Originally posted by JimLamebrain
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Collusion update: "no factual evidence"
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostGrandstanding and unsupported assertions in lieu of evidence duly noted.
You are intelligent people with normally operating memories.
Jim
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostNot what the Constitution says, Jimmy:
"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."
In fact, our Founding Fathers explicitly rejected things like "mal-practice and neglect of duty" and "maladministration" as grounds for impeachment, arguing they were too broad and would essentially make the president subservient to Congress and remove his ability to act independently. There is some controversy about what is specifically meant by "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" (it's a term from English law), but what is not in doubt is that our Founding Fathers expected impeachment to be used "in only the most extreme situations" and that they "also mandated a supermajority requirement to militate against impeachments brought by the House for purely political reasons."
https://www.heritage.org/constitutio...or-impeachment
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostGrandstanding and unsupported assertions in lieu of evidence duly noted.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostNot my Job. It's Mueller's. But the fact we have him ordering a payment of hush money I would expect is just the tip of the iceberg. Trump has his fingers in so many dirty piles it would be a miracle if he in fact was not guilty of crimes and misdemeanors. He's just also happens to be rich enough and powerful enough to make the evidence hard to find. That and the fact the GOP is dragging its feet about as much as is possible pursuing the issue.
Jim
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by oxmixmuddle View PostThere are other possibilities. None of which could be proven at this stage of the game. It is possible somebody got to Cohen and made him realize 'flipping' (as Trump put it) on Trump would not be in his best interests. This is all essentially sleeze on sleeze, corruption on corruption, with all the actors (Putin and the Russian gov't, Trump, Cohen, Manafort, etc etc) having in many cases lots of power and resources with which to make someone 'see the light' and back off. So in my mind anything is possible, from a lying Cohen who mislead his lawyer to Putin acting as Trump's enforcer. When one is dealing with this level of corruption, and players this high on the world stage, literally almost anything is possible. I have been wondering though why Cohen thought he could flip on Trump and not face some sort of consequence. Maybe he's realized he can't
BQePF.jpg
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JimLamebrain View PostNot true, the Congress merely has to determine that the Presidents actions are detrimental to the Country. It could be a crime, and in Trumps case it will be multiple crimes, but ultimately it's a political decision for Congress to make, and only for Congress to make.
"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."
In fact, our Founding Fathers explicitly rejected things like "mal-practice and neglect of duty" and "maladministration" as grounds for impeachment, arguing they were too broad and would essentially make the president subservient to Congress and remove his ability to act independently. There is some controversy about what is specifically meant by "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" (it's a term from English law), but what is not in doubt is that our Founding Fathers expected impeachment to be used "in only the most extreme situations" and that they "also mandated a supermajority requirement to militate against impeachments brought by the House for purely political reasons."
https://www.heritage.org/constitutio...or-impeachment
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
Jim
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostI'm sure you'll provide the requisite factual evidence any day now.
Jim
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostAccording to the Constitution, the president needs to actually be guilty of a crime to be impeached. I think an arbitrary impeachment with no proof of a crime would be quickly overturned by the Supreme Court.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostObvious. IT would never reach the Supreme Court if it was arbitrary and no proof of a crime, but unfortunately tRump is likely guilty of a number of crimes given that almost all of his associates are guilty of crimes, and many connected to tRump.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostShould be no problem in the current case
Jim
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by oxmixmuddle View PostShould be no problem in the current case
Leave a comment:
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by rogue06, Today, 09:33 AM
|
8 responses
78 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by oxmixmudd
Today, 03:41 PM
|
||
Started by whag, Yesterday, 10:43 PM
|
51 responses
292 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
Today, 04:42 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 09:38 AM
|
0 responses
27 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 09:38 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Yesterday, 06:47 AM
|
83 responses
357 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 01:46 PM
|
||
Started by carpedm9587, 04-14-2024, 02:07 PM
|
57 responses
361 views
2 likes
|
Last Post
by oxmixmudd
Today, 07:12 PM
|
Leave a comment: