The Impeachment Thread

#40,152
#40,152
#40,153
#40,153
BowlBrother85 said:
It's funny how quick the right is to admit their guys are douche bags, once they turn against their dear leader. Where were the attacks on John Bolton's character while he was still serving as National Security Adviser? (cue the sound of crickets chirping in a forest)
Click to expand...
The attacks were coming from the left then.
 
#40,159
#40,159
37L1 said:
When has Impeachment ever removed a President? If that option doesn't work, what do you have left? A coup? He's not going to resign.
Click to expand...
It worked with Nixon.


Just wanted to elevate the blood pressure of a couple of posters.
But it actually did work. Nixon only resigned because he knew he would be impeached and removed.

When impeachment doesn't work, there aren't many options. There is the 25th, which was discussed by people in Trump's own inner circle. Resignation is probably the best out, and the one Trump should take.
Beyond those, it pretty much resides with the next election.
If Trump, god forbid, were to be re-elected; and if he did something insanely stupid, dangerous, and debatably illegal within the first couple of weeks (which would assuredly be the case), what then?
Every scenario boils down to a critical mass of the American public demanding the correct action. I had misplaced confidence that it would have happened already. It seems as if Trump knew his magic number was 36%. Lock in a zombified 36%, and you have the golden ticket.
 
#40,161
#40,161
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol and 1972 Grad
#40,163
#40,163
After almost 12 hours of questioning and answers, my observations are that the house managers have avoided every single one of them. It is crazy to set there and listen to them babble these answers, that has all been lies anyways. They can’t tell you what the question even is through an answer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#40,164
#40,164
It will be interesting to see what Roberts does if the vote for witnesses comes in 50-50. Will he break the tie or abstain?
 
#40,166
#40,166
luthervol said:
Who hasn't talked about how to remove Trump? I doubt there is a person in DC who hasn't been in on multiple discussions concerning ways of getting rid of Trump, and not many outside of DC.

Even the Trumpers have those discussions.
Click to expand...

So you’re cool with setting someone up? Framing them using false statements?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#40,168
#40,168
Orange defense said:
After almost 12 hours of questioning and answers, my observations are that the house managers have avoided every single one of them. It is crazy to set there and listen to them babble these answers, that has all been lies anyways. They can’t tell you what the question even is through an answer.
Click to expand...

I thought the answer to any question to the house managers is "we need more witnesses.... relevant witnesses not the irrelevant smear witnesses the WH wants to call"... or "I am very protective of my staff and nobody knows nothin' 'bout the whistleblower!"
 
#40,169
#40,169
volfanhill said:
It will be interesting to see what Roberts does if the vote for witnesses comes in 50-50. Will he break the tie or abstain?
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t think so , since his vote either way would impact the trial . A 50/50 vote wouldn’t be a tie as I understand it , it would be a failed motion .
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#40,170
#40,170
0nelilreb said:
I wouldn’t think so , since his vote either way would impact the trial . A 50/50 vote wouldn’t be a tie as I understand it , it would be a failed motion .
Click to expand...
It depends. During Andrew Johnson’s trial the Justice broke 2 ties and abstained in one. In Clinton’s the Justice abstained. So there is precedent for the Justice to vote.
 
#40,171
#40,171
hog88 said:
Yes, it well within his discretion. But with a simple majority vote his discretion can be taken away and should be in this matter.

This isn't an IC matter so the WB should not be protected under the IC WB rules.
Click to expand...


That would look really cheap, Imo. I doubt you can get a lot of votes to out the web. Would seem vindictive. Why do it if the GOP is guaranteeing a Trump win?
 
#40,172
#40,172
volfanhill said:
It depends. During Andrew Johnson’s trial the Justice broke 2 ties and abstained in one. In Clinton’s the Justice abstained. So there is precedent for the Justice to vote.
Click to expand...

Interesting , if I were the presiding judge , I would want to stay out of it as much as possible . If either side had the votes then the motion passes , if not then it fails as a 50/50 split .
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and hog88
#40,175
#40,175
volfanhill said:
I would stay away from it too if I were a judge
Click to expand...

They probably wouldn’t like me . I’d address them after my introduction and tell them all to save their time and energy on swaying a vote from me . I am just here to keep you pack of wild hyenas from eating the Senate reporters and pages.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, DynaLo, hog88 and 1 other person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top