What's new
By:
Filters

The official "let's impeach Trump" thread

The Thriller said:
Yep


Yep. This is the logical conclusion of the GOP’s arguments today:

Click to expand...


Absolutely. The trend for quite awhile now is for Trump to continue to talk and act as if he were above and beyond the rule of law. Remember, when speaking of Article 2 of the Constitution, that he claimed "I can do whatever I want"? So, are the Republicans actually arguing that we can be an elective monarchy? And, not just any monarch, but one that wields absolute power while in office? Again, it can't happen here. Until, of course, it happens here.
 
I hope Sanders and Warren are paying attention. Once one of them becomes president, I hope they ban all guns, institute universal health care, Abolish the EC, team up with China to spy on the GOP, and ban toothless old people from voting because it’s all “in the national interest.”

Also, muh judges are important too, so we’ll have to send gorsuch and Kavanaugh to Madame Guillotine. Maybe throw thomas in there too for good measure. Cuz you know, National interest. Let’s send “The Squad” to the Supreme Court. Can justin Trudeau serve? Let’s throw him on there. National interest.

Serving 5 terms is in the national interest too.

And who needs the bill of rights? You don’t need freedoms. you don’t need trials or speech. You should be tortured. National interest baby!

Abolishing the congress and packing the Supreme Court can be construed as being in the national interest, right?

Could Elizabeth Warren hire some Iranian terrorists to kidnap her political rivals and pardon them when they get caught and get away with it over the claim of “national interest?”

can we place additional taxes on businesses that don’t support great leader? National interest.

how about intimidate voters? Shut down Fox News?

Hell, let’s go full #MAGA and just make Warren/Sanders supreme leader for life.

SMH
 
Last edited:
What’s stopping trump from shutting down The NY Times or imprisoning Hillary? National interest.

Packing the ballot box? Or hell, abolishing the elections entirely. National interest.

like this is totally insane. And the GOP is doing this over Trump? Because they’re afraid of being primaried? Why don’t they take this opportunity to take trump out and roll with Pence? Unless this is ultimately what they want, a dictator.

I don’t think even the Royal family has had this type of power in 500+ years. Unbelievable.
 
Last edited:
sirkickyass said:
Classic Jesus. Always whooping *** in defense of State power.
Click to expand...

If it’s done under the excuse of “national interest”, it’s fine, right?

just like this:



If his DNA is on her, he can’t be arrested because he’s president.

He can’t be impeached And removed because I’ve learned that impeachment can’t be partisan. And if one side decides to plug their ears and never vote against their boy, then impeachment becomes partisan and renders impeachment unnecessary. Cuz again, partisanship.

And time. Since we’re in an election year, we cannot have any witnesses. Even if there was a first hand witness to the rape asking to testify, we can’t listen because it might take a few more weeks to listen to he/she. Heaven forbid we find the truth.

Besides, if he can claim that raping women was done under the excuse of the national interest, it’s all good, right?

/clearly, this entire post is sarcasm and just highlights the stupidity being spewed on the Senate’s floor right now.
 
Alan Dershowitz loves the spotlight. It would not surprise me if he prefers a contrarian position at times, simply because he understands being outrageous will earn him that spotlight. There was one line in his argument against impeachment Wednesday, that I believe will earn him a certain ignoble status in American history. I think it represents one of the most outrageously demented statements ever spoken in the United States Congress:

“But a complex middle case is: ‘I want to be elected. I think I’m a great president. I think I’m the greatest president there ever was. And if I’m not elected, the national interest will suffer greatly.’ That cannot be an impeachable offense.”
-----------
We've gone over the absurdity of such a position. As @Zombie put it, the president's defense has raised issues even more troubling then what brought impeachment upon Trump in the first place.

Dershowitz:

“Every public official that I know believes that his election is in the public interest. And mostly, you’re right. Your election is in the public interest. And if a president does something, which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment. . . .

“The house managers . . . never allege that it was based on pure financial reasons. It would be a much harder case if a hypothetical president of the United States said to a hypothetical leader of a foreign country, ‘Unless you build a hotel with my name on it and unless you give me a million-dollar kickback, I will withhold the funds.’

“That’s an easy case. That’s purely corrupt and in the purely private interest.

“But a complex middle case is: ‘I want to be elected. I think I’m a great president. I think I’m the greatest president there ever was. And if I’m not elected, the national interest will suffer greatly.’ That cannot be an impeachable offense.”
--------
Congrats to Alan Dershowitz. His words will live in infamy.
 
This is a little wonky (even by my standards) but I've been taken with the assertion that Dershowitz is fine with melding "personal interest" and "the public interest" into a single concern. The idea that a subjective belief that serving your own ends is also for the good of the country is exculpatory is I think unintentionally revealing.

The nature of a "Monarch" in theory is that the person on the throne represents the state itself. The idea of the state is too abstract to cognize, so we endow in a person the powers and functions of the state. Their will is collective will. The illusion that their wants and desires represent the best interests of the entire polity is the social illusion that comprises the foundation of monarchy.

The purest linguistic expression of that concept is the royal "we." Americans think of it as kind of silly when the Queen uses "we" in the singular first person, but that grammatical construction is the entire concept of monarchy. The person on the throne is not capable of having individual thoughts, desires, and urges. When they speak, they speak for all collectively.

Dershowitz's argument is an argument for a "royal we" presidency. That if it is for the president's benefit then it is for everyone's benefit. That also pops up in the arguments made by Philbin yesterday - in which he argues that it is impossible for the President to contravene foreign policy - because whatever he says is foreign policy.

This endows the president with that same mystical authority of the state that is the primary feature of monarchy. It is impossible to betray the country when you are the country. You cannot have a conflict of interest with yourself. You cannot do anything that is against the interests of the state, because if you want it that is the interest of the state.

Dershowitz is telling us that public opinion does not matter. Legitimacy is not conferred on our leaders through acclamation of popular will. If Trump wants to smear the Bidens - then the people want it too. Donald Trump doesn't represent the people, he is the people. WE are Trump.
 


So Trump's lawyers are arguing in the impeachment trial that the House should have gone to the courts to enforce subpoenas, while arguing in those same courts that they shouldn't enforce the subpoenas because the house has the power of impeachment to do so.

Pretty incredible to see GOP senators able to hold both of these arguments in their heads at the same time tbh.
 
Of course, they’re all wrong and Trump and his lawyers are right...



it’s going to be funny. I’m going to laugh so hard. After the senate votes tonight/tomorrow to not have any new witnesses. trump will know that his acquittal is guaranteed. His reaction, is going to be priceless. You know he’s going to admit... to everything.

He’s going to admit to pressuring the senate to acquit. He’s going to Probably blurt out names of senators who he really had to work on to turn. He’s going to brag about how he really asked Ukraine to investigate the Bidens. He’s going to admit to asking other countries for favors. He’s going to brag brag brag and won’t give a **** how bad it makes the GOP look or how it will destroy what’s left of our foreign policy.

meanwhile... Bolton’s book isn’t going Away. Nor is Lev Parnas. More stuff will leak. Trump will do what he always has done, crime. More crimes will be exposed. And everyone will know that he’s corrupt as hell and the GOP helped him to be escape conviction. He won’t ever be acquitted. Everyone will know he’s guilty. And the GOP will own it.

have fun next november! Moscow Mitch is going to lose his majority for the next generation. And Trump’s sham trial and bragging will write Democratic ads themselves. Democrats will have the help of Never Trumper ads like these:

good luck repubs!
 
Zombie said:


So Trump's lawyers are arguing in the impeachment trial that the House should have gone to the courts to enforce subpoenas, while arguing in those same courts that they shouldn't enforce the subpoenas because the house has the power of impeachment to do so.

Pretty incredible to see GOP senators able to hold both of these arguments in their heads at the same time tbh.
Click to expand...


What’s fundamentally different from the current GOP from a drug cartel? Dead serious.

most political parties have an ideological agenda to promote. The GOP’s only agenda it seems, is to merely cling to power and enrich its top donors. That’s not a sustainable agenda. I get it’s been Putin’s agenda for Russia. But it’s not sustainable.
 
What makes the GOPs opinion that Trump is above the law and Trump's claim he can do anything is how for eight years they called Obama a dictator or king and whined about how he isn't above the law. They screamed impeachment when he passed the ACA and made 64 attempts to repeal it. So Obama cannot pass legislature through Congress they don't like which makes him a king/dictator and is grounds for impeachment but Trump can do ANYTHING he wants and the GOP says Yep. Man how absolutely foolish the republicans look, they act like Trump is the head cheerleader and they all want to ask him to the prom. It is a national embarrassment.
 
Douchebag K said:
Is your Democratic Party really so stupid to be pursuing this course of action ?? This is all playing into his hands and he’s going to go to town portraying himself as a victim.

They should be focussed on presenting the best possible viable candidate and providing a clear choice against Donald but all this is muddying the waters and doing nothing but ensuring we are lumped with Trump for another term. Thanks very much.
Click to expand...

Yes I guess you forgot the Lock her up chants through out the 2016 Muddying the waters. I am sure that the GOP would want Obama or any democrat investigated if he said and did the things Trump has done. Republicans want it to go away because deep down they know the ship is taking on water. However, I agree the Democrats need to get there act together but they shouldn't just ignore the corruption. So the Democrats should just let Trump cheat to win another election? I don't think so.
 
Gameface said:
Well if I'm in the Senate I'm voting to convict, but I can completely understand how pretty much all of the Republican Senators are going to find justifications for their acquittal votes. They needed to be presented with a much stronger case to essentially give them no other option than conviction. What I'm saying is that hasn't happened.

And as far as the Senate calling witnesses and getting documents, well we all knew the Senate had a Republican majority, so the House should have let their subpoenas be upheld by the Supreme Court. I'm sure many of them would have been upheld. They should have held out and gathered all the evidence possible so that the Senate wouldn't have an easy out to acquit, which they currently have. It'll be a much easier decision for Republican Senators to acquit vs convict. I'm sure Romney would love to have been presented with a rock solid case that he could use to justify a conviction, but I'm guessing even he will vote to acquit.
Click to expand...

So what additional information would you need to have a more solid case? Have you forgotten the fact that Trump on TV asked Russia, Ukraine and China to help him get dirt on political rivals? He admitted that he would accept dirt from a foreign country if they had it.

He admitted to having all the evidence and blocking anyone from his administration to testify. He hid the "perfect call" transcript on a secret server. Never released the full transcript that should exonerate him if he is telling the Truth. He is not. Mulvaney admitted to withholding the aide because of concerns of corruption (excuse not the reason no emails provided saying they were concerned about corruption). Trump has publicly threatened witnesess and attempt to out the whistleblower.

He thrashed civil servants who have credibility and decades of service to this country and both parties. Their testimony supported the initial whistleblower concerns. We know he hired Rudy and his crew to go to Ukraine outside of contact with our ambassadors to get dirt on Biden get rid of the ambassador and to pressure the Ukrainians into announcing an investigation on Biden after he joined the democratic race for president. Trump demonstrated that his real interest was dirt on Biden in not corruption in Ukraine. Multiple people testified about this. There is more that we know and a lot that is left unknow mostly due to the obstruction of Congress through without documents, ignoring subpoenas and intimidating witness and senators. Does that sound like an innocent man? why are the republicans afraid of the truth? All they have are excuses, denials, name calling, lies and complaints about the process. They have no evidence to exonerate him. They haven't provided any emails, full transcript or testimony from the inner circle. All they have is the president can do whatever the hell he wants. Which certainly wasn't the case when Obama was president? Right?
 
Red said:
Alan Dershowitz loves the spotlight. It would not surprise me if he prefers a contrarian position at times, simply because he understands being outrageous will earn him that spotlight. There was one line in his argument against impeachment Wednesday, that I believe will earn him a certain ignoble status in American history. I think it represents one of the most outrageously demented statements ever spoken in the United States Congress:

“But a complex middle case is: ‘I want to be elected. I think I’m a great president. I think I’m the greatest president there ever was. And if I’m not elected, the national interest will suffer greatly.’ That cannot be an impeachable offense.”
-----------
We've gone over the absurdity of such a position. As @Zombie put it, the president's defense has raised issues even more troubling then what brought impeachment upon Trump in the first place.

Dershowitz:

“Every public official that I know believes that his election is in the public interest. And mostly, you’re right. Your election is in the public interest. And if a president does something, which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment. . . .

“The house managers . . . never allege that it was based on pure financial reasons. It would be a much harder case if a hypothetical president of the United States said to a hypothetical leader of a foreign country, ‘Unless you build a hotel with my name on it and unless you give me a million-dollar kickback, I will withhold the funds.’

“That’s an easy case. That’s purely corrupt and in the purely private interest.

“But a complex middle case is: ‘I want to be elected. I think I’m a great president. I think I’m the greatest president there ever was. And if I’m not elected, the national interest will suffer greatly.’ That cannot be an impeachable offense.”
--------
Congrats to Alan Dershowitz. His words will live in infamy.
Click to expand...
Wow. That's simply amazing that is being used as a defense.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Republican presidents can’t be impeached in election years.

and Democratic presidents can’t appoint Supreme Court justices in election years.

sounds fair

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top