Impeachment does NOT require a crime

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by HereWeGoAgain, Jan 20, 2020.

  1. stone6

    stone6 Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2019
    Messages:
    4,232
    Likes Received:
    1,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    OK...it must have been someone else that claimed the "plenary powers." Apologies for mistakenly thinking it was you. You'd have to be specific on what you feel they've done that violates the Constitution and law. The House role has been described as the equivalent of a Grand Jury investigation and indictment, with the Senate's role as the trial jury, but with the acknowledgement that the comparison is not exact, because it is not a "criminal prosecution," but a political action.
     
  2. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    24,314
    Likes Received:
    6,808
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    How is Sanders socialist? How is AOC socialist? Please be specific and please look up the word "specific" before you answer that. thank you
     
  3. stone6

    stone6 Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2019
    Messages:
    4,232
    Likes Received:
    1,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You need to google and read the Impoundment Control Act of 1974. He doesn't have the authority to "withhold" - temporary or not - Congressionally appropriated funding other than through his veto power. He signed off on the funding. That meant if he wished to withhold a specific funding appropriation or all of it, he had to officially inform Congress of such BEFORE withholding. Read the law.
     
    clennan likes this.
  4. drluggit

    drluggit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    12,865
    Likes Received:
    9,639
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You're kidding, right? Do you really suppose that when the man admits to his being a socialist, runs on it even, that he's befuddled himself because he might not actually conform to the notion of socialism that you subscribe to?
     
  5. RodB

    RodB Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    10,909
    Likes Received:
    4,664
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    True, but congresses' causes are much more limited. They cannot subpoena the president. They cannot subpoena anyone unless it is related to legislative duties. Et al.
     
  6. RodB

    RodB Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    10,909
    Likes Received:
    4,664
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well it is only an opinion as is yours. But Schiff for instance has shown he can make a case out of nothing but desire at the drop of a hat. Many Dems have already said they want these WH witnesses because they would be under oath and unable to lie for Trump without serious reprisals. So DOJ referrals are already firmly in the playbook.

    Sorry you dumbed down our so far decent intercourse by trotting out the old and trite fairyland accusation of Trump.
     
  7. Nemesis

    Nemesis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    7,364
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wrong again. He's made no such admission. Please look it up so that you can verify for yourself that you're incorrect.
     
  8. Lee Atwater

    Lee Atwater Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2017
    Messages:
    20,767
    Likes Received:
    9,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The courts have long reaffirmed Congress’s constitutional authority to issue and enforce subpoenas. As the Congressional Research Service explained in 2017:

    Congress has three formal methods by which it can combat non-compliance with a duly issued subpoena. Each of these methods invokes the authority of a separate branch of government. First, the long dormant inherent contempt power permits Congress to rely on its own constitutional authority to detain and imprison a contemnor until the individual complies with congressional demands. Second, the criminal contempt statute permits Congress to certify a contempt citation to the executive branch for the criminal prosecution of the contemnor. Finally, Congress may rely on the judicial branch to enforce a congressional subpoena. Under this procedure, Congress may seek a civil judgment from a federal court declaring that the individual in question is legally obligated to comply with the congressional subpoena.
    .................................................................................................................................
    The congressional Watergate Select Committee issued a subpoena for Nixon's tapes that was upheld by the SC 8-0.
     
  9. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    33,888
    Likes Received:
    10,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    https://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/14-things-bernie-sanders-has-said-about-socialism-120265

    8. In the book he wrote with Huck Gutman, Outsider in the House, published in 1997: “Bill Clinton is a moderate Democrat. I’m a democratic socialist.”

    9. In an interview with the Guardian in November 2006: “Twenty years ago, when people here thought about socialism they were thinking about the Soviet Union, about Albania. Now they think about Scandinavia. In Vermont people understand I’m talking about democratic socialism.”

    10. In an interview with The Washington Post in November 2006. “I wouldn’t deny it. Not for one second. I’m a democratic socialist. … In Norway, parents get a paid year to care for infants. Finland and Sweden have national health care, free college, affordable housing and a higher standard of living. … . Why shouldn’t that appeal to our disappearing middle class?”
     
  10. RodB

    RodB Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    10,909
    Likes Received:
    4,664
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I have used the term plenary powers but in the context that some posters here were claiming the House essentially had plenary powers with impeachment, that I refuted.

    The House investigation violated the Constitution by not affording due process. I am aware of the rebuttal that the Constitution mentions only due process in criminal proceedings but that does not mean due process is only for criminal processes (though Amendment 14 speaks of due process outside of the criminal context.) SCOTUS has ruled that congressional witnesses have to be afforded due process and the House Manual (their Rules) say just as much, though the House can change its rules -- which IIRC they did when establishing the two committees officially investigating impeachment.

    I don't mean to be picky but it is a substantive difference: impeachment is not a political action; it is a political process.
     
  11. clennan

    clennan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    523
    Likes Received:
    268
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Sanders has made a mistake calling himself a "democratic socialist" - not just literally, but because "socialist" is such a taboo word in the US.

    He's actually a "social democrat" - a well-known term in Europe etc. but not so much here.

    Social democrats want robust social programs (healthcare, education, etc.) in political democracies with capitalist economies.

    Democratic socialists want robust social programs in political democracies with public/government owned and controlled economies.
     
  12. RodB

    RodB Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    10,909
    Likes Received:
    4,664
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Who said congress cannot issue constitutional subpoenas? I did not.

    If you reply to my post, please reply to my actual post. I said that congress has to afford witnesses due process per the Constitution and SCOTUS.
     
  13. stone6

    stone6 Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2019
    Messages:
    4,232
    Likes Received:
    1,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You've conveniently ignored the fact that he broke the law. Why?
     
  14. stone6

    stone6 Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2019
    Messages:
    4,232
    Likes Received:
    1,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why do you think the target of a Grand Jury investigation must appear when summoned absent his attorney? Is this a violation of their due process rights?
     
  15. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    24,314
    Likes Received:
    6,808
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    He's a Social Democrat not a Socialist and there IS a rather substantial difference.

    This explains it much better than my poor capabilities
    https://www.theatlantic.com/interna...3/bernie-sanders-democratic-socialism/471630/

    Are you even remotely capable of actually answering a direct question directly?
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2020
  16. drluggit

    drluggit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    12,865
    Likes Received:
    9,639
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The river you seek is call "the Nile"....
     
  17. drluggit

    drluggit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    12,865
    Likes Received:
    9,639
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL... The deflections... He's not "really" a socialist, we understand that he's actually a communist, and just doesn't want to have to publicly admit it, so we get the "democratic socialist' BS instead. Not buying the obvious deflections anymore. The guy is what he himself claims to be.
     
  18. EyesWideOpen

    EyesWideOpen Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2013
    Messages:
    3,197
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Blah, blah, blah, and every president, including Saint Barack, placed temporary holds on aid in the past.

    Their is no House impeachment article specifically for holding up the aid, so no one but you and the talking heads on TV are trying to make holding up the funds as an impeachable act. If it were impeachable, Nancy would have listed all the aid, from every single country affected by the July 27 letter.

    So all these crimes you all accuse Trump of having committed, don't you think the dems would have impeached Trump for those crimes, and not impeach on these ignorant opinion based non-crimes instead???????????
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2020
  19. EyesWideOpen

    EyesWideOpen Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2013
    Messages:
    3,197
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    Trophy Points:
    113


    Bernie Sanders "I am a socialist."
     
  20. Lee Atwater

    Lee Atwater Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2017
    Messages:
    20,767
    Likes Received:
    9,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You folks keep repeating the nonsense about a lack of a case as though repetition makes something true. It doesn't.

    1. Trump empowered Giuliani to employ the help of various members of the US diplomatic contingent to Ukraine, and some who were not part of that contingent, to put pressure on Ukraine to announce an investigation in to Joe Biden. A campaign that began in the spring of 2019. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50492438
    2. Leverage was used, at Trump's direction, as a means to get Ukraine to acquiesce to Trump's requests in the form of the withholding of military aid authorized by Congress.
    "Clear direction from POTUS to continue hold."
    https://www.justsecurity.org/67863/...ts-reveal-extent-of-pentagons-legal-concerns/
    3. Resulting from the WB complaint, a summary of the transcript of the Zelensky call was released revealing Trump speaking to Zelensky about the investigations he wanted Ukraine to announce. A transcript WH officials tried to hide from other members of the government and the public by placing it in a code level secret server typically used for keeping national security matters secret. https://apnews.com/817c0c285bc9485d88608635e0fef3e3
    4. Trump and Sondland were overheard discussing the efforts to get Ukraine to announce an investigation in to Biden.
    https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/21/imp...ow-he-overheard-trump-call-with-sondland.html
    5. Officials in the admin and the Pentagon expressed concern the hold was illegal.
    https://publicintegrity.org/nationa...rried-ukraine-aid-halt-violated-spending-law/
    A GAO analysis of the laws pertaining to the hold found it was, in their opinion, illegal.
    6. Ukrainian officials asked about the aid on the day Trump called Zelensky when he said, "I need you to do us a favor though," prior to asking Ukraine to investigate Biden (and the server).
    https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/20/ukr...ump-zelenskiy-call-impeachment-testimony.html
    7. Part time, acting Chief-of-Staff Mick Mulvaney publicly acknowledged the quid pro quo.
    https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/17/poli...d-pro-quo-donald-trump-ukraine-aid/index.html
    So did EU ambassador Sondland.
    Sondland acknowledges Ukraine quid pro quo, implicates Trump, Pence, Pompeo and others
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...741e3c-0b92-11ea-8397-a955cd542d00_story.html

    The House managers presented much more solidly confirmed evidence from multiple corroborating sources...........none of which has been refuted by Team Orange Turd.
    8. US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch was relieved of her post by Trump as a result of a smear campaign launched against her by Giuliani because she posed on obstacle to carrying out the scheme to extort Ukraine. https://www.politico.com/news/2019/11/15/trump-yovanovitch-impeachment-070988
    Lev Parnas recently stated her removal was directed as a payoff to get a Ukrainian official to produce dirt on Biden. https://slate.com/news-and-politics...risma-biden-dirt-fire-ukraine-ambassador.html
    9. All of the 17 witnesses who testified during the House inquiry corroborate 1-8.
    10. If any of the witnesses or documentary evidence Trump has blocked as part of his obstruction of the investigation can offer a refutation of the evidence above it is his prerogative to present it.
    11. The solicitation of help in a US election from a foreign person or government is illegal.
    https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...s-illegality-of-soliciting-campaign-help-from
     
    stone6 likes this.
  21. stone6

    stone6 Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2019
    Messages:
    4,232
    Likes Received:
    1,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It's part of the charges on abuse of power and obstruction of Congress and referenced on page 83 of the House Judiciary Report on impeachment.
     
  22. EyesWideOpen

    EyesWideOpen Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2013
    Messages:
    3,197
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's like the witch skit in Monty Pythons "Search for the Holy Grail," where a man claims the witch turned into a newt, and after a long pause he mutters "Well.... I got better." So Bernie defiantly and proudly declares " I am a socialist." but now he presumably "got better???"
     
    drluggit likes this.
  23. EyesWideOpen

    EyesWideOpen Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2013
    Messages:
    3,197
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Would those be the Nov 22, 2017 impeachment articles? It's so hard to keep track, since they have been floating impeachment for over two and a half years now.

    LOL, no it's not. Here are the nine pages, not 83+ Articles of impeachment against President Trump

    Article one was "Using the powers of his high office, President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election."

    You think that Schiff and Pelosi are so stupid they did not think to create a separate article against Trump for for placing a temporary hold on foreign aid?
     
  24. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    33,888
    Likes Received:
    10,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes. And they prove it almost every day.
     
    RodB likes this.
  25. RodB

    RodB Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    10,909
    Likes Received:
    4,664
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Trump has not broken any law, at least beyond the level of a speeding ticket. All of the house witnesses were asked if they had solid knowledge or evidence of Trump acting illegally. All said no. They all testified only to their opinion and to their disagreement with Trump. Only one of the House witnesses had a direct one-on-one conversation with Trump to clarify any quid pro quo. Trump's answer was clear and succinct that there is no quid pro quo, and that he wanted nothing from Zelensky other than for him to do the right thing, which, before any Ah Ha moment, meant to rid the country of its rampant corruption which was Zelensky's sole platform and why he, an outsider and former comedian, got elected.
     

Share This Page