This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Unless Trump is impeached, our country is doomed.

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 2 of 3]

PkrBum wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
PkrBum wrote:Demagoguery

Do you approve of his claim that Obama had him wiretapped?  Yes or NO?

I'd be surprised if trump and or his campaign team weren't wiretaped. It'd also be no surprise that Obama would deny it. Those would be the standard operating procedures of his administration. Whether it's true or not is unknown. That's why you don't see me making countless threads... it's a waste of time. Those other questions put me in a false position to defend trump when all I'm doing is pointing out your double standards and hypocrisy. If you'd done a tenth of this "due diligence" when Obama was president then you'd have a foot to stand on. But you didn't... so demanding it now is just wishing upon a star... especially considering the historic rejection of your ideology and your establishment ruling elite during the Obama terms.  In other words... you're rendered insignificant... at best you're an annoying squeaky wheel.

I don't remember anyone in the Obama administration who was determined to destroy the U.S. government -- the stated purpose of the Pussy Grabber's hugest advisor Bannon. Don't remember anyone threatening to shut off food to elderly low income people. Don't remember anyone in the Obama reign advocating taxing the lower and middle classes while lowering taxes on the ultra rich.

I can handle being called a squeaky wheel who annoys you. Can you handle just being an irrelevant, boring and silly whiner?

View user profile
LoriQ wrote:
ppaca wrote:Are you fresh blood or a sock? If you're new Welcome.

I am new. Just joined this morning.

Halelujah! Somebody new and not afraid to show her picture! Welcome Lori!

View user profile
Viking, you realize, I'm sure, that this may or may not be her picture....

View user profile
LoriQ are you from the Pensacola area. Just wondering, you don't have to answer. I'm from the NY area.

View user profile
RealLindaL wrote:Viking, you realize, I'm sure, that this may or may not be her picture....

Now that you mention it I didn't think it may not be her picture. I keep forgetting what forum I'm on and who these people are.

View user profile
Vikingwoman wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:Viking, you realize, I'm sure, that this may or may not be her picture....

Now that you mention it I didn't think it may not be her picture. I keep forgetting what forum I'm on and who these people are.

LOL on forgetting what forum you're on.  Laughing   As for "who these people are," am not entirely sure what you mean, especially as to a possible new member such as LoriQ, but then I'm a little slow sometimes.  Smile

View user profile
Liberals who want to punish Trump voters need to get in line behind President Trump and the GOP.

View user profile
RealLindaL wrote:Viking, you realize, I'm sure, that this may or may not be her picture....

Whether you believe it or not it is my picture.

View user profile
Telstar wrote:LoriQ are you from the Pensacola area. Just wondering, you don't have to answer. I'm from the NY area.

I live in the Pittsburgh, PA area but originally from Long Island, NY

View user profile
Nobody here is sticking up for the Pussy Grabber ... some forum!

View user profile
LoriQ wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:Viking, you realize, I'm sure, that this may or may not be her picture....

Whether you believe it or not it is my picture.

I didn't say whether or not I believe it, Lori. I was only reminding another member that people post ALL KINDS of pics as their avatar. There is no guarantee either way that any particular photo represents the writer. This has always been true, and was not meant to personally offend you.

View user profile

View user profile
Voters have the power. Public opinion matters. Demonstrations helped end the Viet Nam War, advance civil rights and women's suffrage. The bottom line I took from this article as it explains the various options for ousting 45 from power is that Congress has to be pushed by citizens.

Who’s saying Trump should be impeached?
About 46% of Americans who responded to a Public Policy Polling survey last month, for starters. Public opinion matters because for impeachment to happen, Congress must act, and elected officials sometimes hang their principles on opinion polls.

It’s notable that Nixon, a Republican, faced impeachment in a Congress controlled by Democrats, and Clinton was impeached by a Republican-controlled Congress. For Trump to be impeached, members of his own party would have to turn on him.

That’s why Republican base approval of Trump is so important. If Republican voters do not abandon the president, Republican members of Congress are not likely to.

On the other hand, the Republican Congress might conceivably be enticed into action by the prospect of dumping Trump in exchange for someone they are far more comfortable with: Pence, himself a former congressman and a much more predictable traditional conservative.

At least three congressional Democrats have called for impeachment proceedings of some kind. Representative Mark Pocan of Wisconsin said on the House floor in February that if Trump did not divest business holdings and take other actions, then “we’ll have to take other actions, including legislative directives, resolutions of disapproval and even explore the power of impeachment”.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/22/donald-trump-president-impeached-liberals-history-process?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+USA+-+Collections+2017&utm_term=218505&subid=21779537&CMP=GT_US_collection

View user profile
Telstar wrote:

BRAVO! Very Happy

View user profile
othershoe1030 wrote:[color=#0033cc] impeachment

Y'all keep using that word... but I'm not sure that you know what it means or how it's issued.

View user profile
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States

Impeachment in the United States is an enumerated power of the legislature that allows formal charges to be brought against a civil officer of government for crimes alleged to have been committed. Most impeachments have concerned alleged crimes committed while in office, though there have been a few cases in which Congress has impeached and convicted officials partly for prior crimes.[1] The actual trial on such charges, and subsequent removal of an official upon conviction, is separate from the act of impeachment itself. Impeachment proceedings have been initiated against several presidents of the United States. Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton are the only two presidents to have been successfully impeached by the House of Representatives, and both were later acquitted by the Senate. The impeachment process against Richard Nixon was technically unsuccessful, as Nixon resigned his office before the vote of the full House for impeachment, but successful in the broader sense of leading to Nixon's departure. To date, no U.S. President has been removed from office by impeachment and conviction.
Impeachment is analogous to indictment in regular court proceedings; trial by the other house is analogous to the trial before judge and jury in regular courts. Typically, the lower house of the legislature impeaches the official and the upper house conducts the trial.
At the federal level, Article II of the United States Constitution states in Section 4 that "The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors." The House of Representatives has the sole power of impeaching, while the United States Senate has the sole power to try all impeachments. The removal of impeached officials is automatic upon conviction in the Senate. In Nixon v. United States (1993), the Supreme Court determined that the federal judiciary cannot review such proceedings.
Impeachment can also occur at the state level: state legislatures can impeach state officials, including governors, in accordance with their respective state constitutions.
At the Philadelphia Convention, Benjamin Franklin noted that, historically, the removal of "obnoxious" chief executives had been accomplished by assassination. Franklin suggested that a proceduralized mechanism for removal—impeachment—would be preferable.[2]

Impeachment of a U.S. President[edit]
To bring articles of impeachment against a president requires a majority vote in the House of Representatives. When the case is tried by the Senate, a vote of at least 2/3 of those present is required to convict and remove the president from office.[6]
The law of presidential powers and duties is ill-defined. Justice Robert H. Jackson wrote in 1952 that there is "a poverty of really useful and unambiguous authority applicable to concrete problems of executive power as they actually present themselves."[7] Two U.S. Presidents have been impeached by the House of Representatives—Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1998—both later acquitted at trials held by the Senate. While articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon were passed by the House Judiciary Committee in 1974,[8] Nixon resigned the Presidency before the impeachment resolutions could be considered by the full House.[9]
When an impeachment process involves a U.S. President, the Chief Justice of the United States is required to preside during the Senate trial.[10] In all other trials, the Vice President would preside in his capacity as President of the Senate. Although it has been suggested that a literal reading of the Constitution would designate the Vice President to preside over his or her own impeachment trial,[11] the logic of this scenario has been used as an argument against such textualism.[12]
Federal officials impeached[edit]
# Date of Impeachment Accused Office Accusation(s) Result[Note 1] References
1 July 7, 1797
William-blount-wb-cooper.jpg
William Blount
United States Senator (Tennessee) Conspiring to assist Britain in capturing Spanish territory Senate refused to accept impeachment of a Senator by the House of Representatives, instead expelling him from the Senate on their own authority[13][Note 2] [14]
2 March 2, 1803
John Pickering
Judge (District of New Hampshire) Drunkenness and unlawful rulings Removed on March 12, 1804[13][15] [14][15]
3 March 12, 1804
Samuel Chase.jpg
Samuel Chase
Associate Justice (Supreme Court of the United States) Political bias and arbitrary rulings, promoting a partisan political agenda on the bench [16] Acquitted on March 1, 1805 [13][15]
4 April 24, 1830
JamesHPeck.jpg
James H. Peck
Judge (District of Missouri) Abuse of power[17] Acquitted on January 31, 1831[13][15] [14][15]
5 May 6, 1862
West Hughes Humphreys.jpg
West Hughes Humphreys
Judge (Eastern, Middle, and Western Districts of Tennessee) Supporting the Confederacy Removed and disqualified on June 26, 1862[14][13][15] [14][15]
6 February 24, 1868
President Andrew Johnson.jpg
Andrew Johnson
President of the United States Violating the Tenure of Office Act Acquitted on May 26, 1868[13] [14]
7 February 28, 1873
Mark W. Delahay.jpg
Mark W. Delahay
Judge (District of Kansas) Drunkenness Resigned on December 12, 1873[15][18] [15][18]
8 March 2, 1876
WWBelknap.jpg
William W. Belknap
United States Secretary of War Graft/corruption Acquitted after his resignation on August 1, 1876.[13] [14]
9 December 13, 1904
Charles Swayne
Judge (Northern District of Florida) Failure to live in his district, abuse of power[19] Acquitted on February 27, 1905[13][15] [14][15]
10 July 11, 1912
Robert W. Archbald cph.3a03594.jpg
Robert Wodrow Archbald
Associate Justice (United States Commerce Court)
Judge (Third Circuit Court of Appeals) Improper acceptance of gifts from litigants and attorneys Removed and disqualified on January 13, 1913[14][13][15] [14][15]
11 April 1, 1926
George W. English cph.3a03600.jpg
George W. English
Judge (Eastern District of Illinois) Abuse of power Resigned on November 4, 1926,[14][13] proceedings dismissed on December 13, 1926[14][15] [14][15]
12 February 24, 1933
Harold Louderback
Judge (Northern District of California) Corruption Acquitted on May 24, 1933[13][15] [14][15]
13 March 2, 1936
Halsted L. Ritter
Judge (Southern District of Florida) Champerty/corruption, tax evasion, practicing law while a judge Removed on April 17, 1936[13][15] [14][15]
14 July 22, 1986
Harry claiborne.jpg
Harry E. Claiborne
Judge (District of Nevada) Tax evasion Removed on October 9, 1986[13][15] [14][15]
15 August 3, 1988
Alcee Hastings Portrait c111-112th Congress.jpg
Alcee Hastings
Judge (Southern District of Florida) Accepting a bribe, and committing perjury during the resulting investigation Removed on October 20, 1989[13][15] [14][15]
16 May 10, 1989
Walternixon.jpg
Walter Nixon
Chief Judge (Southern District of Mississippi) Perjury Removed on November 3, 1989[13][15][Note 3] [14][15]
17 December 19, 1998
Bill Clinton.jpg
Bill Clinton
President of the United States Perjury and obstruction of justice Acquitted on February 12, 1999[13] [14]
18 June 19, 2009
KentSamuel.jpg
Samuel B. Kent
Judge (Southern District of Texas) Sexual assault, and obstruction of justice during the resulting investigation Resigned on June 30, 2009,[15][20] proceedings dismissed on July 22, 2009[13][15][21] [15][22]
19 March 11, 2010
PorteousThomasG.jpg
Thomas Porteous
Judge (Eastern District of Louisiana) Making false financial disclosures Removed and disqualified on December 8, 2010[13][15][23] [15][24]
Demands for impeachment[edit]
See also: Impeachment investigations of United States federal officials
While the actual impeachment of a federal public official is a rare event, demands for impeachment, especially of presidents, are common,[25][26] going back to the administration of George Washington in the mid-1790s. In fact, most of the 63 resolutions mentioned above were in response to presidential actions.
While almost all of them were for the most part frivolous and were buried as soon as they were introduced, several did have their intended effect. Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon[27] and Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas both resigned in response to the threat of impeachment hearings, and, most famously, President Richard Nixon resigned from office after the House Judiciary Committee had already reported articles of impeachment to the floor.

View user profile
"To bring articles of impeachment against a president requires a majority vote in the House of Representatives. When the case is tried by the Senate, a vote of at least 2/3 of those present is required to convict and remove the president from office."

Realistically... short of factual and REAL treason... what are the odds of that happening?

I know the dnc is really pushing these busywork talkingpoints... but you don't have to fall for every one.

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:I know the dnc is really pushing these busywork talkingpoints... but you don't have to fall for every one.

Go stick your know-it-all crap right where it belongs.

If we all should've learned ONE THING from this past election, it's that ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.

View user profile
RealLindaL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:I know the dnc is really pushing these busywork talkingpoints... but you don't have to fall for every one.

Go stick your know-it-all crap right where it belongs.

If we all should've learned ONE THING from this past election, it's that ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.

Not when your party has been voted into irrelevance.

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:I know the dnc is really pushing these busywork talkingpoints... but you don't have to fall for every one.

Go stick your know-it-all crap right where it belongs.

If we all should've learned ONE THING from this past election, it's that ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.

Not when your party has been voted into irrelevance.

If Trump's approval continues to tank, ... and it will ... you'll be surprised just how fast many Republicans will suddenly grow something resembling a spine.

Who do you think will spill the beans first, Paul Manafort or Roger Stone?

View user profile
RealLindaL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:I know the dnc is really pushing these busywork talkingpoints... but you don't have to fall for every one.

Go stick your know-it-all crap right where it belongs.

If we all should've learned ONE THING from this past election, it's that ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.


Good God Linda....was PkrBum wrong?

View user profile

You haven't seen irrelevance, but you will.



View user profile
Joanimaroni wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:I know the dnc is really pushing these busywork talkingpoints... but you don't have to fall for every one.

Go stick your know-it-all crap right where it belongs.

If we all should've learned ONE THING from this past election, it's that ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.


Good God Linda....was PkrBum wrong?

Good god Joani...pay attention!  I ONLY quoted Pkr's last sentence,  because it was a gratuitous insult to knothead, who'd simply provided an educational post.  FYI, I don't disagree with Pkr that impeachment is unlikely (at least so far - stay tuned), but I also know that acting so cock sure it won't happen is just as big a fool's errand as all the advance gloating over Hillary's probably election turned out to be for so many liberals/progressives on this forum.  (I warned them against that, too, as you may recall, and got dumped on for it.)  
I said anything can happen and I meant it then, and I mean it now.

View user profile
The thought that President Trump and his staff colluded with Russian agents to hurt Clinton and help Trump, is no longer speculation.

Sen. Adam Schiff this afternoon announced that he HAD SEEN evidence of collusion that was not circumstantial.

In other words -- Trump and staff did act in concert with Russia's attempt to defeat Clinton and sow chaos in our democracy.

So, as I asked in another thread, "do the President's appointed agency heads remain in office when he's impeached?

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:"To bring articles of impeachment against a president requires a majority vote in the House of Representatives. When the case is tried by the Senate, a vote of at least 2/3 of those present is required to convict and remove the president from office."

Realistically... short of factual and REAL treason... what are the odds of that happening?

I know the dnc is really pushing these busywork talkingpoints... but you don't have to fall for every one.

Consider, if you will, that Trump and staff did collude with Russian agents to help Trump win the election, and real evidence makes that recognition unshakeable. And even so, the republican party continues to support Trump. How long do you think that government would be able to survive?

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 3]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum