• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Do you belive there will be an Impeachment 2.0?

Stacyhs said:
I guess you don't see the difference.
Click to expand...
Not really. Impeachment is a political process. If the Dems wanted to impeach Trump for misrepresenting the economy (e.g., by dishonestly blaming a recession on his predecessor), I have no doubt they'd have no trouble presenting evidence and arguments that he'd done so, and that it was worth removing him over.
 
theprestige said:
Not really. Impeachment is a political process. If the Dems wanted to impeach Trump for misrepresenting the economy (e.g., by dishonestly blaming a recession on his predecessor), I have no doubt they'd have no trouble presenting evidence and arguments that he'd done so, and that it was worth removing him over.
Click to expand...

Um, no. I'd nom this for the Most Nonsensical Post of the Week but I'm holding off until the deadline at midnight.
 
Stacyhs said:
Um, no. I'd nom this for the Most Nonsensical Post of the Week but I'm holding off until the deadline at midnight.
Click to expand...

An impeachment like that could be viewed as completely and utterly ridiculous, but then again it emphasizes that an impeachment trial is NOT a standard court trial - it's a political one whether the reasons behind it are plainly objective or outright ludicrous. You're relying on a court of votes in the senate to reach a conviction and if you get the votes for the conviction, then you get a removal from office. People really need to stop embellishing the process with their political blinders and treat it as realistically it is.

Reading the climate of this thread, the people I interact with IRL, and what I see elsewhere, it won't surprise me if there's a second try at it if the canyon rift persists... granted what determines that outcome is how much strategic impotency the prosecution exerts on this one and whether or not the house has enough votes at such time a second attempt is made. Unless it garners bipartisan support, or one party control of the house and senate together, I wouldn't count on an impeachment succeeding before his 8 years are up.
 
Last edited:
Grizzly Bear said:
An impeachment like that could be viewed as completely and utterly ridiculous, but then again it emphasizes that an impeachment trial is NOT a standard court trial - it's a political one even if the reasons behind it are plainly objective. You're relying on a court of votes in the senate to reach a conviction. People really need to stop embellishing the process with their political blinders and treat it as it is.
Click to expand...

Not "could be viewed", it would be viewed as completely and utterly ridiculous. No one could argue with any sanity that blaming a recession on a long out of office president in any way violates the oath of office of the president, is a crime, is criminal-like, abuses the powers of the office, or brings the office into disrepute.

I understand perfectly well that a court of impeachment is a political one, but I also understand that The Prestige's claim was pure nonsense. To whit, the Dems would "have no trouble presenting evidence and arguments" that wrongly blaming Obama for a recession years after leaving office was impeachable and "that it was worth removing him over."

Reading the climate of this thread, the people I interact with IRL, and what I see elsewhere, it won't surprise me if there's a second try at it, granted what determines that outcome is how much strategic impotency the prosecution exerts on this one and whether or not the house has enough votes at such time a second attempt is made. Maybe "never" in the slim chance that the impeachment this time results in a conviction.
Click to expand...

If there is a second try for impeachment, it will only be because Trump has again committed serious acts that violate his oath of office and not for some ridiculous action such as ThePrestige put forth.
 
Stacyhs said:
I understand perfectly well that a court of impeachment is a political one, but I also understand that The Prestige's claim was pure nonsense. To whit, the Dems would "have no trouble presenting evidence and arguments" that wrongly blaming Obama for a recession years after leaving office was impeachable and "that it was worth removing him over."
Click to expand...
And clear analogies should be treated for what they are as well. Analogies to emphasize a point. If they were being used to push real world examples the way certain 9/11 truthers treat limit case models... I'd probably agree with you on your initial reaction... but stick with reality... please, and realize "limiting cases" aren't just found in engineering literature....

Stacyhs said:
If there is a second try for impeachment, it will only be because Trump has again committed serious acts that violate his oath of office and not for some ridiculous action such as ThePrestige put forth.
Click to expand...
"One side" of the aisle already reached a verdict that he's committed an impeachable crime and a good number of them "expect" him to repeat it - so my bet is if given an opportunity, it'll happen. If you want me to be honestly realistic there are indeed qualifiers to whether or not it actually happens, and let's not sugar coat the fact that it could happen with bipartisan support if he went far enough.... but if he gets another 4 year term, at a minimum I expect we get another 5 years of this sort of talk coming... and it's not like I'd be surprised by it. It's been a thing for the last 20 years...
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
My bad. Uh... Sit there passively hoping that some politicians will do the needful?
Click to expand...

In case you didn't notice, that's how our government works: we vote for the politicians to "do the needful".

Just stop the "gotta get the last dig in no matter how silly it is" routine. It does your credibility no good.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
And clear analogies should be treated for what they are as well. Analogies to emphasize a point. If they were being used to push real world examples the way certain 9/11 truthers treat limit case models... I'd probably agree with you on your initial reaction... but stick with reality... please, and realize "limiting cases" aren't just found in engineering literature....
Click to expand...

TP wasn't using an analogy to emphasize a point. He was making what he thought was a clever response when I joked that, if there were a recession during a second Trump administration, he'd blame Obama.


"One side" of the aisle already reached a verdict that he's committed an impeachable crime and a good number of them "expect" him to repeat it - so my bet is if given an opportunity, it'll happen. If you want me to be honestly realistic there are indeed qualifiers to whether or not it actually happens, and let's not sugar coat the fact that it could happen with bipartisan support if he went far enough.... but if he gets another 4 year term, at a minimum I expect we get another 5 years of this sort of talk coming... and it's not like I'd be surprised by it. It's been a thing for the last 20 years...
Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing with you that 'one side' has already reached a verdict..hell...both sides have. One side is based on the evidence and the other side is based on protecting Trump and getting re-elected. And I also do not disagree that many of them expect him to repeat committing an impeachable offense. But that does NOT include that possible offense being blaming Obama for a recession. THAT was the topic of my exchange with TP, not whether Trump may be impeached again.
 
Stacyhs said:
I understand perfectly well that a court of impeachment is a political one, but I also understand that The Prestige's claim was pure nonsense. To whit, the Dems would "have no trouble presenting evidence and arguments" that wrongly blaming Obama for a recession years after leaving office was impeachable and "that it was worth removing him over."
Click to expand...
Like I said: IF the Dems wanted to try to impeach the president over misrepresenting the economy, THEN I think they'd definitely assemble some good evidence and arguments to that effect.
 
theprestige said:
Not really. Impeachment is a political process.
Click to expand...


Even given that, that does not imply that all impeachments are on an equal foundation. Some impeachments are clearly more justified than others. You would realize this if you tried opening your eyes just once, bro.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Like I said: IF the Dems wanted to try to impeach the president over misrepresenting the economy, THEN I think they'd definitely assemble some good evidence and arguments to that effect.
Click to expand...


LOL! No you wouldn't. You don't even think they're assembling good evidence and arguments now. :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom