After watching the sham impeachment hearings run by lying Adam Schiff and bumbling Nancy Pelosi, something has to be done so that we do not have to be tortured by politicians using the solemn act of impeachment for their own political gain. You would think the definition of high crimes and misdemeanors would suffice, but traitors to our Democratic Republic will always find a loophole to hold these circus hearings. Yesterday and today's public hearings are only about disgruntled workers who did not like the new policy brought in by a new president. Give me a break. If you don't like the policy, run for office or leave. These life time state department or diplomatic people need to realize that their position is apolitical. In other words, they are not to take part in politics. Whatever the case, something has to be done to our Constitution so that these retards in Congess cannot do this again. What a waste of time and money.
Are you saying you want to change the Constitution just to protect Trump from the consequences of breaking laws and abusing power in the Oval Office?
Kind of sounds like it.
By the way, as someone who does a lot of volunteer work with developmentally disabled people, I can tell you that your use of the word "retards" is offensive in any context.
Would you take the same position if this were 1998 and Bill Clinton were facing impeached?
Or, Does your "rules change" apply only for Republicans in the hot seat?
Clinton's inpeachment had bipartisan support. This impeachment has none. Gingrich followed the constitution and allowed the Democrats to bring in their witnesses and gave the minority their rights. Schiff has done none of these things. It's a totally different situation today.
What is bipartisan into today's caustic political atmosphere? if this were 1998 in a less contentious time, Trump's impeachment might well have had the same bipartisan support. The politics of the Dems vs. the GOP are far more partisan today than just 20 years ago. So you compare apples with hand granades.
The proposal that you put forth seems more partisan rather than based on any substantial differences between the 2 men and their respective impeachment proceedings.
The reason is this: He did not commit an impeachable offense. That is why Schiff is running this three ring circus and limiting the damage to the Democratic Party by allowing only certain witnesses and even limiting speaking times to certain Republicans. Why? They know they have no case. It's a complete joke.
As for committing an impeachable offense, we will let the impeachment inquiry process reveal whether that is true or not. I am more than content to wait.
I agree, I still have faith if there are provable crimes the Senate will do their duty. I think the trial phase will be fair. After all, we will have Cheif Justice Roberts presiding. I do believe we needed this inquiry and the trial to ascertain if there were crimes that require the impeachment of the president.. To many unanswered questions at this point.
LOL And it may not have happened at all if some Democrats declined to toe the party line in a partisan show.
This impeachment has plenty of Republican support.
Republicans in Congress can't wait to get rid of him. They are staying quiet except when they throw a few bones to Trump fanatics.
In Clinton's impeachment, Ken Starr did the inquiry. As William Barr refused to be involved, this is the inquiry (aka the investigation). You are comparing Clinton's impeachment trial to Trump's impeachment inquiry. Trump will be able to call witnesses once this moves to the Senate, just like Clinton was able to do.
Wonder if the Republicans will shut down any witnesses the Dems want to call, and refuse to allow questions they don't like, as is being done now. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
I don't think it needs to be changed. The American public is not stupid. Let the House do what it will. Once it is done we will determine the motivation and the value of the outcome.
Actually, I doubt it. My prediction is an impeachment by the House and an exoneration by the Senate. And when that happens the comment will be "Well, of course they let him go: they're Republicans!", or "they're Trump lovers!".
The majority of Americans don't participate in online forums, from what I hear. So, the jabbering by the left here doesn't mean much to me.
But, look at Clinton. He was impeached by the house but it helped him. The public saw the process as an embarrassment to the Republicans. The Democrats will ultimately embarrass themselves even in front of many die hard mouth foaming leftists.
How did he break the law and abuse his power? Presidents are called to set foreign policy and what he shared in that phone call was completely legitimate in a court of law. There was nothing he said that rose to the level of an impeachable offense. Also, the whistleblower does not even fit the definition of a true whistle blower. Listening in on someone conducting foreign policy is not considered something to whistle about. He crossed a boundary. In regards to changing the constitution, I wish we didn't have to clarify something to such an extent that liars like Adam Schiff and others could twist it to their own ends. The only one abusing their power are the Democrats running this circus. That's the real abuse of power.
Sounds more like sour grapes to me. Trump abused his power for personal gain. He tried to bribe the Ukrainian president with taxpayer money. What is it you don't understand about this?
What personal gain? He doesn't collect a salary, is continually attacked, and could have just stayed out of politics and enjoyed his wealth. What personal gain? He did not bribe anyone? There is no substantial proof of this. Zelensky and others in Ukraine have repeatedly said they felt no pressure whatsoever? The question should be, "What don't you understand about this?"
I wish that he would have stayed out of politics and kept his gold plated autocratic assitude far from Pennsylvania Ave. Why do so many assume that Trump has nothing to gain because he is a billionaire? The greed of people like him means that there is no reason to settle for 10B, when you could acquire 20...... also, "personal gain" does not always translate into dollars and cents..
One way or the other, this matter is not going away for Trump or the GOP anytime soon. We will get to the truth, either Trump will be exonerated or we will have his head. Gotta stay tuned....
We will and we will be surprised at who gets sent to prison.
You're ignorant of what Trump and Rudy was trying to do in the Ukraine. Rick Perry gave a list of people--coincidentally his campaign donors among them--to Ukraine officials for lucrative contracts. Why do you suppose Ole Rick suddenly decided to resign his position when this first came out?
And what was Zelensky going to say when his countrymen depended on our aid to save many lives? DUH!
If what you are saying is true, then the Democrats would have brought that into the impeachment hearings. What you are saying is huge. They are grabbing for straws right now in their pursuit of something. Therefore, it is not true. It is a nothing burger with a side order of nothing.
How do you know this won't come up during the inquiry, Minnie? Why did Rick suddenly resign if he was so innocent of wrongdoing? Several Texans are involved in this scheme and so were Lev and Igor Trump's Buddies he's now saying he didn't know well even though there are plenty of pics with them.
Wake up, dude!
You need to wake up, dude! Trump's so-called crime does not rise up to an impeachable offense. However, they caught Biden on TV boasting about how he witheld 1.5 billion dollars from Ukraine until they fired a certain prosecutor looking into Burisma and their shady dealings. The Democrats are pursuing a sham impeachment at the expense of our country. There is such a double standard here. It's sickening.
Biden was backed by the European Union, Dude. He wasn't alone in wanting the corrupt prosecutor gone from the scene. You need to seek more info than what is supplied by Fox news. Biden wasn't running for office and had no dog in the fight. Try again with a more plausible excuse for your idol's actions.
Wow, the European Union! That gives Biden a lot of credibility. Those control freaks in Belgium or wherever they have gathered are the main hold up against Britain leaving the EU. They are fighting against the will of the people of England. However, his son worked for the company that this prosecutor was investigating. There is some personal gain here for his family. Being that Adam Schiff is a fair minded and just individual (Not!), he should give some time to this investigation, too. However, he won't. He is just the lap dog for the elite trying to oust a president that was legally elected by 60,000,000 people. Whatever the case, there is definitely a quid pro quo on live TV! I don't consider Trump an idol. I do believe he has kept his promises on many issues despite the Democrats strategy to resist at all costs from day one. He will go down as one of the better presidents that has ever held office. I know you won't agree with me on that, but I don't give a flying rip. I don't believe in politicians anymore, especially the jackass kind.
"He doesn't collect a salary."
He does get hundreds of millions of dollars a year from federal agencies and employees who are forced to visit his resorts.
Our own ambassdors said under testimony that he did insist on Biden investigations in exchange for aid.
That's bribery and abuse of power.
Like the Democrats in the impeachment hearings, you are also grabbing for straws. Quid Pro Quo? Bribery? Abuse of Power? The new one is intimidation? Next week may be a new one. Why is this happening? Why? They have nothing! They have absolutely nothing! Pelosi needs to get off this stupid impeachment bandwagon before its too late for the Democratic Party. This is already backfiring on them.
You are really going out on a limb, Minnie. Read 'em and weep over the next few weeks. It'll cleanse your soul...
Your answer has "absolutely nothing" to do with what I wrote.
Actually he is being accused of withholding money already appropriated by Congress for the Ukraine until they would promise to investigate Biden's son.
If this was the case President Donald Trump is very bad at it. The Ukraine got the money and did NOT start an investigation into the Bidens. So, where is the crime? Most rational people would realize there is nothing here.
We read the released transcript. The only thing the Democrats can do is say "You didn't read what you think you read. You need us to tell you what it said. Don't trust yourself to know what happened. It doesn't matter if you read the conversation transcript. We know better than you."
The impeachment is a hoax.
The real question is, "are any of these charges at the level where impeachment is necessary?" It would be like using a nuke for parking tickets.
Impeachment should be a last resort and not a tool to remove a president they know they can't beat or just don't like.
Does anyone not see the problem with demanding an investigation against a political opponent with military aid on the line? Do you think the investigation would be fair for the Bidens with this type of aid on the line? This is straight up anti-democratic behavior that could lead toward American citizens losing their freedom so that a sitting President can win an election.
Fair elections mean something don't they...otherwise, what's the point? Seems in line with Russian government values.
First, let me say this, I don't like Trump. I don't like his manners, ethics or ever-changing values.
I do think that this has very little to do with what he is accused of and I think you do as well seeing how you mentioned the Russians. It could be said that the Dems are using this hearing as a political tool to try and win an election.
As for anti-democratic behavior, the Democratic party isn't very democratic, just ask Bernie about 2016.
Lt. Col Vindman: On July 25th I listed in on the call. I was concerned by the call what I heard --It is improper for the president of the US to demand an investigation into a political opponent. When I reported my concerns, I did so out of a sense of duty. The character attacks on distinguished public servants are reprehensible. The members of our all volunteer force come together to protect the US Constitution. We don't serve any party.
Did Trump ever mention corruption on the April 21st call? Vindman: "Not to my recollection."
Vindman: "It was improper for the President to demand an investigation into a political opponent especially to a foreign power."--Demand.
If someone really thinks this is not impeachable, that's one thing ( I don't agree with) but to call it a hoax is just nonsense Trump worshiping.
Get the results I want with this Biden case, or don't get funds for your war with Russia. It seems pretty clear. Trump didn't get what he wanted because we have real patriots in our government who blew the whistle. Then, the State Department, on advice from attorney's went around Trump and released the funds before he was even able to.
This is related to Russia, as the Ukranians are fighting a war against Russia. So, if Russia keeps arising, that's due to Trump's own actions.
I do remember Bernie, and I'm not claiming the Dems are moral beacons. Of course it can be said that the Dems are using this as a political tool...they are politicians.
To me, the issue is that the evidence is very clear. The Dems simply had to hold impeachment hearings here, or our government is stating it cares absolutely nothing, or can do absolutely nothing, about corruption by a sitting President.
It's only related because the Dems want the connection.
Now if the Russians were also asking for an investigation then maybe. If Trump had blocked the funds to help the Russians in their ongoing fighting then Ok, but that's not what the charges are.
It seems like anyone not willing to fall in line with the Dem establishment is now a Russian bot or backed by the Ruskies, Just ask Tulsi (a person that could actually get votes in states where people like Bernie and Warren have no chance).
I still think the best way to end this is with a win in 2020 with someone worth voting for (as if that person would ever run).
I agree about the way to end this for everyone..with the election. However, I don't agree with the only reason this is related to Russia is because the Dems made it so. I also think the Dems have a responsibility to the Constitution to impeach.
The reason I brought up Russia is because I watched Lt. Vindman state that Ukraine is "at war" with Russia when he was speaking about the military aid. He obviously found Russia relevant to the discussion.
I would say that some of them see Russia in everything Trump does.
It's just how a political "trial" works. They start with one charge and use that as a platform to hunt for anything they can to justify their actions. Much like how the GOP went after Clinton.
In the end, none of this is going to matter. The GOP controlled Senate will not remove him from office, and Trump will run using the impeachment to rally his base.
Warren will be the Dem Candidate, and we will have four more years of impeachment hearings.
1. The GOP Senate will remove Trump from office if they hold a secret ballot, which they are legally allowed to do.
2. If the economy sinks into recession by the time the Senate votes, which now appears likely, the odds of finding him guilty go way up, even if the vote is not secret.
In either case, the Republicans will put forth a candidate who has a good chance of beating the Democrats.
by John 3 months ago
With something so serious, you would think that Pelosi and the rest of her conspirators would bring a level of respectability to their so-called impeachment inquiry by following a strict adherence to the Constitution and rules. No, they have chosen to use their majority to run a kangaroo court....
by Credence2 4 months ago
Background articlehttps://news.yahoo.com/trump-admits-ask … 51988.htmlYour thoughts?
by John 4 months ago
I don't know about you, but the wagon wheels on this impeachment iniative are starting to come off. The recent challenge by Trump for Pelosi to bring the impeachment inquiry to a house vote is a win-win move. If it comes to a vote and they decide not to impeach, then we go back to waiting for the...
by Ralph Schwartz 2 weeks ago
There have been deals floating around on "witness trades" - the Democrats want Bolton and the Republicans want Hunter Biden. The Democrats want Mulvaney and the Republicans want Eric Ciarmella. The list continues, but it's not necessary to list everyone.The bottom line is that...
by ga anderson 2 weeks ago
I am in a dilemma. I have been presented with an argument that I consider very knowledgeably founded and very well-sourced and researched.I am talking about Constitutional scholar Alan Dershowitz's Senate floor presentation that the Democrat's impeachment charges are Constitutionally invalid.I have...
by Readmikenow 11 months ago
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is setting a high bar for impeachment of President Donald Trump, saying he is “just not worth it” even as some on her left flank clamor to start proceedings. Pelosi said in an interview with The Washington Post that “I’m not for impeachment” of...
Copyright © 2020 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|