McConnell vows to acquit Trump, even though the evidence has not even been presented.

what happends in America has a nasty habbit of affecting everybody arround it, often not in a good way, so there is good reason for us to stay informed and bash fat american asses if they do retarded or stuppid things,

you got a tendency to not listen anyway though so we bash a bit harder and americans ignore us anyway

 

What is missing from your post is the bottom line: Trump's crimes. Sure there's polarization. Of course Democrats want Trump impeached.

No mention of why, or if there is any value to upholding the Constitution, or if a President should be allowed to supersede Congress, the Judicial Power and the Constitution. If you don't address this, your post is biased.

You just assume that everybody is acting on a purely partisan basis. Democrats have no desire whatsoever to see a religious zealot like Mike Pence in the Presidency. Or of giving the opportunity to Republicans to nominate a candidate that would be more "palatable" to the Republican establishment. You do not address this at all. Why?

If you do you will understand that Trump's impeachment is not a political move that benefits Democrats. Quite the contrary. The large majority of Democrats want to impeach Trump because we want to live in a country of laws. And we are not willing to normalize this criminal behavior at the top.

You seem to be trying to project an image of neutrality. But be aware that being unbiased doesn't mean you attack both sides equally. It means that you look at all the facts, and take a position based on only those facts.

You say you would be for impeachment if it resulted in ending polarization. But you don't say that you would also be in favor if it meant maintaining the rule of law. The purpose of impeachment is not the former. It's the latter. Of course there will be many negative consequences to the country. But isn't upholding the Constitution worth the risk? That's the question you need to answer.

 

I think this impeachment is much like Bill Clinton's. Rule of law, that's exactly what the Republicans were spouting back in late 98 early 99. I might buy what you say if the Democrats didn't set out to destroy Trump the day after the election. As for Pence, CNN on Sunday had a guest on that basically stated impeachment of Pence is next.

I have no doubt if Hillary won, the GOP would be up in impeachment arms just like the Democrats are now with Trump. I also have no doubt that whoever wins the presidency in 2020 will be the subject of impeachment from which ever party loses. This is the political era we're in.

Would I be upset if Trump is impeached and removed. Not in the slightest. But that wouldn't improve anything as the democrats then go after Pence. I don't know how this obnoxious, uncouth, egotistical, thin skin oaf of a president got elected in the first place. I guess I do, the Democrats went with a candidate disliked and unwanted by America as a whole as Trump was, but she was disliked even more than Trump by independents who decided the election. We have who we have as president due to the choices, actions and decisions made by both parties back in 2016. For that I will never forgive either party.

 

I don't understand why you make this comment at all. So what if Republicans were "spouting" that in the 90s? You jump to a different matter and don't even make a point. Were they right? Were they wrong? Were they right but we're wrong now? Please make a point.

"Buy"? I don't want you to "buy" anything. I just want you to make a point. Democrats set out to destroy Trump waaaaay before the elections. No point here either.

Then we'll have President Nikki Haley (I bet). Not the Democrats' favorite opponent in 2020. My point was, if you remember, that impeachment is not a move that would benefit Democrats politically. Only thing impeachment benefits is the rule of law. Which is good enough for me.

So what? Will they have as much even a fraction of the evidence of wrong-doing as there is against Trump? If they do, I'll be the first one to jump into the impeachment wagon.

And, if they did, would they have a case? Sorry but I was unable to find a single solid point.

But here is what I don't like about this type of "salomonic" posts: the effort to project an image of "neutrality" is not going to help anybody. Discussing facts. Going were those facts actually lead... that would be very useful.

Assuming that everybody is a partisan hack... not so much.

 

They even had to get somebody to be a whistle blower if one even exists.

 

Another lie. If your post were true, Trump would already be impeached. If your post were true, Pelosi would have agreed to impeachment long before she did. If your post were true, the House wouldn't be continuing to deal with an obstructionist President while trying to gather evidence to enlighten the truth. Democrats may have wanted to impeach Trump early on, but they've always conformed with the law, & still do.

 

If evidence didn't matter to either side, why would Democrats go to such lengths to accrue enough evidence to ascertain the truth? It's hard, exhausting & expensive work, especially when dealing with an obstructionist White House.

 

Because they still have to worry about being re-elected. IE: Political.

 

Boy, the OP sure set himself for that response.

 

I don't share your low opinion of our Democratic representatives, though I would admit to seeing some such behaviors shown by Republican ones.

 

No offense but that there is a silly question. The democrats vowed to impeach Trump the day after he was elected.

 

Yes, I'm sure you don't, and I'm sure you do. Funny how your side is innocent but the side you oppose are not. Take the blinders off man. Both sides do it. If they really cared about the issues that much then they'd spend more time on actual issues and less time pandering.

 

Wow... you gave them a whole day? Generous of you.

 

Not all Democrats. A few perhaps. But all of them knew impeachment is a very difficult thing to accomplish, & doesn't happen often. They are now deeply involved in that process, & sure enough, it still isn't easy, even with a truckload of evidence that Trump deserves it. You make it sound like a conspiracy. It isn't. But the evidence for Trump's wrongdoing--using the office & power of the Presidency--for self promotion & enrichment--is not only morally & ethically wrong, but illegal as well. Now the question arises, whether the President is the only American we must regard as "above the law?" Regardless of party, I hope not.

 

I don't disagree with the general gist of your post, but I'm sensitive to the reality of the intense polarization of parties in Congress, where currently there are 250 bills passed by the House since 2018, that need action by the Senate, but are being held in cold storage on the desk of Mitch McConnell until Hell freezes over. It's unfortunate, but many of those bills had & have bipartisan support, but McConnell prides himself on being a one-man bottleneck for Parliamentary action, & America pays the price for his inaction. I'd very much like to see this change.

 

The Clinton impeachment began with Ken Starr present charges of 8 felonies to the HOUSE. The HOUSE voted to start an impeachment. They were right. The House impeached him. They were right. The Senate held a three day trial only calling three witnesses at the insistence of the Democrats and because no Democrats voted to remove him for the felonies for which he was impeached he was not removed. They were wrong.

Do you have a point?

 

I am confused how you can regard Clinton as guilty of behaviors that warrant impeachment & removal from office, yet still support our current misfit of the Oval Office, who is more destructive to America than any President in my lifetime or probably in American history. Can you explain that?

 

Sure: Who's Clinton?

 

"just give him some rope he will hang himself"

trump is his own worst enemy

he has forced the democrats to impeach him

and it just keep getting worse

thankfully the country is big enough to withstand a mentally ill president

and anybody that cannot see his insanity are basically cult members

 

Clinton was charged with multiple felonies in a federal court and a federal grand jury, perjury, subornation of perjury. obstruction of justice, how could you not support his impeachment but support impeaching and removing Trump when there is no criminal charge even after a two and a half year investigation?

 

So you don't have a point............gotcha

 

No whistleblower to cross examine........no conviction. At least someone still believes in the Constitution. The 6th amendment guarantees the right of face to face cross examination, without that it's just testimonial hearsay and should be ignored as a matter of course. This isn't Communist China.

 

Yet another one who doesn't know the difference between a whistleblower and a witness.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ksonville-jaguars-was-committed-today.562917/

 

This isn't a communist country or a 3rd world dictatorship. Someone can't just anonymously smear another person and slink off into the darkness. Well, maybe in your country that's OK, but not here. Say Hi to Nicolás Maduro for us.

 

I think you need to move beyond the Mueller report & look at what's happening now with the Syria decision & our State Dept professionals' testimony in the ongoing House investigations. Also, note the passage of the House bill yesterday that officially opposed Trump's Syria decision. It was voted for by over 120 Republicans. Trump has offended our friends in Europe, abandoned our comrades in arms against ISIS in Syria, & undercut the Constitution in his efforts to involve foreign forces in our elections. Trump is a national disaster who MUST be removed from the Oval Office, for the sake of national security.