Page 104 of 117 FirstFirst ... 45494102103104105106114 ... LastLast
Results 1,031 to 1,040 of 1166

Thread: Impeachment?

  1. #1031
    Senior Member gimmethesimplelife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    6,975
    I have been busy so I have not keeping up with the trail, relying on family and neighbors I run across to keep me filled in. That said, this Bolton thing - his book verifying quid pro quo - has renewed faith in a chance of A Trump Free Nation. Time will tell. And of course if Trump is ejected it won't be right away - once April gets here I'll have more time as bookings sliw down a bit - I'll be more able to help plan a block party to celebrate. Rob

  2. #1032
    Senior Member gimmethesimplelife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    6,975
    Should be trial above and as bookings slow down above.

  3. #1033
    Simpleton Alan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    9,844
    Quote Originally Posted by jp1 View Post
    And now we know The Dersh's grand, mind blowing legal theory. It's that the president can do absolutely anything in pursuit of reelection and should not be impeached for those actions. I wonder how much money one has to be paid to be able to say something like that without laughing?
    I think the general idea was that a president shouldn't be impeached for doing things to help the re-election effort. If you reject that and, oh I don't know, let's say a President Warren promises to give everyone with student loans a $50,000 credit the year before her next election, should she be impeached for using the power of her office to enhance her chances?

    That's just a thought experiment, you don't have to answer if you don't want to because off hand I can think of lots of scenarios that might trigger future impeachment efforts.
    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein

  4. #1034
    Senior Member Rogar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,042
    The news today had a short blurb on the Federal Election Commission defining what is illegal. It seems to contradict the defense that no crime has been committed and therefore no grounds for impeachment. There must be a reason why this hasn't come up, at least that I've run across. Quote from the FEC chair, “the law is pretty clear. ... It is absolutely illegal for anyone to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with any election in the United States.” The law doesn’t just apply to money — investigations or political dirt that benefit a particular campaign counts as “things of value” too.

  5. #1035
    Senior Member jp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    10,265
    According to Alan, Dershowitz must’ve just chosen his words poorly. This is from his testimony. Lawyers are careful with words. If he had intended any caveats he would have said them.

    “ ’I want to be elected. I think I’m a great president. I think I’m the greatest president there ever was. And if I’m not elected, the national interest will suffer greatly.’ That cannot be an impeachable offense.”
    Last edited by jp1; 1-30-20 at 12:38pm. Reason: Comma

  6. #1036
    Simpleton Alan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    9,844
    Quote Originally Posted by jp1 View Post
    According to Alan, Dershowitz must’ve just chosen his words poorly. This is from his testimony. Lawyers are careful with words. If he had intended any caveats he would have said them.

    “ ’I want to be elected. I think I’m a great president. I think I’m the greatest president there ever was. And if I’m not elected, the national interest will suffer greatly.’ That cannot be an impeachable offense.”
    I don't think he chose his words poorly, he just included too many of them, his entire answer on the subject was much more broad. I think you got the soundbite but missed the message.
    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein

  7. #1037
    Senior Member jp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    10,265
    The message was plain and clear. It is the same message that Nixon gave to us a long time ago.

    If Dersh had intended a different message he would have provided a counter example of when his message doesn’t apply. Perhaps over the coming days he’ll be asked by a reporter for one and clear it up.

  8. #1038
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    8,869
    I see it could end in acquittal as early as today. Just in time for Iowa.

  9. #1039
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    8,394
    Shout out to Sen Collins.

  10. #1040
    Senior Member jp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    10,265
    Quote Originally Posted by Tybee View Post
    Shout out to Sen Collins.
    I’m sure she’s wringing her hands as I type this. Guaranteed the only way she votes for witnesses is if she’s one of 3 who do so.

    If Mitch manages to end this without an actual trial it’s going to be hilarious watching Bolton lob more bombs at the republicans every few days. Although it’s going to be tough to outdo today’s bomb. I mean seriously, trump’s defense attorney is a co-conspirator in the crime?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •