It’s Time: Congress Needs to Open a Formal Impeachment Inquiry

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

https://www.lawfareblog.com/its-time-congress-needs-open-formal-impeachment-inquiry

 

Last Tuesday, the New York Times published a foggy story noting that Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell "has mused about whether Mr. Trump will be in a position to lead the Republican Party into next year’s elections and beyond."

The time for musing has passed. It’s now time to begin a serious conversation about the impeachment and removal of President Trump by opening a formal impeachment inquiry.

The evidence of criminality on Trump’s part is little clearer today than it was a day, a week, or a month ago. But no conscientious member of the House of Representatives can at this stage fail to share McConnell’s doubts about Trump’s fundamental fitness for office. As the Trump presidency enters its eighth month, those members of Congress who are serious about their oaths to "support and defend the Constitution" must confront a question. It’s not, in the first instance, whether the President should be removed from office, or even whether he should be impeached. It is merely this: whether given everything Trump has done, said, tweeted and indeed been since his inauguration, the House has a duty, as a body, to think about its obligations under the impeachment clauses of the Constitution—that is, whether the House needs to authorize the Judiciary Committee to open a formal inquiry into possible impeachment.

It’s not a hard question. Indeed, merely to ask it plainly is also to answer it.

[Dashinka 24,493]

I have been saying this for some time.  If the established politicos in Washington don't like Trump, then impeach him.

[IAMX 3,055]

2 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

I have been saying this for some time.  If the established politicos in Washington don't like Trump, then impeach him.

Impeachment sort of needs a serious crime...

 

The left have called for his impeachment since before he was even President. There's no way to take any of this impeachment stuff seriously. The left are trying every method, including violence, to politically get their way. While I'm normally a bargaining person, when it comes to these kind of tantrums, they deserve 0% of their way. The left deserve to be mocked and derided for their astounding stupidity and lashing out, not bargained with.

Edited August 29, 2017 by IAMX

[spookyturtle 9,465]

S

29 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

I have been saying this for some time.  If the established politicos in Washington don't like Trump, then impeach him.

Short and straight to the point. The whining and throwing tantrums about the left overlooks the simple statement that you posted. If he has committed an impeachable offense, go for it. I don't think not liking him is grounds for impeachment. Ditto for the Russian ties, bring forth the evidence or move on. 

[Dashinka 24,493]

52 minutes ago, IAMX said:

Impeachment sort of needs a serious crime...

 

The left have called for his impeachment since before he was even President. There's no way to take any of this impeachment stuff seriously. The left are trying every method, including violence, to politically get their way. While I'm normally a bargaining person, when it comes to these kind of tantrums, they deserve 0% of their way. The left deserve to be mocked and derided for their astounding stupidity and lashing out, not bargained with.

I don't know, the whole definition of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" is rather vague.  This is what I found on Wikipedia.

 

The charge of high crimes and misdemeanors covers allegations of misconduct peculiar to officials, such as perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, unbecoming conduct, and refusal to obey a lawful order. Offenses by officials also include ordinary crimes, but perhaps with different standards of proof and punishment than for nonofficials, on the grounds that more is expected of officials by their oaths of office.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_crimes_and_misdemeanors

 

Based on all the allegations since January, they would certainly be able to claim "unbecoming conduct", or "abuse of authority".  Impeachment is a political process not a criminal proceeding.  If they want him gone (the Washington elite) then get on with it.

[Dashinka 24,493]

24 minutes ago, spookyturtle said:

S

Short and straight to the point. The whining and throwing tantrums about the left overlooks the simple statement that you posted. If he has committed an impeachable offense, go for it. I don't think not liking him is grounds for impeachment. Ditto for the Russian ties, bring forth the evidence or move on. 

Sure it is.  The founders left the definition of impeachable offenses rather vague since it is a political process.  I think they did this for a reason because if one side started doing it as a matter of course, the other side(s) would do the same thing hence keeping with a balance of power.  This is probably why we don't see a lot of judicial impeachments since if one side started doing it for political reasons, the other side would follow suit.  As you know we have only had two actual House impeachments so far of a sitting president with no actual Senate conviction.  The first one appears to be for completely political reasons (Johnson) and the second began as a criminal proceeding (lying under oath), but was also primarily for political purposes (Clinton).  Of course Nixon saw the writing on the wall and resigned instead.

[IAMX 3,055]

I was all for the idea of referendums and such.. but given all the tantrums.. I would suggest a "supermajority" just to be safe.

 

The left right now are pretty adamant about disrupting all avenues of politics until they get their way. It's like being in a daycare with colic babies.

Edited August 29, 2017 by IAMX

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Stop the tantrums. Stop the nonsense. Bring back discussion, not the same stuff over and over ad nauseum. Some can do it, I'm sure. 

[Mr&Mrs G. 903]

Impeachment again !!!! 

 

About as much chance of this happening as there is to get someone to disavow antifa in the 28 page thread.  

[IAMX 3,055]

1 minute ago, Mr&Mrs G. said:

Impeachment again !!!! 

 

About as much chance of this happening as there is to get someone to disavow antifa in the 28 page thread.  

Have you moved to the US yet? 

 

You sure this is the environment you want to be in? 

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Just now, Mr&Mrs G. said:

Impeachment again !!!! 

 

About as much chance of this happening as there is to get someone to disavow antifa in the 28 page thread.  

I disavowed all hate and racist groups but respect their right to free speech. And being able to peacefully protest. But that wasn't the point of the thread at all, was it? We all know why the thread was started and what its purpose was. 

[Mr&Mrs G. 903]

Just now, IAMX said:

Have you moved to the US yet? 

 

You sure this is the environment you want to be in? 

Nah not moved yet, file stuck in Nebraska. 

 

Still thinking about it, not sure I will fit in because I like to wear polo shirts.  

[CaliCat 3,957]

4 minutes ago, spookyturtle said:

Stop the tantrums. Stop the nonsense. Bring back discussion, not the same stuff over and over ad nauseum. Some can do it, I'm sure. 

 

You're proposing a hissy fit moratorium. It requires maturity. Good luck with that. 

 

 

[IAMX 3,055]

Just now, Mr&Mrs G. said:

Nah not moved yet, file stuck in Nebraska. 

 

Still thinking about it, not sure I will fit in because I like to wear polo shirts.  

I guess just get to know the demographic ahead of time, so you don't find yourself having to KO an Antifa loony (or worse) in self defense. 

[spookyturtle 9,465]

1 minute ago, CaliCat said:

 

You're proposing a hissy fit moratorium. It requires maturity. Good luck with that. 

 

 

It's beyond hissy fits. I do believe that there are some here who can have a healthy discussion. For others, I don't believe it's possible.