Cont: House Impeachment Inquiry - part 2

[theprestige]

Probably addressed before I scrolled further...

The point is to show Graham's rank hypocrisy.

It hasn't really been addressed. If the point is as you say, then it really needs to be addressed directly, by PhantomWolf. Showing Graham's hypocrisy in no way answers the question I was asking.

Either PW thought he was answering my question, in which case, what the hell? Or he thought he wasn't answering my question. In which case, what the hell?

 

[WilliamSeger]

It hasn't really been addressed. If the point is as you say, then it really needs to be addressed directly, by PhantomWolf. Showing Graham's hypocrisy in no way answers the question I was asking.

Either PW thought he was answering my question, in which case, what the hell? Or he thought he wasn't answering my question. In which case, what the hell?

Graham makes a strong case for why the American people need to be able to believe what the president says -- which is to say, a strong case for an additional Article of Impeachment against Trump.

 

[acbytesla]

It hasn't really been addressed. If the point is as you say, then it really needs to be addressed directly, by PhantomWolf. Showing Graham's hypocrisy in no way answers the question I was asking.

Either PW thought he was answering my question, in which case, what the hell? Or he thought he wasn't answering my question. In which case, what the hell?

Of course it was. Just because your fingers are in your ears doesn't mean it wasn't addressed. And it was addressed by Graham twenty years ago in that video. That Graham is now a hypocrite doesn't make what he said twenty years ago any less valid.

Graham explains why impeachment is necessary. Granted it didn't really apply to a blowjob or even lying about a blowjob. But it does apply to corruption, bribery, abuse of power and obstruction of justice.

 

[PhantomWolf]

yt;dw

funny thing, Graham said the same thing about the Transcripts he demanded were released, well tl;dr, but close enough.

My point was that yes he did answer your question, in that impeachment is about cleansing the office when a official abuses it, and that is why it should be done.

Funnily enough, in 1999 when they were all for impeaching Clinton, Republicans were all saying the right things about the need for impeachment and what it was. Now they are all back pedaling on that so fast it's astounding.

The facts that seem to be coming out about the President's actions, and those around him, frankly make Watergate look like a parking ticket.

The evidence says that the President held hostage the duties of his office in an attempt to get another sovereign Government, who is in a war for the survival of their country, to make a statement that he could then use as an attack again the presumed opponent of his re-election campaign. The evidence also shows that a number of government officials were either removed, or quit because they refused to go along with it, or it was believed that they'd get in the way.

If this was a Democrat President, the Republicans would have been losing their minds over this sort of evidence, but instead they have been backing already debunked Conspiracy Theories created by Russia Intelligence, and spread by corrupt pro-Russian Oligarchs and Ukrainian ex-prosecutors who were fired for corrupt practices.

At this point I am waiting for the Republicans to start claiming that Trump's actions were acceptable because the Democrats hoaxed the Apollo Landings under JKF and Johnson.

 

[acbytesla]

funny thing, Graham said the same thing about the Transcripts he demanded were released, well tl;dr, but close enough.

My point was that yes he did answer your question, in that impeachment is about cleansing the office when a official abuses it, and that is why it should be done.

Funnily enough, in 1999 when they were all for impeaching Clinton, Republicans were all saying the right things about the need for impeachment and what it was. Now they are all back pedaling on that so fast it's astounding.

The facts that seem to be coming out about the President's actions, and those around him, frankly make Watergate look like a parking ticket.

The evidence says that the President held hostage the duties of his office in an attempt to get another sovereign Government, who is in a war for the survival of their country, to make a statement that he could then use as an attack again the presumed opponent of his re-election campaign. The evidence also shows that a number of government officials were either removed, or quit because they refused to go along with it, or it was believed that they'd get in the way.

If this was a Democrat President, the Republicans would have been losing their minds over this sort of evidence, but instead they have been backing already debunked Conspiracy Theories created by Russia Intelligence, and spread by corrupt pro-Russian Oligarchs and Ukrainian ex-prosecutors who were fired for corrupt practices.

At this point I am waiting for the Republicans to start claiming that Trump's actions were acceptable because the Democrats hoaxed the Apollo Landings under JKF and Johnson.

From my perspective, it is not so much about cleansing the office, but about declaring limits to POTUS. If Trump is allowed to use Federal resources to smear political opponents without ramifications, future Presidents will also ignore those limits.

 

[Stacyhs]

funny thing, Graham said the same thing about the Transcripts he demanded were released, well tl;dr, but close enough.

My point was that yes he did answer your question, in that impeachment is about cleansing the office when a official abuses it, and that is why it should be done.

Funnily enough, in 1999 when they were all for impeaching Clinton, Republicans were all saying the right things about the need for impeachment and what it was. Now they are all back pedaling on that so fast it's astounding.

The facts that seem to be coming out about the President's actions, and those around him, frankly make Watergate look like a parking ticket.

The evidence says that the President held hostage the duties of his office in an attempt to get another sovereign Government, who is in a war for the survival of their country, to make a statement that he could then use as an attack again the presumed opponent of his re-election campaign. The evidence also shows that a number of government officials were either removed, or quit because they refused to go along with it, or it was believed that they'd get in the way.

If this was a Democrat President, the Republicans would have been losing their minds over this sort of evidence, but instead they have been backing already debunked Conspiracy Theories created by Russia Intelligence, and spread by corrupt pro-Russian Oligarchs and Ukrainian ex-prosecutors who were fired for corrupt practices.

At this point I am waiting for the Republicans to start claiming that Trump's actions were acceptable because the Democrats hoaxed the Apollo Landings under JKF and Johnson.

From my perspective, it is not so much about cleansing the office, but about declaring limits to POTUS. If Trump is allowed to use Federal resources to smear political opponents without ramifications, future Presidents will also ignore those limits.

Exactly! I cannot say how strongly they disgust me with their blatant hypocrisy and party before country actions.

 

[CapelDodger]

No. The most important issue is what did Trump do and what should be the consequences of it.

Indeed. And the most interesting issue, to my mind, is the Republican response to what Trump did and to the impeachment inquiry itself.

 

[PhantomWolf]

From my perspective, it is not so much about cleansing the office, but about declaring limits to POTUS. If Trump is allowed to use Federal resources to smear political opponents without ramifications, future Presidents will also ignore those limits.

I would consider that to be a part of "cleansing the office."

 

[Venom]

Very interesting article on Wikipedia on efforts to impeach Barack Obama.

Multiple surveys of U.S. public opinion found that the clear majority of Americans rejected the idea of impeaching Obama, while a majority of Republicans were in favor; for example, CNN found in July 2014 that 57% of Republicans supported these efforts while about two thirds of adult Americans in general disagreed with them.[4]

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Very interesting article on Wikipedia on efforts to impeach Barack Obama.

For what?

Typical projection, they really have tried to use impeachment to overturn the Presidency. They hunted and hunted for something on Clinton including hiring Jones a $600,000. lawyer.

There's no way they had anything on Obama. I think we would have heard about it.

And here they are with a corrupt bastard in the WH and they pretend the impeachment effort is a political witch hunt.

How can you Trump supporters breathe with so much hypocrisy on your chests?

 

[Stacyhs]

Very interesting article on Wikipedia on efforts to impeach Barack Obama.

I echo the 'for what?'

 

[PhantomWolf]

For what?

The worse offences of all Presidents, wearing a Tan suit and putting Dijon Mustard and no Ketchup on his cheese burger!

Oh, and the High crime of being a Democrat while Presidenting.


(Probably being Black while Presidenting too...)

 

[smartcooky]

For what?

I echo the 'for what?'

Let me summarise that for you

In October 2010, prior to the elections in which Republicans won control of the House, Jonathan Chait published an article in The New Republic called "Scandal TBD" where he predicted that if Republicans were to win control of the House, and Barack Obama were to win re-election in 2012, the Republicans would try to impeach Obama and use any reason possible as pretext.

Here are some of the ones mentioned

1. Obama is alleged to have offered Rep Joe Sestak (D-PA) a job to persuade him to drop out of the PA Senate primary election against Arlen Specter.

2. In order to prevent Obama from "pushing his agenda". The impeachment of Barack Obama "needs to happen" - Rep Mike Burgess (R-TX)

3. Because of his immigration policy,... "if it’s bad enough and if shenanigans [are] involved in it, then of course impeachment is always a possibility" - Sen John Kyl (R-AZ).

4. Obama authorized air strikes against Libya during the Libyan Civil War

5. the alleged WH cover-up after the Benghazi attack

6. the Birther Conspiracy - nuff said about that pile of steaming feces

7. the Bowe Bergdahl, Taliban detainees swap.

8. the transgender bathroom directive... yeah, I said WTF too!

For mine, the most interesting thing in the article was the fact that John Dean, former White House Counsel to Richard Nixon, criticized the movement to impeach Obama as "insanity," arguing that Republican demands for impeachment are grounded in political disagreements rather than actual impeachable offences. He said these people are not conservatives, who by definition seek to protect the system; rather they are radicals who are gaming our constitutional system..

"Partisans promoting and pushing impeachment as a political solution to being out of power seem to forget that what goes around comes around"

Are you listening Repugnicans?

 

[Darat]

For what?



Typical projection, they really have tried to use impeachment to overturn the Presidency. They hunted and hunted for something on Clinton including hiring Jones a $600,000. lawyer.



There's no way they had anything on Obama. I think we would have heard about it.



And here they are with a corrupt bastard in the WH and they pretend the impeachment effort is a political witch hunt.



How can you Trump supporters breathe with so much hypocrisy on your chests?

No way they had anything on Obama? Please, drop your partisanship for a moment, even you can't claim there aren't compromising photos of him, in a tan suit!

 

[varwoche]

Y'all forgot Obama's terrorist fist bump. You do know who the type of person who does terrorist fist bumps don't you? It starts with a t.

The sheriff's a ******! Impeach!

 

[JoeMorgue]

From my perspective, it is not so much about cleansing the office, but about declaring limits to POTUS. If Trump is allowed to use Federal resources to smear political opponents without ramifications, future Presidents will also ignore those limits.

I've said it before. Trump is a genie that will not be easy to put back in the bottle.

The biggest gut check of the last few years has been the realization of how much of the stability in our government was based on the honor system, or a puppet theater act of it which amounts to the same thing, and how much a dishonest agent breaks it without an easy way of reigning him in.

But, and you've be naive and disillusion to think otherwise, right now there are a lot of people where the thought of "Well okay... but all we have to do is get our version, the good version, of Trump into office and have him just get what he wants by not playing the game" is starting to creep into and solidify in their mind. And that's not good.

We've already heard minor variations on "No we can't fix that yet, we have to keep it to undue the damage Trump has done..." on this board already.

Trump's success is not being lost on politicians of all stripes, you can take that to bank. As disgusted and opposed to his actions as they might be, there is not a politicians in the country right now that doesn't at least a teeny-tiny voice in his head going "But it's been so easy for him to break the system... but if you do that you won't break the system no siree, you'll just fix it. So what if..."

We need to silence that voice.

 

[Belz...]

I've said it before. Trump is a genie that will not be easy to put back in the bottle.

The biggest gut check of the last few years has been the realization of how much of the stability in our government was based on the honor system, or a puppet theater act of it which amounts to the same thing, and how much a dishonest agent breaks it without an easy way of reigning him in.

But, and you've be naive and disillusion to think otherwise, right now there are a lot of people where the thought of "Well okay... but all we have to do is get our version, the good version, of Trump into office and have him just get what he wants by not playing the game" is starting to creep into and solidify in their mind. And that's not good.

We've already heard minor variations on "No we can't fix that yet, we have to keep it to undue the damage Trump has done..." on this board already.

Trump's success is not being lost on politicians of all stripes, you can take that to bank. As disgusted and opposed to his actions as they might be, there is not a politicians in the country right now that doesn't at least a teeny-tiny voice in his head going "But it's been so easy for him to break the system... but if you do that you won't break the system no siree, you'll just fix it. So what if..."

We need to silence that voice.

This. This problem is not going to end with Trump. You're in for a rough ride.

 

[CapelDodger]

At this point I am waiting for the Republicans to start claiming that Trump's actions were acceptable because the Democrats hoaxed the Apollo Landings under JKF and Johnson.

One result of the impeachment inquiry is that the Republican Party has disappeared completely into the CT alt-world, as quite a few people predicted they would eventually.

 

[CapelDodger]

This. This problem is not going to end with Trump. You're in for a rough ride.

Constitutional Amendments tend to get bandied about, but I think this time there's a real need for one to firmly define, in modern terms, the powers and limitations of each arm of the US government. At the moment too much is being left to judges to decide, and the rot Trump has spread in the judiciary makes that deeply problematic.

 

[BrooklynBaby]

Not surprising Democrats support Schiff and his bunker star chamber. Not surprising at all. For some reason, people who have lost their moral compass never seem to realize it until it is too late to unring that bell. You know, having hit it with a sledgehammer, and all...