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

If ONE of them fails to show up for a subpoena issue a ****ing bunch warrant and haul their asses in in CHAINS.

 

Party of law and order my ass.

 

But, i guess if the people had to take the law into their own hands, good thing there's 300 million guns and a load of mental illness going 'round.

 

~Bang

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, twa said:

 

I'd say intuitive and reactionary.

I do think his response to the whistleblower charge was not what the Dems expected.

 

 

 

It's certainly 100% what i expected and it completely aligns with how he's handled every other bad thing that has come up for him. He screams and yells and flails and becomes unhinged. I doubt the Dems were taken by surprise. They might have even counted on it, as that stuff can now become official evidence of further impeachable conduct and attempts to obstruct an impeachment investigation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, HOF44 said:

Here it comes.  Building to a moment where the White House just blocks everything.  How will the House respond. What can they do? What will the Courts back.  This will be a seminal moment in our history.  Does Congress matter?

The House actually does have the power to arrest people. It’s rarely been used, but I think now is the time if we are to continue with separated powers and three equal branches of government. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Burgold said:

The House actually does have the power to arrest people. It’s rarely been used, but I think now is the time if we are to continue with separated powers and three equal branches of government. 

 

Yep they do have that power and it was reinforced in a 1927 case I believe, but I don't think it's been done in a long time and they no longer have a holding cell there but I'm sure they could figure something out. 

 

Now THAT would be an interesting situation. The House issues subpoenas for an impeachment investigation, the people refuse, the House finds them in contempt of Congress for obstructing an official impeachment investigation and sends the Sergeant at Arms to arrest them, and Barr sends local Fed LE to stop them from being arrested. What would happen?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

 

Now THAT would be an interesting situation. The House issues subpoenas for an impeachment investigation, the people refuse, the House finds them in contempt of Congress for obstructing an official impeachment investigation and sends the Sergeant at Arms to arrest them, and Barr sends local Fed LE to stop them from being arrested. What would happen?

 

 

Thats what it's leading to if no one backs down.  I don't think anyone has a clue what would happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

GOP is really going to do it, aren't they? Gonna go full on particracy.

 

The people who have said Trump will burn this country down to the ground if need be to protect himself are absolutely spot on. He doesn't give a **** about anything or anyone but himself. The question is how far the GOP will follow him down that road. Are they willing to go all the way? I used to think no but they really might.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

 

Ugliness the likes of which has not been seen in our gov probably since around Reconstruction

 

Pelosi won't do it. She doesn't have the spine. She'd probably request polling about it, decide that the optics might shift public sentiment a couple of points against them in certain demographics in a couple of rust belt counties, and then back down.

 

But I have to admit the optics battle there would be interesting. On one hand the WH would obviously cry and scream about "out of control thugs and bullies from the House", but the House would reply that this admin has been so blatantly and unprecedentedly lawless that there literally was no choice and that they had to do what was best for the country. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Yep they do have that power and it was reinforced in a 1927 case I believe, but I don't think it's been done in a long time and they no longer have a holding cell there but I'm sure they could figure something out. 

 

Now THAT would be an interesting situation. The House issues subpoenas for an impeachment investigation, the people refuse, the House finds them in contempt of Congress for obstructing an official impeachment investigation and sends the Sergeant at Arms to arrest them, and Barr sends local Fed LE to stop them from being arrested. What would happen?

 

 

My understanding is many if not all our institutions are required by law to follow the law.  The Secret Service for example is responsible to keep the President from getting killed, not keep him from getting arrested.  The military is sworn to protect America from enemies both foreign and domestic, not the President himself.  This is only a conflict if people tasked with protecting people like Pompeo from getting killed try to protect him from getting arrested, which would be them breaking the law to help someone else break the law.  Usually in other countries when institutions do that its because they are picking the side that will protect them and their decision and who would most likely win.  Trump has never had 50% approval in this country and did not win the popular vote, he is outnumbered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheMalcolmConnection said:

Still never understood how a lying piece-of-trash corporate New Yorker got the lower class to vote for him when he built his profit on their backs. Like how do you not feel like a ****?!

 

When you live in a dead end town with no job prospects, no infrastructure, no health insurance, no nothing, but you get to jerk off to your Trumpy bear every night and own the libs on the internet, nothing else matters, I guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Pelosi won't do it. She doesn't have the spine. She'd probably request polling about it, decide that the optics might shift public sentiment a couple of points against them in certain demographics in a couple of rust belt counties, and then back down.

 

I tend to agree with you.  The Dems ALWAYS back down.  I hope they don't this time.  If not now it will happen if he is beaten in an election.  He won't go quietly. There will be court cases and cheating allegations.  At some point they will have to stand up to him.  Or just declare him King.  I don't even wanna think about of he wins the election.  Uggghhhh 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

My understanding is many if not all our institutions are required by law to follow the law.  The Secret Service for example is responsible to keep the President from getting killed, not keep him from getting arrested.  The military is sworn to protect America from enemies both foreign and domestic, not the President himself.  This is only a conflict if people tasked with protecting people like Pompeo from getting killed try to protect him from getting arrested, which would be them breaking the law to help someone else break the law.  Usually in other countries when institutions do that its because they are picking the side that will protect them and their decision and who would most likely win.  Trump has never had 50% approval in this country and did not win the popular vote, he is outnumbered.

 

But Barr could say that the DoJ doesn't believe that the House actually has the standing or authority to issue arrest warrants and follow through with them and that any attempt at that arrest would be an illegal detention. Then he could dispatch local Fed LE to stop the Sergeant at Arms from following through. Then we'd have a lovely standoff. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

But Barr could say that the DoJ doesn't believe that the House actually has the standing or authority to issue arrest warrants and follow through with them and that any attempt at that arrest would be an illegal detention. Then he could dispatch local Fed LE to stop the Sergeant at Arms from following through. Then we'd have a lovely standoff. 

 

He can say that, but house to send Sargent in arms to get people, Bush 2 did it. So then its do the Fed LE follow an order that is against the law with their own careers on the line.

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...