d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Senate Impeachment Trial 2020
Prev13536373839134Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Views: 13002Replies: 1337Track Topic
Member
Posts: 54,196
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
#361
Jan 27 2020 12:14am
Quote (Thor123422 @ 27 Jan 2020 06:54)
See, ive always been of the opinion that we should hold our leaders to high standards. If they do things that are clearly illegal and out of a motivation that is not defensible then get their ass out. Pence can take over, thats what vice presidents are for. Trump isnt worthy of the office and is the literal embodyment of the fears that drove the founders to create the electoral college in the first place.


How exactly is what Trump did illegal, lol?

He did release the aid in time to not break any laws, and it's clearly within his powers to give or refuse a WH visit to any foreign leader as he sees fit. The whole case of the Democrats hinges on the notion of corrupt intent... Note how the article of impeachment reads "abuse of power", not "exceeding his powers".

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jan 27 2020 12:14am
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
#362
Jan 27 2020 12:20am
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Jan 27 2020 12:14am)
How exactly is what Trump did illegal, lol?

He did release the aid in time to not break any laws, and it's clearly within his powers to give or refuse a WH visit to any foreign leader as he sees fit. The whole case of the Democrats hinges on the notion of corrupt intent... Note how the article of impeachment reads "abuse of power", not "exceeding his powers".


Getting caught and then not following through doesnt mean the act wasnt illegal dude. You dont get away with theft by giving the car back once youre caught. Ive heard this defense from a few people and its genuinely one of the dumbest talking points.
Member
Posts: 54,196
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
#363
Jan 27 2020 12:31am
Quote (Thor123422 @ 27 Jan 2020 07:20)
Getting caught and then not following through doesnt mean the act wasnt illegal dude. You dont get away with theft by giving the car back once youre caught. Ive heard this defense from a few people and its genuinely one of the dumbest talking points.


For this argument to hold, Democrats would have to prove that Trump had no intention of releasing the aid had Congress/the public not caught wind of it. Good luck with that. My other point still stands btw: if the Dems thought they could prove that Trump committed the more severe crime of exceeding his powers instead of merely abusing them, their articles of impeachment would say so.
Member
Posts: 49,897
Joined: Jun 19 2006
Gold: 3.88
#364
Jan 27 2020 02:28am
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Jan 27 2020 05:31pm)
For this argument to hold, Democrats would have to prove that Trump had no intention of releasing the aid had Congress/the public not caught wind of it. Good luck with that. My other point still stands btw: if the Dems thought they could prove that Trump committed the more severe crime of exceeding his powers instead of merely abusing them, their articles of impeachment would say so.


Trumps word isn't good enough?
Member
Posts: 66,666
Joined: May 17 2005
Gold: 17,384.69
#365
Jan 27 2020 03:22am
Quote (Black XistenZ @ 27 Jan 2020 07:14)
How exactly is what Trump did illegal, lol?

He did release the aid in time to not break any laws, and it's clearly within his powers to give or refuse a WH visit to any foreign leader as he sees fit.


Quote (Black XistenZ @ 27 Jan 2020 07:31)
Democrats would have to prove that Trump had no intention of releasing the aid



Bolton saying Trump gave the directives of a quid pro quo in front of him is decent evidence. Refusing to hear him is abnormal. Not to mention the phone call was perfect.

What if this happened in Germany ? Instant resign ?

This post was edited by Saucisson6000 on Jan 27 2020 03:38am
Member
Posts: 105,152
Joined: Apr 25 2006
Gold: 10,475.00
#366
Jan 27 2020 06:24am


Yep... I'm definitely gonna invest in pink pussy hats and liberal tears cups. :D
Member
Posts: 34,649
Joined: Jul 2 2007
Gold: 273.37
#367
Jan 27 2020 07:34am
Quote (thundercock @ Jan 26 2020 10:23pm)
Maybe not for the trial, but we definitely should chase the truth from an oversight perspective. If we don't want the next President to do something similar, we should pass legislation and/or give more power to the IGs and oversight committees.


If this were a fact finding mission instead of a partisan spectacle, maybe. Schiff was a poor choice for manager if that was the goal, he has been hiding information, promoting conspiracies, and lying since day one. It's hard for anyone to take this process seriously.

We don't want the executive branch any less powerful than it is. Congress is permanently dysfunctional, and Schumer, McConnell, and Pelosi all have worse favourables than Trump. The President has a more active role than ever in setting policy and executing change.
Member
Posts: 2,660
Joined: Mar 28 2010
Gold: 0.00
#368
Jan 27 2020 08:31am
It's almost like the house should have gone through the courts to gather additional evidence.
Member
Posts: 26,025
Joined: Jun 14 2006
Gold: 5,300.00
Warn: 10%
#369
Jan 27 2020 08:41am
Quote (theCrossbones @ Jan 26 2020 04:23pm)
I’m no been doing shit You keep saying stuff like “if I believe etc. it’s not me it’s the given process. And you’re lucky being a trump supporter they would of removed him. The impeachment articles are voted in at the end. I have no idea why you are still confused as to what happened. If the D played a bit of hardball oh well Moscow Mitch set that up with his Supreme Court denial with zero basis of law. The house at least didn’t make up shit on the fly as you accuse them of. If this outrages you so should the Garland appointment. But it doesn’t because your a party liner not a person looking for correct path

i shouldn't say "if you believe." you're correct. you said the statements loud and clear so no "if" was needed. i'll repeat the question a third time.

what if the impeachment inquiry hadn't started yet? how are they given powers and authority above other branches?

"since" you believe the "powers of impeachment" give the House the authority to disregard due process and write rules that go above law and order, the "impeachment inquiry" was not voted on until half-way through the investigation.

did the House have impeachment powers before voting on the impeachment inquiry? if such is the case, when do they gain powers of impeachment?

voting on impeachment inquiry is not voting on the articles. when is the House give powers of impeachment?
Member
Posts: 40,852
Joined: Sep 17 2011
Gold: 0.00
#370
Jan 27 2020 08:53am
Just kinda dumb at this point to keep disallowing witness testimony.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev13536373839134Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll

© 2003-2026 d2jsp  Contact