Impeachment Collection

[Theo520]

And here comes the saddest part of all these conversations. No matter what criticism is brought up against Trump, the “defenders” are unable to present any actual defense, they only say: “but this did something similar, so Trump’s actions must be forgiven!”. This is the usual behavior of small children: "But Johnny did it, too! ". Of course parents do not accept such an excuse. Why do you?

I think you are projecting here. Nobody has forgiven him for actual crimes and it’s not unreasonable to call out hypocrisy of the left in their focus on the minutia of his style.

Why can’t you focus on policy? I’d much prefer to talk immigration and trade policy. I noticed you repeatedly didn’t respond to facts presented to you on how China has systemically tipped the scales in their favor for trade and theft of IP. Instead you are laser focused on a temporary bump in ag exports. You focus on ‘tariff is a tax’ and ignore the reality of international trade, in how China has many competitors that will mitigate the consumer cost impact of tariffs.

Face the economic reality that there is a big difference between tariffs on 1-2 country vs tariffs on all imports. The former is a useful and valid trade negotiation tool while the later is just a consumer tax.

 

[Guinness]

I agree with you re Memorial Day being a somber day of remembrance however this is getting pretty nit picky to focus on this issue.

I got a Memorial Day message from our 3-star commanding officer telling everyone to have fun and be safe over the Memorial Day weekend. I wonder if I should have reported him…

 

[PaulinVA]

From the transcript of Muller’s statement:

First, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting president, because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents available. Among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now.

And second, the opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing. And beyond department policy, we were guided by principles of fairness. It would be unfair to potentially — it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge.

So that was Justice Department policy. Those were the principles under which we operated. And from them, we concluded that we would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime. That is the office’s final position, and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the president. We conducted an independent criminal investigation and reported the results to the attorney general, as required by department regulations.

 

[grotto]

Memorial Day is for those we remember with honor and those doing the remembering.
We can be quiet for a moment and miss them with love and its good to smile and be happy FOR them as they would have been with us. The day will come when we will be together again.

This has nothing to do with those who are playing in an endless theater of misery, but if there were a way for these actors to use Memorial Day as additional fuel for their
marathon impeachment goal, they will find it.

 

[Guinness]

So that was Justice Department policy. Those were the principles under which we operated. And from them, we concluded that we would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime. That is the office’s final position, and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the president. We conducted an independent criminal investigation and reported the results to the attorney general, as required by department regulations.

According to AG Barr, “Special counsel Mueller stated three times to us in that meeting in response to our questioning that he emphatically was not saying that but for the OLC opinion (Office of Legal Council opinion on charging a sitting President), he would have found obstruction,” Barr said Wednesday. “He said that in the future, the facts of the case against a president might be such that a special counsel would recommend abandoning the OLC opinion, but this is not such a case.” IOW, the OLC opinion had nothing to do with Mueller’s decision to not charge the President for obstruction of justice. If he had thought charges were warranted, he would have recommended changing the ruling.

Barr Reveals New Details Of Meeting With Mueller About Obstruction Case

Attorney General William Barr and his colleagues at the Justice Department first...

talkingpointsmemo.com

 

[Jeanne_S]

Well,according to some here you probably should have

 

[PaulinVA]

Do you guys think that Trump wants to be impeached? Would it play out some bizzare strategy for his reelection chances?

 

[tomarin]

I got a Memorial Day message from our 3-star commanding officer telling everyone to have fun and be safe over the Memorial Day weekend. I wonder if I should have reported him…

That’s because Memorial Day operates on two levels: the official holiday is to remember fallen soldiers (wasn’t it originally called Armistice Day and commemorated the end of WWI?) but unofficially it’s the first weekend of cultural summer, so people expect to attend cookouts, play games, enjoy being outside with friends and family, etc.

 

[Guinness]

Do you guys think that Trump wants to be impeached?

Are you saying the House of Representatives would allow itself to be “trolled” into filing impeachment charges it knows it can’t prove? That says less about Trump than it does about our “elites” who are alleged to be so much smarter than Trump…

 

[Economist]

I think you are projecting here. Nobody has forgiven him for actual crimes and it’s not unreasonable to call out hypocrisy of the left in their focus on the minutia of his style.

This is just another example of “but the left did it, too!”. His “style” is not limited to a few locker-room type disgusting phrases. It is the embracing of America’s enemies and bloodthirsty dictators. That is what counts, and that is what cannot be forgiven. Destroying the rule of law, by treating the country as his personal fiefdom is unforgivable. Overruling the experts in giving top-secret clearances to his family members. Nepotism at its worst.

As for the economic policies, they are disastrous on the long run, even if they have some beneficial aspects on the short haul. Tax breaks without corresponding spending cuts are simply pushing the problem unto the next generation. As for his business acumen, just check out the bankruptcies of his enterprises, which he tried to save using his father’s money. Look at the fact that no American bank deals with him any more, and the Deutsche Bank is a well-known money-laundering firm for the Russians.

As a person he is morally bankrupt, even according the principles of the evangelicals and the Catholics. And you are willing to forgive everything, all his trespasses and sins, just because he placed some anti-abortionist judges. It will have no lasting effect on the long run. Abortion is here to stay. At least until the technology will advance so that only wanted and happily anticipated conceptions will become possible. That is the solution of the abortion problem.

 

[Jeanne_S]

Exactly!..

 

[Economist]

Do you guys think that Trump wants to be impeached? Would it play out some bizzare strategy for his reelection chances?

Quite possible. After all his approval rating never reached 50 percent, and his disapproval rating never dipped below 50 percent.

Playing the poor, hounded underdog might help him in the case of impeachment. The real chances for him is that the democrats are impotent. Look at the Texas election between O’Rourke and Cruz. The democrats should have filled up the airwaves with Trump’s hostile messages against Cruz, and Beto would have won hands down. They should spend money on showing the hostile ads between Trump and the members of the Senate, until the cows come home. After all there are no politicians who have a “backbone” (on either side!) and the best strategy would be to expose them for what they are.

 

[PaulinVA]

Are you saying the House of Representatives would allow itself to be “trolled” into filing impeachment charges it knows it can’t prove? That says less about Trump than it does about our “elites” who are alleged to be so much smarter than Trump…

Yep. It’s an impeachment trap.

Should the House file charges that the Senate is sure to acquit on? Would an impeachment investigation find additional impeachable offenses? Will SDNY file charges? Will the NY AG file charges against the Trumps for the illegal way in which they operated their foundation?

I think it’s premature to file impeachment charges, but is the right time to open an official Impeachment inquiry. There are some who think that has more gravitas and would enhance the House’s subpoena authority.

Also, it would seem that opening an Impeachment inquiry that the President would obstruct by not complying with subpoenas would certainly move things further along.

 

[Ridgerunner]

If any president would have acted so below the required behavior of the office, he would have been summarily thrown out of office in no time flat.

LBJ was far, far below Trump when it comes to behavior. Did you favor his impeachment?

And FDR was “buddy-buddy” with “uncle Joe” Stalin, the murderer of millions. Are you wanting all statues to him removed?

And saying those things are not “tu toque” as you want to allege to avoid having to deal with reality. The unspeakable crudeness of LBJ for example, passes without comment, pointing to the hypocrisy of those who condemn Trump for trifles.

Not true. It was to investigate, nothing more. The indictment was made impossible by the “rule”: “a sitting president cannot be indicted”.

Absolutely untrue. Mueller got others indicted and convicted. There’s no actual law preventing prosecution of a president.

 

[Guinness]

I think it’s premature to file impeachment charges, but is the right time to open an official Impeachment inquiry. There are some who think that has more gravitas and would enhance the House’s subpoena authority.

Right, and then the House could file formal impeachment charges based on Obstruction because Trump won’t provide them with the evidence, whether there is any or not, to convict him. It’s perfect because it requires no evidence that Trump did anything wrong.

 

[Economist]

LBJ was far, far below Trump when it comes to behavior.

Yes, he was. And JFK was just another womanizer. So what? They are dead and gone. Go and spit on their graves, if it makes you feel better. But their misdeeds do not exonerate Trump’s similar action. Your attempt to derail the conversation shows crystal clear that you cannot find any excuse to whitewash Trump.

And FDR was “buddy-buddy” with “uncle Joe” Stalin, the murderer of millions. Are you wanting all statues to him removed?

Yes, he was a socialist. So what? He is also dead and gone. I think that his policies were wrong, too. As soon as we develop a time-machine, we can go back and do something about it.

And saying those things are not “tu toque” as you want to allege to avoid having to deal with reality. The unspeakable crudeness of LBJ for example, passes without comment, pointing to the hypocrisy of those who condemn Trump for trifles.

To call them “trifles” tells me everything about you. The past is not reality. The present is. We have to deal with Trump now, not LBJ or FDR.

Absolutely untrue. Mueller got others indicted and convicted. There’s no actual law preventing prosecution of a president.

Baloney. Mueller got others indicted and convicted, and in some of those cases Trump was an “unindicted co-conspirator”. It is a standing rule that sitting presidents cannot be indicted, only impeached. No “actual law”, but a policy of the DOJ. A very bad rule, in my opinion. If it ever comes up in an election, I will vote against it. Along with eliminating the presidential pardon. A ridiculous leftover from the times of monarchies.

 

[JonNC]

Not true. It was to investigate, nothing more. The indictment was made impossible by the “rule”: “a sitting president cannot be indicted”

He could have recommended charges. The OLC rule does not prevent it. The OLC rule is not beyond challenge itself.
Further, no member of the team team or administration was charge with obstruction, something not prevented by the OLC rule

If he would be caught in the middle of a murder in the Oval Office on live television, he could just declare “executive privilege”, and that would be the end.

He never claimed executive privilege. He never claimed attorney client privilege. He withheld absolutely nothing. In other words, he did nothing to obstruct the investigation.

Of course he could be indicted, but if he can fill up either the House or the Senate with his co-conspirators, then he will not be removed. Imagine a mafia boss’ trial where the jury is comprised of his consigliore and his lieutenants.

I thought you just said he couldn’t be indicted. The president has no power to determine who is in the senate.

 

[Guinness]

I think I may have found you a kindred spirit:

The Case to Impeach Trump for Bigotry

Politics aside, Democrats have to confront the possibly naïve question of whether impeaching Trump is the right thing to do, even if it seems politically unpopular.

www.newyorker.com

“I think the strongest case is his bigotry and policy,” Green told me in a recent conversation. “We shouldn’t allow a bigot to continue to hold the highest office in the land. We hear people daily on television who call him a racist, a bigot, who say he’s unfit—people in his own party have said he’s unfit to be the President. And the people of this country gave Democrats an overwhelming majority.”

We need to impeach Trump because Stephen Colbert thinks he’s a racist…

 

[Theo520]

You haven’t mentioned a crime we need to forgive him for, just style differences

It is the embracing of America’s enemies and bloodthirsty dictators.

All presidents should work to embrace our enemies, it’s in the job description. Again I think your criticism is more about his style. Obama embraced Iran for such purpose, etc etc.

As for the economic policies, they are disastrous on the long run,

I agree, we’ll need to cut spending in the long haul! Something much easier to do when you have full employment for an extended period.

As for his business acumen,

Try to stick to discussion on economic policy as a president. I’ve never bragged about his business acumen but I think he does have experience succeeding and failing, both of which are instructional

As a person he is morally bankrupt

Your TDS is flaring again. He’s pretty normal for a President, the media just didn’t cover it in the past. he wasn’t elected to be ‘Pastor’. If he wasn’t making active efforts on his campaign promises, I’d be against him. But it’s refreshing that he is working on what he promised to.

I’m delighted that you mentioned an actual economic policy issue, tax cuts!

I’ll take your avoidance of ‘trade’ as confirmation you recognize your earlier errors.

 

[PaulinVA]

Right, and then the House could file formal impeachment charges based on Obstruction because Trump won’t provide them with the evidence, whether there is any or not, to convict him. It’s perfect because it requires no evidence that Trump did anything wrong

Well, that’s a little cynical, but I’m a cynic, so I agree that is not the way we want to go. The impeachment inquiry should not be a self-licking ice cream cone.

However, there is more than enough evidence in the Mueller report to substantiate an impeachment charge of obstruction. Lots of Democrats are interpreting Mueller’s rare presser as a call to the House to open an inquiry.