To impeach, or not to impeach: there may be an alternative

Huh! Looked this up...

wild!

Republican and conservative support for Barack Obama in 2008
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_and_conservative_support_for_Barack_Obama_in_2008

 

I know you wouldn’t know it based on my posts but my father is a hardcore democrat who constantly nags me on politics.

 

Then off she goes to find a rabbit to boil?

 

More editing? Afraid to keep my post in context?

 

How come Mueller didn't conclude there were any high crimes, let alone misdemeanors? What did Bill Barr lie to Congress about? Why doesn't Congress refer him to the DOJ, or at least hold him in contempt as they did with Holder for his refusal and stonewalling?

 

It is nothing but a continuance of the desperation from the alt-lefties over their tragic election loss.

 

But Mueller didn't find any. Maybe you can point me to where he made the conclusion that was the case, and recommended as such to Congress....like Starr and other Specials before him...

 

Funny, but you'd think it be the other way around. So did you start out Dem and turn Repub?

What were the reasons?

 

I believe myself to be an independent. I’ve criticized trump when I think what he did was wrong. I criticized his use of National emergency to move funds, I think it sets a bad precedent imo. At the moment I honestly think the democrats deserve a lot of criticism than Trump imo

 

And what does your Dad think?

 

Dad thinks Trump is horrible and makes sure to link me John Oliver or Bill Maher stuff on a regular basis. On a personal level I can see where he’d say it. Morally speaking Trump leaves a ton to be desired he’s not GHWB or Jimmy Carter but I personally think most of The issues we face today is Democrats not acknowledging what the people want or acknowledging their shortcomings. This is all my personal opinion so feel free to disagree.

Dads opinion doesn’t make me like him less..... It’s real important to remember life’s about prospective. Two people can view the same thing and honestly see different things and that’s ok.

 

Sounds like you guys have a good relationship!

 

I like people who disagree with me ya know the ole iron sharpens iron saying

 

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State​

Oh.... I can assure you that, if Democrats grow a backbone and impeach, this little matter of Trump using his power to give his family security clearances, against the recommendations of security experts, will be front and foremost.

And that means that conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws is not a crime, or that the cell for it has better lighting?

Of course you don't! Ignorance syndrome on the right is a new malady discovered only after the Mueller Report came out.

 

Have you forgotten that the courts have never established that "making a profit" as an "emolument"? And note that President Trump would have ample precedent on his side Other U.S. presidents conducted personal business for a profit while in office. Including with nations hostile to the United States. Jefferson for one.

And insulting people who do not think President Trump should be impeached serves your cause in no way whatsoever.

 

In this case, the pervasiveness and perversity of the offenses trumps any political consideration. Because it would set an unrecoverable precedent.

Except the "check" you seem to be referring to is on the offender. I'm referring to the check on the judges.

 

I'm not sure. I'll let you know as soon as you actually make a point.

 

All your questions are answered here

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-an-alternative.554516/page-3#post-1070477366

 

All that says is you paraphrase Barr by saying “Barr: no collusion” .. we want specifics, quote the text in Barr’s summary you consider to be a lie and please include an explanation of why it is a lie.

 

I see your theory on what mueller said, but that’s not the report. Site the pages

 

Well, the courts have never seen the likes of Donald Trump.

BTW, what does what the courts never established have to do with impeachment?

Really? Which one of them doubled their club membership fees when they became President, and made themselves available as marketing tools just about every weekend at the people's expense?

 

I'm quoting his press conference. Verbatim.... Does where I quote it from make it less of a lie?

And I did include it. Mueller did not even investigate collusion. That's just one of them. Barr also said "No obstruction". And there are at least 8 very detailed instances of obstruction. Which he did not prosecute for the reasons explained on Page 2: DOJ policy (another Barr lie, BTW).

It's not what I "consider". Barr says the Mueller report says one thing. When Mueller report is released, we learn that it doesn't. Most often it says the contrary. What I "consider' has nothing to do with it. But what does have to do with it is that Fox and the right-wingnut media has apparently made very little effort to explain this to their audience. Because they're still living the lie. Read the report! Stop quoting Barr. He lied!

 

Page 180

 

He lied????? He was talking from a legal stance and you know it

OLC guidelines have been around since 1973...... not a lie

Barr made a summary with the principal conclusion from a legal standpoint there was no collusion or obstruction hence the lack of indictments.

What your doing is conflating legal jargon and political....