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

 

[samiam5211]

Yes. That like Nadler himself It's about to put me to sleep.

Jerry isn’t the sharpest tool in the shed.

Schiff may have had a pencil neck, but at least he was sharp.

 

[JimEverett]

Could you explain about what and how she was wrong? That’s kind of the point.

I feel her mentioning Barron at all was a terrible mistake, and it is going to be a useful tool to anyone interested in discrediting her.

Her words either stand on their own or they do not.

For the same reasons I have mentioned in this thread: what is being alleged does not meet the elements required for statutory bribery; that the appeal to "constitutional bribery" is problematic and seems like an ad hoc response for political purposes, that there is little to no basis for obstruction . . . .

 

[crosswatt]

The Democrats frothing at the mouth doesn't seem to be helping.

House Democrats have passed nearly 400 bills. Trump and Republicans are ignoring them.

Legislative paralysis gripped Capitol Hill well before impeachment started.

www.vox.com

 

[Beach Friends]

Do either of you have any opinions about what they said today?

That’s kind of the point.

I have the opinion that those clips tend to show that those witnesses are biased.

 

[BobE]

House Democrats have passed nearly 400 bills. Trump and Republicans are ignoring them.

Legislative paralysis gripped Capitol Hill well before impeachment started.

www.vox.com

I swear this sounds just like before the D's took over.

 

[samiam5211]

For the same reasons I have mentioned in this thread: what is being alleged does not meet the elements required for statutory bribery; that the appeal to "constitutional bribery" is problematic and seems like an ad hoc response for political purposes, that there is little to no basis for obstruction . . . .

Do you think that what we know so far is enough to justify continued investigation? or even expanding into the process through which the whistleblower blew his whistle and any possible tampering involving Congressmen Schiff and Nunez?

 

[crosswatt]

I swear this sounds just like before the D's took over.

What like the Supreme Court thing? For the record I'm not saying the house is awesome or has sent 400 viable bills over, but I'm not a fan of tryin to shift blame to someone else when you're actively undermining them.

 

[BobE]

What like the Supreme Court thing? For the record I'm not saying the house is awesome or has sent 400 viable bills over, but I'm not a fan of tryin to shift blame to someone else when you're actively undermining them.

No idea about the USSC but I could have sworn there was a interview with Ryan in mid 2018 maybe that the house had passed some where around 300-350 bills and they were all sitting in the Senate. SO basically business as usual.

 

[Archies Ghost]

You must be thrilled then that the dems are doing this, given that you think it will backfire on them.

I have to say, I'm rather surprised to see a Republican admit this about the Hillary email investigation, considering it worked.

While this will certainly damage the Democrat party, it has far reaching and long lasting effects on the country and our system of government. The damage done by this charade will be long lasting. I just hope I am long dead before we reap this particular whirlwind.

So the self inflicted wound on the Democrats is the only silver lining in what is otherwise an rather disgusting chapter in American history. Three years ago I believed I lived in a fairly functional Constitutional Republic. Now I know we are just another Banana Republic with little hope of reversing this slow slide into bureaucratic kleptocracy.

 

[JimEverett]

Do you think that what we know so far is enough to justify continued investigation? or even expanding into the process through which the whistleblower blew his whistle and any possible tampering involving Congressmen Schiff and Nunez?

Yes. I think what we know makes this a very serious matter and there are questions that I think are worth investigating fully.

I also think what Trump did was wrong (based on what I know and sort of drawing some conclusions, although it may change if and when we get to see a real defense) but not illegal, and we shouldn't force what he did into being something illegal because that can do some real permanent damage for the future.

As far as Schiff and Nunes - I really do not have much of an opinion on it.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Yes. I think what we know makes this a very serious matter and there are questions that I think are worth investigating fully.

I also think what Trump did was wrong (based on what I know and sort of drawing some conclusions, although it may change if and when we get to see a real defense) but not illegal, and we shouldn't force what he did into being something illegal because that can do some real permanent damage for the future.

As far as Schiff and Nunes - I really do not have much of an opinion on it.

So, don't you think it would be a bit more productive if you spent some time determining what you think is the proper way for the House to go about reigning in the President, since you clearly don't think they're doing it correctly?

And also, wouldn't you say that impeachment is not about legality in the sense of Trump is not in immediate jeopardy of going to jail over these accusations. The question is, should he still continue to be President given what he has done, and appears willing to continue to do.

I'm not actually sure that Trump should be removed from office based on these accusations, however, there aren't very many tools available to actually reign the President in, especially given the current Republican default position to back stupid conspiracy theories and deflect and not criticize the President at all.

 

[coldseat]

While this will certainly damage the Democrat party, it has far reaching and long lasting effects on the country and our system of government. The damage done by this charade will be long lasting. I just hope I am long dead before we reap this particular whirlwind.

So the self inflicted wound on the Democrats is the only silver lining in what is otherwise an rather disgusting chapter in American history. Three years ago I believed I lived in a fairly functional Constitutional Republic. Now I know we are just another Banana Republic with little hope of reversing this slow slide into bureaucratic kleptocracy.

You can thank Trump and the Republicans for turning us into Banana Republic. The much greater danger is for the Democrats to do nothing and allow the slow slide to an elected dictatorship with the complicity of congressional Republicans.

To allow so much corruption to continue is unacceptable. Republicans are way over playing their hands by not pushing back on Trump and thinking this is going to ruin Democrats in the election. If Senate Republicans put on a charade of an impeachment trial, they could easily lose the Senate as a result. They're in a much more vulnerable position than Democrats.

 

[MT15]

If the intent is to NOT actually seek an impeachment and criminal indictment, but only to poison the waters of a sitting Presiden's re-election bid, then it's a smear campaign.

no, you’re wrong. A smear campaign traffics in lies. It’s what Trump is doing to Biden.

 

[MT15]

Do you genuinely not understand how the question, as presented in the clip, is fundamentally flawed?

clearly, he does not.

 

[MT15]

For the same reasons I have mentioned in this thread: what is being alleged does not meet the elements required for statutory bribery; that the appeal to "constitutional bribery" is problematic and seems like an ad hoc response for political purposes, that there is little to no basis for obstruction . . . .

so, Jim, what about using the contemporary definition of bribery is problematic? It seems to me I heard the minority counsel going to great lengths to explain the contemporary definitions of “high crimes and misdemeanors“ during the short time I got to listen today. Was that problematic too? I’m asking sincerely.

As for obstruction, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. I think most people see the obstruction. I do wish the Democrats would slow down and compel Trump to turn over relevant documents and I’d like to see the main conspirators have to testify.

 

[LA - L.A.]

The signs are so Busch league. What is this - student council?

I see it as real life imitating social media, so that it can be echoed on social media. Like it just has been.

Why bother speaking for yourself when you can just load up a virtual t-shirt cannon with virtual promotional t-shirts and blast them at people?

 

[wardorican]

Here is what to remember when it comes to polls. Does it agree with me? If yes it's a good poll if no it's a crappy poll.

I think that is a bad way to look at it. How a poll is run and how the question is structured always matters. I can "agree" with a result, but also realize it was done poorly or unfairly.

 

[wardorican]

I see it as real life imitating social media, so that it can be echoed on social media. Like it just has been.

Why bother speaking for yourself when you can just load up a virtual t-shirt cannon with virtual promotional t-shirts and blast them at people?

Floor charts have been a thing for a long time..