RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
The Trump Presidency
- Thread starter joepistole
- Start date
- Status
I think he has a point there. Given how slow US politicians have been to act while all of their own top intelligence and security agencies are ringing the alarm bells, and given how much members of the Republican party have been willing to overlook Trump's transgressions when they feel his views are shared by their constituents or when he offers them assistance with their own agendas in exchange for their support, impeachment within the next year does seem like an unlikely or even impossible prospect. The US senate is stacked with Republicans and two thirds of the total representatives need to support an article of impeachment for it to go through, so how is this ever going to be more than symbolic? Even if treason is proven, most Republican senators will say that elections are right around the corner and that proceedings should be stayed in order to avoid "undermining" the US presidency or skewing the electoral atmosphere. If a majority of Americans despise Trump at this point, they'll almost certainly have to wait for the next election in order to have anything done about him, because the Republican party is completely blind and deaf to their grievances.
National treason in coordination with a power-hungry nation of nuclear-armed fascists with bruised egos looking to maim and kill Americans and their friends at every opportunity? Really no big deal. On the other hand if Trump were to admit to being gay or something like that, or a tape of him kissing another man made it onto the news, he'd be out of office in two weeks.
Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
Hey lets give grand jury testimony to someone who's father was part of a mob.
Then maybe we can force imprissoned rival gang members to get along by giving them time together in the yard.
Then maybe we can force imprissoned rival gang members to get along by giving them time together in the yard.
War is peace
Freedom is slavery, yada yada yada
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
Schmelzer
Valued Senior Member
And therefore I have used that word "suspicion" too. Learn to read. Fortunately, I'm not a lawyer and don't live in three felonies a day land where one can never know if that is forbidden or not. So I can afford the risk of not repeating "suspicion" twenty times. Those with an ability to read will be able to understand what I talk about.
And, just to clarify, I'm not talking about some false accusation, given that there is no official accusation at all (it is, in particular, not clear what Biden has sold to Burisma, and given that my point is that the suspicion will never go away, because there simply is no way to prove that the money paid to his son were not a bribe. (Beyond the purely theoretical possibility that Burisma explains in a plausible way why they thought Hunter was worth to be hired in that position given his own credentials.)
BTW, the "if you throw enough mud" is part of my point: The decision to start impeachment based on this has the natural consequence that this suspicion will be discussed all the time of the impeachment procedure too. This suggests that among the motives of this impeachment is the interest of the Dem competitors of Biden to get rid of him.
My bet is any way that the big economic crisis starts before the elections, and that means Trump will not have a chance to win. Whoever wins, will be from the Dem globalist swamp, so it does not really matter. Biden, given that he is known to be corrupt, would be probably even the least evil. Russia has no problem to hire Hunter Biden for a Gasprom job if this prevents a world war.
Comrade, you just agreed that there's no proof of Joe Biden being corrupt or otherwise doing anything wrong, even given his son's possible attempt to profit from the name. It would be nice if one day you eventually decide to quit your infantile KGB propaganda tricks and stop trying to subtly insert suggestive accusations- we're not babushka-clad peasants here who accept that 1+1=3 if you repeat it often enough.
Gawdzilla Sama
Valued Senior Member
I thought you were Spartacus?
Schmelzer
Valued Senior Member
Yes, there is nothing sufficient to imprison him. But I also wrote that the suspicion of corruption will remain, and there is nothing they can do against this. What does the phrase "known to be corrupt" mean? It means exactly this situation. The person in question is not imprisoned (else, one would say "imprisoned for corruption" instead). On the other hand, everyone who knows the facts which are known to the public thinks he is corrupt. (Of course, some propagandists have to claim to think otherwise, but nobody cares.)
Totally daft conflation...
Trump is suspected and confirmed as being corrupt. His relationship with Netanyahu is very suspect as well especially recent real estate dealings in the West Bank.
Putin is suspected of corruption, you just have to look at his bank balance...
Leveraging on public focus is all you are talking about.
But if you wish to compare degrees of actual and suspected corruption by all means do so...
In other words you are just as much a member of the propaganda teams that you complain about.
The Dems need to quit making those kinds of calculations - they are cowardly, irresponsible, and feckless, and that's how Dems lose.
Meanwhile: The House impeaches - the Senate tries the case. Having the Senate try various impeached members of Trump's administration during the coming campaign season would be far from symbolic only, eh?
And the impeachment inquiry is not only a moral and ethical and professional duty of the House, but a valuable means of making public what Trump has been doing. That's not just symbolic - it's a weapon.
The bulk of the American people have no idea what Trump has been doing. An impeachment inquiry can bring it into the open. That would force Republican politicians to deal with it in public, during a campaign season.
There is.
The reason Mueller did not indict Trump is that Trump is a sitting President - otherwise, he could be posting bail and facing trial right now, for what was in the Mueller report.
And that's just the Mueller report. Trump has been documented guilty - from his own Twitter feed and TV utterances, from his own lawyer's admissions in sworn testimony and documentation - of far more than Mueller addressed.
Schmelzer
Valued Senior Member
AFAIK, Putin's bank balance is not open source. I have heard about these Western propaganda fantasies, with billions of dollars owned by Putin somewhere in Western bank accounts, sorry, but they are simply laughable. If Trump is corrupt or not I have not researched, I think it is quite probable. I don't want to compare degrees of corruption. I simply explain why it is quite stupid to start impeachment procedures against Trump based on this issue.
Is it really that difficult to understand my point? 1.) The impeachment procedure has the consequence that the suspicion against Biden will be discussed all the time. 2.) Trump will present himself as the fighter against corrupt politicians like Biden, and the Dems as all the same corrupt swamp which tries to impeach him because of this. My argument is simple, obvious, straightforward, and already supported by the actual propaganda of Trump. It does not even take sides, because it is about the stupidity of the Dems, not them being more evil than Trump or so. (As far as it is stupidity of the Dems, instead of an attempt of Biden's competitors to get rid of him using (1).)
Perhaps you don't understand that the impeachment is not really a political act. It is a legal one. ( Again I wish to be corrected if needed)
It is about the national interests beyond politics even though Trump is seeking to politicize it.
If the Dems do nothing and Trump is allowed to continue to perform illegal acts he is undermining the very foundations of the nation. The rule of law has to be a top priority and has little to do with politics. ( not like in Russia I might add which is almost all about politics)
It is irrelevant whether Biden and his son are guilty or not. It is a law enforcement issue and is with in the jurisdiction of law enforcement and not the POTUS.
The Dems have to consider the consequences of doing nothing to be even more damaging than any blow back or the political and legal future of one silly man.
The fear is that Trump is simply unhinged and acting quite irrationally and that the next 12 months are going to lead to utter disaster if no action is taken.
The risk of blow back is incidental to the very real potential of what Trump's behavior is creating and threatening.
Again, I repeat, it is not really about politics, not about Repubs or Dems or partisan issues it is about national security and welfare.
Trump is just a man, nothing more. Remove him and elect another, move on - end of story...
Last edited:
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
And let the abuses stand for other presidents to cite as precedence when breaking the law?
The overriding argument is to punish unlawful behavior, not to replace the person with another and leave the crime unaddressed.
Schmelzer
Valued Senior Member
Whatever, it does not change my argument.
In this particular case, this is nonsense. A criminal investigation by the Ukrainians against Biden would have left the foundations of the nation quite unimpressed.
Rule of law in three felonies a day land? Sorry.
Like i wrote.. it is a law enforcement issue.
But not if the Ukraine judiciary were interfered with. Pressured politically by some one in a foreign country. For a political end.
Last edited:
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Not necessarily.
The law states "high crimes and misdemeanors".
Crimes are punishable in accordance with Law. Misdemeanors are punishable by removal through Impeachment and be used as examples of Proper demeanors expected from a United States President.
Often the two go hand-in-hand, as is the case under current consideration.
But would you agree that impeachment should not be a political act??
- Status