The Case for Impeachment Is Overwhelming | The American Conservative

  • Thread starter Thread starter dvdjs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Guinness said:
As I said, I’m not inclined to speculate about hypothetical situations in this case.
Click to expand...
Well, I’ll accept your lack of answer, but please know this remains the position of irresponsibility, not being able to respond. It’s not a matter of speculation, I’m asking you to assume that this did not necessarily happen, and then to answer according to what a person of conscience would answer, keeping in mind “do unto others”.
Guinness said:
Wait…we were told that we had to investigate Trump vis a vis Russia to determine if a crime was committed. Are you now claiming that this was wrong to do?
Click to expand...
Our president did not ask Russia to do an investigation on himself.
 
Jeanne_S said:
Before you start hurling insults to those who differ with you here,know it’s against forum rules to attack anyone personally.
Click to expand...
There was no personal insult, either expressed or implied.
Jeanne_S said:
Having said that, yes the Republicans could have chosen to impeach Obama for any number of reasons,some concerning others just as petty and baseless as what the Dems have chosen in impeaching Trump.
Click to expand...
Were there others? Examples, it you will. Of course if there would have been, and the republicans opted to forego to pursue, then they acted against their oath to protect the Constitution. So, the only conclusion is that they had nothing.

Of course none of this is relevant. We are not talking about Obama.

As soon as the floor was opened for the republicans for presenting actual arguments or counter-arguments, when Trump or his lawyers were explicitly invited to participate, they all decided not to participate at all. I watched the whole procedure, and there was not one argument presented, only yelling.

The basic question, which goes on unanswered is still the base: “Is it acceptable to invite a foreign government / power to meddle in our election?” To dig up “dirt” on someone who might be a potential opponent for the incumbent president? Because Biden is nothing more than that. Personally, I don’t think he should run, if for no other reason, but because he is OLD. No one over 60 should qualify for public office - but this is really only my personal opinion.
 
Guinness said:
So what? President’s are allowed to ask their foreign counterparts to do things. What he’s being accused of is requesting the investigation solely for the purpose of ensuring his re-election, which no one can attest to.
Click to expand...
This is still the situation:
JapaneseKappa said:
So the president decided for no reason to create an irregular channel that was at cross purposes with the official channels to investigate a conspiracy theory that his advisors and intelligence agencies told him was a fools errand. When asked about it he repeatedly lied and refused to supply documents when ordered by congressional subpoena because… it was none of their business?

OR

The president wanted his political opponent to be under investigation, so he made an irregular channel to pressure Ukraine into launching an investigation without tipping off the ordinary channel. He then tried to cover this fact up by claiming he was concerned about corruption.
Click to expand...
And we know investigating the Bidens was a goal of his because he said so publicly.
 
Guinness said:
Seems worthy of an investigation.
Click to expand...
To directly address the latest iteration in your “throw stuff at the wall to see what sticks” campaign, Trump could just ask Barr to investigate the Bidens. There was no reason to pressure the Ukranian government if the end goal was to “get to the bottom” of some shady dealings.
 
dvdjs said:
He is acting to preserve his seat. Too bad that he is not acting on principle.
Click to expand...
I think he is and perhaps he now sees the dignity and sanctity of life. If the Democrats stand for any principles, they are evil principles.
 
Last edited:
dvdjs said:
Plain and simple, without principle.
Click to expand...
I don’t see the slaughter of the unborn as principle. That’s what the Democrats stand for. Please don’t excerpt my posts in a deceptive way from what I said.
 
dvdjs said:
40.png
7_Sorrows:
they are destroying our
democratic system
Click to expand...
What they are doing is a lawful part of our system. Calling for and accrepting foreign governmentinterference is not. It is anathema. Our founders were very wary of that corruption…
Click to expand...
Just because it is lawful does not mean it should be abused.
 
If Trump has lost the New York Times…wait, the Times has been wanting to impeach him since 2016, so a big fat “who cares?”.
 
The NY Times has your position pegged at least. To quote the editorial:
Republicans’ sole remaining argument is: “So what? It wasn’t that big a deal.” Or, as acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney said in October, “Get over it.” This stance at least has the virtue of acknowledging the president’s vice, but that doesn’t make it O.K.
Click to expand...
 
www.nydailynews.com

The truth hurts: The House Intelligence Committee presents a coherent and compelling case for impeachment

That President Trump’s press secretary claims the House Intelligence Committee’s report “reads like the ramblings of a basement blogger straining to prove something when there is …
www.nydailynews.com www.nydailynews.com

www.tampabay.com

The case for impeachment | Editorial

The House has enough reason to justify the impeachment of President Donald Trump.
www.tampabay.com www.tampabay.com

www.usatoday.com

USA TODAY's Editorial Board: Impeach President Trump

The president's transgressions and stonewalling are so egregious that the House needs to defend the nation's system of checks and balances: Our view
www.usatoday.com

www.sltrib.com

Tribune Editorial: Impeachment proceeds as it should

To paraphrase <a href="https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript" target="_blank">Mr. Jefferson</a>,
www.sltrib.com www.sltrib.com

www.inquirer.com

Impeach President Donald Trump | Philadelphia Inquirer Editorial Board

President Trump has severely disrespected his office and the document he swore to protect and uphold.
www.inquirer.com www.inquirer.com
 
Last edited:
chicago.suntimes.com

EDITORIAL: The case for impeachment over censure for President Donald Trump

Censure — which the Chicago Tribune editorial board is calling for instead of impeachment — is a form of shaming. But this president cannot be shamed.
chicago.suntimes.com chicago.suntimes.com

www.bostonglobe.com

Impeach the president - The Boston Globe

Yes, the president's actions were wrong and yes, impeachment is the proper remedy.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com

www.latimes.com

Editorial: We've seen enough. Trump should be impeached

Trump perverted foreign policy by asking Ukraine to investigate Biden
www.latimes.com www.latimes.com

www.orlandosentinel.com

The House should vote to impeach Trump, and the Senate should remove him from office | Editorial

The question was never if Donald Trump did something wrong. Of course he did. The president of the United States got on the phone and asked the leader of a foreign power to investigate a domestic p…
www.orlandosentinel.com www.orlandosentinel.com
 
Last edited:
Paulin,
You have conjecture without evidence
There is evidence he asked for legit investigation by Ukraine, which would invariably have yielded evidence of corruption by their people as well
There is no evidence he asked them to fake evidence
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top