Trump Impeachment: What crimes to include

[TurkeysGhost]

Regardless of what crimes they select, Trump is almost guaranteed to criminally interfere in the investigation, so plan to add additional articles for fresh obstruction.

 

[Belz...]

Trump has presented the country with a situation where we almost have too many options. If they drew up articles of impeachment based on all of them, it’d be too complex to deal with all of them in one go.

Maybe they can impeach him for the next four years.

 

[Segnosaur]

Here are some, just off the top of my head:

EDIT
- Sharpie-gate: Giving false weather information (warning Alabama it could be hit by hurricane Dorian) is technically a crime

not this one.
The map Trump showed was out-of-date; he did not claim that this was what will happen, only what might have happened. This doesn't qualify as tampering with an official weather report.

The law states: "Whoever knowingly issues or publishes any counterfeit weather forecast or warning of weather conditions falsely representing such forecast or warning to have been issued or published by the Weather Bureau, United States Signal Service, or other branch of the Government service, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ninety days, or both"

Trump had been briefed earlier in the day that Alabama would not be affected. Even if the map was 'out-of-date", at the time of Trump's statement, Trump should already have known that Alabama would not be affected. Extending the potential areas that could be affected by the hurricane contradicted what Trump had been told about earlier.

Now, you could make the case that "The broken law was so minor that including it makes impeachement seem petty", but it was still a broken law. (And unlike so many other crimes, such as emoluments violations, its pretty easy to prove.)

 

[ponderingturtle]

not this one.
The map Trump showed was out-of-date; he did not claim that this was what will happen, only what might have happened. This doesn't qualify as tampering with an official weather report.

Exactly no one could possibly believe anything the president says. That way lies madness. I am waiting for Bin Laden to show up because seriously why should I accept a presidents word that he is dead? Liars all of them.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Regardless of what crimes they select, Trump is almost guaranteed to criminally interfere in the investigation, so plan to add additional articles for fresh obstruction.

But obstruction of justice is legal when a republican president does it. Just ask any republican. That is why Nixon got railroaded, he was totally within is powers all along.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Just one charge, a lot of evidence.

Or maybe just focus on a single thing that's considered the most egregious or easiest to demonstrate.

Agreed. As odd as it sounds if we charge Trump with everything he's actually done, it's gonna feel more and more like "throwing everything against the wall and hope somethings sticks" and will allow Trump to continue his "distract from the thing I did wrong by doing something else worse" tactic.

Trump's biggest power has always been to make sure nobody can agree on what to be angry at him about, he's given us so many options. One of the reasons he's so untouchable is I don't see us getting the Dems on the same page as to what to be angry at him about.

Just pick something. He has his hand in the cookie jar. There impeach him for that. When he tries to distract us by raping the dog JUST KEEP YELLING AT HIM ABOUT THE COOKIE JAR EVEN THOUGHT WE KNOW RAPING THE DOG IS WORSE.

 

[theprestige]

After three years of desperate searching for The One Thing, it'll be interesting to see what the Dems actually settle on for their big play.

 

[Belz...]

After three years of desperate searching for The One Thing, it'll be interesting to see what the Dems actually settle on for their big play.

What's more interesting is how the Repugnicans do nothing in response to same.

 

[WilliamSeger]

I think the list should include all ten incidents of obstruction of justice that Mueller documented (just to rub it in, if nothing else); the emoluments; the hush-money campaign finance violations and any possible tax fraud that might be uncovered; and this Ukrainian extortion mess. I might add misappropriating military budget to pay for his stupid wall, but that one makes him a hero to some people.

 

[ponderingturtle]

What's more interesting is how the Repugnicans do nothing in response to same.

Because Nixon was right, obstruction of justice is legal when a republican president does it. There is also the fundamental republican principle that the rich are above any and all laws. That is what we need to overcome after all.

 

[Donal]

There were 4 articles of impeachment submitted against Clinton

2 counts of perjury
1 count obstruction of justice
1 count abuse of power

1 count of perjury and the obstruction article passed the House.

All the charges were for actions committed while Clinton held office, so I would stay away from the Stormy Daniels stuff (for so many reasons)

ETA: I don't mean that as a reason for getting back at Republicans, but rather to work from established precedent.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I think the list should include all ten incidents of obstruction of justice that Mueller documented (just to rub it in, if nothing else); the emoluments; the hush-money campaign finance violations and any possible tax fraud that might be uncovered; and this Ukrainian extortion mess. I might add misappropriating military budget to pay for his stupid wall, but that one makes him a hero to some people.

Folks who hate the troops. Or at least our troops worthless kids.

 

[JoeMorgue]

There were 4 articles of impeachment submitted against Clinton

2 counts of perjury
1 count obstruction of justice
1 count abuse of power

1 count of perjury and the obstruction article passed the House.

All the charges were for actions committed while Clinton held office, so I would stay away from the Stormy Daniels stuff (for so many reasons)

The nano-second anyone in an actual position of power or influences pulls the "But you impeached Clinton!" card, the impeachment turns into a political revenge scheme in the public's eyes.

 

[Donal]

The nano-second anyone in an actual position of power or influences pulls the "But you impeached Clinton!" card, the impeachment turns into a political revenge scheme in the public's eyes.

Ya, I phrased that poorly. I meant that as a historical reference for the sake of precedent, not as a way to make it tit-for-tat.

 

[WilliamSeger]

There were 4 articles of impeachment submitted against Clinton

2 counts of perjury
1 count obstruction of justice
1 count abuse of power

1 count of perjury and the obstruction article passed the House.

All the charges were for actions committed while Clinton held office, so I would stay away from the Stormy Daniels stuff (for so many reasons)

ETA: I don't mean that as a reason for getting back at Republicans, but rather to work from established precedent.

With the election as close as it was, Trump might well not have won without those hush-money payouts, and we wouldn't be dealing with this mess. That, and what it says about his character, are why I include it.

 

[dudalb]

Maybe we should see the evidence first?
I hate Trump as much as anybody, but am really concerned about impeachment backfiring and giving him a second term in the white house.

 

[applecorped]

lol, Pence 2020 (after the pardon)

 

[Belz...]

With the election as close as it was, Trump might well not have won without those hush-money payouts, and we wouldn't be dealing with this mess. That, and what it says about his character, are why I include it.

There're a lot of questions about whether Trump would've won if this or that hadn't happened. With the coverage the Russian fake news had, that's my main question about that.

 

[Segnosaur]

There were 4 articles of impeachment submitted against Clinton

2 counts of perjury
1 count obstruction of justice
1 count abuse of power

1 count of perjury and the obstruction article passed the House.

All the charges were for actions committed while Clinton held office

I think the difference between Trump and Clinton is that Trump seems to have major crimes that he was involved in before he took office (such as potential money laundering). Clinton may not have been perfect, but there wasn't much in the way of potential criminal activity prior to the presidency. (There was whitewater but as of yet there doesn't seem to be evidence that they themselves were involved.)

so I would stay away from the Stormy Daniels stuff (for so many reasons)

The Stormy daniels stuff could get messy from a P.R. point of view (with the whole sexual aspect outweighing Trump's criminal activity.) But what other reasons can you see for omitting them?

ETA: I don't mean that as a reason for getting back at Republicans, but rather to work from established precedent.

The problem is that whatever 'precedent' provided by the Clinton impeachment is rather ill fitting.

Clinton's impeachment was based almost completely on Republican's attempts to score political points. (The fact that Starr couldn't pin any whitewater stuff on him and had to go searching for stuff from Clinton's sexual history is evidence of this.)

On the other hand, there are real, serious, and numerous crimes that Trump has engaged in. Even without the politics, there are serious legal issues here.

 

[dudalb]

Maybe they can impeach him for the next four years.

Serioulay, I think the best approach for the Dems is to have inquiries, have hearings, get the info out there, but avoid actual Impeachment until after the elections. If Trump loses, they become unnecessary....they can give the info to the court system if statute law violatins are involved...if he is reelected, they have nothing left to use. But an impeachment followed by an acquittal would be disasterous for the Democrats.