CDZ Impeach or Censure

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by task0778, Dec 1, 2019.

  1. OldLady
    Offline

    OldLady Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2015
    Messages:
    53,940
    Thanks Received:
    9,384
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Ratings:
    +43,151
    And according to what you posted, it is even harder to do than impeachment. How odd that political grandstanding is even harder to pass in the Congress than the call to remove him.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. task0778
    Offline

    task0778 Gold Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2017
    Messages:
    4,692
    Thanks Received:
    1,160
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Location:
    Texas hill country
    Ratings:
    +4,966
    Procedurally, it's not harder. In the House, for an impeachment they normally do investigations and conduct hearings and do the committee vote to send it to the floor and then hold the impeachment vote. For a Censure, they can do whatever they want, avoid all the other stuff and send it to the floor, cuz it's really nothing more than a resolution without any power of law behind it. Of course, they won't and don't do that cuz the pols want the chance to look good on TV denouncing the President for everything and anything they can think of whether he's actually guilty or not. Screw worrying about proof, we don't need no stinking proof, but it all comes down to what is politically smarter. As I noted, a Censure has no real ramifications and no real consequences and so if the Dems go that route then there's gonna be a bunch of pissed off far Left Dems to deal with in next year's primaries. THAT's why it's harder to do a Censure. But if they vote for impeachment then they're going to risk losing the House next November cuz all those Dems that got elected in 2018 from Trump districts are going to have to face the voters with nothing to show for the last 2 years. It's quite a conundrum - which course of action hurts them more, in one case they lose their seats in the primaries and in the other they lose their seats in the general election. Gotta be an individual choice based on the individual and his/her district.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2019
  3. OldLady
    Offline

    OldLady Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2015
    Messages:
    53,940
    Thanks Received:
    9,384
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Ratings:
    +43,151
    Reported. My patience has limits.
     
  4. OldLady
    Offline

    OldLady Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2015
    Messages:
    53,940
    Thanks Received:
    9,384
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Ratings:
    +43,151
    I think the "stinkin proof" this go-round is pretty clear, but be that as it may, I still don't understand why it's harder, though, to get a vote, based on what you explained. It would seem to me that there would be censures up the wazoo, but there was only one, later rescinded, back in the 1830's.
     
  5. OldLady
    Offline

    OldLady Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2015
    Messages:
    53,940
    Thanks Received:
    9,384
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Ratings:
    +43,151
    Actually, you don't ELECT a President cuz he's a rat bastard. I watched the entire public hearings and heard straight from the people who were there what was happening. There is no doubt in my mind what Trump was up to, and it is so obvious that I really don't believe someone as smart as you doesn't know it too.
    SMH
     
  6. task0778
    Offline

    task0778 Gold Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2017
    Messages:
    4,692
    Thanks Received:
    1,160
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Location:
    Texas hill country
    Ratings:
    +4,966
    Maybe somebody more knowledgeable in US political history can shed more light on this than I can, but my guess is that since a Censure carries no real consequences, if you can't get bi-partisan support for it then it just wasn't worth it politically in the past. My personal opinion is that the moderates in the Dem Party would rather do the Censure and move on, as some of them did in 1998 when Clinton was facing an impeachment vote. But the Repubs were out for blood and refused the Censure idea and so it didn't happen.

    Note: As a matter of fact there was a black Congresswoman from Detroit who said on TV she thought a Censure vote was a good idea and the Dems could move on. But she got shut down pretty quick on that, I guess the Dem Party leadership made her walk that back. So, it appears an impeachment vote will take place in the House. There are some Repubs would might vote for a Censure, but I highly doubt any of them will vote for impeachment. It'll be interesting to see how many Dems jump ship and vote no, to save themselves in the next general election. But also how many of them will get bushwhacked by the far Left in their own party in their primaries.
    Why the Democrats Can’t Settle for Censure | The American Spectator | Politics Is Too Important To Be Taken Seriously.

    Finally: I am just not seeing any proof of wrong-doing on Trump's part. You say it's pretty clear, but all I see is personal interpretations and guesses. Yes, the aid to Ukraine was held up, but there's no proof for why. Coulda been Trump's doing to coerce them Ukrainians to investigate Biden, or it coulda been something else. Like wanting the EU countries to pony up some of that aid, or making sure the aid wasn't going to the wrong people in Ukraine. What's odd to me is the lack of any hard evidence to support your position; no emails,no memos, no documents, no transcripts of a phone call where he bribes anybody or tells somebody to hold up the aid until he gets his investigation.

    That's my problem. It's not that I think Trump is innocent, he very well could've done what he's accused of. BUT - you don't impeach a President without hard evidence, and your side doesn't have any. Not that I've seen or heard of anyway. Further, I suspect that Biden is guilty of the same thing yet he isn't been hounded like Trump is and that ain't right. And I also think that Obama and every other president has probably done exactly the same thing, but no one knew about it or it was ignored. Until now.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. task0778
    Offline

    task0778 Gold Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2017
    Messages:
    4,692
    Thanks Received:
    1,160
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Location:
    Texas hill country
    Ratings:
    +4,966
    Actually, you don't ELECT a President cuz he's a rat bastard.

    Nobody votes for or elects somebody cuz he's a rat bastard. You vote for somebody because you think that person will do a better job as president than the other person, according to whatever your criteria are. It was my opinion that Trump would do a better job as president than Hillary would do. And BTW, Hillary was no less a corrupt, lying bitch than he was a rat bastard. JMO.

    Full disclosure: I didn't watch the entire hearings, just pieces here and there, but I did read several accounts of each day's proceedings. At no time did I hear or read where anybody testified that Trump told him or her that aid to Ukraine would be denied if they didn't investigate Biden. The Ukrainians themselves didn't get that message, why did you? What I did read and hear was a number of presumptions and personal guesses. One more time: where's the memo, email, document, or transcript that clearly says not to send aid to Ukraine until they investigate Biden.

    Now - it very well may be that what you claim did indeed occur. Maybe. Likely even. But proof? NO. And that's why Trump should not be impeached. Suspicions are one thing, but solid evidence is another, and I cannot support impeaching a duly elected president when all you have is suspicions, presumptions, and personal guesses. If you're disgusted with me for that, so be it.
     
  8. sartre play
    Offline

    sartre play Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2015
    Messages:
    3,898
    Thanks Received:
    377
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Ratings:
    +1,631
    Why should Trump be any different, if you have the money, lawyers, and clout, usually you can get away with almost anything.
     
  9. Uncensored2008
    Online

    Uncensored2008 Libertarian Radical Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    79,440
    Thanks Received:
    10,420
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Ratings:
    +42,890
    If they do, I strongly urge the President to issue an "Executive Reprimand" of Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, and Jerry Nadler. It has just as much legal basis, which is to say none at all, and a hell of a lot more actual basis.
     
  10. CowboyTed
    Offline

    CowboyTed Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2014
    Messages:
    7,059
    Thanks Received:
    1,251
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Location:
    Ireland
    Ratings:
    +4,774
    These lads are too far gone, they have a regular diet of Fox and hyper right wing sites....

    The thing about the Senate trial is the discovery part... All the Emails and Text Messages are going to be revealed...

    On top of that the likes of Rudy, Mulvaney, Barr, Pompeo are going to testify and that is not going to go well for the GOP. These guys have a simple way not to impeach themselves, tell the truth, that is going to be very tricky.

    They have some wild idea that Hunter Biden on the stand is going to reveal anything. Hunter said he got offered a job and he took it, what corruption questions can he answer?

    I might not be even called to testify. Roberts is not going to let them go off fishing for nothing, he is a real judge. A real question is what does Biden offer to Trump's defence, what is he's connection to the case that hasn't been dismissed as wild conspiracy theories...
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1

Share This Page