and refuse to admit they’re wrong. That, as any first-year law student will tell you, makes it true.

    For example, if I murder someone, I can just make up a story about how another person murdered someone and didn’t get charged, and that would insulate me from prosecution.

    So did Trump violate his oath of office? Yes. But did Hillary Clinton violate her oath of office when she was president by allowing aliens to lure rural Americans to untoward sex parties in the basement of a pizza parlor? Absolutely.

    Game. Set. Match.

    4) Impeaching Trump would damage the Democrats’ carefully honed “We’re too afraid to impeach Trump” brand.

    Congressional Democrats have spent the past three years not flexing their political muscles and pretending Trump is a normal political figure who can be contained by silly things like “rules” and “laws” and “basic common decency.”

    Their inaction has emboldened Trump to think he can just get on the phone with a foreign leader and ask him to dig up dirt on a political opponent. Why would Democrats want to undo all the non-good they’ve done by suddenly cracking down on a lawless president? Totally off-brand.

    5) Impeachment will rile up Trump’s base and divide the country, two things that are definitely not already happening.

    If Democrats try to impeach President Trump, his supporters — known for their calm demeanor and openness to hearing both sides — might get angry. That would be terrible for Democrats’ chances of winning over people who think Trump — who according to the Washington Post’s fact-checker has told more than 12,000 false or misleading claims in less than 1,000 days — is a great truth-teller.

    It also might divide the country by exposing the extent of Trump’s corruption and giving the truth a chance to win out.

    Which would be terrible. For Donald Trump.
     
    B-Bob and RayRay10 like this.
  10. Sweet Lou 4 2

    Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    37,714
    Likes Received:
    18,912
    He has a floor that is inflexible and a ceiling that is inflexible. But in between is re-election. There are enough people who could be swayed that he wins again. He has a strong economy and he managed to appeal to white working class folks in midwestern states.

    His path to victory lies in painting the Democrats as the main problem and himself as the victim. It's worked for many demagogues. I am not saying Pelosi should not impeach him, but she should be very careful about it. It's not even clear that she had enough votes in the caucus to impeach Trump. What if an impeachment vote failed, do you know what a massive victory it would be for Trump?
     
  11. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182
    No, in between is the irreparable damage to the United States and its people, that a derelict, corrupt and incompetent President continues to do every single day and the re-election campaign that he is committing impeachable acts to fraudulently secure for himself.

    There is a sworn duty to stop this.
    [​IMG]
     
    mikol13, DaDakota and Rashmon like this.
  12. DaDakota

    DaDakota If you want to know, just ask!

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 1999
    Messages:
    123,879
    Likes Received:
    32,770
    Stop trying to be nice, get in the mud with Trump and the traitors around him - Attack attack attack - still pissed that Al Franken resigned when President p***y Grabber basically brushed it off.

    We need to fight fire with fire.

    DD
     
    Rashmon likes this.
  13. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182
    It's not even attack attack attack.

    It's duty duty duty.

    I linked this above but it needs to be stated again - now even the swing seat democrats are on board with moving forward with impeachment proceedings.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...gations-are-threat-all-we-have-sworn-protect/


    If these allegations are true, we believe these actions represent an impeachable offense. We do not arrive at this conclusion lightly, and we call on our colleagues in Congress to consider the use of all congressional authorities available to us, including the power of "inherent contempt" and impeachment hearings, to address these new allegations, find the truth and protect our national security.
    As members of Congress, we have prioritized delivering for our constituents — remaining steadfast in our focus on health care, infrastructure, economic policy and our communities' priorities. Yet everything we do harks back to our oaths to defend the country. These new allegations are a threat to all we have sworn to protect. We must preserve the checks and balances envisioned by the Founders and restore the trust of the American people in our government. And that is what we intend to do​

    This was part of the rationale that Pelosi and internet genius political analysts pushed on with: "no you can't impeach it will endanger the purple districts". It doesn't get more purple than Abigail Spanberger's seat. That rationale is gone.

    There is no more time to delay, and the further they wait the more it becomes normalized.

    Begin the Inquiry. Now.
     
  14. Nook

    Nook Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    Messages:
    53,785
    Likes Received:
    111,485
    The time to have began impeachment was right after the release of the Mueller Report.

    The democrats could have controlled the narrative of the contents of the report.

    It did not happen and the narrative now is that the report was inconclusive.
     
    RayRay10 and DaDakota like this.
  15. B-Bob

    B-Bob "94-year-old self-described dreamer"

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    34,618
    Likes Received:
    33,558
    Maybe.

    To me, this is more clear cut, with fewer pages for Americans to read. And the president is basically admitting the action (in his barely coherent way).

    I agree with Sam. If our elected officials avoid sworn duties as part of a political calculation, how is that any different than, say, avoiding supreme court nominee hearings for nearly a year? Or all the other cynical crap that Mitch pulls? Dems may argue it's for a "better outcome," but that presumes too much precognition anyway.

    There is a non-trivial argument that what 45 has done is worse than what Nixon did, as it involves foreign powers.
     
    Rashmon likes this.
  16. Dubious

    Dubious Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2001
    Messages:
    18,316
    Likes Received:
    5,087
    But "if the President does it, it's not illegal" is an easy argument for 45% of Americans... either way.

    And the Dem's are not going to get impeachment in the Senate so Trump can argue exoneration the same as with Mueller.
     
  17. dobro1229

    dobro1229 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Messages:
    23,888
    Likes Received:
    19,692
    I don’t think the articles of impeachment will rely much on volume 1 of the Mueller report and I don’t think it needs to. Here’s the articles I think will be included in the draft that comes out of the inquiry:

    Article 1: National Security Threat: Ukraine extortion and other foreign influence
    Article 2: Obstruction: A. Congress and B. DOJ
    Article 3: Campaign finance violations: Stormy Payments and other violations
    Article 4: Abuse of Power- Take your pick


    I think elements of the Mueller report can be sprinkled in here and there but I think leading with Ukraine will be what they go with since it’s such an obvious one.
     
  18. Amiga

    Amiga I get vaunted sacred revelations from social media
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    21,698
    Likes Received:
    18,478
    One precognition that seems to escape Dem that are against impeachment is free and fair election. If the house does nothing,
    Trump next step is what to enhance his chances to win? He would be encouraged to do whatever it takes... including outright fraud.
     
    B-Bob likes this.
  19. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182




    It's happening...?
     
  20. B-Bob

    B-Bob "94-year-old self-described dreamer"

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    34,618
    Likes Received:
    33,558
    I'm very sad for our country, and the path will be turbulent, but the constitution is pretty clear on what should be done. I think the Dem leadership avoided it for as long as they could, TBH. :(
     
    RayRay10 likes 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