Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Impeachment Thread


No Excuses

Impeachment  

198 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Donald Trump be impeached for obstruction of justice?



Recommended Posts

so getting impeached being tied to the call summary has inspired the orange bag-o-crap to shut that **** down...he has put into effect what the most senior wh aides are calling the vindman rule---from now only trump and whatever top cabinet political appointees he chooses (his cronies) will be on any call with a foreign gov and there won't be experts or analysts from any of the deep state controlled agencies anymore...from now on the goal is to have it be 2 or 3, and they are changing who gets to read transcripts and how they're stored and disseminated...details unavailable...

 

in my best don meredith voice "turn out the lights, the party's over"   :evil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Burgold said:

 

I don’t know if lying about an affair (even under oath) qualifies as a national security risk/high crime or misdemeanor. 

 

The issue isn’t lying about an affair. It’s lying under oath. 
 

If you don’t punish people for lying under oath then that’s just one of the steps the trump admin is trying to work in to get to a state where there is no authority and the rules and laws don’t matter

 

impeaching Clinton was more about protecting the sanctity of our legal system for all of us than anything else. 
 

You can’t tolerate lying under oath

 

the fact that it was a bs investigation and the only thing they got him on was lying about his affair, is why there was no reason to remove him. 
 

trump there’s every reason to remove him. and then have him investigated by sdny 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, tshile said:

The most frustrating thing so far about rooting for the democrats (cause this is new for me) is that in regards to strategy, they are awful 

 

like really awful. 

 

I am not a member of any organized political party.  I, sir, an a Democrat.  

 

- Will Rogers.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, tshile said:

The issue isn’t lying about an affair. It’s lying under oath. 
 

If you don’t punish people for lying under oath then that’s just one of the steps the trump admin is trying to work in to get to a state where there is no authority and the rules and laws don’t matter

Don't want to relitigate this, but you really oughtn't (in my opinion) separate the one from the other. Clinton lied under oath about having an affair. Sure, you can make a blanket statement that no one should ever lie under oath and I will probably agree with you.  However, I will also say that certain lies have different weights. Certain lies matter more.

 

Where do we rate lying about an affair on the scale?

 

As to whether lying under oath matters in Trumpville, the Clinton case has no baring whatsoever. The Republicans have shown time and time again that what's good for the goose has no bearing on the gander. Hypocrisy or fairness doesn't bother them in the least. How else could they move against Franken as they did while ignoring members of their own party who did worse? 

 

So, in an ideal reality you might have a point, but in this reality Clinton lying under oath about an affair is hogwash. It was neither consequential nor harmful to the United States national security or his ability to function as POTUS. But to take it a step further, If perjury mattered then Kavanaugh claiming his sexual exploits weren't sexual exploits but just the name of a drinking game would have made him ineligible for the Supreme Court (or you can pick  one of the other several dozen other times that kavanaugh told obvious bold faced lies while under oath.

 

The Republicans do not hold their own to any standard. They hold Democrats to a standard that neither Jesus, Ghandi, nor Superman could live up to.

3 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

I am not a member of any organized political party.  I, sir, an a Democrat.  

 

- Will Rogers.  

 

Said more than a hundred years ago and still accurate lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Burgold said:

Where do we rate lying about an affair on the scale?

 

On a scale of 1 to 10, a 1. 
 

I mean I think it’s a **** move to cheat on your wife so if he was a friend I’d be pissed. But as a career politician being possibly removed from office, hah nah it’s a 1. 
 

but lying under oath is a 10. 
 

and I’m not using the republicans as a guide on where my ethics and morality fall. 
 

don’t get me wrong, generally I’m more pragmatic about this sort of thing and less punitive, but we’re not talking about an issue within my social group. 
 

we’re talking about what fundamentally holds this democracy together. If the courts and the legislative branches lose their oversight ability of the executive then we’re in deep ****. 

 

it being ok for the head of the executive to walk into congress and lie, and get caught, and not act? Yeah that’s deep ****

 

whats stupid is the lie was about banging the intern. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jumbo said:

so getting impeached being tied to the call summary has inspired the orange bag-o-crap to shut that **** down...he has put into effect what the most senior wh aides are calling the vindman rule---from now only trump and whatever top cabinet political appointees he chooses (his cronies) will be on any call with a foreign gov and there won't be experts or analysts from any of the deep state controlled agencies anymore...from now on the goal is to have it be 2 or 3, and they are changing who gets to read transcripts and how they're stored and disseminated...details unavailable...

 

in my best don meredith voice "turn out the lights, the party's over"   :evil:

 

From now on, we have to make sure that there are no potential squealers listening to Trump's perfectly fine expert negotiations.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tshile said:

impeaching Clinton was more about protecting the sanctity of our legal system for all of us than anything else. 

 

So, you're saying that the GOP impeached Clinton because of their deep desire to protect the sanctity of our legal system from the executive branch?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

So, you're saying that the GOP impeached Clinton because of their deep desire to protect the sanctity of our legal system from the executive branch?  

 

They were obviously early #MeToo adopters.

 

some of ya'll need to surrender your badges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, twa said:

 

They were obviously early #MeToo adopters.

 

some of ya'll need to surrender your badges.

No the republicans were clawing for anything and got lucky. 
 

a few were willing to show they actually had mixed feelings about it all with their votes. But the undertone was digging for anything. 
 

The general public was able to accept that it was right to impeach him but not remove him. It’s why he’s still so popular and liked and respected, but also no one really argues anything other than it was a stupid reason to get impeached. 
 

it is cute to try to make them some sort of early supporters of women. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...