TheCid

Impeachment AND Conviction, Impeachment Inquiry, 25th Amendment or Censure

479 posts in this topic

MSNBCVerified account @MSNBC 11h11 hours ago

 
 

Speaker Pelosi: "That letter that came from the White House was a joke, beneath the dignity of the presidency of the United States, in defiance of our Constitution. Shame on them.”

 

The HillVerified account @thehill 8h8 hours ago

 

Speaker Nancy Pelosi: "I think the president every day gives grounds for impeachment in terms of obstruction of justice."

===========================================

Seth AbramsonVerified account @SethAbramson 1h1 hour ago

 
 

Why can't House Democrats see that impeaching Trump, whether or not it leads to his conviction and removal in the Senate,

gives tens of millions of Americans hope that truth, decency, integrity, rule of law, and democracy still mean something?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jill Wine-BanksVerified account @JillWineBanks 6h6 hours ago

 

Here's something I wrote showing why Ds should proceed to hearings, and likely impeachment.

Data shows it won't hurt Ds,

won't help Trump,

and without holding Trump accountable for the crimes in plain sight, democracy is at risk

------------------------------------------------------

 

The Balance Has Shifted: The Data on Impeachment Favor Moving Ahead

 

 

"....... it solves the political conundrum at the center of the debate about how to balance the potential political impact of impeachment on the 2020 election with the moral and constitutional obligations of Congress to hold this president accountable in the face of the corruption and wrongdoing reported in the Mueller Report and the nightly news. ...

Unlike Clinton, Nixon faced – as Trump does now – grave charges of abuse of power, ignoring Congressional subpoenas, obstruction of justice by misuse of government agencies, firing federal investigators, hush money payments, dangling pardons, perjury and subornation of perjury, witness tampering, and stonewalling Congress. As in the case of Nixon, Trump aides (plus Russians in the case of Trump) were indicted and convicted or pleaded guilty. No Clinton aides were ever indicted. It was not organized crime.

In fact, the case for impeachment of Trump is stronger because he has engaged in a broader stonewalling than Nixon ever did.......

 

– Congressional Democrats must fully engage the process of public education that is a necessary prerequisite for action — either impeachment or removal by the voters in 2020. Public hearings would allow the public and the Senate to fairly judge the culpability of the incumbent. ........

 

Without a common base for discussion, we can never reach consensus, but a public hearing could change that by letting the American people observe witnesses’ words and demeanors for themselves. The bubbles we all live in can be penetrated by such evidence, just as it was in the Manafort trial and the Watergate Senate and impeachment hearings.

This is why we must have public hearings....

Not only will impeachment of Trump not hurt Democrats in 2020, it is essential to preserving Congress as a co-equal branch of government as our Founders intended and is essential to Congress fulfilling its constitutional and moral obligations. "

https://www.justsecurity.org/64173/the-balance-has-shifted-the-data-on-impeachment-favor-moving-ahead/

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@justinamash Republican Congressman from Michigan,

 

Here are my principal conclusions: 1. Attorney General Barr has deliberately misrepresented Mueller’s report

2. President Trump has engaged in impeachable conduct.

3. Partisanship has eroded our system of checks and balances. 4. Few members of Congress have read the report.

========================================

Jon FavreauVerified account @jonfavs 4h4 hours ago

 
Jon Favreau Retweeted Justin Amash

There is now bipartisan agreement in the House of Representatives that the President of the United States has engaged in impeachable conduct.

--------------------------------------------------------

Asha RangappaVerified account @AshaRangappa_ 56m56 minutes ago

 

In the coming months, we’re going to see two categories of politicians, and it won’t be based on party.

It will be those who care about principles, accountability, and the rule of law

vs. those who care about winning elections and political kubuki dances.

Thank you @justinamash

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, mr6666 said:

MSNBCVerified account @MSNBC 11h11 hours ago

 
 

Speaker Pelosi: "That letter that came from the White House was a joke, beneath the dignity of the presidency of the United States, in defiance of our Constitution. Shame on them.”

 

The HillVerified account @thehill 8h8 hours ago

 

Speaker Nancy Pelosi: "I think the president every day gives grounds for impeachment in terms of obstruction of justice."

===========================================

Seth AbramsonVerified account @SethAbramson 1h1 hour ago

 
 

Why can't House Democrats see that impeaching Trump, whether or not it leads to his conviction and removal in the Senate,

gives tens of millions of Americans hope that truth, decency, integrity, rule of law, and democracy still mean something?

Because the House Dems know that a precipitous rush to impeach Trump on shaky "evidence" will cause MORE millions of VOTERS to vote to  re-elect him in 2020.  As well as electing more Republicans to state and federal offices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, mr6666 said:

Jill Wine-BanksVerified account @JillWineBanks 6h6 hours ago

 

Here's something I wrote showing why Ds should proceed to hearings, and likely impeachment.

Data shows it won't hurt Ds,

won't help Trump,

and without holding Trump accountable for the crimes in plain sight, democracy is at risk

------------------------------------------------------

 

The Balance Has Shifted: The Data on Impeachment Favor Moving Ahead

 

 

"....... it solves the political conundrum at the center of the debate about how to balance the potential political impact of impeachment on the 2020 election with the moral and constitutional obligations of Congress to hold this president accountable in the face of the corruption and wrongdoing reported in the Mueller Report and the nightly news. ...

Unlike Clinton, Nixon faced – as Trump does now – grave charges of abuse of power, ignoring Congressional subpoenas, obstruction of justice by misuse of government agencies, firing federal investigators, hush money payments, dangling pardons, perjury and subornation of perjury, witness tampering, and stonewalling Congress. As in the case of Nixon, Trump aides (plus Russians in the case of Trump) were indicted and convicted or pleaded guilty. No Clinton aides were ever indicted. It was not organized crime.

In fact, the case for impeachment of Trump is stronger because he has engaged in a broader stonewalling than Nixon ever did.......

 

– Congressional Democrats must fully engage the process of public education that is a necessary prerequisite for action — either impeachment or removal by the voters in 2020. Public hearings would allow the public and the Senate to fairly judge the culpability of the incumbent. ........

 

Without a common base for discussion, we can never reach consensus, but a public hearing could change that by letting the American people observe witnesses’ words and demeanors for themselves. The bubbles we all live in can be penetrated by such evidence, just as it was in the Manafort trial and the Watergate Senate and impeachment hearings.

This is why we must have public hearings....

Not only will impeachment of Trump not hurt Democrats in 2020, it is essential to preserving Congress as a co-equal branch of government as our Founders intended and is essential to Congress fulfilling its constitutional and moral obligations. "

https://www.justsecurity.org/64173/the-balance-has-shifted-the-data-on-impeachment-favor-moving-ahead/

As I have pointed out many times the current Trump situation is nothing at all similar to the Nixon situation.  The evidence, AKA the smoking gun, was there showing Nixon's direct recorded participation.  Supported by credible testimony showing Nixon directly involved.  What we have now on Trump is that some of his people were involved in something.  He did try to influence certain people in his administration regarding the Mueller investigation, but then again a lot of people will see that as it is HIS administration.

Furthermore, The Dems had overwhelming control of both House and Senate when Nixon was impeached and they do not have that now.  Also, when Nixon was president, there were many Republicans who were moderate and would have possibly have supported impeachment.  We do not have that now.  Republicans in House and Senate,except for a very few, will support Trump.  The people who voted them in demand it.

The Dems. need to let this play out fully before going to impeachment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a very recent interview with Rep. Jamie Raskin (D), MD who is a "Constitutional expert."  He began considering impeachment for Trump the day after Trump was elected.  He cites several sources and considerations.

Basically, he is not advocating impeachment now.  He thinks Trump is impeachable, but the House and its committees need to continue to build up a very strong case against Trump.  He recognizes the needed balance between removing Trump (or attempting to) and the damage to the country that will occur it the public at large does not accept it as the right thing to do.

Personally, I believe a failed impeachment/conviction process will severely damage an already weak Democratic Party.  While it did gain seats in the House, the GOP still controls most state legislatures and governorships.  It also controls the Senate and may even gain seats in 2020.

https://www.thenation.com/article/impeachment-trump-congress-mueller-barr/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TheCid said:

This is a very recent interview with Rep. Jamie Raskin (D), MD who is a "Constitutional expert."  He began considering impeachment for Trump the day after Trump was elected.  He cites several sources and considerations.

Basically, he is not advocating impeachment now.  He thinks Trump is impeachable, but the House and its committees need to continue to build up a very strong case against Trump.  He recognizes the needed balance between removing Trump (or attempting to) and the damage to the country that will occur it the public at large does not accept it as the right thing to do.

Personally, I believe a failed impeachment/conviction process will severely damage an already weak Democratic Party.  While it did gain seats in the House, the GOP still controls most state legislatures and governorships.  It also controls the Senate and may even gain seats in 2020.

https://www.thenation.com/article/impeachment-trump-congress-mueller-barr/

Haven't you admonished others in the past about posting the same thing in multiple threads? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

Haven't you admonished others in the past about posting the same thing in multiple threads? 

Not exactly.  I admonished them (one in particular) for copying multiple posts from one thread and then posting them to other threads.

In this case, my first post was a response to a post from someone else.  However, I also considered in germane to the specific thread on impeachment (which I created).  Sorry if it offends you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TheCid said:

Sorry if it offends you.

Some how I don't think that you're really sorry.

And don't confuse annoyance with offense. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LawrenceA said:

Some how I don't think that you're really sorry.

And don't confuse annoyance with offense. ;)

OK, I'm no more sorry than you are for challenging my posting.

Why is it offensive?  One aspect of this forum is the multiple threads that are related to the same subject.

I have always admired your posts and your depth of knowledge.  However, it seems you seem to be getting testy lately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TheCid said:

OK, I'm no more sorry than you are for challenging my posting.

Why is it offensive?  One aspect of this forum is the multiple threads that are related to the same subject.

I have always admired your posts and your depth of knowledge.  However, it seems you seem to be getting testy lately.

You're the one who said I was offended. I stated that your reposting of the same thing in multiple threads was an annoyance.

As for attitude problems lately, have you looked in the proverbial mirror? You've been in a very poor, combative, defeatist, negative, naysayer mood for a while now. I gave you some slack because I didn't know if something was going on in your home life to cause the change, but I've got my own problems, and have grown tired of it all. 

As I've said in the past, I should try to refrain in engaging with people in this section of the message board. Nothing constructive, instructive, or even entertaining ever comes from any of it, just misery and ill-will. I'll do my best to avoid the Off-Topics from now on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

You're the one who said I was offended. I stated that your reposting of the same thing in multiple threads was an annoyance.

As for attitude problems lately, have you looked in the proverbial mirror? You've been in a very poor, combative, defeatist, negative, naysayer mood for a while now. I gave you some slack because I didn't know if something was going on in your home life to cause the change, but I've got my own problems, and have grown tired of it all. 

As I've said in the past, I should try to refrain in engaging with people in this section of the message board. Nothing constructive, instructive, or even entertaining ever comes from any of it, just misery and ill-will. I'll do my best to avoid the Off-Topics from now on.

I was almost always responding to posts with an alternative viewpoint, none of mine which were "very poor, combative, defeatist, negative, naysayer mood."  Nothing is going on in my home life.  In fact, it is improving.  The whole purpose of TCM forum is to permit alternative viewpoints.  For the most part my posts were in response to what someone else said.  I did not criticize their viewpoint, but merely offered an alternative one.

Since this appears to be related to my posts re: impeachment, let's be clear.  I would like nothing better than to see Trump impeached, convicted and sent to prison. BUT, a rash, precipitous impeachment at this time would most likely result in a boost to the GOP in the 2020 elections.  That is why they Democratic leadership in the House has not done it.  That is why the Democrats in the Senate are not pushing for it.  It is about politics and elections.  There is a process and that is what the Dem leadership is doing.  I'm just trying to support the process.  I was around for both the Nixon and the Clinton impeachment contorversies.  Actually Nixon never was impeached to be precise.  He resigned first.

I accept that you've "got [your] own problems" and that has influenced you.  I actually looked forward to your posts in Off Topics and agree with most of them.  I'll miss your contributions here, but if avoiding it will help you, best wishes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mehdi HasanVerified account @mehdirhasan 9h9 hours ago

 

“It is an age-old lesson: if you give the bully a pass, he doesn’t back off or calm down.

He comes back to bully some more.”

Me on Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats’ refusal to impeach Trump - even after Republican Justin Amash’s intervention:

=============================

Republican Justin Amash Gets What Top Democrats Don’t — It’s Time to Impeach Trump

"........Pelosi told an audience at Cornell University earlier this month that she believes Trump is “goading” Democrats to try to impeach him in order to help him “solidify his base” of supporters ahead of next November.

Sorry, this is absurd on so many levels.

First, does anyone seriously believe that the petulant and touchy narcissist in the Oval Office wants to be impeached? That he wants to have his actions — and his finances! — pored over by House Democrats? That he wants his kids dragged in front of televised impeachment hearings? That he wants to be remembered by history as only the third president to ever be impeached by the House? Come. Off. It.

Second, the president’s cultish base needs no new excuses to get riled up and needs no solidifying. These are people who are still chanting “Lock her up!” at Trump rallies. The president’s approval ratings among Republicans, lest we forget, stands at 90 percent.

Third, the Democrats should worry less about the GOP base turning out next year and much more about their own. A big majority of the Democratic base wants to see Trump impeached. How is it bad politics to give them what they want?

Fourth, what happens over the next 18 months if they do nothing? Can they not see how there is a clear political cost to not impeaching him, too?...........

 

Ludicrous charges of treason aside, Trump has also said it would be “appropriate” for him to speak to Attorney General William Barr about investigating his 2020 Democratic opponents. This is the direct and unsurprising result of immunizing this president from the impeachment process.

This is what happens when House Democrats say it’s “not worth it.” Trump now sees himself as unchecked and unrestrained; able to say and do as he pleases. ....

Congressional Democrats need to find their spines. This is a period of unprecedented danger for the republic, with a lawless and reckless president gearing up for the dirtiest of presidential campaigns, while committing impeachable offenses in front of our eyes on a near weekly basis. .........

the only real question the Democrats need to ask themselves is:

If not Trump, who, and if not now, when? "

https://theintercept.com/2019/05/20/republican-justin-amash-gets-what-top-democrats-dont-its-time-to-impeach-trump/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mr6666 said:

Mehdi HasanVerified account @mehdirhasan 9h9 hours ago

 

“It is an age-old lesson: if you give the bully a pass, he doesn’t back off or calm down.

He comes back to bully some more.”

Me on Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats’ refusal to impeach Trump - even after Republican Justin Amash’s intervention:

=============================

 

"........Pelosi told an audience at Cornell University earlier this month that she believes Trump is “goading” Democrats to try to impeach him in order to help him “solidify his base” of supporters ahead of next November.

Sorry, this is absurd on so many levels. First, does anyone seriously believe that the petulant and touchy narcissist in the Oval Office wants to be impeached? That he wants to have his actions — and his finances! — pored over by House Democrats? That he wants his kids dragged in front of televised impeachment hearings? That he wants to be remembered by history as only the third president to ever be impeached by the House? Come. Off. It.

Second, the president’s cultish base needs no new excuses to get riled up and needs no solidifying. These are people who are still chanting “Lock her up!” at Trump rallies. The president’s approval ratings among Republicans, lest we forget, stands at 90 percent.

Third, the Democrats should worry less about the GOP base turning out next year and much more about their own. A big majority of the Democratic base wants to see Trump impeached. How is it bad politics to give them what they want?

Fourth, what happens over the next 18 months if they do nothing? Can they not see how there is a clear political cost to not impeaching him, too?...........

 

Ludicrous charges of treason aside, Trump has also said it would be “appropriate” for him to speak to Attorney General William Barr about investigating his 2020 Democratic opponents. This is the direct and unsurprising result of immunizing this president from the impeachment process.

This is what happens when House Democrats say it’s “not worth it.” Trump now sees himself as unchecked and unrestrained; able to say and do as he pleases. ....

Congressional Democrats need to find their spines. This is a period of unprecedented danger for the republic, with a lawless and reckless president gearing up for the dirtiest of presidential campaigns, while committing impeachable offenses in front of our eyes on a near weekly basis. .........

the only real question the Democrats need to ask themselves is:

If not Trump, who, and if not now, when? "

https://theintercept.com/2019/05/20/republican-justin-amash-gets-what-top-democrats-dont-its-time-to-impeach-trump/

Sorry Lawrence, but I disagree again.  I do not believe Trump wants to be impeached, but I do believe a precipitous one will gin up his base and the independents that put him in office in 2017.  I remember the Nixon controversy and how strong the opposition was to having him removed from office.  And that was when the Democrats controlled the House and the Senate and had massive amounts of evidence and testimony to justify conviction.  While we have some testimony now, we do not have anything as clear cut not do we have a John Dean, among others.  What we have is some shady characters and some indications.  Let's let the process proceed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justin AmashVerified account @justinamash

 

People who say there were no underlying crimes and therefore the president could not have intended to illegally obstruct the investigation—and therefore cannot be impeached—are resting their argument on several falsehoods:

In fact, obstruction of justice does not require the prosecution of an underlying crime, and there is a logical reason for that. Prosecutors might not charge a crime precisely *because* obstruction of justice denied them timely access to evidence that could lead to a prosecution. ......

..... In fact, “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is not defined in the Constitution and does not require corresponding statutory charges. The context implies conduct that violates the public trust—and that view is echoed by the Framers of the Constitution and early American scholars. ......

see all: https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/1130533772951207937

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adam Jentleson 🎈🐢Verified account @AJentleson

 

If you want to argue that 2020 is the best way to remove Trump,

then impeaching him in the House and watching the Senate vote to protect him

(excruciating vote for Collins, Gardner etc) is a great way to illustrate it

while also juicing anti-Trump energy for Dems in Senate races.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

25 Dems who support an impeachment inquiry against President Trump

..... Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has long resisted impeachment and argued that Democrats should instead focus on the policy issues they campaigned on. But the pressure is growing on Pelosi and her leadership team.

Several Democrats have signed onto a resolution from Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) that calls on the Judiciary Committee to inquire whether the House should impeach Trump.

Here's a tally of which lawmakers have endorsed launching an impeachment inquiry of President Trump.

This list will be updated. .......

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/444874-whip-list-dems-who-support-an-impeachment-inquiry-against-president-trump

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sure, go ahead and try to impeach trump with no chance of conviction in the GOP-controlled US senate.

it'll work both ways.

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The below column by Jennifer Rubin was printed May 15, but I believe it is still accurate to the impeachment question.  Basically, she is saying what I have been advocating.  The Dems need to build a much stronger case and follow due process (for lack of a better term) before rushing to impeachment.  She outlines what that entails.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/15/constitutional-crisis-call-it-what-you-want-heres-what-trump-has-done/?utm_term=.d6182aed2df5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, mr6666 said:

Adam Jentleson 🎈🐢Verified account @AJentleson

 

If you want to argue that 2020 is the best way to remove Trump,

then impeaching him in the House and watching the Senate vote to protect him

(excruciating vote for Collins, Gardner etc) is a great way to illustrate it

while also juicing anti-Trump energy for Dems in Senate races.

This will backfire unless the Dems have a convincing case to present to the Senate.  Remember, if the House impeaches, then they select "managers" from House members to present (prosecute) the case before the Senate.  The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides.

Read Jennifer Rubin's column.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/15/constitutional-crisis-call-it-what-you-want-heres-what-trump-has-done/?utm_term=.d6182aed2df5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After Trump's stunt with Pelosi and Schumer over infrastructure, consideration of impeachment may be much more viable.  Trump has stated he will not do his job as president by refusing to cooperate with the Democrats.

However, it is still somewhat of a slippery slope.  His job is to carry out the laws enacted by Congress, but so far Congress has not actually enacted any laws that he should carry out.  Such as infrastructure, prescription medicine cost containment, health care, immigration, etc.  Primarily due to Dictator McConnell's almost total control of the Senate and the GOPers cowardice toward Trump.

The House Dems need to go ahead and pass reasonable bills that can be forwarded to the Senate.  Forcing McConnell to deal with them.  Leave all the New Deal, Medicare for All, free college, unlimited immigration, etc. out of them.  Make them reasonable enough that 10 Republican senators can vote for them - it they have the courage.

But it is definitely a dumb move on his part as to giving the House Dems more grounds to investigate him and possibly have impeachment hearings.  When the GOP senators go home to run for re-election (McConnell among them), they will have to explain why they have not brought home the bacon for over a year or two.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Impeachment Is a Refusal to Accept the Unacceptable

Taking action against Trump is a rejection of the idea that nothing matters.

 

 

"......The House should take up the task of examining the president’s conduct as detailed in the Mueller report and evaluating whether it is fitting of the person who holds the nation’s highest office. It should investigate the many other instances of potentially impeachable conduct by the president, from tweets to pardons. It should debate how to understand what constitutes a “high crime and misdemeanor,” and whether relatively minor offenses can accumulate over time into something worthy of impeachment.

The House should fulfill its constitutional duties and the process of constitutional interpretation, which by its nature is a declaration that the Constitution holds some significance........

 

Lincoln’s warning of the “approach of danger,” in context, was less about the political fracturing that would lead to the Civil War and more about the creeping acceptance of what should have been unacceptable. He decried “the increasing disregard for law which pervades the country;.....

It was this, in his mind, that pointed toward the death of the nation.

The antidote he offered was “the support of the Constitution and laws.” In the absence of that, the cynical country would become vulnerable to the approach of a dictator: ......

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/05/impeaching-trump-refuse-accept-unacceptable/590104/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us