What's new
By:
Filters

The official "let's impeach Trump" thread

I do want to put on my lawyer hat for a bit here and say that the "unless there's a statutory crime, you can't impeach" argument is very bizarre to me. I see Jonathan Turley and the GOP talking heads say that like it's this beyond obvious statement. It doesn't actually make any sense in the overall framework of the American legal system.

The structure of our government is that there are tiers of legal authority. Roughly:

Tier One: The Constitution

Tier Two: Statutes.

Tier Three: Administrative law and implementation decisions.

And so on and so forth. We can have debates about where things like executive orders and OLC decisions sit, but there's no dispute that the Constitution sits at the top.

In this scheme, laws derive their power and force because they are in accordance with the larger constitutional design. This is why the Supreme Court invalidates laws that are Unconstitutional. By contrast, it does not invalidate portions of the Constitution that are incompatible with individual laws passed by Congress. The existence of Constitutional mechanisms takes precedence over the existence of laws: not the other way around.

The GOP insistence that it is impossible to invoke constitutional remedies without reference to later-drafted criminal statutes gets this power relationship precisely backwards. The impeachment process was drafted and defined before there was even an operating United States criminal code. The impeachment clauses of the Constitution exist independently of any specific criminal violation - they do not require Congress to have passed a specific "don't abuse your power brah" criminal statute in order to be effective. Many of the crimes against the country that a President could commit are probably logistically only commitable by that one person. No one else has the authority to sell US Foreign policy credibly. A legal theory that the impeachment provisions of the Constitution are inoperable unless later codified by statutory grant presupposes that the Constitution gets its power from later law and that we need a separate criminal code that applies to only a single person. These are, frankly, legal absurdities.

Those who most claim to love our Constitution sure do their damnedest to render it ineffective. They either don't understand the basics of how the government is supposed to work or are purposely saying things that "sort of sound right" to confuse people who don't know any better. And it honestly saddens me to these sort of "ignorant of civics 101" talking points spread so widely during this process.
 
Also, it is surreal to me that it has been taken as an article of faith that the Russia investigation turned up nothing. We have the Mueller report, which documents all the Russian hacking and distribution of information to Wikileaks. We have Don Jr.'s "I love it email" and we know they met with the Kremlin lawyer about Magnitsky act sanctions. We know all about Manafort and Flynn's connections to Deripaska and other Putin connected oligarchs. We've got people in jail that were at the closest points of Trump's inner circle.

Just today: Maria Butina, the Russian spy who infiltrated the NRA and used Russian money to pump up the influence of the gun right's group,to help Trump, in the 2016 election, has been hired as a new television presenter for state-run Russia Today. She wears a t-shirt that says "foreign agent" in the promotional video for her new show.

https://tolknews.ru/news/27366-stal...TxpoutiARz3VinWD5IE_XAt3KhSnOYbPFwog9CY07zKgs

Here's video of Butina talking to then candidate Donald Trump at a public forum, in which they agree that there should be no sanctions on Russia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Fp1TioaLcg&feature=youtu.be

The core issue in American politics is that Trump's administration has fundamental and glaring legitimacy problems, he was elected by a minority with the interference of an adversarial foreign power. In reality, the GOP has won the popular vote in a presidential election precisely one time in the last 30 years. A rule by the minority is not sustainable over decades in a consitutional democracy, and there's a push to pretend that isn't what has occurred. Trump's illegitimacy cannot be psychologically acknowledged by the party - it requires too much of a shock to the overall system of understanding of what and who America is. But until we break the deadlock caused by illegitimate government we're all going to be at each other's throats perpetually.
 
sirkickyass said:
I do want to put on my lawyer hat for a bit here and say that the "unless there's a statutory crime, you can't impeach" argument is very bizarre to me. I see Jonathan Turley and the GOP talking heads say that like it's this beyond obvious statement. It doesn't actually make any sense in the overall framework of the American legal system.

The structure of our government is that there are tiers of legal authority. Roughly:

Tier One: The Constitution

Tier Two: Statutes.

Tier Three: Administrative law and implementation decisions.

And so on and so forth. We can have debates about where things like executive orders and OLC decisions sit, but there's no dispute that the Constitution sits at the top.

In this scheme, laws derive their power and force because they are in accordance with the larger constitutional design. This is why the Supreme Court invalidates laws that are Unconstitutional. By contrast, it does not invalidate portions of the Constitution that are incompatible with individual laws passed by Congress. The existence of Constitutional mechanisms takes precedence over the existence of laws: not the other way around.

The GOP insistence that it is impossible to invoke constitutional remedies without reference to later-drafted criminal statutes gets this power relationship precisely backwards. The impeachment process was drafted and defined before there was even an operating United States criminal code. The impeachment clauses of the Constitution exist independently of any specific criminal violation - they do not require Congress to have passed a specific "don't abuse your power brah" criminal statute in order to be effective. Many of the crimes against the country that a President could commit are probably logistically only commitable by that one person. No one else has the authority to sell US Foreign policy credibly. A legal theory that the impeachment provisions of the Constitution are inoperable unless later codified by statutory grant presupposes that the Constitution gets its power from later law and that we need a separate criminal code that applies to only a single person. These are, frankly, legal absurdities.

Those who most claim to love our Constitution sure do their damnedest to render it ineffective. They either don't understand the basics of how the government is supposed to work or are purposely saying things that "sort of sound right" to confuse people who don't know any better. And it honestly saddens me to these sort of "ignorant of civics 101" talking points spread so widely during this process.
Click to expand...

I love it when you speak legalese to me.
 
sirkickyass said:
In your view what is "the middle?"
Click to expand...

The middle looks something like this.

We can agree mostly on what the facts are. We cut the hyper partisan BS. The outrage is spread equally to all those that are guilty of wrong doing. It isn't directed in just one direction while deliberately overlooking other important factors.

We can look at politics and admit that there are troubling things coming from both sides and it all deserves attention and rectification.

We can admit the there is hyperpartisan propaganda being spewed by both sides and the media outlets that supports them. Then discuss productive ways to try and fix it.

For example: You cant overlook what the FBI, the Clintons, etc have done and solely focus on what you dont like about Trump. It all matters if you care about truth and justice.

But that isnt what happens is it? If someone on the right brings up anything the left is accused of doing it is mostly rigorously defended and those who talk about it are called idiots. Or if it's pointed out that the media is taking sides then you are called an idiot and told its only Fox News. Responding this way to people is only going to get you what you have been getting. No one is going to just agree with you because you look down your nose at them and berate them for disagreeing. Especially if only half the claimed facts line up.
 
Last edited:
fishonjazz said:
Remember how you wanted Trump impeached for multiple things besides the Ukraine bribery but even said that you think he is guilty of that but that there just wouldn't be enough evidence to get him for that?
So you think he has done 3 impeachable offenses but there is only enough evidence on two of the things.
Good times

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
Harambe said:
I'm glad mainstream media didn't get to you.
Click to expand...

You must need your daily dose of attention from me. Look, you can't honestly not expect this to happen to the guy. He can't go around acting the way he does and say the things he does without painting a giant target on his back. People are going to be out to get him and all of this is to be expected, deserved even. I would go as far as saying you are up in the night if you don't think Trump not only expects the blowback but wants it and thrives on it. That's why my pet theory is still that Trump was behind the whistleblower. That's just a hunch and I have nothing to back it up, so stop demanding i google some link to prove it to you. I just think he thinks it's the best way to win the political battle. Keep in mind this is all one giant political battle. You can either see it that way, from above, or you can be one of the actors unwittingly running around inside the play.
 
sirkickyass said:
Also, it is surreal to me that it has been taken as an article of faith that the Russia investigation turned up nothing. We have the Mueller report, which documents all the Russian hacking and distribution of information to Wikileaks. We have Don Jr.'s "I love it email" and we know they met with the Kremlin lawyer about Magnitsky act sanctions. We know all about Manafort and Flynn's connections to Deripaska and other Putin connected oligarchs. We've got people in jail that were at the closest points of Trump's inner circle.

Just today: Maria Butina, the Russian spy who infiltrated the NRA and used Russian money to pump up the influence of the gun right's group,to help Trump, in the 2016 election, has been hired as a new television presenter for state-run Russia Today. She wears a t-shirt that says "foreign agent" in the promotional video for her new show.

https://tolknews.ru/news/27366-stal...TxpoutiARz3VinWD5IE_XAt3KhSnOYbPFwog9CY07zKgs

Here's video of Butina talking to then candidate Donald Trump at a public forum, in which they agree that there should be no sanctions on Russia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Fp1TioaLcg&feature=youtu.be

The core issue in American politics is that Trump's administration has fundamental and glaring legitimacy problems, he was elected by a minority with the interference of an adversarial foreign power. In reality, the GOP has won the popular vote in a presidential election precisely one time in the last 30 years. A rule by the minority is not sustainable over decades in a consitutional democracy, and there's a push to pretend that isn't what has occurred. Trump's illegitimacy cannot be psychologically acknowledged by the party - it requires too much of a shock to the overall system of understanding of what and who America is. But until we break the deadlock caused by illegitimate government we're all going to be at each other's throats perpetually.
Click to expand...

I think you're living too much in the world of facts.

The alt world that Fox News and the vast right wing echo chamber have created the (incorrect) idea that the Mueller investigation turned up nothing. They assume (correctly) that most people haven't read the report. Hell, 1/4 of all American adults haven't read a single book this year and most of them have a high school diploma or less according to this survey. Even the NY Times and other MSM outlets have been caught up in confusing viewers/readers of the actual facts surrounding Trump's crimes. Just the other day the NY Times put out a piece describing the impeachment in ridiculous "both sides" terms.

It was not just that the committee eventually voted to approve two articles of impeachment, charging Mr. Trump with abusing the power of his office and obstructing Congress. Throughout the committee’s debate, the lawmakers from the two parties could not even agree on a basic set of facts in front of them...
It was an example of the different impeachment realities that the two parties are living in. But it was hardly the only one.
Click to expand...

By placating to "fairness" rather than "accuracy", the MSM is doing our already intellectually lazy and ignorant populace a severe disservice. By failing to clearly point out the GOP's lies and the actual facts from Mueller and now impeachment, we have a populace that really struggles to deal with your world of facts.
  • Do we recognize that the GOP is the minority party today?
  • Do we recognize the problems associated with a Senate and EC that favors a party increasingly out of line with the will of the majority?
  • Do we recognize how much help Trump received from Russia? Do we remember Maria Butina? Do we recognize the advantage of Facebook and Cambridge Analytica? Do we understand the value that Wikileaks had in unleashing Podesta's emails on Oct 7, shortly after the Access Hollywood tape came out?
  • How are we to recognize we're being gaslighted when the media is doing its best to try and normalize and "both sides" Trump's disinformation campaign?
 
Last edited:
NPC D4617 said:
Sure, Id be happy to answer your questions.

I could point to dozens of fake news stories about Trump, but why not just point to the mother load that proves my point.

Russia Gate. Nothing a bigger lie and nonsensical BS conspiracy story than this. Inside of this bgger lie has been many lies told. See below.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...sia-investigation-questions-remaining-928081/

  1. Are media corrections forthcoming?
"The Horowitz report makes clear that multiple news cycles over the last few years were dominated by reports that were either incorrect or lacking factual foundation.

These included assertions by multiple outlets that the Steele dossier was not central to the FBI’s efforts to secure a warrant on Page, that the FBI found Christopher Steele and his dossier “credible,” that tales of FISA abuse were conspiracy theory (one of many claims Mother Jones called “********”), that the memo written by Devin Nunes on the subject was wrong and had been “debunked,” that Russians “blocked” Trump from nominating Mitt Romney as Secretary of State, that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen was in Prague (presumably to meet Russian hackers), that a “pee tape” existed, that Russia’s Alfa Bank and the Trump campaign were communicating via a secret server, that the FISA warrant on Page must have been producing good intelligence in order to be renewed three times, and many other things."


Why do I support Trump and why did I vote for him?

Im not religious and I have never watched a single episode of The Apprentice. So those guesses are wrong. Im not a true conservative. Im just temporarily taking this side. I voted for him because he represented throwing a wrench in the corrupt political system. The more the establishment goes after him and exposes themselves as what I thought they were, which are corrupt liars, the more I support him.

As I have stated before, I can see his flaws. I would have much rather have preferred it was someone else that was doing this. Someone smarter and less cringey. But no one else had the power or guts to do what he is doing.

In a weird way he has the outward appearances of being a terrible person, but at the same time is doing one of the bravest things Ive seen a politician do. He is a one man show taking on things no one else thought was possible. Im honestly suprised he hasnt been JFK'd yet.
Click to expand...


So, I read the article-- thanks for including the link. It's compelling, to be sure, and I think any reasonable person would read it with very little surprise at the idea that our political media machine is churning out a fair amount of crap. But a lot of it is also very anecdotal-- not a lot of news is proven to be fake from this author's commentary. I can definitely appreciate his skepticism, though, and there's a lot there to consider.

As for 'Russia Gate', I have a hard time with that dismissive label and everything it implies. It's just an easy out for anyone with no desire to take off their MAGA hat and look at that situation with an objectively critical eye. The outcome of that situation was not that Trump did nothing wrong, was it? The outcome was that no conclusion could be reached with the information on hand. And the thing I can't shake is that Mueller-- a good guy who for absolutely no reason has been accepted by the right as somehow incompetent and corrupt merely because Trump said so-- not only did not exonerate Trump, but actually made it clear Russia did in fact interfere with our elections, and warned that Russia will continue to do so. When I put that on the same page as Trump openly inviting Russia to interfere with our election process, it's awfully difficult not to arrive at the conclusion that there was, at a minimum, a very passive and shrewdly-executed cooperation between Trump and Russia. Explain how I am wrong in my thinking there-- I'm happy to hear it and reconsider my position.

It's also very difficult for me to understand his business dealings within Russia and not believe that a man who has spent his life pursuing financial fortune in unquestionably shady ways might be tempted to act out in an opportunistic fashion. To not only publicly glad-hand Putin the way he has been since before he took office, but to behind the scenes keep Putin happy so his business interests remain afloat. And what better way to do so than by inviting Putin to interfere in our processes, thinking-- as an individual believing himself to be of particularly high IQ might-- that he is in control of the situation? That's nothing but conjecture on my part, but I don't think my logic is bad or my basic analysis is unfair.

Also, almost as a side note here, I don't really make the connection between the Russia investigation's credibility or lack thereof, and the Ukraine situation. Aren't they unrelated...? How does one delegitimize the other?

That he has captured the unquestioning loyalty of apparently most Americans is fascinating to me, since I'm one of the minority who can't seem to understand why he is the right guy for the job. I don't find him brave-- I find him shrewd (and not in a good way) and calculating, and I think he uses this campaign identity of 'swamp-draining outsider' to create and maintain appeal among his constituents, with not much in the way of personal character to execute it in any quantifiable and honorable way. That he is taking on that identity is disingenuous on its face, in fact: Look at the swamp he's brought in that is in a rapid cycle of drain/replace/drain/etc., after all. He's not brave; he's a liar that has surrounded himself with liars, and that's not even a matter of opinion.

Anyway, thanks for answering my questions-- you're a good dude, and I'm thankful to have an opposing perspective that challenges my own.
 
Last edited:
SCS said:
Using one poll is never accurate.

This is multiple polls...

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...ment_and_removal_of_president_trump-6957.html

And the group of polls on 538 reveals an even worse outlook for democrats.
Click to expand...

Impeachment AND Removal has consistently lagged in support behind impeachment and the impeachment inquiry. However, impeachment support has been much stronger now than Nixon at a similar stage in the impeachment process.

But since you're obviously concerned about getting the truth out, you must support Mulvaney, Pompeo, and Bolton being compelled to testify under oath, right? I mean, after all, if Donald is so innocent, then their testimonies must be quite liberating, don't you think? If Trump's so innocent, then their testimonies will vindicate him and crush the Democrats in the polls, right?

So you agree that Mulvaney, Pompeo, and Bolton must testify, correct?
 
And since you can't shake a tree near the white house without a Russian falling out: Giuliani's work in Ukraine, the Lev Parnas arm of this scandal, is being financed by Dmitry Firtash - under indictment in the US for activities as part of Russian organized crime and, wait for it, in exile from the Ukraine for activities in the Yanukovich administration - supported by Paul Manafort.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...m-ukrainian-oligarch-prosecutor-idUSKBN1YL26B

There aren't really all that many names at play. You just gotta pay attention to keep them straight.
 
NPC D4617 said:
The middle looks something like this.

We can agree mostly on what the facts are. We cut the hyper partisan BS. The outrage is spread equally to all those that are guilty of wrong doing. It isn't directed in just one direction while deliberately overlooking other important factors.

We can look at politics and admit that there are troubling things coming from both sides and it all deserves attention and rectification.

We can admit the there is hyperpartisan propaganda being spewed by both sides and the media outlets that supports them. Then discuss productive ways to try and fix it.

For example: You cant overlook what the FBI, the Clintons, etc have done and solely focus on what you dont like about Trump. It all matters if you care about truth and justice.

But that isnt what happens is it? If someone on the right brings up anything the left is accused of doing it is mostly rigorously defended and those who talk about it are called idiots. Or if it's pointed out that the media is taking sides then you are called an idiot and told its only Fox News. Responding this way to people is only going to get you what you have been getting. No one is going to just agree with you because you look down your nose at them and berate them for disagreeing. Especially if only half the claimed facts line up.
Click to expand...

There is no middle ground in moonbatville. Most have fallen victim to the Gerasimov Doctrine. That's clearly evident in the lefties use of Kremlin manufactured fake news and the righties responding with Kremlin manufactured conspiracies.

What you are asking for here is way too much.
 
sirkickyass said:
So "the middle" is a pure both-sidesism perspective where everyone is equally corrupt and villainous?
Click to expand...

Not everyone, but at least some people on both sides. It doesn't mean its equal either.

See, your response is exactly what Im saying. You essentially are responding in a way that rejects the idea that both sides have problems and corruption. You reject the idea that the people you choose to side with could ever be corrupt. Thats hilarious that you are so naive.

Like I said, I attempted to come to the middle in good faith, but you are too married to your delusions and can't give them up. You would be forced to admit you have been wrong in some instances, and your ego is too big to do that.

Im fine with playing the partisan games. The right has most the truth on their side right now anyways, so its easy and fun just kicking the left's butts right now.

march-of-tyranny-ben-garrison.jpg
 
idestroyedthetoilet said:
You must need your daily dose of attention from me. Look, you can't honestly not expect this to happen to the guy. He can't go around acting the way he does and say the things he does without painting a giant target on his back. People are going to be out to get him and all of this is to be expected, deserved even. I would go as far as saying you are up in the night if you don't think Trump not only expects the blowback but wants it and thrives on it. That's why my pet theory is still that Trump was behind the whistleblower. That's just a hunch and I have nothing to back it up, so stop demanding i google some link to prove it to you. I just think he thinks it's the best way to win the political battle. Keep in mind this is all one giant political battle. You can either see it that way, from above, or you can be one of the actors unwittingly running around inside the play.
Click to expand...

I need my weekly allowance of you. Only reason I haven't ignored you is I know you know you're being stupid.

Can't uh... can't say the same for some other others
 
Excellent article explaining impeachment.

https://babylonbee.com/news/the-bee-explains-impeachment?

Impeachment can be confusing. But The Babylon Bee is here with an explainer so you will know how the process works and what it takes for Dems to snap their fingers together and make Trump disappear in a cloud of dust.

What is impeachment?

It's the official, constitutional method for screaming at the sky because Trump is president.

Why is Trump being impeached?

Trump has committed some very serious offenses, from not being a Democrat to being a Republican. He also won the 2016 election, which rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors. He also restored the celebration of Christmas after eight years of winter with no Christmas under Obama. This drove Dems up a wall so they drummed up some charges against him.

Why didn't Democrats include any criminal offenses in the articles of impeachment?

There were just so many of them, it was hard to pick one. So, instead of laying out actually impeachable offenses, the Democrats summarized it all with two main articles of impeachment: 1.) Trump is president. 2.) TRUMP IS PRESIDENT.

What does it take to remove the president from office?

Faith, trust, and pixie dust.

Will Trump be removed from office?

Lol.

If we believe in ourselves and try hard, and Trump is removed, Hillary Clinton becomes president, right?

Actually, Mike Pence would become president, basically making the United States into a Handmaid's Tale-style dystopia.

What happens if Trump is impeached in the House but acquitted in the Senate?

Democrats don't get the big prize, but they each get a complimentary copy of Impeachment: The Board Game.

Once the House votes to officially impeach President Trump, what happens next?

Trump wins the 2020 election.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top