Articles of Impeachmenat

Status
Closed
Jul 2017
247
Neverland
Democtarts are in a mode of 'Clinton revenge' and having majority in the Lower House are set to impeach Trump, no matter what.
The process though will reverse in the Senate, where Republicans have majority and 2/3 needed to convict the President will severely lack.

Its obvious that the impeachment has one goal and one goal only - to give victory(not gonna happen) in 2020 to the extreme left and pinko libs in the General Election next year. Do Republicans intend to challenge and counterattack with Biden findings ie him and his son - Hunter Biden greatly enriched themselves, by dealing with Ukrainian gas company ?

Moreover, fmr.Vice President Biden is on record of bragging he personally stopped US financial aid to Ukraine contingent of 'playing ball' with the Obama's administration. In other words they are accusing and investigating Trump for same charges Biden is guilty from. Do this Republican Party has guts to counter with lawsuit, instead of whining that they are 'victims'.

I understand Pres. Trump is citizen President with no political experience, but his aides are about same level diletants as he is - Ivanka, her husband, Kelyanne Moore(whose husband is bitter Trump foe) etc.There is a constant flow of White House leaking to the press, as it is a inexhaustible supply of his enemies inside his administration atop his rookie behavior and actions.

They also have a RNC chair of dubious loyalty, whose uncle is now a Senator from Utah and also Trump's constant critic. Where does it stop ? Democratic win in 2020 means means opening the floodgates of illegal immigration with fresh Democratic voters from Latin America, changing demographics and civil s trife of the 1st kind in the future. Does GOP know whats at stake ?
 

Code Blue

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
4,403
Caribbean
Thread closed. Oh, that's right. I am not a moderator. lol
 
Last edited:
May 2019
209
Salt Lake City, Utah
Very few extreme left and pinko libs exist in the Dem party. All the Dems have to do is stay within the lines and let Trump implode.

Bleda, the demographics are changing anyway. When Texas goes blue (by 2024), the GOP becomes a permanent minority.
 

Chlodio

Forum Staff
Aug 2016
4,623
Dispargum
Thread moved to Current Events. Keep the conversation about history in the making, ie, how will future historians discuss this subject?
Moderators are watching this thread.
 

Code Blue

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
4,403
Caribbean
ie, how will future historians discuss this subject?
Like everything else, it will depend to a large degree on the political leanings of the historian. For example, the impeachment of Andrew Johnson is a laughable farce, but since 90% of historians are "pro North," they'll just keep piling on Johnson as a "bad" President. That there was no "high crime," which ought to be the centerpiece, because it reveals the nature of the proceeding - a simple political vendetta - is somewhere in the dustbin of the predominant Pro North history. I predict this will also be the "history" of this impeachment. It will be no "where's the beef," and a lot of "bad, bad, bad."

IMO, the history of 1998 is not solidified into a single, simple 90% narrative, yet. So, some of us will not live long enough to know from the impeachment of 2019, which books get "burned."
 
Last edited:

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,243
Italy, Lago Maggiore
It would be really interesting to make this a debate about institutional politics.

The United States of America are a Republic with a Constitution and usually this is the normality. Actually some scholars of political science say that a Republic without a Constitution cannot be defined a Republic since nothing states one of the basic principles of a Republic: that the sovereignty belongs to the People [the Italian Constitution begins just saying that ... and the American one starts with the famous "We The People" ...].

When there is a constitution, institutions have to follow the rules written in it, otherwise they can face consequences [usually a Republic has got special judges or the law gives special prerogatives to common judges to evaluate the behaviors of the institutional subjects].

In some particular cases, judges are not enough and since the sovereignty belongs to the People, the representatives of the People are required to judge. This is, in good substance, the the nature of the process of impeachment [which exists also in Italy and it works in a very similar way].

But ... in which circumstances such a process is justified?

Generally experts of institutional right tend to say that abuse of power justifies it, not a mere violation of the constitutional rules [for violations judges are usually enough].

And this makes sense: it's like to say that the principles of the "Public Thing" [Republic comes from an ancient expression which meant this] are challenged by acts generated by "imperium" and not by the constitutional prerogatives of the authority.
 

Code Blue

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
4,403
Caribbean
It would be really interesting to make this a debate about institutional politics.
And fit better within the rules.

Generally experts of institutional right tend to say that abuse of power justifies it, not a mere violation of the constitutional rules [for violations judges are usually enough].
Can you give examples of "experts" telling us what constitutes abuse of power that does not constitute what the original American "experts" called "treason, bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors?"

Do the "experts" ever say anything about impeachment itself as an abuse of power?
 
Last edited:

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,243
Italy, Lago Maggiore
Can you give examples of "experts" telling us what constitutes abuse of power that does not constitute "treason, bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors?"

When you pass from theory to reality, the "abuses of power" vary from a country to an other. In Italy they are "treason and attack to the Constitution". Those are considered acts of imperium and not mere violations of rules. In the American system things are more complicated because the Italian President doesn't rule and so he's not responsible for the majority of his acts [the Prime Minister countersigning them is responsible]. And about this the American Constitution leaves room to the evaluation of the Representatives with that "high crimes and misdemeanors".

Anyway I was saying that the abuse of power [act of imperium] justifies the impeachment. The US Constitution indicates some abuses and, as said, leaves room for interpretation.
 
Status
Closed