Impeachment Does Not Require a Crime

[easyt65]

 

[justoffal]

No they didn't.... But they also didn't say that the high crimes and misdemeanors were required for the impeachment process.

?!

You're freakin' nuts.

You are quite right, impeachment can be anything that the Congress deems impeachable. Problem for idiots like you, is that once the impeachment is processed it goes to the Senate where sane people are in charge, and put down all the crazy shit that the left presented....You are a dumbass.

I dont agree with that premise "anything congress seems impeachable".

Let's put it like this, if trump wins again, but the senate goes to the dems, trump will be impeached again, and he will be removed.

Even if the Senate goes to the Dems they need 67 votes to remove. Not likely to happen

Yes, but my point was, we dont need this precedent being established. It could lead to less savory times in the years ahead.

Unfortunately, pandora box is already open. If trump is acquitted, then next time dem holds the presidency, and comes into this situation, then people can look back and say "see, repubs got away with it, so you cant impeach the dem president".

If he is removed, then it opens the door for any congress to remove a president at their whim, and it means congress can hold power over the executive branch, via threat of impeachment.

This is simply a bad situation we find ourselves in and it could be bad for the future.

The way I see it, if trump is truly innocent and he has nothing to hide, then he needs these witnesses and documents to come out. He needs to prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that he has done nothing wrong, and put this precedent to bed.

If he is guilty of conspiring with a foreign government, then he needs to be removed. I dont buy the obstruction accusation as I believe there is a procedure for dealing with refused subpoenas, and the dems didnt do it. Each of the 3 coequal branches of government cannot be forced by the other, they can be challenged, and that challenge needs to go to court.

Had the house done that, there is a good chance they would have won, but they didnt, and here we are.

The way I see it, if trump is truly innocent and he has nothing to hide, then he needs these witnesses and documents to come out.


Yeah......in our system of government, it is up to the government to prove it's case....not the victim of the government prosecution....

I see what you are saying, but my point is, if trump is innocent, he needs to remove all doubt about it. He doesnt needs to allow this case to be won with doubt and speculation in peoples minds. Doing so will open doors and set precedents that I dont think this country wants.

Like I said already this is just the beginning.
Now any POTUS who loses the house will be looking at Impeachment.

Jo

 

[easyt65]

Like I said already this is just the beginning. Now any POTUS who loses the house will be looking at Impeachment.

Not if the Senate does what needs to be done, which is dismiss this partisan treasonous abuse of power, Censure Pelosi, Schiff, and Nadler, and rebuke the entire House for attempting such a thing / using Impeachment as a partisan weapon!

 

[Faun]

Impeachment Does Not Require a Crime



Ok, enough of the Snowflakes' 'Constitutional Expertise' IGNORANCE - Time to put an end to the Liberal Progressive Socialist Democrat butt-hurt, Trump-hating, TDS-suffering, false narratives.......


The Constitution, Article II, Section 4:
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.


Words mean something...all the time. The Founding Fathers did not just 'throw' the Constitution together. They knew this document would be the foundation for this nation, and they new every word would be analyzed, scrutinized, and even questioned. It is one of the greatest documents ever written, the greatest Constitution ever written.

Unlike current Democrats like Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, and Jerry Nadler - and snowflakes, the Founding Gathers understood that the Constitution was a framework of government FOR THE PEOPLE, not got power-hungry partisan politicians. They knew it was much bigger than themselves. Impeachment was not a tool taken / created lightly, one that would allow a President to be removed from office for some subjective, partisan reason, such as the Democrats and snowflakes suggest here.



View attachment 302793

IT'S NOT IN THERE...

The House Impeachment / Coup managers are attempting to make the case that the Constitution created BY THE PEOPE FOR THE PEOPLE, a document creating a new government against Tyranny, one that empowers the PEOPLE, includes a provision that would allow partisan politicians to step in to void a democratic election, that would allow the government to strip the people of their choice of Presidents, and allow those partisan power-hungry politicians to declare 'the people an not be entrusted to make such a choice'...not based on any crime but rather on those politician's personal / partisan DISLIKE of the President.

IT'S NOT IN THERE!



View attachment 302790

“You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic, if this body determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role.” ~ Lindsey Graham​

 

[justoffal]

No they didn't.... But they also didn't say that the high crimes and misdemeanors were required for the impeachment process.

?!

You're freakin' nuts.

I'm actually with you....
Unfortunately no crime is required for either Impeachment or removal. It says that he can be removed for high crimes and misdemeanors... That's the way it should always be used. It does not say he cannot be removed minus those things....that's exactly what the Dems are trying. The ultimate price will be paid in the voting booth for that kind of blatant politics....and now that they have set the bar so low....they will watch in horror as a GOP majority removes a Dem POTUS for nothing.Expect it!

Jo

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Impeachment Does Not Require a Crime



Ok, enough of the Snowflakes' 'Constitutional Expertise' IGNORANCE - Time to put an end to the Liberal Progressive Socialist Democrat butt-hurt, Trump-hating, TDS-suffering, false narratives.......


The Constitution, Article II, Section 4:
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.


Words mean something...all the time. The Founding Fathers did not just 'throw' the Constitution together. They knew this document would be the foundation for this nation, and they new every word would be analyzed, scrutinized, and even questioned. It is one of the greatest documents ever written, the greatest Constitution ever written.

Unlike current Democrats like Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, and Jerry Nadler - and snowflakes, the Founding Gathers understood that the Constitution was a framework of government FOR THE PEOPLE, not got power-hungry partisan politicians. They knew it was much bigger than themselves. Impeachment was not a tool taken / created lightly, one that would allow a President to be removed from office for some subjective, partisan reason, such as the Democrats and snowflakes suggest here.



View attachment 302793

IT'S NOT IN THERE...

The House Impeachment / Coup managers are attempting to make the case that the Constitution created BY THE PEOPE FOR THE PEOPLE, a document creating a new government against Tyranny, one that empowers the PEOPLE, includes a provision that would allow partisan politicians to step in to void a democratic election, that would allow the government to strip the people of their choice of Presidents, and allow those partisan power-hungry politicians to declare 'the people an not be entrusted to make such a choice'...not based on any crime but rather on those politician's personal / partisan DISLIKE of the President.

IT'S NOT IN THERE!



View attachment 302790

Oh Really?

John Bolton bombshell undercuts Trump impeachment defense - CNNPolitics

Democrats demanding new witnesses in Donald Trump's impeachment trial are seizing on a report that the President ordered former national security adviser John Bolton to keep military aid to Ukraine frozen in a bid to coerce political favors.

The revelation, first reported by the New York Times, heaped new pressure on a handful of Republican senators who may be interested in hearing testimony from Bolton and other witnesses in a process that could significantly delay Trump's hopes for a swift acquittal as soon as this week. A source with direct knowledge of the manuscript told CNN the Times' account of Bolton's account of the Ukraine aid hold discussion with Trump is accurate.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

The title speaks for itself. Abuse of power is an impeachable offense. trumps impeachment is constitutionally correct.

Presidential Impeachment: The Legal Standard and Procedure - FindLaw

All that is true. The guidelines for impeachment do not require a crime. There is no need for evidence, an investigation or witnesses to impeach a president. The impeachment and ensuing trial are 100% political with no legal ramifications other than removal from office. But guess what, the Republicans do not have to offer any defense either. They can simply vote for acquittal and it is all over.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The title speaks for itself. Abuse of power is an impeachable offense. trumps impeachment is constitutionally correct.

Presidential Impeachment: The Legal Standard and Procedure - FindLaw

All that is true. The guidelines for impeachment do not require a crime. There is no need for evidence, an investigation or witnesses to impeach a president. The impeachment and ensuing trial are 100% political with no legal ramifications other than removal from office. But guess what, the Republicans do not have to offer any defense either. They can simply vote for acquittal and it is all over.

But they are offering a defense. Clearly they saw the need to push back at the damaging evidence presented by the house.

 

[easyt65]

I'm actually with you....Unfortunately no crime is required for either Impeachment or removal.

Sorry, I showed you where you are wrong.

The Founding Fathers did not intend, did not create Impeachment to be a partisan tool for would-be dictators to strip the people of their Democratically-elected leader.

if you think that they did even for a second, you know nothing about out nation, how it was created, by whom it was created, etc... Instead, you allowed Democratic talking points and Common Core Indoctrination to replace actual knowledge / education.

.

 

[easyt65]

But they are offering a defense. Clearly they saw the need to push back at the damaging evidence presented by the house.

They are pushing back against the LIES, false narratives, and BS being pitched by a man who falsely claimed for over 2 years to have personal evidence of crimes committed, who attempted to present his own personally-authored fictional transcript as evidence...and presented by a man who demanded the US AG break the law then Censured him when he refused.

The WH Counsel has shredded the House Manager's case. Sekulow pointed out that the Democrats spun a tale that consisted of omitted evidence / facts and false narratives - much like the FBI did when it committed FISA Court abuses so it could illegally spy on the President and his team.

 

[easyt65]

But they are offering a defense.

BTW, Democrats called / call that 'Obstruction of Justice'.




.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

The title speaks for itself. Abuse of power is an impeachable offense. trumps impeachment is constitutionally correct.

Presidential Impeachment: The Legal Standard and Procedure - FindLaw

All that is true. The guidelines for impeachment do not require a crime. There is no need for evidence, an investigation or witnesses to impeach a president. The impeachment and ensuing trial are 100% political with no legal ramifications other than removal from office. But guess what, the Republicans do not have to offer any defense either. They can simply vote for acquittal and it is all over.

But they are offering a defense. Clearly they saw the need to push back at the damaging evidence presented by the house.

They presented a defense for political reasons. It is not meant or expected to influence any of the jurors/senators. The whole process is political.

 

[justoffal]

I'm actually with you....Unfortunately no crime is required for either Impeachment or removal.

Sorry, I showed you where you are wrong.

The Founding Fathers did not intend, did not create Impeachment to be a partisan tool for would-be dictators to strip the people of their Democratically-elected leader.

if you think that they did even for a second, you know nothing about out nation, how it was created, by whom it was created, etc... Instead, you allowed Democratic talking points and Common Core Indoctrination to replace actual knowledge / education.

.

I believe they are abusing the process and setting a new standard that will bite them in the ass.... I wish the Constitution said
ONLY for this or that reason....but it doesn't.
IMO.....it should.

We will see this again and again from here on out I'm afraid. They won't succeed....this time.

Jo

 

[IM2]

I'm actually with you....Unfortunately no crime is required for either Impeachment or removal.

Sorry, I showed you where you are wrong.

The Founding Fathers did not intend, did not create Impeachment to be a partisan tool for would-be dictators to strip the people of their Democratically-elected leader.

if you think that they did even for a second, you know nothing about out nation, how it was created, by whom it was created, etc... Instead, you allowed Democratic talking points and Common Core Indoctrination to replace actual knowledge / education.

.

None of what you have said applies to this impeachment. The majority of the people did not vote for trump. The electoral college using states that had over 200,000 illegally purged from voting is what gave trump the office. So it's time to quit repeating trumps lies and understand that he has been impeached because he violated his oath, and subverted the constitution.

 

[IM2]

The title speaks for itself. Abuse of power is an impeachable offense. trumps impeachment is constitutionally correct.

Presidential Impeachment: The Legal Standard and Procedure - FindLaw

All that is true. The guidelines for impeachment do not require a crime. There is no need for evidence, an investigation or witnesses to impeach a president. The impeachment and ensuing trial are 100% political with no legal ramifications other than removal from office. But guess what, the Republicans do not have to offer any defense either. They can simply vote for acquittal and it is all over.

Wrong. There is a need for evidence and evidence has been shown, there have been investigations and witnesses. The reality here is the republicans do not want to remove a criminal president because he is a republican.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm actually with you....Unfortunately no crime is required for either Impeachment or removal.

Sorry, I showed you where you are wrong.

The Founding Fathers did not intend, did not create Impeachment to be a partisan tool for would-be dictators to strip the people of their Democratically-elected leader.

if you think that they did even for a second, you know nothing about out nation, how it was created, by whom it was created, etc... Instead, you allowed Democratic talking points and Common Core Indoctrination to replace actual knowledge / education.

.

None of what you have said applies to this impeachment. The majority of the people did not vote for trump. The electoral college using states that had over 200,000 illegally purged from voting is what gave trump the office. So it's time to quit repeating trumps lies and understand that he has been impeached because he violated his oath, and subverted the constitution.

The majority of the people did not vote for trump.

But the majority of the EC did. Just like in every election in our history.

states that had over 200,000 illegally purged from voting

Should anyone ever be purged from the voter rolls? Why?

 

[justoffal]

I'm actually with you....Unfortunately no crime is required for either Impeachment or removal.

Sorry, I showed you where you are wrong.

The Founding Fathers did not intend, did not create Impeachment to be a partisan tool for would-be dictators to strip the people of their Democratically-elected leader.

if you think that they did even for a second, you know nothing about out nation, how it was created, by whom it was created, etc... Instead, you allowed Democratic talking points and Common Core Indoctrination to replace actual knowledge / education.

.

None of what you have said applies to this impeachment. The majority of the people did not vote for trump. The electoral college using states that had over 200,000 illegally purged from voting is what gave trump the office. So it's time to quit repeating trumps lies and understand that he has been impeached because he violated his oath, and subverted the constitution.

Actually no....he has been impeached ONLY BECAUSE they hate him....not because he's guilty of anything.

This genie is officially out of the bottle and it's not going away. Very bad move
On the Dems part. Like Reid's Senate rules change.

Jo

 

[justoffal]

The title speaks for itself. Abuse of power is an impeachable offense. trumps impeachment is constitutionally correct.

Presidential Impeachment: The Legal Standard and Procedure - FindLaw

All that is true. The guidelines for impeachment do not require a crime. There is no need for evidence, an investigation or witnesses to impeach a president. The impeachment and ensuing trial are 100% political with no legal ramifications other than removal from office. But guess what, the Republicans do not have to offer any defense either. They can simply vote for acquittal and it is all over.

Wrong. There is a need for evidence and evidence has been shown, there have been investigations and witnesses. The reality here is the republicans do not want to remove a criminal president because he is a republican.

The reality is that the word criminal at this point is purely a democratic opinion.

Jo

 

[easyt65]

I believe they are abusing the process and setting a new standard that will bite them in the ass.... I wish the Constitution said
ONLY for this or that reason....but it doesn't. IMO.....it should.

In YOUR OPINION it doesn't. I read you exactly what the Constitution says and the Constitutional Expert's remarks.

Again, if you think the Founding Fathers created Impeachment to be a tool for partisan would-be-rulers to void / strip THE PEOPLE of the Constitutional right to pick their leaders / of their democratically elected choice for President you are a Liberal / Democrat or a brainwashed snowflake whose education is limited to Common Core.

The whole entire premise of the Constitution is based / founded on the principle of 'WE THE PEOPLE'. Creating a partisan tool that allows partisan, power-hungry leaders to snatch power form the people and dictate to them who thy can and can not have as their leaders is everything the Constitution stands for.

It's just not in there and was never meant to be that way...no matter what your OPINION may be.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

The title speaks for itself. Abuse of power is an impeachable offense. trumps impeachment is constitutionally correct.

Presidential Impeachment: The Legal Standard and Procedure - FindLaw

All that is true. The guidelines for impeachment do not require a crime. There is no need for evidence, an investigation or witnesses to impeach a president. The impeachment and ensuing trial are 100% political with no legal ramifications other than removal from office. But guess what, the Republicans do not have to offer any defense either. They can simply vote for acquittal and it is all over.

Wrong. There is a need for evidence and evidence has been shown, there have been investigations and witnesses. The reality here is the republicans do not want to remove a criminal president because he is a republican.

There is no need for a crime (as you already agreed), there is no need for any evidence, and there is no need for any defense.

The democrats could have called for the impeachment vote without ever presenting any evidence. They presented evidence for political purposes. They are trying to damage the president politically while giving themselves political cover.

The Republicans could have acquitted the president without ever presenting a defense. They presented the defense to attack the Dems politically, and provide political cover for themselves.

Everybody knew the outcome of the impeachment and trial before it all began. The only question was which side would win politically.