The Impeachment Process Has Officially Begun (1 Viewer)

[Andrus]

By Laura Bassett

After months of internal arguing among Democrats over whether to impeach President Donald Trump, the dam is finally breaking in favor of trying to remove him from office. The Washington Post reported that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would announce a formal impeachment inquiry on Tuesday, following a bombshell report that Trump illegally asked Ukraine’s government to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, one of his political opponents. (He essentially admitted to having done so over the weekend.)

“Now that we have the facts, we’re ready,” Pelosi said Tuesday morning at a forum hosted by The Atlantic. At 5 p.m. the same day, she was back with more. "The actions taken to date by the president have seriously violated the constitution, especially when the president says Article Two says I can do whatever I want," referring to the segment of the Constitution that defines the power of the executive branch of the government. Pelosi's message was that checks and balances of those branches are just as central to the Constitution. And one more thing: "Today, I am announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry," she said at a conference broadcast on Twitter by the Huffington Post. ...

Read the Full Story - InStyle

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Under what source of propriety? Again, this is foreign affairs where the power of the President is close to plenary.

I’m pretty sure you don’t believe that a President can’t abuse that power.

Having said that I do think I have been very consistent in saying Giuliani's role seems extraordinarily problematic. I just have not heard something that is very specific as to his use being illegal.

It’s used as evidence of Trump’s motive. Ie, Trump wasn’t concerned with corruption because he was using his personal lawyer. He was doing this for his personal benefit.

No. Exercising a constitutional power is not an abuse of that power.

I’m pretty sure you don’t believe that a constitutional power can’t be abused right?

Perhaps

, but then why so much focus on whether Trump and/or his Administration had ever expressed concern for Ukrainian corruption?

I might be reading different arguments than you are, but I think the accusation is that Trump has shown little interest in corruption at all, outside of the Ukraine and this issue narrowly.

I am not trying to be flippant here , but if an Executive makes a demand that a foreign leader pony up $1m - with $999,999 going to the Executive and $1 going to the Red Cross has he not expressed corrupt intent because $1 was not for his benefit?

Yes, you got me. The point is with financial corruption it’s pretty easy to quantify, with this it’s harder so you have to work more to prove corrupt intent.

 

[Lazybones]

I don’t know, are you saying that having a family member if business dealings should always open up a public investigation outside of normal judicial channels?

I do in today’s political environment. Especially if there is already a public question into the dealings of said person. Have they not combed through every dealing they can find on trump and his last dealings?

I may have missed it. Did you tell me why hunter got that gig?

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

I do in today’s political environment. Especially if there is already a public question into the dealings of said person.

Really, outside normal judicial channels?

Have they not combed through every dealing they can find on trump and his last dealings?

Umm, no. So, are you supporting the Democrats pressuring China to publicly announce an investigation into Ivanka’s trademarks? How about Qatar investigating Kushner?

Are you supporting the release of Trump’s taxes so we know what all the income and debt streams are?

I may have missed it. Did you tell me why hunter got that gig?

I said I don’t know, I said it probably had to do with his dad’s position.

 

[Beach Friends]

I don’t think that’s it because there are lots of other Republicans to choose from and there is no pressure from Trump’s base to adhere to normal standards of ethics.

When is the last time a party successfully primaried their own incumbent? Saying that there are a lot of other Republicans does not mean anything.

I don't make any apologies for supporting Trump. Ever since the 2016 election I, and whole lot of other people, have been saying that voters are looking at the alternative and selecting Trump. A lot of people have been warning that the Democratic party is too woke and going too far to the left.

The Democratic party has been stubborn. Instead of listening, they keep doubling down.

I expected the Democratic debates would be a mad rush to the left and the early ones certainly were. I have a feeling that the remaining candidates see the mistake, but it's hard to turn back now.

 

[Lapaz]

I really don’t think y’all are not following what I’m saying. The scenario is that in politics, politicians use their influence to influence others. I said THIS ISNT EXACTLY THE SAME AS WHAT TRUMP DID (because some of you want to be obtuse and want an exact comparison).

the fact that the prosecutor was fired, via pressure from the VP, shows that political bullying is commonplace.

if the lot of you want to keep disregarding this line of thinking as BS, 2020 is going to be a huge let down for you.

I

First of all, you didn't answer my question about why Biden sought to remove the prosecutor. That is critical to understand, because it justifies what he did.

Second, you're right that they are not the same. What Trump did was corrupt, while what Biden did was legal and just.

Third, you are being disingenuous by saying all politicians do it, because by saying that, you ARE comparing them without context. That's like saying all politicians take illegal contributions from foreigners. Some politicians do that, but others do not. Trump is corrupt, while Biden is not.

 

[Lapaz]

I don’t think it’s that big is a deal. I don’t see a ton of difference with the DNC and Hillary buying the Steele dossier. It’s politics. It’s a nasty business.

do you really think that Biden squeezing the prosecutor being fires had ZERO to do with his son? By admitting that there might be a connection, is not the same as saying what trump did was legit. Im just curious to know if you think it is implausible for the actions of Biden to have some personal motives.

There is a big difference between what the DNC did and what Trump did. Paying a foreigner to collect information is legal. The DNC legally paid for the Steele dossier, and the dossier was only raw intelligence. Almost all intelligence starts that way. It helps investigators uncover wrong doing. Since it was raw, no one should expect it to be 100% accurate. It has to be confirmed/corroborated by other evidence. Many people have been indicted for inappropriately working with the Russians as well as Russians themselves.

Also, with respect to Biden, Shokin was NOT investigating Burisma, so HOW does that help Biden to remove Shokin?

 

[Lazybones]

Clearly I am not seeing things today. Can you please link me to the post?

I want to give you benefit of the doubt, because I appreciate you reaching out the other day. By I have explained my thoughts throughout this thread. I’m pretty sure I have expressed my view points very clearly.

 

[Lapaz]

I think I just answered this to him above while you were typing.

but to answer your question, there are obvious differences. Not impeachable ones.

Coercing another country to interfere with our elections is classic abuse of power. If that doesn't justify impeachment, then that removes a huge undergirder protecting democracy. Trump is trying to remove all of the girders. Thank goodness there are some people that are pushing back for the sake of the country.

 

[Lazybones]

First of all, you didn't answer my question about why Biden sought to remove the prosecutor. That is critical to understand, because it justifies what he did.

Second, you're right that they are not the same. What Trump did was corrupt, while what Biden did was legal and just.

Third, you are being disingenuous by saying all politicians do it, because by saying that, you ARE comparing them without context. That's like saying all politicians take illegal contributions from foreigners. Some politicians do that, but others do not. Trump is corrupt, while Biden is not.

you are willing to stake your reputation on the fact that Biden has been involved in no corruption? Are you sure about that?

did you really not understand the point I made about Biden or are you purposely ignoring it? it’s important for me to know if you are being genuine in your response. The above doesn’t give me the initial impression that you actually want conversation.

please go back and reread my position on Biden and Clinton and then get back to me. If you don’t understand the point being made, ask. But don’t make up a narrative and claim it to be mine.

 

[Lazybones]

Coercing another country to interfere with our elections is classic abuse of power. If that doesn't justify impeachment, then that removes a huge undergirder protecting democracy. Trump is trying to remove all of the girders. Thank goodness there are some people that are pushing back for the sake of the country.

you are the man. Keep up the good fight homie.

 

[Lapaz]

you are willing to stake your reputation on the fact that Biden has been involved in no corruption? Are you sure about that?

did you really not understand the point I made about Biden or are you purposely ignoring it? it’s important for me to know if you are being genuine in your response. The above doesn’t give me the initial impression that you actually want conversation.

please go back and reread my position on Biden and Clinton and then get back to me. If you don’t understand the point being made, ask. But don’t make up a narrative and claim it to be mine.

I'm not going to read through all of your responses, but I do recall you asking me to ask a question. So I've asked you the question about 3 times about why Biden asked Shokin to be removed? Keep in mind that Shokin was NOT investigating Burisma.

P.S. I'm not concerned about Hillary. The impeachment is based on corrupt actions by Trump to damage his chief political opponent. By the way, I think it is backfiring on Trump only because he was caught. Had he not been caught, Biden would be in trouble. A future president could use this ploy, and wouldn't have to be concerned about being caught, since "it is not impeachable".

P.P.S If people find CREDIBLE evidence that Biden is corrupt, then I will also want him to face prosecution. We should all seek cleaner government, rather than apologizing for repeated corruption. We should expect better.

 

[Lazybones]

I'm not going to read through all of your responses, but I do recall you asking me to ask a question. So I've asked you the question about 3 times about why Biden asked Shokin to be removed? Keep in mind that Shokin was NOT investigating Burisma.

P.S. I'm not concerned about Hillary. The impeachment is based on corrupt actions by Trump to damage his chief political opponent. By the way, I think it is backfiring on Trump only because he was caught. Had he not been caught, Biden would be in trouble. A future president could use this ploy, and wouldn't have to be concerned about being caught, since "it is not impeachable".

P.P.S If people find CREDIBLE evidence that Biden is corrupt, then I will also want him to face prosecution. We should all seek cleaner government, rather than apologizing for repeated corruption. We should expect better.

If your not willing to read the thread, sorry.

 

[Lapaz]

If your not willing to read the thread, sorry.

Nice deflection. You asked me to ask a question, so then I did, and you deflect to avoid answering the question.

 

[Lazybones]

Nice deflection. You asked me to ask a question, so then I did, and you deflect to avoid answering the question.

I’ve answered your projected questions 10 times. I’m not deflecting. Just read above. I asked if you wanted clarity on my position to ask. But based on what you have written, you haven’t read my position or you don’t understand it.

your retort of “I’m not going to go back and read your post” tell me all I need to know. Again peace homie

 

[Lapaz]

I’ve answered your projected questions 10 times. I’m not deflecting. Just read above. I asked if you wanted clarity on my position to ask. But based on what you have written, you haven’t read my position or you don’t understand it.

your retort of “I’m not going to go back and read your post” tell me all I need to know. Again peace homie

For the record, I've read many of your posts, and none of them answered the question about why Biden would seek to remove a prosecutor that was not investigating the company that his son worked for. You've asserted that they are all in the same wheelhouse, but have never clarified how legal actions can be in the same wheelhouse as an illegal act. You've asked "do we really believe that Biden didn't benefit', to which the answer is obviously not for the reason that you may believe. You assert that what Trump has done is not worthy of impeachment, but give no basis for that opinion. Peace.

 

[Lazybones]

For the record, I've read many of your posts, and none of them answered the question about why Biden would seek to remove a prosecutor that was not investigating the company that his son worked for. You've asserted that they are all in the same wheelhouse, but have never clarified how legal actions can be in the same wheelhouse as an illegal act. You've asked "do we really believe that Biden didn't benefit', to which the answer is obviously not for the reason that you may believe. You assert that what Trump has done is not worthy of impeachment, but give no basis for that opinion. Peace.

i never attempted to argue the Biden point. The point was people use influence in politics all the time. I sited two examples, I notice you ignore the Clinton example. If you take the two of them in context to politicians using the influence they have is part of the process. I also started this off pages ago saying THESE ARE NOT EXACT COMPARISONS, but are an example of where people used influence to various degrees to get a desired outcome.

I have said this numerous times in this thread. I know you and others have tried to reframe what I have said. Whether purposely or you guys just didn’t care to read what I posted, you just wanted to float your narrative.

though I have answered each of you. I still have not received any answers to my questions.

1. when the impeachment fails will you reconsider your position of the leaders of the Democratic Party
2. Was the mueller investigation in an attempt to help the American public or the democrats in Washington
3. Is the impeachment for the betterment of the country or for the Democratic Party?

 

[Dragon]

i never attempted to argue the Biden point. The point was people use influence in politics all the time. I sited two examples, I notice you ignore the Clinton example. If you take the two of them in context to politicians using the influence they have is part of the process. I also started this off pages ago saying THESE ARE NOT EXACT COMPARISONS, but are an example of where people used influence to various degrees to get a desired outcome.

I have said this numerous times in this thread. I know you and others have tried to reframe what I have said. Whether purposely or you guys just didn’t care to read what I posted, you just wanted to float your narrative.

though I have answered each of you. I still have not received any answers to my questions.

1. when the impeachment fails will you reconsider your position of the leaders of the Democratic Party
2. Was the mueller investigation in an attempt to help the American public or the democrats in Washington
3. Is the impeachment for the betterment of the country or for the Democratic Party?

I have no bone in this fight - I'm not even american but I DO care about the rule of LAW

1. when the impeachment fails will you reconsider your position of the leaders of the Democratic Party

When/if the impeachment fails it will say more about the spineless senators who put their loyalty to party and a single person higher than their loyalty to the constitution they have sworn to protect.

TBH - I think democrats took too long to act. Trump kept breaking one law after the other

The emoulution Clause,
The Federal ethics regulations concerning the “use of office for private gain” multiple times
Obstruction of a federal investigation
Using a fake emergency to take money from the military to pay for his Windmill and circumventing the constitutions seperation of powers
Telling more lies every day than pinochio himself...

2. Was the mueller investigation in an attempt to help the American public or the democrats in Washington
Neither. It was an attemp to help maintain a country based on democracy and law, and to find out if the person who held the highest office in the land had conspired with an enemy nation

3. Is the impeachment for the betterment of the country or for the Democratic Party?

For justice - and therefor for the country, Democracy is a fragile thing. it is a finely tuned balance between the use of power and the abuse of power.
When the highest ranking person in the land openly states that the rules does not apply to him and he can do whatever he wants, and half the country applaus - then there is something seriously rotten somewhere.

 

[Lapaz]

i never attempted to argue the Biden point. The point was people use influence in politics all the time. I sited two examples, I notice you ignore the Clinton example. If you take the two of them in context to politicians using the influence they have is part of the process. I also started this off pages ago saying THESE ARE NOT EXACT COMPARISONS, but are an example of where people used influence to various degrees to get a desired outcome.

I have said this numerous times in this thread. I know you and others have tried to reframe what I have said. Whether purposely or you guys just didn’t care to read what I posted, you just wanted to float your narrative.

though I have answered each of you. I still have not received any answers to my questions.

1. when the impeachment fails will you reconsider your position of the leaders of the Democratic Party
2. Was the mueller investigation in an attempt to help the American public or the democrats in Washington
3. Is the impeachment for the betterment of the country or for the Democratic Party?

First of all, Dragon answered your questions, and I completely agree with what he said. With respect to the Biden point, you asked in one of your posts, and I'm paraphrasing, do you really believe Biden didn't benefit from removing the prosecutor, which implies that you believe he did. Therefore I've asked you repeatedly, how did Biden benefit, in light of the fact that Shokin was not investigating his son's company. Are you now saying that you don't believe Biden benefited? Also, using influence is a continuum. Using influence within the U.S. to make some extra money is wrong, but bribing another country to interfere with our elections is treasonous and impeachable. Also, you're right that they are not exact comparisons. They are not even in the same wheelhouse. Sure they are both using influence, but one is totally illegal influence and the other is grey at best only in Clinton's case and totally legal in Biden's case. Hillary is not a public official nor running to be one. Trump is a corrupt official that continues to abuse his office, and needs to be impeached.