I share this opinion.
Really Dems, you don't have a candidate and a way to beat him at the ballot booth? Apparently not, hence this. This whole debacle is just weak sauce by those who know they are already defeated. A lot of America will see it that way too. He may be impeached in the house, but he won't get removed and will be acquitted in the Senate. Please go for it and I'll laugh at the ham handed foolishness that went down, netting nothing but wasted time and resulting in a two term presidency for Trump. I'm saying this and I don't like the guy, but I can see. This will be politically fatal for Democrats. The better option would have been having a candidate that could win.
I share this opinion.
Really Dems, you don't have a candidate and a way to beat him at the ballot booth? Apparently not, hence this. This whole debacle is just weak sauce by those who know they are already defeated. A lot of America will see it that way too. He may be impeached in the house, but he won't get removed and will be acquitted in the Senate. Please go for it and I'll laugh at the ham handed foolishness that went down, netting nothing but wasted time and resulting in a two term presidency for Trump. I'm saying this and I don't like the guy, but I can see. This will be politically fatal for Democrats. The better option would have been having a candidate that could win.
No, because it's stupid. The best evidence is that Trump has literally been doing exactly the crap that the founding fathers put impeachment into the Constitution o address. The op-ed is farcical and in no way based on reality.Why, because it's the truth? Sometimes truth looks stupid, especially when one is vehemently against it and comfortable that the outcome will be different.
I share this opinion.
Really Dems, you don't have a candidate and a way to beat him at the ballot booth? Apparently not, hence this. This whole debacle is just weak sauce by those who know they are already defeated. A lot of America will see it that way too. He may be impeached in the house, but he won't get removed and will be acquitted in the Senate. Please go for it and I'll laugh at the ham handed foolishness that went down, netting nothing but wasted time and resulting in a two term presidency for Trump. I'm saying this and I don't like the guy, but I can see. This will be politically fatal for Democrats. The better option would have been having a candidate that could win.
Mason, Madison, and Randolph all spoke up to defend impeachment on July 20, after Charles Pinckney of South Carolina and Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania moved to strike it. “[If the president] should be re-elected, that will be sufficient proof of his innocence,” Morris argued. “[Impeachment] will render the Executive dependent on those who are to impeach.”
“Shall any man be above justice?” Mason asked. “Shall that man be above it who can commit the most extensive injustice?” A presidential candidate might bribe the electors to gain the presidency, Mason suggested. “Shall the man who has practiced corruption, and by that means procured his appointment in the first instance, be suffered to escape punishment by repeating his guilt?”
Madison argued that the Constitution needed a provision “for defending the community against the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the Chief Magistrate.” Waiting to vote him out of office in a general election wasn’t good enough. “He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation”— embezzlement—“or oppression,” Madison warned. “He might betray his trust to foreign powers.”
Impeachment is not about partisan politics. Why not condemn Republicans?
It shouldn't be.
You asked me who the "they" was in my response above. So I answered you with an honest reply.
Many of the Democrats have been saying for 2 years that they have all they need to impeach Trump. Yet they sit on their hands until now.
So to be clear do you think asking foreign governments to investigate your domestic political enemies is not an impeachable offense?
Something about he hasn’t been charged with a high crime or misdemeanors so he shouldn’t/can’t be impeached. Just ignore the DoJ’s position that a sitting president can’t be charged with anything or Trump’s legal argument that he can’t even be investigated by anyone for anything.
I do not think what happened on the phone with the Ukraine is impeachable w/respect to the phone transcripts.
Did it occur to you the entirely different standards of evidence needed to convict the bloated orange white guy dictated waiting to vote until he virtually impeached himself??It shouldn't be.
You asked me who the "they" was in my response above. So I answered you with an honest reply.
Many of the Democrats have been saying for 2 years that they have all they need to impeach Trump. Yet they sit on their hands until now.
I do not think what happened on the phone with the Ukraine is impeachable w/respect to the phone transcripts.
Are you claiming that Trump did not request that Ukraine investigate his political opponents or that it was fine for him to do so?
What you mean "THEM"?They’ll stand behind him until it hurts their electoral chances, and then they’ll all claim to have merely been fighting for due process.
I think @fskimospy has asked a very relevant question. I would like to know your answer to that as well.I do not think what happened on the phone with the Ukraine is impeachable w/respect to the phone transcripts.
Fat chance......lolI think @fskimospy has asked a very relevant question. I would like to know your answer to that as well.
I do not think what happened on the phone with the Ukraine is impeachable w/respect to the phone transcripts.
What you mean "THEM"?
Your feels are irrelevant wrt the law.I do not think what happened on the phone with the Ukraine is impeachable w/respect to the phone transcripts.
Your feels are irrelevant wrt the law.
I do not think what happened on the phone with the Ukraine is impeachable w/respect to the phone transcripts.