Impeachment?

[jp1]

On some other thread a while back I had commented that after we get that s***stain out of the oval office democrats will need to codify into law many of the things that were just considered political norms before. I didn't think we would need to include making it illegal for the president to extort a foreign ally to obtain political gain, but here we are.

[Ultralight]

you dont read much around here, eh? LDahl is a prime representation of a Never Trumper. I think his words have great value for that reason.

What does LDAHL have to do with my comment?

[jp1]

you dont read much around here, eh? LDahl is a prime representation of a Never Trumper. I think his words have great value for that reason.

Which is what makes his statement all the more shocking. I get it that the forever trumpers of the world will keep moving the goalposts of what is deserving of impeachment/removal as the facts come out and make goalpost movement necessary. But I had hoped rational republicans would actually care that a president should act with at least a vague sense of integrity.

[iris lilies]

What does LDAHL have to do with my comment?

Specifically then, who are you referring to in your Forever Trumper comment?

[iris lilies]

Which is what makes his statement all the more shocking. I get it that the forever trumpers of the world will keep moving the goalposts of what is deserving of impeachment/removal as the facts come out and make goalpost movement necessary. But I had hoped rational republicans would actually care that a president should act with at least a vague sense of integrity.

And there you go, wanting to “codify “integrity with laws. good luck with that.

[Ultralight]

Which is what makes his statement all the more shocking. I get it that the forever trumpers of the world will keep moving the goalposts of what is deserving of impeachment/removal as the facts come out and make goalpost movement necessary. But I had hoped rational republicans would actually care that a president should act with at least a vague sense of integrity.

I think many never Trumpers are happy with much of Trump's actions. And they also know that an impeachment that actually held the Prez accountable would damage Repubs across the board. So they toe the line, defending and deflecting for Trump, but in the background they have a low level disdain for him.

[frugal-one]

What I believe is that attempting to punish the motivation rather than the act is where the rule of law dissolves into mob mentality.

Then why do we punish those who are armed when contemplating doing dastardly acts.... such as school shootings where they have not yet shot anyone? Just an example of punishing for motivation. The president admitted on tv in front of the world that he is guilty of such.

[LDAHL]

So a president using the power of his office for direct personal gain is ok?

No. But it is a common enough practice that I don’t see it rising to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors. I think that there is a strong sense in which almost everything a president does is with an eye to personal gain. Did Obama push DACA out of kind regard for illegal immigrants or because it would play well with Hispanic voters? Did Trump push for a corruption investigation to resume because he thought Biden might become an electoral threat or because combating corruption was an ongoing policy? While I grant you Trump’s case is especially brazen, I think prosecuting motivations and character is more appropriate through an election process than a legal one.

[LDAHL]

Which is what makes his statement all the more shocking. I get it that the forever trumpers of the world will keep moving the goalposts of what is deserving of impeachment/removal as the facts come out and make goalpost movement necessary. But I had hoped rational republicans would actually care that a president should act with at least a vague sense of integrity.

Can’t I have as little use for Trump abusing his office for political gain as I do House Democrats abusing theirs for political gain?

[jp1]

Did Trump push for a corruption investigation to resume because he thought Biden might become an electoral threat or because combating corruption was an ongoing policy?

LOLOL. You had me believing you were serious until this sentence. Thanks for the best belly laugh I've had in days.