Should The Republicans Impeach Hillary Clinton if she becomes President.....

YES. It's VERY corrupt when a serial liar and corrupt person like Hillary is not convicted, or even INDICTED. That's the definition. She's hidden from prosecution from our CURRENT corrupt administration. Haha her husband MET WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL before the FBI made a decision not to indict, even though they ADMITTED what happened. They "felt the need not to pursue".

You're defending corruption. She could shoot a puppy next to a little girl, on the white house lawn on CNN, and you'd say "Fake scandal. Not enough evidence".

 

Again I said if......it is possible for her to win. Do you deny that reality?

Albeit, with collusion. Its still a chance, Right?

 

It would be a 2nd Clinton Impeachment. Here is a Repub that has given up on Trump and what he says.



The Second Clinton Impeachment.....


Because the Republicans have decided to nominate a misinformed, unqualified, and unstable candidate it is now virtually guaranteed that Hillary Clinton will be our next president. Our efforts now are not to be directed toward getting Trump in office based on some pipe dream that he will somehow save the Supreme Court. Our efforts need to be focused on keeping a Republican House and Senate. The reason is simple: We have a case for impeaching Hillary Clinton beginning in January of 2017.

Clinton is guilty of more serious crimes than those of her husband prior to his impeachment. Next year she will have been placed in office by accepting a series of bribes – some of which have been funneled through her private “charitable” foundation and illegally used to fund her campaign for the presidency. If that is not an impeachable offense then no offense is impeachable.

Things have only gotten worse since Hillary became the Secretary of State. The Clinton Foundation has been collecting money from foreign-owned businesses without getting approval from the Obama administration. The foundation has also failed to disclose millions of dollars of gifts (bribes) from foreign entities seeking Hillary’s help to approve of transactions with serious national security implications.

Speaking of serious national security implications, it is interesting to observe the change in policy toward India since Bill left office in 2001. India had never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and was hit with sanctions for refusing to do so. India attempted to have those sanctions lifted by having Indian entities with a direct financial interest in lifting the sanctions pay Bill Clinton large speaking fees. Indians who could legally do so also made donations to Hillary’s senate and presidential campaigns. Additionally, millions were poured directly into the Clinton Foundation. After the bribes were deposited, Bill and Hillary went to work lifting the sanctions that Bill had imposed as president.

The activities of the Clinton Foundation deserve heightened scrutiny because foreign governments cannot contribute to American political campaigns. But they can donate to a “charity” like the foundation. They are also allowed to pay exorbitant fees for speeches. Americans of all political persuasions should be troubled by the fact that corporations benefiting from State Department actions while Hillary was Secretary of State have funded Clinton speeches. Notably, affiliates of companies funding Clinton speeches have been the direct recipients of tens of millions of taxpayer dollars. Predictably, the Clintons never disclosed any of the obvious conflicts of interests.

Nonetheless, in 2012 Hillary stated that fighting corruption is an “integral part of national security” adding that “our credibility depends on practicing what we preach.” She even said that bribery is “morally wrong – and far too common.”.....snip~

http://townhall.com/columnists/mikeadams/2016/08/11/the-second-clinton-impeachment-n2203812

 

I'm not defending anything or anyone.

I have posted the legal requirements for impeachment. First, she has to be elected, before the question of impeachment even comes up. Next, she would have to be charged and convicted of treason, bribery, or high crimes and misdemeanors. Then, the procedure for impeachment could be started… and not before. Impeachment is a big deal and it hasn't ever removed a sitting President from office. Andrew Jackson and Bill Clinton were both impeached by the House and both were overturned by the Senate. Nixon resigned before he was impeached. Claiming she is a serial liar and corrupt just doesn't rise to the level of evidence, and she hasn't been charged with anything. Shoot, she hasn't even been elected yet, and you're ready to impeach her, despite swearing to protect and defend the Constitution…. you know, the document that describes in detail what it takes to impeach the President.

 

Haha of course there's evidence. It's so overwhelming the administration that tried SO HARD to keep her away from any investigation, had to buckle. She was investigated by the liberal-run FBI. They ADMITTED her illegalities, without factual reason stated that they didn't "feel the need". You're a blind sheep.

 

Nothing is wrong with me.

What is wrong with you? Do you know how our government works? Or is supposed to work?

 

No one in the IC or the Pentagon or IT security tech experts are looking a Republicans and believing they gave up breaches of National Security. We have the FBI saying she and her people were extremely careless with classified material. They also said she and her people sent Classified materials over an unclassed system. So no Right wing Conspiracy crap and not now with Hillary saying her campaign was hacked by the Russians.

People make mistakes you say.....Hillary's judgment made to many and her mistakes have increased the risk of harm to personnel and the Country. That is unacceptable.

That's correct as damn near 70% of the country think it is headed in the wrong direction under Demo governing and their failed policies. So save the LW lunacy.

 

We don't need a conviction with a State Dept OIG saying she violated Federal Law. That's with Protocols and procedures. That was his finding.....He decided. It was his job.

Moreover think Nixon and how that went down.

 

Why wait till she is elected. IMPEACH THE CANDIDATE. IMPEACH HER DOG. Throw the entire Dem party into Fema CAmps. You guys say what goes, RIGHT?

 

The GOP Establishment is more eager to surrender than the French at the opening of WWII. That is why Trump is the nominee, not Jeb!

Hillary is the a neocon warmonger, destroys everything she touches, lies, cheats and is awash in corrupt sunni cash. The warmonger's love her, because she is "game on"! She is also recently showing an inability to stand up. As the most cheated on woman in America, she may be in the advanced states of STD deterioration.

In fact she is displaying symptoms from several:

Neurosyphilis: can cause paranoia, mood swings, emotional troubles, personality changes, weakened muscles, and eventual dementia. It leads to trouble balancing, loss of coordination, incontinence, altered gait, and vision problems. Of course, who will forget her screaming at the Congressional Committed "What does it matter" with those big freaky glasses that looked like coke bottles.

Oropharyngeal cancer is also on the list based on the hole in Mrs. Clinton's tongue (google it) and her well documented coughing fits.

In short, she is a hot mess.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/08/crooked_hillary_or_unhealthy_hillary.html

 

The country thinking that we are heading in the wrong direction does not equate to people thinking that Trump will lead it in the right direction.

 

Um, I'm not aware of very many predictions about general-election turnout this year. Google isn't, either. All I can find are some prediction market bets, and some polls on voter enthusiasm (never mind that voter enthusiasm doesn't reliably predict turnout).

So can you provide sourcing for your claim?

- - - Updated - - -

Translation: "I KNOW Hillary is guilty despite the lack of evidence or convictions, and I want her impeached based on my feelings."

How emo of you.

 

Name calling? lol

I get the anger and resentment, but it doesn't change the fact that she hasn't been charged with a crime. much less convicted of one. I'd welcome you to check my posting history to see that I didn't defend her, but simply posted that if the prosecutor had sufficient evidence to charge her, she should be charged, but I doubt you'd go back and read my posting history. I don't look at this situation with partisan rosy-colored glasses. I look at the law. I felt she wasn't going to be charged for two main reasons- 1. They couldn't prove intent and 2. A high profile case like this one would make or break a prosecutor. It would take slam-dunk evidence and all the ducks would have to be in a row for anyone to risk their career on it, and that just wasn't there. For prosecutors, it's not what they believe, or even what they know… it's what they can prove… beyond a reasonable doubt and with a preponderance of evidence. Comey could have punched his political ticket to anywhere he wanted to go, if he could have proven a case against Clinton. However, he didn't even recommend prosecution, just as none of the Benghazi committees found wrongdoing.

I'm not even trying to convince you that there wasn't corruption. I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm simply saying that according to the law, she can't be impeached. She isn't even elected yet, and if and when she is elected, she hasn't been convicted of anything, so impeachment is impossible.

At this point in time, I think most peoples' minds are made up on which candidate they will support, and most people are voting against a candidate than voting for one. That's the situation I find myself in.

 

The premise is if she won.....should the Repubs impeach her. Just an FYI there.

Still went down for the Record that the House Impeached. Did it not?

 

Still repeating this stupid talking point, I see.

Since the "direction of country" question was first asked in the early 1970s, the poll has almost always showed a majority thinking we're heading in the wrong direction. It has little to no bearing on reality or election results.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/11/07/we-ve-been-on-the-wrong-track-since-1972.html

 

Sheep offends you to the point that you label it 'name calling'? Sheep is a term that describes someone who ignores the reality, and follows the media or norm. You're a blind Hillary follower. You ignore corruption, lies, and all. I don't care about impeachment because it will never happen. There is too much power for the left. The right, with their horrible leadership in Congress, could not fester the proceeding to lead the impeachment. She will go on and be President (and a good one, to the complete morons) for probably 8 years. We'll get into awesome wars, the middle class will buckle, and she can continue to make millions of dollars, oust Presidents and leaders from other nations, and Russia will thank the American people every second after Hillary is elected.

 

All efforts to remove elected Presidents from office so far have been misguided. They undermine our political stability. The Banana Republics are not a good model to follow. It is far better to wait for the next election cycle.

 

I get the premise.

The House did vote to impeach Jackson and Clinton. The Senate overturned and neither were removed from office. For practical purposes, the impeachment meant nothing, since both remained in office. Is it a smear on their record? Sure it is. Were they vindicated somewhat by the overturning? Yes, I think so.

What good does it do to impeach a President if you don't remove them from office? Spanking their hand would be as effective.

 

I'm not ignoring reality. You are. The law is plain and that's what I am pointing out to you. The legal requirements to impeach are not present, no matter how mad you are she hasn't been charged.

What you are failing to see is that it doesn't matter what you think, what prosecutors think, what judges think… what matters is what they can prove.

I'm not a Democrat, much less a blind Hillary follower. If you want to label me, put me in the #neverTrump camp.

You seem emotionally invested in this topic. Are you going to be OK?

 

Completely off base.

1) There are no grounds to impeach her.
2) If impeached by the House, a 2/3 vote of the Senate is required to convict. The Republicans are unlikely to have even a majority in the Senate.
3) As suicidal as some Republicans are, most of them know better than to impeach a president without grounds. That would be the final nail in the coffin of the Republican Party.

 

Err... it IS name calling.

See?

 

YES! The Republicans SHOULD shoot themselves in the foot again......they are doing so well now !

They should AGAIN ignore the needs of Americans to promote their obstructionist policies....it'll earn them more votes

 

There is no sense in replying to someone who writes a rambling post completely devoid of logic. I would just put the poster in ignore.

 

So let's encourage them to do just that

Spend millions of taxpayer's dollars on a "going nowhere " effort while ignoring what Americans need and want .....

 

How many pundits have said they think it will be low voter turn out again? Its their predictions Right? Both sides so there can be no crying and whining about it.

Awwww but it is okay for all those of the leftness to get so emo touchy feely over all other issues but now they think they can talk about tissues. Trump says....Give me a break. I say Give it a break.