Page 270 of 273 FirstFirst ... 170220260263264265266267268269270271272273 LastLast
Results 3,498 to 3,510 of 3549

Thread: Impeachment

  1. #3498
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    SE Michigan
    Posts
    23,500
    Post Likes
    Nope...I knew it rang a bell. Mikey quoted Lincoln. Great quote though!

  2. #3499
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    1,696
    Post Likes
    One of the weird things about doing something for a long time is that many things come back around. I remember reading something the other day about a repair and what caused the failure. My next comment was who made that BS statement. Flipped the page and found my own signature. Funny thing, I don't remember that, I did not remember I knew that then, yes we change and sometimes so does what we have learned and it causes our opinion and actions to change as well

  3. #3500
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    napping on the couch
    Posts
    13,483
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Guy View Post
    Where is the evidence for obstruction of Congress?
    You do know that it is the white house lawyers that stated the Suponenas have no authorization..and that executive privilege applies.
    So how is that obstruction by Trump?
    Which brings us to abuse of power.
    Lay out the abuse of power for me.
    And why is such abuse of power impeachable.
    Abuse of power by itself means nothing.
    Bring me a cup of coffee...that's abuse of power..so should a president be impeached for that as well.
    It all comes back to the word rival.
    We learned yesterday he been working on the corruption with Ukraine since the very first conversation with Ukraine in 2016.
    Was Joe a Rival then?
    And what difference does it make being a Rival...when are rivals Constitutionally protected from crime?




    Sent from LG Stylo 4 using Tapatalk
    It's not only NOT obstruction, it's actually following the letter of the Constitution.

    Unbelievable that following the Constitution would be labeled as obstruction by the evil left. And more amazing that some people buy into it.

    Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk
    “Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.”
    -Possibly said by Thomas Jefferson(but true even if he didn't)


    “What one generation tolerates, the next generation will embrace.”
    ― Definitely said by John Wesley

  4. Likes Missouri Guy liked this post.
  5. #3501
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    napping on the couch
    Posts
    13,483
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Guy View Post
    Where is the evidence for obstruction of Congress?
    You do know that it is the white house lawyers that stated the Suponenas have no authorization..and that executive privilege applies.
    So how is that obstruction by Trump?
    Which brings us to abuse of power.
    Lay out the abuse of power for me.
    And why is such abuse of power impeachable.
    Abuse of power by itself means nothing.
    Bring me a cup of coffee...that's abuse of power..so should a president be impeached for that as well.
    It all comes back to the word rival.
    We learned yesterday he been working on the corruption with Ukraine since the very first conversation with Ukraine in 2016.
    Was Joe a Rival then?
    And what difference does it make being a Rival...when are rivals Constitutionally protected from crime?




    Sent from LG Stylo 4 using Tapatalk
    Sadly, some are immune to facts.

    Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk
    “Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.”
    -Possibly said by Thomas Jefferson(but true even if he didn't)


    “What one generation tolerates, the next generation will embrace.”
    ― Definitely said by John Wesley

  6. Likes vin lashon liked this post.
  7. #3502
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    napping on the couch
    Posts
    13,483
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BBeerme View Post
    It really is about, whatever. Meaning, the dims in Congress know they can't remove Trump from office, because he did nothing wrong. Same thing with the Mueller Report, what was that 30-40, million bucks, and they couldn't find a single thing to come out and say Trump did bad?

    You see, it's all about keeping the narrative going in the main stream media; trying to sway public opinion before the election.

    Awhile back, I heard one analyst explain how this is all backfiring in a big way. What he was explaining is that the dims cannot win the next presidential election without the black vote. And more and more blacks are siding with Trump. If only because they are rooting for the underdog.

    Rest assured, after the Senate votes not to convict Trump, the dims will manufacture another crisis. They're in too deep to stop now.
    I've heard they are already working on a Turkey crisis. Not sure what's it's about. I'm sure, they are getting their ducks in a row right now. Planting evidence. Hiding evidence. Making statements and and sending emails and memos to others so those others can be called in front of Schiff down the road. And some people will eat it all up when it happens.

    Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk
    “Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.”
    -Possibly said by Thomas Jefferson(but true even if he didn't)


    “What one generation tolerates, the next generation will embrace.”
    ― Definitely said by John Wesley

  8. #3503
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    napping on the couch
    Posts
    13,483
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by garyed View Post
    So Dershowitz spent over an hour saying he doesn't believe the offenses Trump is accused of doing are impeachable. I couldn't watch it all but I watched enough to get the gist of it & I might agree with him on the obstruction of congress but I definitely don't agree with him on the abuse of power or the part about it needing to rise to a criminal offense. IMO abuse of power is exactly what the framers had in mind when it comes to impeaching the president & I think that is exactly why the "misdemeanors" part was explicitly put in the Constitution. It encompasses anything an official does that can be considered a misuse or not worthy of the office. I also disagree with Dershowitz's claim that the evidence has to be beyond a reasonable doubt because this is not a criminal trial & the only standards are a preponderance of the evidence. Before I ever knew he was going to be Trump's attorney I emailed him & asked why he had such a position that I thought was obviously inconsistent with the Constitution. I said that I always respected his interpretations of the law & wanted to know what I was missing. I never received a reply & I now that he's arguing for Trump on the impeachment trial have to suspect his motives. Here's a less than 2 minute clip where he contradicts himself:
    He clearly explained why his position changed over the years. And that it happened long before Trump was even president. And there is documented proof of his change in position. It's not because he's defending Trump. Quite the opposite. He defending Trump because he had a change of heart after dogging through mountings of information.

    IMHO, for a president to be impeached for something that isn't technically a crime, there would have to be an overwhelming loss of trust and support from the American people. And we are no where near that level. Thanks mostly to enough intelligent people realizing how shady the left is. I do wish more would wake up to that reality though.

    Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk
    “Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.”
    -Possibly said by Thomas Jefferson(but true even if he didn't)


    “What one generation tolerates, the next generation will embrace.”
    ― Definitely said by John Wesley

  9. Likes vin lashon liked this post.
  10. #3504
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bay Area California
    Posts
    26,554
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BNME8EZ View Post
    Just curious; If the DEMs fail at removing Trump from office would it be possible to make a case that they owe us the American people all the money they have spent going after Trump on made up charges. I'm not thinking that they need to send a check to everyone just put the money back in the coffers. It has to be pushing $100 million by now doesn't it? Mueller's part alone was give or take $40 mil, I haven't heard any numbers on the House or Senate hearings, plus legal fees on both sides, plus the salaries of all the member of Congress, plus all the time wasted they could have gotten something worthwhile accomplished. It might make them think twice about trying to pull this crap again, and not just the DEMs but send a message to the GOP in the process.
    Congress would have to vote on that.
    I do a triple evac with nitro to remove non condensables.

  11. #3505
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Beatrice, NE
    Posts
    10,731
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BBeerme View Post
    Congress would have to vote on that.
    Not if everybody pitched in a buck and hired a couple good attorneys to take them to court. In case I wasn't clear it would be the DEM party not Congress itself. If you tried Congress you would have to get approval first as it is a government entity but he party is a separate entity.

    You know if some people were to really get the ball rolling on this the Koch Bros. may even throw a $5 or 2 into the pot to help out.

  12. #3506
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    9,656
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BNME8EZ View Post
    I'll be. Your not the first person I have heard say this. The funny thing is I don't remember being in a coma from 08-16 but I do remember a lack luster economy where people were afraid to spend money even with low interest rates and a FED lowering prime to "ZERO", unemployment was near 25% and nobody was investing in anything. How can one call an economy like that in "full swing"? Maybe it had something to do with a president that said this is the new normal, get use to it cause it can't get any better. Those may not have been they exact words but close enough for now. I think he has been shown to have been wrong.

    I'm not the one saying this, it's creditable opinions of the recovery. The economic flywheel takes a long time to change speed. Much of the mechanics are also beyond a Presidents control.
    Trump will take credit for all the good stuff and deny the rest. It's a mistake to take Trump
    at his word. I wouldn't give BO credit for the recovery either, just that it was beginning before mr.T was elected. Trump didn't start it. He probably had a limited affect on pot shot investors but serious players look at the fundamentals before investing. Especially the GNP.
    Cheap money is another key to investment along with employment and trade.
    Give me a relay with big enough contacts, and I'll run the world!

    You can be anything you want......As long as you don't suck at it.

    If a person wants to create a machine that will be more likely to fail...Make it complicated.

    USAF 98 Bomb Wing 1960-66 SMW Lu49

  13. #3507
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Deep Southeast
    Posts
    9,489
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by garyed View Post
    So Dershowitz spent over an hour saying he doesn't believe the offenses Trump is accused of doing are impeachable. I couldn't watch it all but I watched enough to get the gist of it & I might agree with him on the obstruction of congress but I definitely don't agree with him on the abuse of power or the part about it needing to rise to a criminal offense. IMO abuse of power is exactly what the framers had in mind when it comes to impeaching the president & I think that is exactly why the "misdemeanors" part was explicitly put in the Constitution. It encompasses anything an official does that can be considered a misuse or not worthy of the office. I also disagree with Dershowitz's claim that the evidence has to be beyond a reasonable doubt because this is not a criminal trial & the only standards are a preponderance of the evidence. Before I ever knew he was going to be Trump's attorney I emailed him & asked why he had such a position that I thought was obviously inconsistent with the Constitution. I said that I always respected his interpretations of the law & wanted to know what I was missing. I never received a reply & I now that he's arguing for Trump on the impeachment trial have to suspect his motives. Here's a less than 2 minute clip where he contradicts himself:
    Even if Dershowitz's earlier statements are true, Trump hasn't risen to that level either, except in the eyes of those who hate Trump. But let's face it, the Left isn't concerned about actual crime...they just want to get rid of Trump. The same can be said for those who hate Trump.

    If you aks yourself and answer honestly, do you really care if Trump committed a "crime", or do you just want him gone? I think the latter can be said for the vast majority of Liberals. They've convinced themselves he's guilty of something (sans evidence) and should be impeached, but they just can't be specific about what it is he's done.

  14. #3508
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Deep Southeast
    Posts
    9,489
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BNME8EZ View Post
    Not if everybody pitched in a buck and hired a couple good attorneys to take them to court. In case I wasn't clear it would be the DEM party not Congress itself. If you tried Congress you would have to get approval first as it is a government entity but he party is a separate entity.

    You know if some people were to really get the ball rolling on this the Koch Bros. may even throw a $5 or 2 into the pot to help out.
    If there were an entity serious about exposing and prosecuting Liberal corruption, I'd donate a lot more than that. Send a check made out to me and I'll make sure they get it.

  15. #3509
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    7,265
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BBeerme View Post
    By your definition or justification of an impeachable offense, every president in the history of United States of America could or should have been impeached.
    Not should have but probably could have been impeached. The way impeachment was worded in the Constitution leaves it completely up to the House & Senate to decide if the offense is impeachable. Other than the crime of treason & bribery anything else is a matter of if the Congress sees the offense as egregious enough to warrant impeachment. The very reason "high crimes & misdemeanors" was added to the constitutional requirement for impeachment is to encompass things like "abuse of power" that would otherwise not be covered under treason or bribery. So basically Congress has the right to impeach & remove a president for almost anything they think is a breech of office. It is just very unlikely that any president would be impeached for a trivial matter but the possibility is there. There are people that accept that Trump is guilty but think what he did it is no big deal while there are others who think its the worst offense ever committed by any president in our history. It all comes down to what the congressmen think.
    Gary
    -----------
    http://www.oceanhvac.com
    The best things in life are free but not everyone is willing to pay the price.

  16. #3510
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Deep Southeast
    Posts
    9,489
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian8383 View Post
    Good lordy.

    What I've been trying to get you to see is that the charges against Trump are invented out of nearly nothing. Just like the Russia hoax. And all the other hoaxes they tried to pull on him.

    I've bright up the indict a ham sandwich thing a few times. Because it's the most simplistic way I can think of to describe what's happened. And what you've fallen for. They've taken something so minor AND inferred and impeached a president over it.

    Gary, could you think about this for us. In the countries 240+ year history there have been three president who have been impeached. And none have been removed from office. Are you really telling me a phone call requesting another nation look into corruption that involved many USA government officials including Biden reaches that bar? Not pressure to find something "or else". No "get dirt on Biden or no $". Just to look into it for "us". Are you really saying that in our long history, that phone call rises to the level to remove a sitting president? Given the history of deeds perpetrated by other Presidents? None of whom have been removed from office? The line that must be crossed now has been lowered that drastically? Trumps stupid phone call requesting for another country to look into the deep and sustained corruption at nearly every level in the Democrat party in a foreign country?

    Can you start to understand how "indict a ham sandwich" propaganda is at play here? Your emotions have been ginned up and you're no thinking clearly?
    And none have been totally partisan except for this one.

    There should be an amendment that prohibits such action unless it's bi-partisan by 20% or more. Of course, although the founders knew evil from the British governing, they really had no concept of a 'Dem Reality'.

  17. Likes Brian8383 liked this post.
Page 270 of 273 FirstFirst ... 170220260263264265266267268269270271272273 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Contracting Business
HPAC Engineering
EC&M
CONTRACTOR