Impeachment of Donald J. Trump

  • Thread starter Thread starter dvdjs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have three kids. Abortion is something others have. Fidelity is a personal commitment.
 
Last edited:
How would I know if she’s even had one abortion.That’s not the point she is complicit in putting into law abortion rights that continue to devolve into infanticide. She is just as guilty as the woman who has an abortion,in the eyes of God as per Church teaching .Look at an examin of conscience prior to Reconciliation
 
Last edited:
mrad25 said:
The Constitution doesn’t say that.
Click to expand...
Yes it does. From the article you posted:
So Mason offered a substitute: “other high crimes and misdemeanors against the State.” The English Parliament had included a similarly worded phrase in its articles of impeachment since 1450. This compromise satisfied Madison and most of the other Convention delegates. They approved Mason’s amendment without further debate, 8 states to 3, but added “against the United States,” to avoid ambiguity.
Unfortunately for everyone who’s argued since about what an impeachable offense is, the convention’s Committee on Style and Revision, which was supposed to improve the draft Constitution’s language without changing its meaning, deleted the phrase “against the United States.” Without that phrase, which explained what constitutes “high crimes,” many Americans came to believe that “high crimes” literally meant only crimes identified in criminal law.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t have to be a criminal law case. It says “high crimes and misdemeanors”.
 
Just as guilty how. Does she order abortion. Does she coerce free will of another.
Does she follow the law and therefore oath and support a choice?
The abortion happens because a woman makes a choice. The choice is part of the Constitution. Not her action.
She isn’t complicit putting into law that which is already law. She doesn’t take symbolic steps to oppose. I agree with that.
 
Last edited:
I have three free living kids. Abortions are something others have.
I don’t believe in abortion. I live in a nation where it is a protected Constitutional right.
What’s a slavery voter?
 
Last edited:
Two more hours 😳
Maybe I will check back in about an hour.
 
Last edited:
dvdjs said:
There is some merit to the idea that “Trump did not go far enough in demanding that Ukraine investigate …”
  1. Trump’s quids had a a very limited scope. he was not interested in corruption in Ukraine, just the Biden’s and the Crowdstrike-related theorizing.
  2. The manner of his approach to Ukraine - pack channels with private counsel, secretive conversations - was circumscribed in a very unusual fashion.
Of course, these aspects of Trump’s not going “far enough” present evidence of guilt and consciousness of guilt. Just like the obstruction.
Click to expand...
Yes, by limiting what he was asking for, wanting a public announcement of an investigation and keeping his withholding of the aid a secret, it is clear that Trump had no interest in corruption, but was more interested in damaging his political opponents.
 
Ridgerunner said:
The impeachment farce was started to deflect from the Biden scandal which was generated from Biden’s own mouth and cries for investigation both here and in Ukraine. I think Trump should have insisted that Ukraine investigate further, as the treaty requires, if it was to expect good relations with the U.S.
Click to expand...
Only in the imagination of someone that hates Biden would an investigation be justified. There was no controversy about what Biden did for almost a half decade. Only when Trump felt that Biden could become a challenger to him was there interest in an investigation. Of course, Trump did it in secret because it was nefarious (unlike Biden who was quite public about what he did) and was really only interested in an announcement so the right wing propaganda machine in the US can claim Biden is corrupt without any evidence to that effect. Kind of like what you are doing here.
Ridgerunner said:
Shokin was charged with nothing, to this day. I guess you can quote Obama saying that removing Shokin was U.S. policy (not just that of Nuland and Pyatt and Yovanovich or perhaps the EU) so we can be sure.
Click to expand...
Shokin was corrupt and it was widely reported at the time of his firing. It was also widely reported at the time of his firing that he did not have the support of the US, EU, IMF and anti-corruption Ukrainians. This is the most accurate read of what was going on at the time because it was reported before there was a Republican spin on this that it was somehow corrupt.
Ridgerunner said:
Still no evidence “exonerating” Biden. But then, when an obvious conflict of interest occurs and one does not disqualify himself from it, an investigation might show that or guilt.
Click to expand...
Yes, never mind all the evidence presented and pretend it wasn’t presented or that you were able to dispute it. Just ignore it and say there is no evidence exonerating Biden.
Ridgerunner said:
What Pope Benedict said about “proportionate reasons” to support an abortion-supporting politician is in the public domain. Personal insults don’t change that.
Click to expand...
Well, I guess you are going to have to provide what Pope Benedict said exactly, because I would rather read from the actual source then your opinion of what you think it means.
Ridgerunner said:
The relationship is between abortion and sex, not just outside wedlock. But you know that.
Click to expand...
Six out of seven abortions in the US are performed on women outside of wedlock, so it is clear there is a significant relation between sex outside of wedlock and abortion. But you know that.
 
OMG now he is imagining what the defense will say
Out loud
😳
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top