The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on June 17, 2017, 01:13:22 pm
-
Dem: Congress will begin impeachment if Trump fires Mueller, Rosenstein
By Brandon Carter - 06/17/17 08:02 AM EDT
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) said Friday that Congress would come together and “begin impeachment proceedings” against President Trump if he fired special counsel Robert Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
“All Americans, regardless of party, agree on the fundamental principle that no one is above the law,” Lieu said on MSNBC. “And if President Trump were to fire Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein, and then [get] special counsel Mueller fired, I believe Congress would begin impeachment proceedings.”
more
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/338244-dem-lawmaker-congress-would-begin-impeachment-if-trump-fired-mueller
-
From what I understand, it would just be a waste of time as nothing would come of it. Like Clinton.
-
The DEMS and the leftist mental midgets will not rest until impeachment proceedings are brought against this president. After all there was a warning of impeachment even before he was sworn in! I don't think (at least at this point in time) they will be successful. However, the RINO's in Congress have never ceased to surprise me and they may very well go along with it.
-
I would fire Mueller today. I like Mueller, and I have no problem with what he is doing. I would fire him anyway, just to stuff it down the Democrats throat.
Impeach me! Bitch! Bring it on you bastards!
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfbBqBOSXlU
-
This must be the most absurd scandal I have seen in 50 years of following politics. The POTUS is being investigated by a special prosecutor for obstructing justice in a case where no crime would have been committed even if he had done what is alleged, and there is no evidence he did squat. In fact, the whole thing was initiated based on a completely bogus document likely produced by the Clinton dirty tricks division.
In short, this is an establishment attempt to rein in Trump and keep him from doing what he was elected to do, dismantle the managerial state and put the people back in charge of their own lives.
Trump can't fire Rosenstein and Mueller fast enough, IMHO. The media will squeal and yelp, but Trump's popularity will increase and congress will have to do its own investigation if it is at all interested in this goofy charade.
This president, any president, is entitled an opportunity to govern. So far, Trump has been denied that opportunity by those with vested interests that are 180 degrees from those of the American taxpayer.
Trump's last chance is at hand. I say he should use the constitutional authority the people gave him, and drain both Rosenstein and Mueller from the swamp.
-
This must be the most absurd scandal I have seen in 50 years of following politics. The POTUS is being investigated by a special prosecutor for obstructing justice in a case where no crime would have been committed even if he had done what is alleged, and there is no evidence he did squat. In fact, the whole thing was initiated based on a completely bogus document likely produced by the Clinton dirty tricks division.
In short, this is an establishment attempt to rein in Trump and keep him from doing what he was elected to do, dismantle the managerial state and put the people back in charge of their own lives.
Trump can't fire Rosenstein and Mueller fast enough, IMHO. The media will squeal and yelp, but Trump's popularity will increase and congress will have to do its own investigation if it is at all interested in this goofy charade.
This president, any president, is entitled an opportunity to govern. So far, Trump has been denied that opportunity by those with vested interests that are 180 degrees from those of the American taxpayer.
Trump's last chance is at hand. I say he should use the constitutional authority the people gave him, and drain both Rosenstein and Mueller from the swamp.
Trump hasn't been particularly interested in governing in any event. Wasting time mentally vomiting up on twitter seems to be much more interesting to him than actually governing.
-
The DEMS and the leftist mental midgets will not rest until impeachment proceedings are brought against this president.
Casting a Nixonian cloud over his head could be better than impeachment as the impeachment process might exonerate him in the public mind.
-
Trump should bring articles of Impeachment against himself. I would.
We have to bring closure to this insane idiotic crap the Democrats are doing. Who gets impeached in 90 days? What the hell is this?
Alright. OK. You want to impeach me then do it. Do it! Let me see what you got! Bastards!
-
This must be the most absurd scandal I have seen in 50 years of following politics. The POTUS is being investigated by a special prosecutor for obstructing justice in a case where no crime would have been committed even if he had done what is alleged, and there is no evidence he did squat. In fact, the whole thing was initiated based on a completely bogus document likely produced by the Clinton dirty tricks division.
In short, this is an establishment attempt to rein in Trump and keep him from doing what he was elected to do, dismantle the managerial state and put the people back in charge of their own lives.
Trump can't fire Rosenstein and Mueller fast enough, IMHO. The media will squeal and yelp, but Trump's popularity will increase and congress will have to do its own investigation if it is at all interested in this goofy charade.
This president, any president, is entitled an opportunity to govern. So far, Trump has been denied that opportunity by those with vested interests that are 180 degrees from those of the American taxpayer.
Trump's last chance is at hand. I say he should use the constitutional authority the people gave him, and drain both Rosenstein and Mueller from the swamp.
Great take, Victor!
I realize being in love is terrific....but geez....please post more often! :smokin:
-
Trump should bring articles of Impeachment against himself. I would.
We have to bring closure to this insane idiotic crap the Democrats are doing. Who gets impeached in 90 days? What the hell is this?
Alright. OK. You want to impeach me then do it. Do it! Let me see what you got! Bastards!
How would he go about doing that?
-
How would he go about doing that?
We all know that none of this is serious. All the Democrats want to do is to obstruct. They want to delay, defer, postpone anything Trump tries to do.
Trump should get the hell off of Twitter, and start taking these guys on. Impeach me MFer! Do it. I am waiting for you.
We have to end this stalemate that the Democrats have so carefully constructed.
-
Trump hasn't been particularly interested in governing in any event. Wasting time mentally vomiting up on twitter seems to be much more interesting to him than actually governing.
@Oceander
Trump's history is, from the time he was old enough to sue someone, he has had court cases ongoing since that time and getting sued in return for his scalping companies who did work for him; and personally attacking people every single day; that has been his life and it isn't going to change. No one can keep him off twitter as that is his life blood to him; using twitter to attack. Rule: don't expect a person with a mental disorder to be normal.
-
We all know that none of this is serious. All the Democrats want to do is to obstruct. They want to delay, defer, postpone anything Trump tries to do.
Trump should get the hell off of Twitter, and start taking these guys on. Impeach me MFer! Do it. I am waiting for you.
We have to end this stalemate that the Democrats have so carefully constructed.
But how is he going to bring articles of impeachment against himself?
-
Just curious. What would be their basis for impeachment (other than Trump being a Republican)?
-
Just curious. What would be their basis for impeachment (other than Trump being a Republican)?
Obstruction of justice.
-
Obstruction of justice.
How so? Where is the obstruction?
-
How so? Where is the obstruction?
Trying to interfere with an ongoing investigation. Do not forget that impeachment is political and therefore doesn't require a criminal act.
And yes, trying to stifle an investigation into one of his friends is something a president could very well get into trouble for.
Trump should have kept his damned mouth shut.
-
Obstruction of justice.
@Oceander
He has tried obstruction of justice throughout his life by attacking judges in public. All judges were not "fair" to him. And, remember, he attacked, in public, one judge born in the United States, who he said was "unfair" because his ancestors came from Mexico. I believe, Trump considers the whole world is "unfair" to him. Can you say, "crybaby"?
-
But how is he going to bring articles of impeachment against himself?
Just make up your own law, like Hussein did for eight years. Just simply make it up. It worked in the past.
If you want to do something. THEN DO IT! I am definitely pro-impeachment Hell Yes.
Let's get his ass impeached. I am 100% behind the Democrats on this.
-
This must be the most absurd scandal I have seen in 50 years of following politics. The POTUS is being investigated by a special prosecutor for obstructing justice in a case where no crime would have been committed even if he had done what is alleged, and there is no evidence he did squat. In fact, the whole thing was initiated based on a completely bogus document likely produced by the Clinton dirty tricks division.
In short, this is an establishment attempt to rein in Trump and keep him from doing what he was elected to do, dismantle the managerial state and put the people back in charge of their own lives.
Trump can't fire Rosenstein and Mueller fast enough, IMHO. The media will squeal and yelp, but Trump's popularity will increase and congress will have to do its own investigation if it is at all interested in this goofy charade.
This president, any president, is entitled an opportunity to govern. So far, Trump has been denied that opportunity by those with vested interests that are 180 degrees from those of the American taxpayer.
Trump's last chance is at hand. I say he should use the constitutional authority the people gave him, and drain both Rosenstein and Mueller from the swamp.
Absolutely spot on Victor and the SOLE purpose of it all is to prevent any and all swamp draining! Trump is a nuclear missile aimed directly at the swamp and the swamp dwellers ALL know it!
-
This must be the most absurd scandal I have seen in 50 years of following politics. The POTUS is being investigated by a special prosecutor for obstructing justice in a case where no crime would have been committed even if he had done what is alleged, and there is no evidence he did squat. In fact, the whole thing was initiated based on a completely bogus document likely produced by the Clinton dirty tricks division.
In short, this is an establishment attempt to rein in Trump and keep him from doing what he was elected to do, dismantle the managerial state and put the people back in charge of their own lives.
Trump can't fire Rosenstein and Mueller fast enough, IMHO. The media will squeal and yelp, but Trump's popularity will increase and congress will have to do its own investigation if it is at all interested in this goofy charade.
This president, any president, is entitled an opportunity to govern. So far, Trump has been denied that opportunity by those with vested interests that are 180 degrees from those of the American taxpayer.
Trump's last chance is at hand. I say he should use the constitutional authority the people gave him, and drain both Rosenstein and Mueller from the swamp.
goopo
-
@Oceander
He has tried obstruction of justice throughout his life by attacking judges in public. All judges were not "fair" to him. And, remember, he attacked, in public, one judge born in the United States, who he said was "unfair" because his ancestors came from Mexico. I believe, Trump considers the whole world is "unfair" to him. Can you say, "crybaby"?
Can you say "wrong"?
-
This must be the most absurd scandal I have seen in 50 years of following politics. The POTUS is being investigated by a special prosecutor for obstructing justice in a case where no crime would have been committed even if he had done what is alleged, and there is no evidence he did squat. In fact, the whole thing was initiated based on a completely bogus document likely produced by the Clinton dirty tricks division.
In short, this is an establishment attempt to rein in Trump and keep him from doing what he was elected to do, dismantle the managerial state and put the people back in charge of their own lives.
Trump can't fire Rosenstein and Mueller fast enough, IMHO. The media will squeal and yelp, but Trump's popularity will increase and congress will have to do its own investigation if it is at all interested in this goofy charade.
This president, any president, is entitled an opportunity to govern. So far, Trump has been denied that opportunity by those with vested interests that are 180 degrees from those of the American taxpayer.
Trump's last chance is at hand. I say he should use the constitutional authority the people gave him, and drain both Rosenstein and Mueller from the swamp.
..." In fact, the whole thing was initiated based on a completely bogus document likely produced by the Clinton dirty tricks division....Trump can't fire Rosenstein and Mueller fast enough..."
:amen: AND :amen: :patriot:
-
This must be the most absurd scandal I have seen in 50 years of following politics. The POTUS is being investigated by a special prosecutor for obstructing justice in a case where no crime would have been committed even if he had done what is alleged, and there is no evidence he did squat. In fact, the whole thing was initiated based on a completely bogus document likely produced by the Clinton dirty tricks division.
In short, this is an establishment attempt to rein in Trump and keep him from doing what he was elected to do, dismantle the managerial state and put the people back in charge of their own lives.
Trump can't fire Rosenstein and Mueller fast enough, IMHO. The media will squeal and yelp, but Trump's popularity will increase and congress will have to do its own investigation if it is at all interested in this goofy charade.
This president, any president, is entitled an opportunity to govern. So far, Trump has been denied that opportunity by those with vested interests that are 180 degrees from those of the American taxpayer.
Trump's last chance is at hand. I say he should use the constitutional authority the people gave him, and drain both Rosenstein and Mueller from the swamp.
I am torn on this. On one hand, firing Mueller and Rosenstein would seem to be the common sense thing to do, considering their obvious anti-Trump bias. However.... it is probably too late to do so now.... and firing Mueller & Rosenstein is exactly what the radical left and RINO Trump haters want him to do.
So I would have to say...hell no. Let them muck about, wasting taxpayer money trying to find something, anything, with which to hang Trump on.... and let Trump point that out to voting taxpayers...
every.. single.. day.
Trump should rub their noses in it.... re: how the Dems (America's enemy within) are wasting time, money and energy trying to destroy a duly elected president..... even while America's enemies without are busily making plans to destroy us.
-
Absolutely spot on Victor and the SOLE purpose of it all is to prevent any and all swamp draining! Trump is a nuclear missile aimed directly at the swamp and the swamp dwellers ALL know it!
Trump is part and parcel of the swamp. Always has been, always will be. It's how you get ahead in NYC real estate development.
What do you think that nonsense with Comey about going easy on his friend was all about? That's how the swamp operates.
-
Do not forget that impeachment is political and therefore doesn't require a criminal act.
Not true. Per the Constitution:
Article II, Sec 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Article I, Sec 3
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
Judgment in Cases of Impeachments shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust, or Profit under the United States, but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment, and Punishmnet, according to Law.
Clearly, some sort of crime is necessary for impeachment. One cannot be impeached for a political reason, but must instead be accused of an actual crime.
Which is what obstruction of justice is. And which it is why you brought it.
So yes, obstruction of justice is indeed a crime. Which expands back to the original question. Where is the obstruction of justice? There would first have to be a criminal investigation to obstruct.
-
Not true. Per the Constitution:
Article II, Sec 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Article I, Sec 3
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
Judgment in Cases of Impeachments shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust, or Profit under the United States, but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment, and Punishmnet, according to Law.
Clearly, some sort of crime is necessary for impeachment. One cannot be impeached for a political reason, but must instead be accused of an actual crime.
Which is what obstruction of justice is. And which it is why you brought it.
So yes, obstruction of justice is indeed a crime. Which expands back to the original question. Where is the obstruction of justice? There would first have to be a criminal investigation to obstruct.
And the kicker is..... the Dems have absolutely no proof at all of any crime having been committed by Trump.
-
Not true. Per the Constitution:
Article II, Sec 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Article I, Sec 3
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
Judgment in Cases of Impeachments shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust, or Profit under the United States, but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment, and Punishmnet, according to Law.
Clearly, some sort of crime is necessary for impeachment. One cannot be impeached for a political reason, but must instead be accused of an actual crime.
Which is what obstruction of justice is. And which it is why you brought it.
So yes, obstruction of justice is indeed a crime. Which expands back to the original question. Where is the obstruction of justice? There would first have to be a criminal investigation to obstruct.
Nope. I know you won't accept it, so I'll make it short and sweet: what counts as a high crime or misdemeanor is a political decision, not something bound by the existing federal criminal code.
Believe what you want - facts and reality have never stopped most people from doing so - but the fact is that if Trump gets impeached, obstruction of justice based on his extremely unseemly attempt to get Comey to leave Flynn alone will be a count. And if he is successfully impeached on that count, the Supreme Court won't touch his conviction with a 100 foot pole.
-
Do not forget that impeachment is political and therefore doesn't require a criminal act.
What the hell are you talking about?
-
And if .DT continues to exhibit his overwrought rantings there will be a democrat congress
-
Trying to interfere with an ongoing investigation. Do not forget that impeachment is political and therefore doesn't require a criminal act.
And yes, trying to stifle an investigation into one of his friends is something a president could very well get into trouble for.
Trump should have kept his damned mouth shut.
How many people have been found guilty of "hoping". Trump as the chief law enforcer in the country could have legally stopped the Flynn investigation any time he wanted. Comey is a liar and a Clinton crony as is Mueller.
-
What the hell are you talking about?
Something you wouldn't know anything about, which leaves the field pretty wide open.
-
How many people have been found guilty of "hoping". Trump as the chief law enforcer in the country could have legally stopped the Flynn investigation any time he wanted. Comey is a liar and a Clinton crony as is Mueller.
Maybe so, but Trump just keeps feeding them the rope they'll eventually need to hang him.
-
I am torn on this. On one hand, firing Mueller and Rosenstein would seem to be the common sense thing to do, considering their obvious anti-Trump bias. However.... it is probably too late to do so now.... and firing Mueller & Rosenstein is exactly what the radical left and RINO Trump haters want him to do.
So I would have to say...hell no. Let them muck about, wasting taxpayer money trying to find something, anything, with which to hang Trump on.... and let Trump point that out to voting taxpayers...
every.. single.. day.
Trump should rub their noses in it.... re: how the Dems (America's enemy within) are wasting time, money and energy trying to destroy a duly elected president..... even while America's enemies without are busily making plans to destroy us.
Yup
-
And if .DT continues to exhibit his overwrought rantings there will be a democrat congress
Fingers crossed @Rivergirl ?
-
No one! I repeat no one in Washington thinks there is a chance in hell of impeaching Trump over this! EVERY bit of it is aimed at gumming up the works and preventing his getting anything done for a long as possible!
-
Something you wouldn't know anything about, which leaves the field pretty wide open.
Well it obvious the voices you're listening to know nothing about the US Constitution, ..... so they're rather moot.
-
Well it obvious the voices you're listening to know nothing about the US Constitution, ..... so they're rather moot.
Sport, my shoes know more about the Constitution than you do.
-
No one! I repeat no one in Washington thinks there is a chance in hell of impeaching Trump over this! EVERY bit of it is aimed at gumming up the works and preventing his getting anything done for a long as possible!
Ahhh. So you mean he is absolutely and totally paralyzed, cannot even nominate anyone to fill any of the open offices that need filling, until all of this goes away? Cannot draft even a single line of proposed legislation until all of this goes away? Cannot use the bully pulpit to present a thoughtful, nuanced policy discussion to the country until all of this goes away? That's a crock, sport, and you know it. He'd much rather fight this one in the mud than do anything that might look like an attempt to govern.
-
Ahhh. So you mean he is absolutely and totally paralyzed, cannot even nominate anyone to fill any of the open offices that need filling, until all of this goes away? Cannot draft even a single line of proposed legislation until all of this goes away? Cannot use the bully pulpit to present a thoughtful, nuanced policy discussion to the country until all of this goes away? That's a crock, sport, and you know it. He'd much rather fight this one in the mud than do anything that might look like an attempt to govern.
Nope! Never said a word of that and as far as I can determine he is doing as much of that as he can on his own initiative!
-
Nope! Never said a word of that and as far as I can determine he is doing as much of that as he can on his own initiative!
So then why not leave the sideshow alone and start acting like a responsible adult? Why keep picking the scab and upping the ante? It takes two to tango and Trump is making sure his dance card runneth over.
-
Sport, my shoes know more about the Constitution than you do.
Oh, goodie .... another "Saturday with Oceander".
Not this time.
:seeya:
-
And if .DT continues to exhibit his overwrought rantings there will be a democrat congress
Just as Obama's self-absorbed, childish behavior led to the downfall of the Democrats, so will Trump's exact behavior lead to the downfall of what's left of the Republican party.
-
Oh, goodie .... another "Saturday with Oceander".
Not this time.
:seeya:
I always welcome a break from your inanity. Good bye and good riddance.
-
Just as Obama's self-absorbed, childish behavior led to the downfall of the Democrats, so will Trump's exact behavior lead to the downfall of what's left of the Republican party.
:thumbsup:
-
Ok @Oceander yet another wacko Leftist on the board. HAHAHA!
Hooray for you. Go find your bothers, and they can all speak for you. You know, since all you guys all chant in unison.
-
Stop the personal insults...move on and get back on topic.
-
Sport, my shoes know more about the Constitution than you do.
Are you sure you really want to go with a shoe size reference? :laugh:
-
Totally up the combined mental age of a large portion of the posting group brings the total to 2.375.
All fighting over one teddy bear.
nice
-
I would fire Mueller today. I like Mueller, and I have no problem with what he is doing. I would fire him anyway, just to stuff it down the Democrats throat.
Impeach me! Bitch! Bring it on you bastards!
I like your style.
-
Nope. I know you won't accept it, so I'll make it short and sweet: what counts as a high crime or misdemeanor is a political decision, not something bound by the existing federal criminal code.
At one end of the spectrum, we have this claim. At the other end of the spectrum, we have reality.
Bill Clinton got impeached for obstructing justice and committing perjury in a civil trial. Those are crimes.
So again, back to your charge of obstruction of justice. What criminal proceeding was being obstructed? What crime took place? What criminal act was being investigated. Please be specific.
Believe what you want - facts and reality have never stopped most people from doing so - but the fact is that if Trump gets impeached, obstruction of justice based on his extremely unseemly attempt to get Comey to leave Flynn alone will be a count.
What crime did Flynn commit, and where was the investigation of that crime? Because without it, there is no obstruction.
Also, if we are to follow this same line of logic [sic], then shouldn't Bush have been impeached for ordering a halt to the investigation of the trashing of the White House executive offices by departing Clinton staff?
Seriously, if you have some beef with Trump, then call him out on what he actually did instead of repeating baseless Dem talking points. I don't even like Trump. But damn sure will not throw him under the bus based upon a lie. He is the President. He can hire and fire whoever he damn well pleases. And the FBI director works for him at his discretion.
The last time a President was impeached for firing someone, it did not turn out well. The Supreme Court came in and ruled that it was absolutely within the Executive powers of the President to do what he did. So yes, the President can fire whoever he damn well pleases. The Supreme Court said so. And so does the Constitution of the United States. So to hell with the Dem talking points.
-
Totally up the combined mental age of a large portion of the posting group brings the total to 2.375.
All fighting over one teddy bear.
nice
I know, it gets old...
-
This is why threads get locked..the insults just won't stop and nobody wants to be the first to simply walk away.
-
This must be the most absurd scandal I have seen in 50 years of following politics. The POTUS is being investigated by a special prosecutor for obstructing justice in a case where no crime would have been committed even if he had done what is alleged, and there is no evidence he did squat. In fact, the whole thing was initiated based on a completely bogus document likely produced by the Clinton dirty tricks division.
In short, this is an establishment attempt to rein in Trump and keep him from doing what he was elected to do, dismantle the managerial state and put the people back in charge of their own lives.
Trump can't fire Rosenstein and Mueller fast enough, IMHO. The media will squeal and yelp, but Trump's popularity will increase and congress will have to do its own investigation if it is at all interested in this goofy charade.
This president, any president, is entitled an opportunity to govern. So far, Trump has been denied that opportunity by those with vested interests that are 180 degrees from those of the American taxpayer.
Trump's last chance is at hand. I say he should use the constitutional authority the people gave him, and drain both Rosenstein and Mueller from the swamp.
@massadvj Great post !! And I want to hear more about your love life.
-
I am torn on this. On one hand, firing Mueller and Rosenstein would seem to be the common sense thing to do, considering their obvious anti-Trump bias. However.... it is probably too late to do so now.... and firing Mueller & Rosenstein is exactly what the radical left and RINO Trump haters want him to do.
So I would have to say...hell no. Let them muck about, wasting taxpayer money trying to find something, anything, with which to hang Trump on.... and let Trump point that out to voting taxpayers...
every.. single.. day.
Trump should rub their noses in it.... re: how the Dems (America's enemy within) are wasting time, money and energy trying to destroy a duly elected president..... even while America's enemies without are busily making plans to destroy us.
@XenaLee I want him to fire them, but I sure see your point !!
-
How many people have been found guilty of "hoping". Trump as the chief law enforcer in the country could have legally stopped the Flynn investigation any time he wanted. Comey is a liar and a Clinton crony as is Mueller.
He can hope all he wants to but why mention his hopes to Comey who was in charge of the investigation if not to communicate to Comey that you want him to drop the investigation?
He didn't mention his "hopes" in passing to his wife or some casual friends. He mentioned it to the head of the FBI who was doing the investigation. I think his intentions are pretty clear. Unless Comey and Trump were besties who often shared their hopes and dreams with each other. But they were not. This was the head of the FBI and the POTUS.
While I am not sure that they would be able to successfully remove the POTUS via impeachment and prove collusion I do believe there is certainly enough evidence to proceed with an Article 25 removal. JMO.
This is not something that I wanted for our country but it could have been prevented. There were plenty of warning signs.
-
I am torn on this. On one hand, firing Mueller and Rosenstein would seem to be the common sense thing to do, considering their obvious anti-Trump bias. However.... it is probably too late to do so now.... and firing Mueller & Rosenstein is exactly what the radical left and RINO Trump haters want him to do.
Here is the best solution. Continue to let Mueller do his thing, except severely curtail his budget. Cap it at $1 million. Once the money is gone, he's done. And when he complains, put it back on him. "Hey, you were in charge of the taxpayers' money. What happened?"
Lawrence Walsh spent $71 million of the taxpayers' money on Iran-Contra, and did not have a single conviction upheld. Not a single one. So yes, the President does have control here. He simply limits the money spent. See how many of these Mueller hacks jump ship once they find out they won't be getting paid. Besides, it is illegal to work for the government for free which we learned during Clinton's early years.
-
Oh, goodie .... another "Saturday with Oceander".
Not this time.
:seeya:
I'm tempted also but I've resolved only to block people ... and right now, there is just one ... who have engaged in personal insults containing bad language.
-
I know, it gets old...
Bless your heart! And you have to read it all in case someone really needs to be bitch-slapped.
-
Here is the best solution. Continue to let Mueller do his thing, except severely curtail his budget. Cap it at $1 million. Once the money is gone, he's done. And when he complains, put it back on him. "Hey, you were in charge of the taxpayers' money. What happened?"
Lawrence Walsh spent $71 million of the taxpayers' money on Iran-Contra, and did not have a single conviction upheld. Not a single one. So yes, the President does have control here. He simply limits the money spent. See how many of these Mueller hacks jump ship once they find out they won't be getting paid. Besides, it is illegal to work for the government for free which we learned during Clinton's early years.
Good idea. These people spend way too much time whittling the straws they grasp at.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMNgbISmF4I
-
:laugh:
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMNgbISmF4I
:silly: Love Aerosmith. One of my top 5 fav bands. Perfect song for this thread!!
-
I'm tempted also but I've resolved only to block people ... and right now, there is just one ... who have engaged in personal insults containing bad language.
I don't have anyone on "ignore" @Emjay ..... I find I'm able to ignore just by moving on down the list ^-^
When that becomes tiresome, I just log off.
Happy weekend!
-
At one end of the spectrum, we have this claim. At the other end of the spectrum, we have reality.
Bill Clinton got impeached for obstructing justice and committing perjury in a civil trial. Those are crimes.
So again, back to your charge of obstruction of justice. What criminal proceeding was being obstructed? What crime took place? What criminal act was being investigated. Please be specific.
What crime did Flynn commit, and where was the investigation of that crime? Because without it, there is no obstruction.
Also, if we are to follow this same line of logic [sic], then shouldn't Bush have been impeached for ordering a halt to the investigation of the trashing of the White House executive offices by departing Clinton staff?
Seriously, if you have some beef with Trump, then call him out on what he actually did instead of repeating baseless Dem talking points. I don't even like Trump. But damn sure will not throw him under the bus based upon a lie. He is the President. He can hire and fire whoever he damn well pleases. And the FBI director works for him at his discretion.
The last time a President was impeached for firing someone, it did not turn out well. The Supreme Court came in and ruled that it was absolutely within the Executive powers of the President to do what he did. So yes, the President can fire whoever he damn well pleases. The Supreme Court said so. And so does the Constitution of the United States. So to hell with the Dem talking points.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
-
Here is the best solution. Continue to let Mueller do his thing, except severely curtail his budget. Cap it at $1 million. Once the money is gone, he's done. And when he complains, put it back on him. "Hey, you were in charge of the taxpayers' money. What happened?"
Lawrence Walsh spent $71 million of the taxpayers' money on Iran-Contra, and did not have a single conviction upheld. Not a single one. So yes, the President does have control here. He simply limits the money spent. See how many of these Mueller hacks jump ship once they find out they won't be getting paid. Besides, it is illegal to work for the government for free which we learned during Clinton's early years.
Excellent idea. It never occurred to me that Trump could cut their budget. As Picard would say.... make it so! ^-^
-
@massadvj Great post !! And I want to hear more about your love life.
:laugh: A good man! :beer:
-
And the kicker is..... the Dems have absolutely no proof at all of any crime having been committed by Trump.
Exactly. How can one obstruct justice for a crime that was never committed in the first place?
-
Oh, goodie .... another "Saturday with Oceander".
Not this time.
:seeya:
Sometimes ... it's better to just let some people sink their own ship. Have a good one RIV.
-
Exactly. How can one obstruct justice for a crime that was never committed in the first place?
One can't. But per usual, the Dems are counting on the sublime ignorance of most of their voting public (their constituents) to not know that and ergo, to support their calling for further investigation towards impeachment proceedings.
-
While I am not sure that they would be able to successfully remove the POTUS via impeachment and prove collusion I do believe there is certainly enough evidence to proceed with an Article 25 removal. JMO.
Should a President object to The 25th Amendment, Section 4. removal, you realize that it takes 2/3 vote by BOTH legislative chambers, which is a steeper hill to climb then mere impeachment?
It is highly unlikely this will occur. Reaching that conclusion, takes both knowledge and good judgment; qualities in scarce supply these days.
-
I haven't read through the entire thread, so maybe I'm repeating someone else, but after reading this headline the first question that springs to mind is - why is a dem quoted? don't the republicans run congress?
-
I haven't read through the entire thread, so maybe I'm repeating someone else, but after reading this headline the first question that springs to mind is - why is a dem quoted? don't the republicans run congress?
The Dems are betting they'll win Congress in '18, in which case the hearing for Impeachment will start around Jan 5, 2019 (8:00 AM). They'll fabricate a "high crime or Misdemeanor" from whole cloth if they have to. As a practical matter, @Oceander is correct to point out there doesn't have to be a crime committed, as you and I understand the word "crime."
-
The Dems are betting they'll win Congress in '18, in which case the hearing for Impeachment will start around Jan 5, 2019 (8:00 AM). They'll fabricate a "high crime or Misdemeanor" from whole cloth if they have to. As a practical matter, @Oceander is correct to point out there doesn't have to be a crime committed, as you and I understand the word "crime."
Exactly.
-
The Dems are betting they'll win Congress in '18, in which case the hearing for Impeachment will start around Jan 5, 2019 (8:00 AM). They'll fabricate a "high crime or Misdemeanor" from whole cloth if they have to. As a practical matter, @Oceander is correct to point out there doesn't have to be a crime committed, as you and I understand the word "crime."
I understand there is historical ambiguity attached to the term 'high crimes and misdemeanors' but if 'you won the election and we lost' now meets the criteria we are well and truly $#@ed.
-
He'd much rather fight this one in the mud than do anything that might look like an attempt to govern.
And the Dems know it, and are playing him, and he just can't help himself from fighting with the chew toy.
-
I understand there is historical ambiguity attached to the term 'high crimes and misdemeanors' but if 'you won the election and we lost' now meets the criteria we are well and truly $#@ed.
That's what makes impeachment inherently a political, not a legal, matter.
-
And the Dems know it, and are playing him, and he just can't help himself from fighting with the chew toy.
Exactly.
-
That's what makes impeachment inherently a political, not a legal, matter.
If thats true then what good are elections?
If this becomes precedent then we'll never have a non insider in the white house again. I do not believe this is what the founders intended.
-
If thats true then what good are elections?
If this becomes precedent then we'll never have a non insider in the white house again. I do not believe this is what the founders intended.
For one thing, impeachment is not a walk in the park so it doesn't render elections meaningless.
Second, we don't have a non-insider in the White House now; we have a sleazy NYC insider in the White House right now, one who forgot he wasn't dealing with a sleazy NYC council member when he expressed his hopes about Flynn to Comey.
-
For one thing, impeachment is not a walk in the park so it doesn't render elections meaningless.
Second, we don't have a non-insider in the White House now; we have a sleazy NYC insider in the White House right now, one who forgot he wasn't dealing with a sleazy NYC council member when he expressed his hopes about Flynn to Comey.
Of course it does. With conviction or not it hamstrings the administration. Not the intended purpose of the impeachment process.
To your second point,
-
Of course it does. With conviction or not it hamstrings the administration. Not the intended purpose of the impeachment process.
To your second point,
The point of the impeachment process is precisely to hamstring a president if, after the election, a sufficient number of members of Congress have second thoughts about the wisdom of electing him.
It is somewhat analogous to the vote of no confidence process in parliamentary systems, which allows the members of parliament to second-guess the results of an election.
-
And the Dems know it, and are playing him, and he just can't help himself from fighting with the chew toy.
If what you mean by 'chew toy' is Trump's twitter habit, not everyone agrees with you that it's harmed him. I don't, for one. Rush doesn't, for another. Here is Rush's quote:
"Rush Limbaugh
Yesterday at 7:13am •
Donald Trump's 140-character proclamations change the world every day. Donald Trump's tweets thwart and obstruct the unified effort of his enemies to destroy him. Donald Trump's tweets keep his supporters supporting him. Donald Trump's tweets are one of the best weapons he has against this all-out assault arrayed against him."
-
The point of the impeachment process is precisely to hamstring a president if, after the election, a sufficient number of members of Congress have second thoughts about the wisdom of electing him.
It is somewhat analogous to the vote of no confidence process in parliamentary systems, which allows the members of parliament to second-guess the results of an election.
Think about what you're saying here.
-
Think about what you're saying here.
I am. Impeachment is a safety relief valve that can be used as a political tool to remove an elected president. The primary counter to its abuse is the requirement for a greater than mere majority vote. That is what the Founders intended it to be there for. Do not forget that the Founders had a lot more distrust for the executive than they did for the legislative. They intended for the legislative branch to have this sort of leverage over the executive.
-
I would fire Mueller today.
I would fire him anyway, just to stuff it down the Democrats throat.
Impeach me! Bitch! Bring it on you bastards!
This was my thinking as well.
-
I am. Impeachment is a safety relief valve that can be used as a political tool to remove an elected president. The primary counter to its abuse is the requirement for a greater than mere majority vote. That is what the Founders intended it to be there for. Do not forget that the Founders had a lot more distrust for the executive than they did for the legislative. They intended for the legislative branch to have this sort of leverage over the executive.
Then the founders send of distrust was incomplete if not misplaced. Because the way the system has evolved todays congress is hardly accountable to their constituents - the checks and balances now are going only in one direction.
-
Then the founders send of distrust was incomplete if not misplaced. Because the way the system has evolved todays congress is hardly accountable to their constituents - the checks and balances now are going only in one direction.
Nobody said the Founders were perfect. They designed the system with their own direct experience with King George and the British parliament in mind. They also never foresaw political parties of the sort we have.
-
Then the founders send of distrust was incomplete if not misplaced. Because the way the system has evolved todays congress is hardly accountable to their constituents - the checks and balances now are going only in one direction.
Yes. The Bribing of their constituents to vote for them was a consequence of the 24th amendment. (Requiring no Taxes to vote.) Prior to 1964, the requirement to pay taxes to vote put a brake on excessive spending, because the voters were aware that they had to ultimately foot the bill for the spending.
Removing the requirement to pay taxes gave incumbency much more power than it had previously enjoyed. Now Congressmen and Senators could offer goodies to the public without having to worry about paying for it.
Incidentally this also started us on the road to insolvency.
-
I think what bothers me the most about this presidency, so for, is the disjointed, discontinuous disarray from with which he proceeds. He should be sniping from a protected elevated position and not be standing in the gutter wildly firing from the lip.
-
I think what bothers me the most about this presidency, so for, is the disjointed, discontinuous disarray from with which he proceeds. He should be sniping from a protected elevated position and not be standing in the gutter wildly firing from the lip.
What does that even mean?
-
Yes. The Bribing of their constituents to vote for them was a consequence of the 24th amendment. (Requiring no Taxes to vote.) Prior to 1964, the requirement to pay taxes to vote put a brake on excessive spending, because the voters were aware that they had to ultimately foot the bill for the spending.
Removing the requirement to pay taxes gave incumbency much more power than it had previously enjoyed. Now Congressmen and Senators could offer goodies to the public without having to worry about paying for it.
Incidentally this also started us on the road to insolvency.
Limiting the vote to only those who have paid above a certain amount of tax simply creates an oligarchy with its own problems that leads to the abuse of the poor by the wealthy. Athens liked to pretend it was a democracy, and people nowadays imply into it all the freedoms our own democracy provides universally, but if you weren't a wealthy male, life wasnt that free or fun in ancient Athens. There are no easy fixes in life.
-
The point of the impeachment process is precisely to hamstring a president if, after the election, a sufficient number of members of Congress have second thoughts about the wisdom of electing him.
It is somewhat analogous to the vote of no confidence process in parliamentary systems, which allows the members of parliament to second-guess the results of an election.
I've been living in Arizona for quite a while, including the 80's. There was a Gubernatorial Election back then ('86) where the Dems had a Dem run as a third-party, which split the Dem vote and allowed a Republican, Evan Mecham to win with less than 40% of the vote. A citizen's Recall Committee was established at the first available opportunity and the Legislature took up Impeachment promptly. Meanwhile, the AG started building charges to take him to criminal court. There was a charge ginned up that there were financial improprieties in the Inaugural Ball. All three actions moved simultaneously, all the while questions of "What was the crime?" were answered with "We don't need one." The facts on the ground were he won with a minority of the votes, and a majority hated him and wanted him out.
As it turned out, the first shoe to drop was the Impeachment vote in the Senate after referral from the Legislature. With every Dem and a number of Reps against him he easily lost and was removed from office. This rendered the Recall moot, so it stopped, but the AG proceeded with the strongest charge against him. He was acquitted, proving there was no crime committed in the first place.
Governor Evan Mecham was successfully Impeached and removed from office because the rest of the State Government "could," regardless of whether they "should." Talk of high crimes and misdemeanors was irrelevant. I submit it is irrelevant today.
-
If what you mean by 'chew toy' is Trump's twitter habit, not everyone agrees with you that it's harmed him. I don't, for one. Rush doesn't, for another. Here is Rush's quote:
"Rush Limbaugh
Yesterday at 7:13am •
Donald Trump's 140-character proclamations change the world every day. Donald Trump's tweets thwart and obstruct the unified effort of his enemies to destroy him. Donald Trump's tweets keep his supporters supporting him. Donald Trump's tweets are one of the best weapons he has against this all-out assault arrayed against him."
I am thinking of a story about the king who was going to send his people out to collect taxes from the farmers as their crops came in from harvest. On the first morning of harvest, criers came through the streets, shouting insults about the king. So the king sent his people out to track down these criers and arrest them. By sundown, he hadn't gotten any taxes collected, but he felt good that he'd put all of those criers out of business.
On the second morning, a breeze blew a piece of parchment through his window. He picked it up and saw that it was a poster. His people said that they'd been posted all throughout town, making a mockery of the king! Well, he couldn't let that stand! So he sent his people out to round them all up and stand watch over the print shops. No taxes were collected on the second day's harvest, but he'd put an end to that mockery!
On the third day, he woke and looked out his window, and there on the castle wall was a giant painting of him looking foolish. OH MY! His people were sent out to paint over the graffiti, and to stand watch over the paint shops. And that evening, the farmers went to sleep with the granaries full and not a penny collected, as the harvest was done for the year.
But at least nobody was making fun of the king...right?
-
The dems are in "all out" mode, and impeachment would be ONLY to impede the enactment of conservative measures,
--cutting federal budget
--repealing/replacing Obamacare
--Other
If you think otherwise,, you are being manipulated by the crooked, DC/NYC media and apparently can't help yourself.
-
I am thinking of a story about the king who was going to send his people out to collect taxes from the farmers as their crops came in from harvest. On the first morning of harvest, criers came through the streets, shouting insults about the king. So the king sent his people out to track down these criers and arrest them. By sundown, he hadn't gotten any taxes collected, but he felt good that he'd put all of those criers out of business.
On the second morning, a breeze blew a piece of parchment through his window. He picked it up and saw that it was a poster. His people said that they'd been posted all throughout town, making a mockery of the king! Well, he couldn't let that stand! So he sent his people out to round them all up and stand watch over the print shops. No taxes were collected on the second day's harvest, but he'd put an end to that mockery!
On the third day, he woke and looked out his window, and there on the castle wall was a giant painting of him looking foolish. OH MY! His people were sent out to paint over the graffiti, and to stand watch over the paint shops. And that evening, the farmers went to sleep with the granaries full and not a penny collected, as the harvest was done for the year.
But at least nobody was making fun of the king...right?
:thumbsup:
-
What does that even mean?
It means I think he should get his shit together, let his lawyer do the talking, and stop acting like the sergeant-at-arms from the local Hell's Angels club over on 25th steret.
-
I am thinking of a story about the king who was going to send his people out to collect taxes from the farmers as their crops came in from harvest. On the first morning of harvest, criers came through the streets, shouting insults about the king. So the king sent his people out to track down these criers and arrest them. By sundown, he hadn't gotten any taxes collected, but he felt good that he'd put all of those criers out of business.
On the second morning, a breeze blew a piece of parchment through his window. He picked it up and saw that it was a poster. His people said that they'd been posted all throughout town, making a mockery of the king! Well, he couldn't let that stand! So he sent his people out to round them all up and stand watch over the print shops. No taxes were collected on the second day's harvest, but he'd put an end to that mockery!
On the third day, he woke and looked out his window, and there on the castle wall was a giant painting of him looking foolish. OH MY! His people were sent out to paint over the graffiti, and to stand watch over the paint shops. And that evening, the farmers went to sleep with the granaries full and not a penny collected, as the harvest was done for the year.
But at least nobody was making fun of the king...right?
That story would be relevant if the tax collectors are the ones cracking down on the speech. Today's King runs a government large enough to hire both tax collectors and speech police.
-
It means I think he should get his shit together, let his lawyer do the talking, and stop acting like the sergeant-at-arms from the local Hell's Angels club over on 25th steret.
And that will make the media stop driving the agenda against him?
That sounds like wishful thinking to me. The media created these false accusations, and they are not going to stop trying to impeach him no matter what he does.
Trump needs to go to war with the media, and especially the larger corporations that own them. He needs to start looking at what kind of Presidential powers can be brought to bear on these corporate behemoths, and he needs to start inflicting pain upon them.
The message to "the media" will trickle down in no uncertain terms.
-
That story would be relevant if the tax collectors are the ones cracking down on the speech. Today's King runs a government large enough to hire both tax collectors and speech police.
Yes, it was a bunch of childish nonsense that someone made up. If you postulate a King, then an accurate portrayal would have some executions in it.
And the taxes will always be collected. The idea that someone would "forget" is more childish prattle.
-
That's what makes impeachment inherently a political, not a legal, matter.
The Constitution says otherwise.
-
The Constitution says otherwise.
Haven't you noticed? The Democrats consider the Constitution a "Bill of Negative Rights," and it's their job to find ways around it. They will simply deem Trump guilty of High Crimes and Misdemeanors even if they have to make them up as they go along. The Maxine Waters types have already signaled this is what they're going to do.
That makes it a political matter, even though it should be a legal matter.
-
The Constitution says otherwise.
1. Don't try to argue with a lawyer, for they are trained to argue either side.
2. The Constitution says "high crimes and misdemeanors," so presumably Congress would need to demonstrate they argued it from that basis; e.g. the constitution, not merely politics.
IMO however talk of impeachment, it SOLELY to delay, and block enactment of conservative measure. A smokescreen, a distraction.
It appears the GOP establishment are letting outsider Trump, "dangle in the wind." I believe many of them feel enactment of conservative measures, will not be widely accepted by voters.
--Cutting welfare, food stamps, health coverages, federal spending in general, curtailing illegal immigration, ramping up defense spending, etc.
IOW mostly things which many Republicans also talk out of both sides, of their mouths about.
-
That makes it a political matter, even though it should be a legal matter.
The motivation behind impeachment may be political. But the process itself is legal. Which is why there is no case for obstruction of justice.
They can mention 'obstruction of justice' all they want. But when it comes to drawing up a formal charge, they will come up empty.
-
The Constitution says otherwise.
No, it does not.
-
IMO however talk of impeachment, it SOLELY to delay, and block enactment of conservative measure. A smokescreen, a distraction.
It appears the GOP establishment are letting outsider Trump, "dangle in the wind." I believe many of them feel enactment of conservative measures, will not be widely accepted by voters.
--Cutting welfare, food stamps, health coverages, federal spending in general, curtailing illegal immigration, ramping up defense spending, etc.
IOW mostly things which many Republicans also talk out of both sides, of their mouths about.
Nobody in Washington and New York wants to enact the Trump agenda. It is the nation that wants it, but New York and Washington D.C. have long become accustomed to getting what they want instead.
All of this is just more effort by them to get what they want.
Time for Trump to start playing hardball. The first thing he needs to do is to clear out much of the entrenched bureaucracy, especially at the State Department and "Intelligence services."
"You're Fired!" is how Trump needs to handle this. Give the media something else to talk about, and put the Fear of God into the bureaucrats who are currently interfering.
Plus, firing people convinces others that you are not to be trifled with.
"Pour encourager les autres."
-
And that will make the media stop driving the agenda against him?
That sounds like wishful thinking to me. The media created these false accusations, and they are not going to stop trying to impeach him no matter what he does.
Trump needs to go to war with the media, and especially the larger corporations that own them. He needs to start looking at what kind of Presidential powers can be brought to bear on these corporate behemoths, and he needs to start inflicting pain upon them.
The message to "the media" will trickle down in no uncertain terms.
Right. He is already at war with the media. He has an AG, doesn't he? He has the, FCC doesn't he? He has a press secretary, doesn't he? He doesn't help himself at all by firing off equally fraudulent, false, or misleading claims. I don't know what kind of magical "Presidential Powers" he can invoke to stop people talking crap about him, but he can sure as hell TRY to let someone else handle it. That is the presidential power he should invoke.
-
The motivation behind impeachment may be political. But the process itself is legal. Which is why there is no case for obstruction of justice.
They can mention 'obstruction of justice' all they want. But when it comes to drawing up a formal charge, they will come up empty.
Fine. Let's hope I don't have to feed those words back in a year or two. If you think Mueller & Company doesn't come back with some charge against somebody, you still haven't learned enough yet.
-
Right. He is already at war with the media. He has an AG, doesn't he? He has the, FCC doesn't he? He has a press secretary, doesn't he? He doesn't help himself at all by firing off equally fraudulent, false, or misleading claims. I don't know what kind of magical "Presidential Powers" he can invoke to stop people talking crap about him, but he can sure as hell TRY to let someone else handle it. That is the presidential power he should invoke.
"STFU" is advice given him almost universally. He won't until it bites him hard. The gummint's jaws close slowly, but they close.
-
What does that even mean?
Leave him alone, he's on a roll... ^-^
-
2. The Constitution says "high crimes and misdemeanors," so presumably Congress would need to demonstrate they argued it from that basis; e.g. the constitution, not merely politics.
The Constitution also says "Impeachment for, and Conviction of". "Conviction" denotes a formal criminal charge and deliberation.
It also says "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. . . . And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.". Again, this indicates a trial process - one based upon due process of law. Once based upon violation of written statute. In other words, a legal process.
The Constitution goes on to say, "the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment, and Punishmnet, according to Law. " According to Law. Not political fiat. But Law. They can't simply charge him with being someone they don't like. They must have evidence of an actual crime and formally charge him with that crime. And so far, there is zero evidence of this occurring. None. Zip. Nada.
-
It means I think he should get his shit together, let his lawyer do the talking, and stop acting like the sergeant-at-arms from the local Hell's Angels club over on 25th steret.
I disagree. Tweeting to 50 million followers and a curious media is the perfect counter-measure to the tactics of the Left.
-
1. Don't try to argue with a lawyer, for they are trained to argue either side.
2. The Constitution says "high crimes and misdemeanors," so presumably Congress would need to demonstrate they argued it from that basis; e.g. the constitution, not merely politics.
IMO however talk of impeachment, it SOLELY to delay, and block enactment of conservative measure. A smokescreen, a distraction.
It appears the GOP establishment are letting outsider Trump, "dangle in the wind." I believe many of them feel enactment of conservative measures, will not be widely accepted by voters.
--Cutting welfare, food stamps, health coverages, federal spending in general, curtailing illegal immigration, ramping up defense spending, etc.
IOW mostly things which many Republicans also talk out of both sides, of their mouths about.
Exactly! As I pointed out a few pages back on this very thread.
-
No, it does not.
Again:
Article II, Section 4
(https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii#section4)
Article I, Section 3 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#section3)
I will go by what the Constitution actually says instead of by what you say.
-
And that will make the media stop driving the agenda against him?
That sounds like wishful thinking to me. The media created these false accusations, and they are not going to stop trying to impeach him no matter what he does.
Trump needs to go to war with the media, and especially the larger corporations that own them. He needs to start looking at what kind of Presidential powers can be brought to bear on these corporate behemoths, and he needs to start inflicting pain upon them.
The message to "the media" will trickle down in no uncertain terms.
Meh. Takes too long!
I'd make a stern, take-no-sh*t, 60 second announcement from the Oval Office, with a TV monitor on in the background...coincidentally showing the Baptism scene from The Goldfather.
/s for the sarcasm-challenged.
-
I disagree. Tweeting to 50 million followers and a curious media is the perfect counter-measure to the tactics of the Left.
He should be using it as a highly effective weapon against THEM. Aim the gun at your enemy. Not your own foot. Use a little decorum, aplomb, and FOR GODS SAKE, spell check.
-
He should be using it as a highly effective weapon against THEM. Aim the gun at your enemy. Not your own foot. Use a little decorum, aplomb, and FOR GODS SAKE, spell check.
Come one....he could have been bearing down on the crapper when he typed "cofefe". Give him a break! ^-^
-
Come one....he could have been bearing down on the crapper when he typed "cofefe". Give him a break! ^-^
:laugh:
-
:bigsilly:
-
Come one....he could have been bearing down on the crapper when he typed "cofefe". Give him a break! ^-^
I was going to look to see if that was available for a domain name...lol
-
I was going to look to see if that was available for a domain name...lol
It's already taken.
-
I am thinking of a story about the king who was going to send his people out to collect taxes from the farmers as their crops came in from harvest. On the first morning of harvest, criers came through the streets, shouting insults about the king. So the king sent his people out to track down these criers and arrest them. By sundown, he hadn't gotten any taxes collected, but he felt good that he'd put all of those criers out of business.
On the second morning, a breeze blew a piece of parchment through his window. He picked it up and saw that it was a poster. His people said that they'd been posted all throughout town, making a mockery of the king! Well, he couldn't let that stand! So he sent his people out to round them all up and stand watch over the print shops. No taxes were collected on the second day's harvest, but he'd put an end to that mockery!
On the third day, he woke and looked out his window, and there on the castle wall was a giant painting of him looking foolish. OH MY! His people were sent out to paint over the graffiti, and to stand watch over the paint shops. And that evening, the farmers went to sleep with the granaries full and not a penny collected, as the harvest was done for the year.
But at least nobody was making fun of the king...right?
I think you have the story wrong. I read a different version.
I stand by my post about the tweets. The only people making fun of them are the media and the leftists ... and maybe you.
-
It's already taken.
darn it..I should have done it right away
-
And that will make the media stop driving the agenda against him?
That sounds like wishful thinking to me. The media created these false accusations, and they are not going to stop trying to impeach him no matter what he does.
Trump needs to go to war with the media, and especially the larger corporations that own them. He needs to start looking at what kind of Presidential powers can be brought to bear on these corporate behemoths, and he needs to start inflicting pain upon them.
The message to "the media" will trickle down in no uncertain terms.
Yes, but if he is governing effectively and inspiring confidence, whatever the dems do will drive them even further down the road to irrelevance.
-
Come one....he could have been bearing down on the crapper when he typed "cofefe". Give him a break! ^-^
It's "covfefe". Damn D.C. you can't misspell a misspelling. That's just rude man.
-
It's "covfefe". Damn D.C. you can't misspell a misspelling. That's just rude man.
Damnit! You're right! I stared at it for 15 seconds before I hit 'Post', too!
^-^
-
:silly:
-
No, it does not.
Actually it does.
-
The Democrats consider the Constitution a "Bill of Negative Rights,"...
It is.
-
@massadvj Great post !! And I want to hear more about your love life.
I am engaged to be married in late August. Don"t believe in premarital sex. :whistle:
-
I am engaged to be married in late August. Don"t believe in premarital sex. :whistle:
Congratulations.
-
Those Dems better get crack'en, without a majority they aren't going to do squat on the impeachment front.
-
Those Dems better get crack'en, without a majority they aren't going to do squat on the impeachment front.
They're counting on 2018 and being able to peel a few republicans off.
-
Congratulations.
Which one? :silly:
-
The Dems still think they are in charge. But they are probably right with their surrogates of Ryan and McCookoo
-
This must be the most absurd scandal I have seen in 50 years of following politics. The POTUS is being investigated by a special prosecutor for obstructing justice in a case where no crime would have been committed even if he had done what is alleged, and there is no evidence he did squat. In fact, the whole thing was initiated based on a completely bogus document likely produced by the Clinton dirty tricks division.
In short, this is an establishment attempt to rein in Trump and keep him from doing what he was elected to do, dismantle the managerial state and put the people back in charge of their own lives.
Trump can't fire Rosenstein and Mueller fast enough, IMHO. The media will squeal and yelp, but Trump's popularity will increase and congress will have to do its own investigation if it is at all interested in this goofy charade.
This president, any president, is entitled an opportunity to govern. So far, Trump has been denied that opportunity by those with vested interests that are 180 degrees from those of the American taxpayer.
Trump's last chance is at hand. I say he should use the constitutional authority the people gave him, and drain both Rosenstein and Mueller from the swamp.
Ahem. Scooter Libby.
Nuff said.
-
For one thing, impeachment is not a walk in the park so it doesn't render elections meaningless.
Second, we don't have a non-insider in the White House now; we have a sleazy NYC insider in the White House right now, one who forgot he wasn't dealing with a sleazy NYC council member when he expressed his hopes about Flynn to Comey.
Oh how I hate NeverTrumpers.
-
Oh how I hate NeverTrumpers.
We know.
-
Oh how I hate NeverTrumpers.
The first step to repentance is admitting you are sinning.
Take step two. And three. And four..........
-
Oh how I hate NeverTrumpers.
Oh how I hate NeverConservatives.
-
I predict Trump will wait until Wednesday to do the deed. He will not want to affect the congressional special election in Georgia on Tuesday.
-
I predict Trump will wait until Wednesday to do the deed. He will not want to affect the congressional special election in Georgia on Tuesday.
Methinks you're right @massadvj
BTW... now you're going to have to post wedding pictures! :laugh:
Congratulations!
-
The first step to repentance is admitting you are sinning.
Take step two. And three. And four..........
Oh, do give it a rest.
-
Oh, do give it a rest.
She's got a point.
-
The first step to repentance is admitting you are sinning.
Take step two. And three. And four..........
Yeah, give it a rest.
-
I am engaged to be married in late August. Don"t believe in premarital sex. :whistle:
Congratulations @massadvj
-
Oh how I hate NeverTrumpers.
Well @jpsb I think "hate" may be a little strong. .... but they are joining forces with the enemies of freedom and aligning with the deep state vermin. What sickens me is the self-righteousness they use as a shield and a sword while doing this.
A pox on the house of #NeverTrump.
-
She's got a point.
Only for the gloriously self-righteous.
-
You people start the yelling at each other crap again? Lets not and say we did.
-
but they are joining forces with the enemies of freedom and aligning with the deep state vermin.
Don't worry. According to Trump's attorney, he isn't under investigation. :silly:
-
Yeah, give it a rest.
I was complimenting him for his confession of sin.
Confession is good for the soul.
Hating people weighs one down, so his admission of sin was good for him.
btw, I'm very well rested, but thanks for the advice anyway. :seeya:
-
She's got a point.
Hatred eats people up inside, and we've seen it over and over again......... even here.
I'm glad he admitted it.
-
You people start the yelling at each other crap again? Lets not and say we did.
:amen: :amen: and :amen:
-
:amen: :amen: and :amen:
What is the matter with us? I'm guilty also but we cannot seem to discuss any topic rationally and without rancor to each other.
Are we grownups or little kids who should be sent to our rooms?
-
What is the matter with us? I'm guilty also but we cannot seem to discuss any topic rationally and without rancor to each other.
Are we grownups or little kids who should be sent to our rooms?
Others can do as they please but I'm done with that! I will discuss any issue with anyone here but I refuse to further participate in the garbage that has been going on here for FAR to long!
-
I believe there are a group of folks, that claim to be conservatives, yet they get giddy, almost orgasmic, every time they read then post a story by the mainstream establishment news, with a Trump gotcha agenda.
Like "I think we got him, this time."
-
I believe there are a group of folks, that claim to be conservatives, yet they get giddy, almost orgasmic, every time they read then post a story by the mainstream establishment news, with a Trump gotcha agenda.
Like "I think we got him, this time."
Just can't let it go.
-
Thank you all for the congrats down thread. Here is a pic of me and my fiance.
(https://scontent.fagc1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/18222143_220606238437766_5104839215038764385_n.jpg?oh=65e355f200bd981feda0aba4523354eb&oe=59C78172)
-
Thank you all for the congrats down thread. Here is a pic of me and my fiance.
(https://scontent.fagc1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/18222143_220606238437766_5104839215038764385_n.jpg?oh=65e355f200bd981feda0aba4523354eb&oe=59C78172)
She's beautiful, @massadvj and you both look so happy. ^-^
Thanks for posting this and congratulations again! (https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT8aDIS2t6cybtNTM0peH4HEtl6yUv2IqxAWLCvp97WOs57BQN3)
-
She's beautiful, @massadvj and you both look so happy. ^-^
Thanks for posting this and congratulations again! (https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT8aDIS2t6cybtNTM0peH4HEtl6yUv2IqxAWLCvp97WOs57BQN3)
You make a beautiful couple!
-
She is beautiful @massadvj
Congratulations, I have not given up on the institution of Marriage and hope to try it again someday, now that I'm older, wiser and most importantly Mature enough to understand that 'till death do us part stuff'.
-
Thank you all for the congrats down thread. Here is a pic of me and my fiance.
Top notch. She looks younger than you. Do you have a nice fat bank roll or an awesome line of shit?
Either way, kudos.
-
Top notch. She looks younger than you. Do you have a nice fat bank roll or an awesome line of shit?
Either way, kudos.
She is older than she looks, but still 11 1/2 years younger than me. I don't know why she chose me. My theory is she's delusional.
-
She is older than she looks, but still 11 1/2 years younger than me. I don't know why she chose me. My theory is she's delusional.
Congrats to you both. You both look like you should know better. Just kidding. Best wishes.
-
She's beautiful, @massadvj and you both look so happy. ^-^
Thanks for posting this and congratulations again! (https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT8aDIS2t6cybtNTM0peH4HEtl6yUv2IqxAWLCvp97WOs57BQN3)
Mega congrats. And please post wedding pictures. I love wedding pictures.
-
She is older than she looks, but still 11 1/2 years younger than me. I don't know why she chose me. My theory is she's delusional.
The greatest relief I have ever experienced is seeing the woman I was about to marry walk through the door at the back of the church. Until that moment, my biggest fear was that she would come to her senses and call off the wedding.
God has blessed me beyond measure.