Let's ask a fundamental question...

Lol demands answer, gets answerer, doesn't like answer and demands different answer.

 

Depends... remove him for what reason?

What the hell are you talking about. Republicans don't need to give Democrats anything. They just need to do their job: defend the Constitution!

That's a partisan unpatriotic question you just asked.

 

You didn't. But I don't expect you to. So... don't bother.

 

I did, it just either isn't the answer you want or your question wasn't precise.

But go ahead and pretend that any answer you get that you don't like is not really an answer

 

Yet the repub controlled senate would not remove Clinton for perjury. Lest you forgot it. The dems would remove trump if they had the senate .

Looks like the repubs are more responsible than the dems with superior judgment given removing a president is serious and should never happen especially when driven by politics .

 

When the Republicans revealed their blind loyalty to a person like Trump...plus all their silly antics & tantrums, whatever 'superior judgment' that may or may not have been present flew right out the window.

But you have to compare Clinton's violations to Trump's. There a vast crevasse between the two. I wouldn't have removed Clinton for sexually motivated violations since it didn't adversely impact national security or his duties of office, nor was there any intention of enriching himself at the expense of taxpayers. He had an affair in the White House & lied about it to cover it up. Not what I would call an impeachable offense.

Nevertheless...times have really changed. There's very little reasoning or sense of responsibility anymore. It's just theatrics & political drama now. Someone like Trump wouldn't have gotten away with 1% of what's he's done during Clinton's time.

 

I am having a similar problem. Trump's fans have difficulty dealing with Trump's impeachment because they know their hero is guilty, and they would rather not deal with the issue. They certainly don't want to deal with the evidence against Trump. There are exceptions, of course, and those fans simply pretend there is no evidence of impeachable offenses.

That is a strange position in view of the facts. Trump admitted twice that he invited foreign interference in our Presidential election. Trump's chief of staff admitted to the bribery charges or quid pro quo. The GAO said "the White House’s Office of Management and Budget violated the Impoundment Control Act when it withheld nearly $400 million this summer for “a policy reason."

 

Yes, and voters will remember that on November 3. Already 30 Republicans have quit Congress. They want nothing to do with Trump. Here's why. He's guilty.

Trump incriminated himself and there is an abundance of direct evidence. This is a quote directly from the July 25 phone call, and it comes soon after Trump said, “I would like you to do us a favor, though.” The statement comes right after Zelensky expressed interest in buying Javelin missiles. This is what Trump said.

Good because I· heard you had a prosecutor who· was very good and he was shut down and that's really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor bf New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General.· :Rudy very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States,· the woman., was bad news and the people she was dealing with in.the Ukraine.were bad news so I jtist want to_let you know that. The other thing, there's a lot of.talk about Biden's son,. that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you ·can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me.

During the impeachment inquiry, Trump's chief of staff admitted to quid pro quo.

“What you’re describing is a quid pro quo,” asserted the reporter. “We do that all the time,” replied Mulvaney. “Did he also mention to me the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely. No question about it. But that’s it. That’s why we held up the money … I have news for everybody: Get over it. There’s going to be political influence in foreign policy.” http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/10/mulvaney-ukraine-get-over-it.html

After the July 25 phone call with Zelensky, as he usually does, Trump doubled down by asking again for foreign intervention in our elections. On Oct. 3, in a news conference on the White House lawn, he called on Ukraine and China to look into his chief rival's affairs, Joe Biden.

“If they were honest about it, they would start a major investigation into the Bidens,” Trump said when asked what he wanted Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to do about the former veep and his son.

“They should investigate the Bidens,” Trump said. “Likewise, China should start an investigation into the Bidens, because what happened in China is just about as bad as what happened with Ukraine.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/03/trump-calls-for-ukraine-china-to-investigate-the-bidens.html

 

Retirements from congress always goes in cycles. As of 3 Jan 2020 you had 26 Republicans along with 9 Democrats.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/congress-retirements/

In 2018 you had 34 Republicans and 18 Democrats
2016 it was 20 Republicans and 8 Democrats
2014 25 Republicans and 16 Democrats
2012 23 Republicans and 20 Democrats

It does seem in recent years you have more Republicans leaving the House voluntarily than Democrats. But after the 2010 election you have to remember from that point through 2018 the Republicans held on average 240-245 seats to the democrats 190-195 seats give or take, so one would expect more retirements from the Republicans.

Even with the retirements, when I look at the at risk seats, those seats that are competitive and could change parties, the Democrats have 35 seats at risk vs. the Republicans 17. Which is to be expected since the democrats now have the most seats. Back in 2018 the Republicans had 62 at risk seats vs only 8 for the democrats. The results in 2018 was a net pick up of 40 seats by the Democrats. Even with the 26 retirements leaving those seats open, only 6 of those 26 fall into the at risk of switching category. Of the 9 Open Democratic seats, 3 fall into the at risk category.

What all that means in plain English is the Republicans would pickup between 5-10 seats in the house if the election were held today. Those numbers are dynamic and change all the time. One thing you should remember, of the 40 seats the Democratic picked up in 2018, 31 came from district won by Trump in 2016. How those 31 vote to impeach Trump plays out remains to be seen. But you can bet that the GOP candidate running against those freshman Democrats will make their impeachment vote a huge campaign issue.

 

Lying. I had no sexual relations with that woman.

 

I can remember when the Democrats won one state, and so the D party was finished. Then Bill Clinton won twice and declared that the era of big government was over. Then Dubya thumped the Dems twice. Then Obama thumped the Republicans twice.

Vegas has Trump winning reelection. As does even Michael Moore. But neither party is finished and likely won't be for another hundred years. Cycles are normal. Yet professional talking heads who should know better sound the death knell of whichever party just won an election. I guess they have to draw dramatic contrasts to get people to watch and sell more insurance and pharmaceuticals.

 

I wouldn't have removed him either, but the problem was perjury, not sex.

It's a disingenuous trick to pretend that it was all about an extramarital blow job. "Republicans are all uptight about sex." It wasn't. And the backdrop even to the Lewinsky investigation was, I think, a lawsuit by a different woman alleging non consensual groping or worse. Can't remember her name; there were so many that it's easy to lose track.

 

This is the thing.... every day more and more evidence comes out. And this drip drip drip is not going to stop when the Republican Senate rubber-stamps Trump's "not guilty" verdict. They will have to answer to everything in the campaign. Not just for what has come out, but for what hasn't...

 

If you think that lying is a valid motive for removing a President, I know of one who I'm sure you want out on the street tomorrow!

But I don't think that lying is sufficient motive to remove a President. Lying is not "High Crimes and Misdemeanors". A President should be removed for abuse of power for personal benefit. As I said, for abusing his position to obtain sex from an intern, for example.

 

Like I said, his violations were sexually motivated...including lying about it. It was all about sex & trying to cover it up. Clinton would've been fine with just admitting to having the affair with Lewinski, because (1) it was consensual, and (2) he was quite a popular President. The groping/sexual assault charge against Clinton by Paula Jones, however, I would deem impeachable (if it were determined to be truthful)...although that incident allegedly occurred when Clinton was governor of Arkansas. Still, sexual assault on an unwilling party is not the kind of conduct I would tolerate from any official of high standing with influence/power.

Bill Clinton has been publicly accused of sexual misconduct by four women: Juanita Broaddrick accused Clinton of raping her in 1978; Leslie Millwee accused Clinton of sexually assaulting her in 1980; Paula Jones accused Clinton of exposing himself to her in 1991 as well as sexually harassing her; and Kathleen Willey accused Clinton of groping her without her consent in 1993.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_sexual_misconduct_allegations

You think Trump, in Clinton's time, would've gotten off so easy even on his sexual assault allegations alone? 25 women have thus far accused him of sexual assault.
https://www.businessinsider.com/women-accused-trump-sexual-misconduct-list-2017-12#jessica-leeds-1

And speaking of perjury, perhaps you can appreciate why Trump (or his lawyers) will absolutely never agree to testify. He would lie the moment he opened his mouth.

 

Really? No political or legal motivation at all? Interesting perspective.

 

Of course he lied because he wanted to remain in office & avoid impeachment, but my point is that his violations were centered around a sexual affair. There was no political or legal motivation involved when he chose to have a sexual affair.

This is the kind of guy who never could keep his pants zipped up.

 

Lying was enough to bring charges on Gen. Flynn, why wasn't Hillary charged?

 

Enable to respond to the matter at hand........another Trumper engages in whataboutisms. Sad.

 

I just find it odd that the Left always over look the crimes committed on their side.

 

Flynn was not charged with lying. He was charged with "willfully and knowingly making false, fictitious and fraudulent statements to the FBI"