Congress will flush TPP down the toilet, White House concedes

[yuna628 9,671]

Still the fact remains he was not impeached

Again Nixon was impeached, but it did not result in the full removal from office (the conclusion of impeachment) because he resigned from office. I know the process is complicated, but it is a multi-level thing, that may or may not result in the removal of the person for a variety of reasons. Nixon took the easy way out, but because he received a pardon by Ford - this means that it is essentially an acknowledgment that Nixon was guilty of a crime that required pardoning (being let off easy for it after he had already cowardly run away from the charges). If a President resigns the full impeachment cannot continue. He was not acquitted, if anything he was almost absolutely about to be removed from office.

[MarkPerry 488]

Your heros are quitters, Fascists, and lean towards bigotry Mr. Middle of the Road.

Nixon was impeached. Quitting before it was completed is not going to work as a claim it didn't happen.

Sounds like since Trump has won the election you have joined the rest of your family on the ledge

[MarkPerry 488]

Again Nixon was impeached, but it did not result in the full removal from office (the conclusion of impeachment) because he resigned from office. I know the process is complicated, but it is a multi-level thing, that may or may not result in the removal of the person for a variety of reasons. Nixon took the easy way out, but because he received a pardon by Ford - this means that it is essentially an acknowledgment that Nixon was guilty of a crime that required pardoning (being let off easy for it after he had already cowardly run away from the charges). If a President resigns the full impeachment cannot continue. He was not acquitted, if anything he was almost absolutely about to be removed from office.

He was not impeached, He was in the process of being impeached when he resigned. Then Ford pardoned him.

Been there, saw it

[yuna628 9,671]

He was not impeached, He was in the process of being impeached when he resigned. Then Ford pardoned him.

Been there, saw it

That's nice but again: Impeachment is a multi level process. It does not always mean the individual is removed from office. Impeachment in the first part means charges are brought - which they were. But because he resigned from office he could not be removed.

Facts are facts, I can't help that you seem to have an intense desire to defend a person that was a stain on our country and his party. I'm not willing to defend Clinton for it either, but I'm willing to state the facts as they are.

Edited November 12, 2016 by yuna628

[millefleur 5,046]

Sheesh, I posted this because I thought since both Sanders and Trump were against the TPP so it might let us find common ground. Instead we're in a debate over details about a disgraced president from nearly 40 years ago. Nice job, guys!

Edited November 12, 2016 by millefleur

[MarkPerry 488]

That's nice but again: Impeachment is a multi level process. It does not always mean the individual is removed from office. Impeachment in the first part means charges are brought - which they were. But because he resigned from office he could not be removed.

Facts are facts, I can't help that you seem to have an intense desire to defend a person that was a stain on our country and his party. I'm not willing to defend Clinton for it either, but I'm willing to state the facts as they are.

I have zero feeling toward Nixon one way or the other, I was in grade school. But the simple fact is he was not impeached. He was umder impeachment but never impeached. Read a history book

[yuna628 9,671]

Sheesh, I posted this because I thought since both Sanders and Trump were against the TPP so it might let us find common ground. Instead we're in a debate over details about disgraced president from nearly 40 years ago. Nice job, guys!

Welcome to CEHST. Someone has always got to argue about something.

Personally I'm against the TPP and TIPP, and I'd suspect most here are too, so that's something right?

And Mark: really, I think I'm a little more versed than most in the history education department. We're saying the same thing but you're reaching a different meaning of conclusion. I can't help your understanding of that error.

Edited November 12, 2016 by yuna628

[MarkPerry 488]

Welcome to CEHST. Someone has always got to argue about something.

Personally I'm against the TPP and TIPP, and I'd suspect most here are too, so that's something right?

NAFTA needs to go also..

Can we agree on that?

[millefleur 5,046]

NAFTA needs to go also..

Can we agree on that?

As far as I can tell, getting rid of NAFTA would also be a benefit to the country as well. Let's see if that happens.

[yuna628 9,671]

NAFTA needs to go also..

Can we agree on that?

I would say it depends. I think the ability to trade with our allies is important in a way that is of mutual benefit. How would you suggest we arrange trade deals that helps us and our allies? I would agree we have had many bad deals on the table. Whether NAFTA is bad, all depends on whom you ask. You can even find conservatives in very adamant support of this (it's been floated around since Bush Sr) agreement, some were very vocal about it being of benefit during the election. As I've said before it seems these days we've traded our republic for capitalism.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

He was not impeached, He was in the process of being impeached when he resigned. Then Ford pardoned him.

Been there, saw it

Don't confuse the MDL with facts. They hate those. They can't seem to understand there is a difference in defending someone's actions and stating the tRuth.

In nor way defending Nixon but the fact is he was not impeached.

Clinton was and and the other Clinton surely would have been.

[Rob L 3,811]

As far as I can tell, getting rid of NAFTA would also be a benefit to the country as well. Let's see if that happens.

NAFTA needs to go also..

Can we agree on that?

I would say it depends. I think the ability to trade with our allies is important in a way that is of mutual benefit. How would you suggest we arrange trade deals that helps us and our allies? I would agree we have had many bad deals on the table. Whether NAFTA is bad, all depends on whom you ask. You can even find conservatives in very adamant support of this (it's been floated around since Bush Sr) agreement, some were very vocal about it being of benefit during the election. As I've said before it seems these days we've traded our republic for capitalism.

What is most discouraging for me to hear educated folks not understand the tremendous benefit trade has brought the world. The losses of jobs is not from Free Trade but from automation and technology shifts. We are not going to trade in our iPhones for instamatics, clean energy for coal, raw steel for modern materials, cloud computing for manual ledgers.

Industry has shifted, for better and worse, and we could make a case for better use of resources to equip us for this shift, but it is in fact a benefit and consequence of free markets and innovation.The world is moving on, the responsibility is personal to make sure we and our children are equipping ourselves for the future, with support from government and enlightened industry.

Trump and Bannon have won, they have extract all of the oxygen from the room and want to take us back to the 50s or before the 20s

This is in fact the start of an American Brexit....and we are buying it. If you want to see a influx of immigrants from south of the border, dismantle NAFTA in an irresponsible fashion. You will not be able to build a wall deep, high, thick or electrified enough to hold back the misery.