* THE 2ND IMPEACHMENT OF DONALD J TRUMP / INDICTMENT (S) AFTER LEAVING OFFICE *

13

Comments

  • tempo_n_groovetempo_n_groove Posts: 23,905
    2023
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time.
  • Ledbetterman10Ledbetterman10 Posts: 13,303
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2

    Pearl Jam bootlegs:
    http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
  • tempo_n_groovetempo_n_groove Posts: 23,905
    2023
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
  • Ledbetterman10Ledbetterman10 Posts: 13,303
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the Republicans during Nixon's time were willing to be unbiased, look at the evidence, and act accordingly despite the fact that Nixon was their party leader. With Trump, no matter what he was charged with in the articles of impeachment, he wasn't going to get removed by these Republicans. 
    2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2

    Pearl Jam bootlegs:
    http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 7,253
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 7,253
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time.
    Concrete like where he withholds aid to a foreign country until that country would agree to make a public announcement that they are investigating his political opponent. 
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 23,271
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    lol 
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 36,935
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time.
    Well I'm sure they will be certain to run it by you next time.

    It was absolutely warranted. They did the right thing. They had no choice. 
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • tempo_n_groovetempo_n_groove Posts: 23,905
    2023
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 23,271
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 36,935
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    Yeah, sure. Compromising our national security pales in comparison to breaking into an opponent's campaign headquarters in a campaign they were going to win by a landslide. Of course what Trump did was worse. 

    People continue to have their heads in the sand. 
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • OnWis97OnWis97 St. Paul, MNPosts: 2,422
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    Yeah, sure. Compromising our national security pales in comparison to breaking into an opponent's campaign headquarters in a campaign they were going to win by a landslide. Of course what Trump did was worse. 

    People continue to have their heads in the sand. 
    And if I'm not mistaken (and I admit I may be) Nixon was not a part of the crime, but the cover up.

    Trump's doin' the crimin' and the coverin' up.
    1995 Milwaukee
    1998 Alpine, Alpine
    2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston
    2004 Boston, Boston
    2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty)
    2011 Alpine, Alpine
    2013 Wrigley
    2014 St. Paul
    2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley
    2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 24,066
    Well, it looks like the House isn't finished yet but I suspect it'll go to the SC.

    https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/10/politics/house-mueller-secret-grand-jury/index.html

    The House had told the courts it wants the still-confidential Mueller findings and grand jury material so it can investigate the President for potential obstruction of justice during the Russia investigation. The House especially raised questions about what campaign witnesses told Mueller versus what Trump said to Mueller in written answers -- saying he didn't recall conversations about WikiLeaks in 2016. The House has said during the Ukraine impeachment proceedings it could still consider impeaching Trump again because of his actions during the Mueller investigation.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 7,253
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    Stop what? A logical comparison of the two? 
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 18,128
    house allowed to see GJ evidence.....

    House Can See Mueller’s Secret Grand Jury Evidence, Appeals Court Rules https://nyti.ms/2wOqLkU

    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 23,271
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    Yeah, sure. Compromising our national security pales in comparison to breaking into an opponent's campaign headquarters in a campaign they were going to win by a landslide. Of course what Trump did was worse. 

    People continue to have their heads in the sand. 
    Baffoon has that effect on some people it’s unreal, did you notice a couple of trumpsters ove on the cancelled thread defending the idiot and questioning why the band had to postpone the spring shows. 

    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 23,271
    I’m not confident the Europe shows happening specially the Italy show..
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 6,007
    I’m not confident the Europe shows happening specially the Italy show..
    Sssshhhh
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020 AT 07/07/2020
  • tempo_n_groovetempo_n_groove Posts: 23,905
    2023
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    Yeah, sure. Compromising our national security pales in comparison to breaking into an opponent's campaign headquarters in a campaign they were going to win by a landslide. Of course what Trump did was worse. 

    People continue to have their heads in the sand. 
    No, my head isn't up my ass.

    National security?  I thought Trump asked for a "quid pro quo"?  A favor, an abuse of power?  I don't see where our national security was at risk from this?  Ukraine was still going on with security despite not having a payment made to them.  They were still doing what was asked.

    Think about what you said, "breaking into an opponents headquarters".  The President acted like a mob boss and had people break in.

    Again, this is just me as I know most of you think it was the end of the world.
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 23,271
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    Yeah, sure. Compromising our national security pales in comparison to breaking into an opponent's campaign headquarters in a campaign they were going to win by a landslide. Of course what Trump did was worse. 

    People continue to have their heads in the sand. 
    No, my head isn't up my ass.

    National security?  I thought Trump asked for a "quid pro quo"?  A favor, an abuse of power?  I don't see where our national security was at risk from this?  Ukraine was still going on with security despite not having a payment made to them.  They were still doing what was asked.

    Think about what you said, "breaking into an opponents headquarters".  The President acted like a mob boss and had people break in.

    Again, this is just me as I know most of you think it was the end of the world.
    lol that’s all I can do is laugh 
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • jeffbrjeffbr SeattlePosts: 7,064
    2023
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    Yeah, sure. Compromising our national security pales in comparison to breaking into an opponent's campaign headquarters in a campaign they were going to win by a landslide. Of course what Trump did was worse. 

    People continue to have their heads in the sand. 
    No, my head isn't up my ass.

    National security?  I thought Trump asked for a "quid pro quo"?  A favor, an abuse of power?  I don't see where our national security was at risk from this?  Ukraine was still going on with security despite not having a payment made to them.  They were still doing what was asked.

    Think about what you said, "breaking into an opponents headquarters".  The President acted like a mob boss and had people break in.

    Again, this is just me as I know most of you think it was the end of the world.
    Trump was engaging in extortion. He had no legal right to withhold those funds, as they were already appropriated by Congress. And to withhold them using Burisma/Biden conspiracy theories as the quid-pro-quo makes it worse, because it now becomes soliciting help from a foreign government for a domestic political campaign in violation of federal campaign laws. Trump was the instigator, and the actor, and after the fact the one doing the lying and obstruction.

    Nixon was not the instigator. Nixon was not in on the deed. Nixon was part of the cover-up. So yes, Trump was in it way deeper than Nixon, who only played a role after the fact.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 36,935
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    Yeah, sure. Compromising our national security pales in comparison to breaking into an opponent's campaign headquarters in a campaign they were going to win by a landslide. Of course what Trump did was worse. 

    People continue to have their heads in the sand. 
    No, my head isn't up my ass.

    National security?  I thought Trump asked for a "quid pro quo"?  A favor, an abuse of power?  I don't see where our national security was at risk from this?  Ukraine was still going on with security despite not having a payment made to them.  They were still doing what was asked.

    Think about what you said, "breaking into an opponents headquarters".  The President acted like a mob boss and had people break in.

    Again, this is just me as I know most of you think it was the end of the world.
    o
    m
    g

    Boggles my mind how people can come away with this kind of take. Unfuckingreal. 


    chinese-happy.jpg
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 36,935
    jeffbr said:
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    Yeah, sure. Compromising our national security pales in comparison to breaking into an opponent's campaign headquarters in a campaign they were going to win by a landslide. Of course what Trump did was worse. 

    People continue to have their heads in the sand. 
    No, my head isn't up my ass.

    National security?  I thought Trump asked for a "quid pro quo"?  A favor, an abuse of power?  I don't see where our national security was at risk from this?  Ukraine was still going on with security despite not having a payment made to them.  They were still doing what was asked.

    Think about what you said, "breaking into an opponents headquarters".  The President acted like a mob boss and had people break in.

    Again, this is just me as I know most of you think it was the end of the world.
    Trump was engaging in extortion. He had no legal right to withhold those funds, as they were already appropriated by Congress. And to withhold them using Burisma/Biden conspiracy theories as the quid-pro-quo makes it worse, because it now becomes soliciting help from a foreign government for a domestic political campaign in violation of federal campaign laws. Trump was the instigator, and the actor, and after the fact the one doing the lying and obstruction.

    Nixon was not the instigator. Nixon was not in on the deed. Nixon was part of the cover-up. So yes, Trump was in it way deeper than Nixon, who only played a role after the fact.
    Thank you. I don't have the energy to argue this same point over and over and over again. 
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • tempo_n_groovetempo_n_groove Posts: 23,905
    2023
    jeffbr said:
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    Yeah, sure. Compromising our national security pales in comparison to breaking into an opponent's campaign headquarters in a campaign they were going to win by a landslide. Of course what Trump did was worse. 

    People continue to have their heads in the sand. 
    No, my head isn't up my ass.

    National security?  I thought Trump asked for a "quid pro quo"?  A favor, an abuse of power?  I don't see where our national security was at risk from this?  Ukraine was still going on with security despite not having a payment made to them.  They were still doing what was asked.

    Think about what you said, "breaking into an opponents headquarters".  The President acted like a mob boss and had people break in.

    Again, this is just me as I know most of you think it was the end of the world.
    Trump was engaging in extortion. He had no legal right to withhold those funds, as they were already appropriated by Congress. And to withhold them using Burisma/Biden conspiracy theories as the quid-pro-quo makes it worse, because it now becomes soliciting help from a foreign government for a domestic political campaign in violation of federal campaign laws. Trump was the instigator, and the actor, and after the fact the one doing the lying and obstruction.

    Nixon was not the instigator. Nixon was not in on the deed. Nixon was part of the cover-up. So yes, Trump was in it way deeper than Nixon, who only played a role after the fact.
    Thank you. I don't have the energy to argue this same point over and over and over again. 
    I keep giving you the same damn answer so I guess we can agree to disagree.
  • tempo_n_groovetempo_n_groove Posts: 23,905
    2023
    jeffbr said:
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    Yeah, sure. Compromising our national security pales in comparison to breaking into an opponent's campaign headquarters in a campaign they were going to win by a landslide. Of course what Trump did was worse. 

    People continue to have their heads in the sand. 
    No, my head isn't up my ass.

    National security?  I thought Trump asked for a "quid pro quo"?  A favor, an abuse of power?  I don't see where our national security was at risk from this?  Ukraine was still going on with security despite not having a payment made to them.  They were still doing what was asked.

    Think about what you said, "breaking into an opponents headquarters".  The President acted like a mob boss and had people break in.

    Again, this is just me as I know most of you think it was the end of the world.
    Trump was engaging in extortion. He had no legal right to withhold those funds, as they were already appropriated by Congress. And to withhold them using Burisma/Biden conspiracy theories as the quid-pro-quo makes it worse, because it now becomes soliciting help from a foreign government for a domestic political campaign in violation of federal campaign laws. Trump was the instigator, and the actor, and after the fact the one doing the lying and obstruction.

    Nixon was not the instigator. Nixon was not in on the deed. Nixon was part of the cover-up. So yes, Trump was in it way deeper than Nixon, who only played a role after the fact.
    Well then this makes Trump a friggin genius since he knew he'd be running against Biden...

    I still don't see what he did as being impeachable.
  • jeffbrjeffbr SeattlePosts: 7,064
    2023
    jeffbr said:
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    Yeah, sure. Compromising our national security pales in comparison to breaking into an opponent's campaign headquarters in a campaign they were going to win by a landslide. Of course what Trump did was worse. 

    People continue to have their heads in the sand. 
    No, my head isn't up my ass.

    National security?  I thought Trump asked for a "quid pro quo"?  A favor, an abuse of power?  I don't see where our national security was at risk from this?  Ukraine was still going on with security despite not having a payment made to them.  They were still doing what was asked.

    Think about what you said, "breaking into an opponents headquarters".  The President acted like a mob boss and had people break in.

    Again, this is just me as I know most of you think it was the end of the world.
    Trump was engaging in extortion. He had no legal right to withhold those funds, as they were already appropriated by Congress. And to withhold them using Burisma/Biden conspiracy theories as the quid-pro-quo makes it worse, because it now becomes soliciting help from a foreign government for a domestic political campaign in violation of federal campaign laws. Trump was the instigator, and the actor, and after the fact the one doing the lying and obstruction.

    Nixon was not the instigator. Nixon was not in on the deed. Nixon was part of the cover-up. So yes, Trump was in it way deeper than Nixon, who only played a role after the fact.
    Well then this makes Trump a friggin genius since he knew he'd be running against Biden...

    I still don't see what he did as being impeachable.
    He violated federal campaign laws, which by definition is illegal. He solicited foreign interference in an election. AND the GAO (the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office) issued a report in January 2020 saying that the withholding of funds was illegal.

    The GOP said Trump committed no crime. The GAO now rules he broke the law.

    "The Government Accountability Office ruled Thursday the Trump administration’s withholding of aid to Ukraine violated the law, because Trump can’t use his policy priorities to supersede the constitutional power of the purse that Congress enjoys.

    If Congress appropriates the money, essentially, Trump needs to have a very specific reason for withholding it, and the reasons supplied didn’t qualify.

    In a nine-page report, GAO general counsel Thomas H. Armstrong delivers rebukes to Trump and his administration, saying it has failed to abide by the law, failed to substantiate its actions and failed to cooperate by providing the necessary documentation."

    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 23,271
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    Yeah, sure. Compromising our national security pales in comparison to breaking into an opponent's campaign headquarters in a campaign they were going to win by a landslide. Of course what Trump did was worse. 

    People continue to have their heads in the sand. 
    No, my head isn't up my ass.

    National security?  I thought Trump asked for a "quid pro quo"?  A favor, an abuse of power?  I don't see where our national security was at risk from this?  Ukraine was still going on with security despite not having a payment made to them.  They were still doing what was asked.

    Think about what you said, "breaking into an opponents headquarters".  The President acted like a mob boss and had people break in.

    Again, this is just me as I know most of you think it was the end of the world.
    o
    m
    g

    Boggles my mind how people can come away with this kind of take. Unfuckingreal. 


    lol yeah it’s absurd it’s like they want so badly to believe he’s a good guy when in fact he’s proven over & over again that he is a deplorable human! 
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 36,935
    jeffbr said:
    jeffbr said:
    Is it wise to try and impeach him again?

    If it warrants it, it must be done. 
    I didn't see it warranted the first time around so not so sure it would be the 2nd time either.

    Find something that is concrete this time. 
    With the partisanship, he could probably murder someone and be acquitted in a Senate trial. These aren't the Republicans that were willing to remove Nixon. 
    I don't see how what Trump did was even remotely close to what Nixon did.
    It was worse. 
    Stop it...
    lol yeah ok 
    Yeah, sure. Compromising our national security pales in comparison to breaking into an opponent's campaign headquarters in a campaign they were going to win by a landslide. Of course what Trump did was worse. 

    People continue to have their heads in the sand. 
    No, my head isn't up my ass.

    National security?  I thought Trump asked for a "quid pro quo"?  A favor, an abuse of power?  I don't see where our national security was at risk from this?  Ukraine was still going on with security despite not having a payment made to them.  They were still doing what was asked.

    Think about what you said, "breaking into an opponents headquarters".  The President acted like a mob boss and had people break in.

    Again, this is just me as I know most of you think it was the end of the world.
    Trump was engaging in extortion. He had no legal right to withhold those funds, as they were already appropriated by Congress. And to withhold them using Burisma/Biden conspiracy theories as the quid-pro-quo makes it worse, because it now becomes soliciting help from a foreign government for a domestic political campaign in violation of federal campaign laws. Trump was the instigator, and the actor, and after the fact the one doing the lying and obstruction.

    Nixon was not the instigator. Nixon was not in on the deed. Nixon was part of the cover-up. So yes, Trump was in it way deeper than Nixon, who only played a role after the fact.
    Well then this makes Trump a friggin genius since he knew he'd be running against Biden...

    I still don't see what he did as being impeachable.
    He violated federal campaign laws, which by definition is illegal. He solicited foreign interference in an election. AND the GAO (the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office) issued a report in January 2020 saying that the withholding of funds was illegal.

    The GOP said Trump committed no crime. The GAO now rules he broke the law.

    "The Government Accountability Office ruled Thursday the Trump administration’s withholding of aid to Ukraine violated the law, because Trump can’t use his policy priorities to supersede the constitutional power of the purse that Congress enjoys.

    If Congress appropriates the money, essentially, Trump needs to have a very specific reason for withholding it, and the reasons supplied didn’t qualify.

    In a nine-page report, GAO general counsel Thomas H. Armstrong delivers rebukes to Trump and his administration, saying it has failed to abide by the law, failed to substantiate its actions and failed to cooperate by providing the necessary documentation."

    Also....quite obvious he did this because he DIDN'T want to run against Biden.....haha.......wtf?
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 36,935
    So....this new Russia thing is a little bothersome, no?
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 13,046
    So....this new Russia thing is a little bothersome, no?

    Yes. But will be old news in two days.  You were right in your posts above that he could kill someone on 5th avenue and Republicans would still vote him into office.  I truly believe that.   If I give the benefit of the doubt at all to Republicans they may do it and then impeach him so they can try to keep power.  #deplorables 
Sign In or Register to comment.