Is impeachment of a President biblically justified?

[whatistrue]

De jure, but not de facto. Not in this day and age.

Where is your evidence?

Do not patronize me. Ever.

Patronize? Wow. What are you, 12?

 

[AlmaRedemptorisMater]

I wish we could have a moratorium on American politics threads for at least a month.

 

[whatistrue]

I wish we could have a moratorium on American politics threads for at least a month.

At least. Permanent would get my vote if this were a democracy.

 

[TK421]

Romans 13:1-2

Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

So scripture appears to imply that impeachment of a head of state is sinful. There’s a lot of discussion by our separated brethren over Romans 13 but little by Catholics. Opinions?

It doesn’t imply anything.

There are built-in structures within the law to allow an impeachment process. The legislature has this authority.

 

[Gorgias]

He is not allowed to use his influence with foreign governments to directly funnel financial or material gain towards himself, those he favors, or his campaign.

Fair enough. This wasn’t a request for finances, though, was it?

If he is calling a leader of a foreign country he is acting as POTUS. Does one really have to ask that question?

Patience…

So, if he’s acting as the POTUS, and asking a foreign power to re-open an investigation that he deems to have been closed for political reasons, is that not a reasonable request?

He is only acting as POTUS if he is discussing matters that fall within the purview of a Head of State or Government. Prying into foreign criminal investigations into private individuals doesn’t, at least at first blush, seem to be within the remit of a POTUS merely because they relate to the son of a former Vice-President.

See, @farronwolf… not everyone agrees with your take on it!

But more to the point, it seems that a forum full of–presumably–professing Roman Catholics is simply willing to disregard what Saint Paul had to say in the realm of relations between citizen and state, despite it being divinely inspired.

That’s your take on what Paul had in mind. Others (including Scripture scholars) differ with that opinion.

 

[farronwolf]

What business is it of POTUS whether or not a foreign country had decided to close an investigation or not. Should the US look at opening investigations which our justice department had closed because Russia or Germany gives our POTUS a call and asks us to reopen it. Anyone hear of sovereignty? If there is something that happened that violated laws in the US, the DOJ is under the executive branch, it can be pursued based on whether or not it violated the laws of the US.

I could care less if anyone agrees with me. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions regardless of how uninformed they are.

§ 30121. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
(a) Prohibition. It shall be unlawful for—
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make—
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing
of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a
contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or
local election;

Other thing of value, doesn’t have to be monetary. Read the law.

 

[PetraG]

the same way the Russia investigation cleared Trump

Um…the Russia investigation didn’t clear Trump.
When Mr. Mueller was directly asked: "…What about total exoneration? Did you actually totally exonerate the president?” he answered “No.”
If you write a report and you intend to exonerate someone, you know it. Exoneration is a very high bar.

the evidence of graft, in Biden’s case, looks overwhelming.

“Overwhelming”? Um…no, it actually doesn’t. (And, by the way, the President wouldn’t be asking Ukraine to investigate if it did.)

It’s just a matter of time before they request the Biden’s come back to Ukraine to assess the extent of their involvement.

Now, that is just absurd. You’re saying they’re going to be extradited? Or are you suggesting they are going to freely cooperate in Trump’s attempt to put dirt about them in the headlines? Please.

Yes, the US would. It’s called, “justice”. If Biden was taking graft, he was acting criminally. And he needs to be brought to justice. Look at what is happening to Brazil’s ex-president. The same thing could happen to Biden. Everybody is wondering why Obama wouldn’t endorse him. This may be one of the reasons.

My goodness, and this is from the side that thought Mueller was on a witchhunt, lol?

Fair enough. This wasn’t a request for finances, though, was it?

Material support for a political campaign counts.
This item is kind of like the credit card commercials, with this item being the punchline state that is deemed: Priceless

This is a big deal. I don’t currently believe that it will get him impeached, let alone removed, because it is an election year coming up.

In my opinion, it also looks most likely that this is Donald Trump pumping up another non-existent “conspiracy” like the birther thing, in order to put tar on someone else. He has shown himself to be shameless about that in the past, so based on his past behavior that is a possibility that prudence unfortunately forces one to keep in mind. He has shown he knows how to cry “Wolf!” (or in his case, “Fake!!” or “Guilty!”) in order to get what he wants.

Tell me what is false in this assessment:

PolitiFact | Donald Trump’s boasts about former Ukrainian prosecutor’s fairness ring false

Then tell me what other country is decrying the firing of this prosecutor. The President said, “A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved”" and “I heard the prosecutor was treated very badly and he was a very fair prosecutor.”

What people? He does that all the time, saying “people are saying” and you always have to ask that: WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING THAT? Sometimes, there aren’t any people with any direct knowledge who are saying anything of the sort. (Voices in the President’s head or people throwing out conjecture with no evidence to show as a basis do not count.)

 

[TULIPed]

(What is official church teaching on this passage?)

 

[angel12]

But, the evidence of graft, in Biden’s case, looks overwhelming. And, judging from the text of the phone call, it looks like the Ukrainians had already re-opened the investigation without Trump’s request. It’s just a matter of time before they request the Biden’s come back to Ukraine to assess the extent of their involvement.

You might want to inform Ukraine.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/26/europe/ukraine-investigation-biden-intl/index.html

 

[bibcat]

Ad hominem attacks now. The hallmark of someone with nothing of substance to say.

 

[whatistrue]

As a response to a threat? You bet. Keep ducking, dodging, and weaving. I am done. Welcome to the Ignore bucket - current population 2.

 

[bibcat]

From the USCCB
" Paul must come to grips with the problem raised by a message that declares people free from the law. How are they to relate to Roman authority? The problem was exacerbated by the fact that imperial protocol was interwoven with devotion to various deities. Paul builds on the traditional instruction exhibited in Wis 6:1–3, according to which kings and magistrates rule by consent of God. From this perspective, then, believers who render obedience to the governing authorities are obeying the one who is highest in command. [i.e. the POTUS in our case] At the same time, it is recognized that Caesar has the responsibility to make just ordinances and to commend uprightness; cf. Wis 6:4–21. That Caesar is not entitled to obedience when such obedience would nullify God’s prior claim to the believers’ moral decision becomes clear in the light of the following verses [Nothing what Trump is accused of by the snitch–I mean whistleblower–applies here].

 

[Fauken]

Paul must come to grips with the problem raised by a message that declares people free from the law.

Impeachment is a process that is written into the document that is the very basis of every law in the United States: impeaching the President is very different to declaring a state of anarchy.

 

[Gorgias]

Material support for a political campaign counts.
This item is kind of like the credit card commercials, with this item being the punchline state that is deemed: Priceless

This is a big deal.

I agree that it would have an effect. Yet, it’s not “material support”; it’s something that, if it turns out to have substance, might factor into the election. So, yeah, “a big deal.” Yet, there’s no direct material or financial support for the president.

 

[De_Maria]

Looks like there’s a smoking gun:

 

[De_Maria]

Which passage are you talking about? The one about the sword being given to officials?
The official Catholic Teaching with regards to government authority is that we give Caesar what is Caesar’s and God what is God’s.

2242 The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s."48 “We must obey God rather than men”:49

When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel.50

2243 Armed resistance to oppression by political authority is not legitimate, unless all the following conditions are met: 1) there is certain, grave, and prolonged violation of fundamental rights; 2) all other means of redress have been exhausted; 3) such resistance will not provoke worse disorders; 4) there is well-founded hope of success; and 5) it is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution.

Edit: In addition:
1899 The authority required by the moral order derives from God: “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.”

 

[Dovekin]

Yet, there’s no direct material or financial support for the president.

Why are you discussing material support? You injected the qualifier material in message 109 whout any justification that I can see. It is not in the emoluments clause that you were discussing, and it seems odd that you keep using it.

The emoluments clause is not the real issue, as I understand. It is soliciting or receiving something of value from a foreign sovereign government that would be used for campaign purposes.

 

[Dovekin]

“Shokin was not investigating. He didn’t want to investigate Burisma,” Daria Kaleniuk of the Ukrainian Anti-Corruption Action Center told The Washington Post in July. “And Shokin was fired not because he wanted to do that investigation, but quite to the contrary, because he failed that investigation.”

Shokin is the Ukrainian prosecutor who was fired after Biden and others pushed for his dismissal.

Burisma is the company whose board included Hunter Biden.

 

[De_Maria]

Biden’s statements called into question.
In a newly sworn affidavit prepared for a European court, Shokin testified that when he was fired in March 2016, he was told the reason was that Biden was unhappy about the Burisma investigation. “The truth is that I was forced out because I was leading a wide-ranging corruption probe into Burisma Holdings, a natural gas firm active in Ukraine and Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, was a member of the Board of Directors,” Shokin testified.

I’m just wondering how Hunter Biden keeps getting so lucky to go and get lucrative deals where ever Biden was given an official assignment.

 

[Fauken]

I never realized how liberal and pro-Democratic Party the posters on this forum are. Reading these comments and responses is like listening to MSNBC. Rife with modernism.

Call us whatever you want, but evidence talks. Show us evidence your interpretation is what the Church teaches. Though after asking you about five times now, I take it you have none. And that is all that need be said.