Impeachment now certain

The E wrote:

Michael Everett wrote:Well done, E. You just summarized 90% of human history.

I don't know about you, but unlike our american friends I do still live in a country where "rule of law" is a thing.

Rule of law is not something I'm willing to give up on just yet. But we are living through a time when it has gotten more difficult...

Don


-

n7axw wrote:Rule of law is not something I'm willing to give up on just yet. But we are living through a time when it has gotten more difficult...

Don
-

When the truth is relegated to the backseat in favor of partisan politics, the rule of law is being superseded by the rule of power.

n7axw wrote:
I like your new signature line...

Don

-

Thanks)

Joat42 wrote:

n7axw wrote:Rule of law is not something I'm willing to give up on just yet. But we are living through a time when it has gotten more difficult...

Don
-

When the truth is relegated to the backseat in favor of partisan politics, the rule of law is being superseded by the rule of power.

To be sure. But that doesn't mean we can give up on calling these people to account.

Don

-

Since the Eurotrash are so incensed about President Trump being acquitted, the only sane response should be for them to dissolve NATO so that they will not have to rely on the US for their defense.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:Since the Eurotrash are so incensed about President Trump being acquitted, the only sane response should be for them to dissolve NATO so that they will not have to rely on the US for their defense.

It isn't just the Europeans. Right now our stock is pretty low world wide.

Don

-

TFLYTSNBN wrote:Since the Eurotrash are so incensed about President Trump being acquitted, the only sane response should be for them to dissolve NATO so that they will not have to rely on the US for their defense.

Incensed? Some people have just pointed out that the republicans are more interested in keeping their guy in power no matter what rather than getting to the truth.

And while we are talking about incensed, there are a bunch of incensed republicans out there that are itching to attack Romney any way they can just because he didn't toe to the party line. I wonder to what deplorable depths they will sink to just so they can attack him.

It's not surprising though, since most Republicans aren't interested in the truth, only that that everyone keeps to the official narrative.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:
Well said.

It isn't as if POTUS Trump's SOTU Address was a vicious, partisan attack.

It was one long series of lies from beginning to end with a Medal of Freedom for RUSH LIMBAUGH thrown in for good measure to forever cheapen the value of that award.

The entire presentation was designed to provoke. Which is all Trump knows how to do, it's the only play in his playbook.

I found it a relief to find a Republican with some integrity. It implies the existence of others.

Don

-

Dilandu wrote:There is a difference between 75% of the population wanting to follow procedure, and 75% wanting president out. The impeachment, as I mentioned before, is NOT about justice; it is about damage control. If impeachment would be about justice, then all former presidents of USA still alive would be in prison for their numerous crimes.

What procedure? There is no procedure for impeachment trials beyond what the Senate sets. 75% of people wanting witnesses means just that, not adherence to procedure for it's own sake - since said procedure doesn't exist.

This is, that Founding Fathers perfectly understood, that they live in imperfect world. And that it is utterly impossible to run a nation with strict adherense to the letter or even spirit of law. So, they were more worried about having a procedure to remove president whose actions are disliked by an absolute majority of the population, rather than a procedure to establish did he actually break the law or no.

Were that the case they would have established that the President is immune to criminal investigation and prosecution. They didn't do that - the President has such immunity due to DOJ policy dating back to Nixon, not by the Constitution.

TProblem is, it is not about the law. It's about efficiency. 48% of Americans considered Trump efficient enough to stay.

Do you mean 52%? Except that that's not true either.

If the Founders had wanted the President removed only if a majority of the population - or their representatives - wanted that to happen, the issue would have been decided in the House. You forget that the number of Senators per state is equal - And thus Senators don't represent the population of their states. That was even more true when the Constitution were written, before the 17th Amendment. And if they were going by popular opinion, they would have allowed witnesses.

smr wrote:DilanduI think this was the best summary of the the Impeachment with spot on analysis.

Dilandu wrote:Well, impeachment predictably failed. A lesson to all Democrats: never spend your most powerful weapon immediately. Always wait for the right moment.

P.S. The thing that need to be understood - impeachment is NOT a procedure for some "justice". It is essentially a damage control, a method to remove president if the absolute majority of population are dissatisfied with his actions.

Funny. I could have sworn I'd seen American conservatives proclaim - quite smugly - how the US was run under rule of law rather than rule of men...

TFLYTSNBN wrote:Since the Eurotrash are so incensed about President Trump being acquitted, the only sane response should be for them to dissolve NATO so that they will not have to rely on the US for their defense.

Pop quiz - which was the only country to ever invoke NATO Article V?