Impeachment Is Unwarranted

Oh, brother, 'storm. Where to start with you? This is not a "criminal investigation". Congress does not have that power. This is an impeachment. Unless I am completely mistaken, POTUS must be removed from office before being criminally charged.

There has been talk of criminal actions on Trump's part. and as best I can tell, it is sheer nonsense. Why would I say that? Despite Democrat babbling of "bribery", "extortion" (terms popular with focus groups), "collusion with Russia", the best the Dems could come up with are two articles:

1. abuse of power, a rather vague, if potentially serious, claim, but one that Democrats were not at all concerned about under Obama;

2. obstruction of Congress.

Democrats seem to realize they have a flimsy basis on which to impeach Trump. They didn't even pretend to claim a "quid pro quo" with respect to Ukraine.

As for "obstruction of Congress", I think all recent presidents have resisted Congressional subpoenas. I don't even think the Democrats wanted administration officials to testify- they just wanted to embarrass POTUS. I say that, because they refused to allow people to testify with agency lawyers with them: they had to hire their own lawyers. Typical heavy handed government effort to squeeze people, bankrupt them, even.

If Democrats were serious about getting access to executive branch documents and officials, they would have taken the honorable route of going to court. But they didn't want to do that: they just wanted to hound administration officials, catch them in unguarded moment saying something incorrect, and then hoping to sic DoJ on them like they did with Gen Flynn. It is a despicable abuse of government power, and Trump was right in refusing them and forcing them to go to court if they were serious. That they did not go to court shows, in my mind, that they were not serious.

I understand there are problems with Trump. I don't think he is well-suited to the presidency. But you Never Trumpers come up with the most bogus of reasons to attack the man.

 

If there were crimes, why didn't the articles of impeachment list them?

 

I'm sure they're cutting Trump some slack. After all, he was a big donor and all around democrat supporter once upon a time.

 

The list will be made public tonight (Sunday) before midnight Eastern Time.

 

Not sure what list you are referring to- I know of nothing scheduled for today in terms of the impeachment process. The articles were published a few days ago. Anything you can point to, or is this simply more disinformation? The House probably will, later this week, decide whether to approve the articles of impeachment, neither of which I think are criminal.

Here is a link describing the likely upcoming sequence of events pertaining to impeachment. Nothing mentioned about today.

Factbox: Trump impeachment trial - What happens next?

 

You ask a good question. Why no listing of bribery, extortion, or obstruction of justice? That was a tactical decision, probably because the Committee chair and Nancy Pelosi thought they could increase the chances of getting more support this way. Anyhow, as I've said before, Trump isn't being charged under the U.S. C. The question is whether he's committed crimes within the meaning of the impeachment clause.

 

Do the Dems present the illusion of absurdity or the absurdity of illusion ? Because they fell for the Trump Trick , which
invited the impeachment . It surely is the hysteric-historic event .

 

I dunno- it seems to me like hyping the charges, but then when it comes to formalizing them, well, really, it isn't that bad. I think Pelosi & Co. would have been happy to throw anything at them they thought would stick- turns out he didn't play nice with (a not nice) Congress. If they had included more articles, it might have complicated the debate (a forgone conclusion, I would say), but Congress wouldn't have had to accept them all. I think the bribery and extortion claims were just wild posturing on the part of people with no sense of fair play.


These same Democrats didn't seem concerned when Obama abused the power of the Oval Office:

1. Five Times Obama Abused His Power and Democrats Didn’t Care

2. Top 10 Ways Obama Violated the Constitution during His Presidency

It reeks of politically inspired hypocrisy to me!

 

Not at all. There was solid evidence to support them. This is a much stronger case than we've ever had before in an impeachment case. The blind loyalty of Republicans prevents a fair trial. The alleged abuses by Obama are Tea Party fantasies.

 

Not at all. There was solid evidence to support them. This is a much stronger case than we've ever had before in an impeachment case. The blind loyalty of Republicans prevents a fair trial. The alleged abuses by Obama are Tea Party fantasies.[/QUOTE]

You present nothing other than your conclusion. Zero rationale. You couldn't bestir yourself in the slightest to say how why this alleged abuse of power (and I think it was) warrants the extreme action of impeachment or why the "Tea Party fantasies" were false. Why should anyone take your "opinions" (and I think I'm being generous using that term) with anything more than a generous grain of salt? I suggest it it pure prejudice on your part, and your language about "fantasies" supports my contention.

Not that it has anything to do with Trump's blunder in Ukraine, but it's interesting that even Comey admits there there were major problems with the FISA applications. His contempt for the "Deep State" is often wrong, but it's understandable.

 

Partly because your two links above are alt-right OPINION pieces? That might have something to do with it.

 

The first article I linked gave facts- actual examples of Obama's illegality. The Cato thing (hardly "alt-right") I found less informative. Perhaps you can dispute pjmedia's claims, instead of simply smearing them?

 

Was originally written for The Federalist...

Simply smearing them is much more fun...

 

The CATO Institute is a right wing libertarian think tank founded by the Koch brothers, who also bankrolled the Tea Party. Pj mediaI was founded by right wing billionaire Aubrey Chernik and bought out by Salem Media Group which caters to the Christian religious right. I won't wast my time disputing is claims which never gained traction in a Republican controlled Congress. Obama isn't the President anymore, but if he could run again he'd be re-elected easily, Russian trolls and bots notwithstanding. Nothing alleged about Obama is comparable to encouraging foreign powers to interfere in our elections and total obstruction of Congress in performing its investigative duties.

 

Remembering President Obama teasing Republicans to launch an impeachment inquiry. was near the end of his term.

 

This is a: Fill-in the Blank Impeachment. They were always going to impeach; the only question was on what grounds?

Our bullying,sloppy, off-script President has provided much motivation and some petit infractions to assist this effort.

Mitt Romney or any other Republican would have been impeached also.

This is the new normal.

 

Who is "they"? The left wing of the Democrat Party was always ready to impeach. The moderates were not, and Pelosi was with the moderates until the Ukraine incident presented such blatant abuse of Presidential power that she couldn't let it go.

 

The “right” wing crazies started with the birther nonsense and expanded their delusions with a blizzard on non-documented accusations. The truth is that there is not a shred of evidence supporting misconduct by President Obama. I remember well his efforts to support a more inclusive, less divided nation. Too bad so many Americans believed the St Petersburg trolls and anything they see in writing...no matter what the source. I think there’s a substantial minority in this nation who had better hope there isn’t a “second coming of Christ”

I also remember the hope and promise of JFK. As a nation we could use that hope and promise again.

 

"We donut need no leader "... Rainbow Family of Living Light

 

Yeah, right.