Law Defining "high crimes and misdemeanors"

[DoomPatrol]

start here and go backwards to collusion, nothing they said was correct.

you're listening to shift now, the same guy that said he had proof of collusion. he's a liar

watch what happens to this when in comes out he was in touch with their bullshit whistleblower all along, yesterday he denied knowing him

I'm of the opinion that the case for collusion was proven about as well as it ever could have been without a video of Trump asking Russia to commit a crime against an American political rival on television. But that would be ridiculous for him to do that. If someone were to do that, or say have his campaign meet with Russians, or invite Russians into the White House immediately after taking office, that would be a sure sign of collusion.

 

[second sight]

I'm of the opinion that the case for collusion was proven about as well as it ever could have been without a video of Trump asking Russia to commit a crime against an American political rival on television. But that would be ridiculous for him to do that. If someone were to do that, or say have his campaign meet with Russians, or invite Russians into the White House immediately after taking office, that would be a sure sign of collusion.

well forget facts when you have opinions, incidentally that what the state guys had yesterday. their opinions did not line up with Trumps policy

I'm done

 

[grimballer]

I guess you missed that huge part of my post where I said I had no idea whether the impeachment would find Trump guilty of any crimes or misconduct and that I was fine either way. Again, coming from the guy who doesn't even know the definition and procedure of an impeachment, you should stop posting.

This is exactly why I have the avatar I have. Do I need to break this down as I would for an autistic child for you to properly understand my simple position on this matter?

1. Impeachment - good idea.
2. Results of impeachment - Not sure.
3. @grimballer - retard.

So it’s k to use impeachment for partisan politics?

i get most libtards are emotionally unstable children, but it is new low.

impeachment (like democrats reminded everybody during Clinton impeachment) shouldn’t be used as a political tool to undo an election.

I guess that standard is no longer possible when you have to appease aoc generation

 

[DoomPatrol]

So it’s k to use impeachment for partisan politics?

i get most libtards are emotionally unstable children, but it is new low.

impeachment (like democrats reminded everybody during Clinton impeachment) shouldn’t be used as a political tool to undo an election.

I guess that standard is no longer possible when you have to appease aoc generation

I think it's perfectly acceptable to use impeachment when misconduct for personal gain by a President is claimed by ambassadors and members in his administration.

I get Republicans are loyalist dogs who would defend anything Trump does, but I can't help but feel disgusted by you people.

If the same situation was occurring with President Obama, you pussies would be calling for blood.

 

[DoomPatrol]

well forget facts when you have opinions, incidentally that what the state guys had yesterday. their opinions did not line up with Trumps policy

I'm done

I use the facts to draw my opinion from. Like the fact that Trump went on national television and personally asked Russia to commit a crime against an opposition candidate. Like the fact that emails were released where his campaign sought and pursued damning information provided by Russian sources. Those are facts of collusion.

 

[grimballer]

I think it's perfectly acceptable to use impeachment when misconduct for personal gain by a President is claimed by ambassadors and members in his administration.

I get Republicans are loyalist dogs who would defend anything Trump does, but I can't help but feel disgusted by you people.

If the same situation was occurring with you President Obama, you pussies would be calling for blood.

republicans didn’t like Obama, however they didn’t act like immature children n use government institutions to go after Obama n try to impeach him on every turn cause they disagree with his policies.

just cause some low level bureaucrat doesn’t like trumps policies means there should be investigations n impeachment hearings looking for potential crimes committed?

if that’s a new standard good luck having a functioning government in the future

 

[DoomPatrol]

republicans didn’t like Obama, however they didn’t act like immature children n use government institutions to go after Obama n try to impeach him on every turn cause they disagree with his policies.

just cause some low level bureaucrat doesn’t like trumps policies means there should be investigations n impeachment hearings looking for potential crimes committed?

if that’s a new standard good luck having a functioning government in the future

That's because former President Obama may have had bad policy ideas, but he wasn't a criminal. You'll can absolutely fucking bet that if Obama had pulled the same bullshit that Trump pulled, every Republican in the world would be demanding to use "government institutions" to go after his blatantly criminal and unethical activity. That's the difference.

I disagreed with some of President Bush's policy but I didn't find it criminal in scope. I disagreed with some of President Obama's policy but I didn't find it criminal in scope. I disagree with President Trump's policy and I find it very well to be criminal in scope.

Just so we're clear about this. President Obama's team had zero criminal indictments and arrests after eight years in office. In just a couple years President Trump's friends have racked up nearly 100 criminal indictments and over 25 convictions with several prison terms.

Then there's this whole thing right here where candidate Trump begs a hostile foreign government ON CAMERA TO commit cyber crimes against an American official for political purposes, but you think this is a fucking witch hunt?



But yeah it's just librulz being snowflakes about a Republican. It has nothing to do with the criminal and ethical behavior of said Republican.

 

[grimballer]

That's because former President Obama may have had bad policy ideas, but he wasn't a criminal. You'll can absolutely fucking bet that if Obama had pulled the same bullshit that Trump pulled, every Republican in the world would be demanding to use "government institutions" to go after his blatantly criminal and unethical activity. That's the difference.

I disagreed with some of President Bush's policy but I didn't find it criminal in scope. I disagreed with some of President Obama's policy but I didn't find it criminal in scope. I disagree with President Trump's policy and I find it very well to be criminal in scope.

Just so we're clear about this. President Obama's team had zero criminal indictments and arrests after eight years in office. In just a couple years President Trump's friends have racked up nearly 100 criminal indictments and over 25 convictions with several prison terms.

Then there's this whole thing right here where candidate Trump begs a hostile foreign government ON CAMERA TO commit cyber crimes against an American official for political purposes, but you think this is a fucking witch hunt?



But yeah it's just librulz being snowflakes about a Republican. It has nothing to do with the criminal and ethical behavior of said Republican.

democrats are trying to impeach trump n are still not sure themselves what actual crimes he committed.

they just wanna have endless investigations n n hope to eventually find something, if not then pretend what they found is “impeachable offence”

It’s textbook fishing expedition.

if republicans did same thing democrats are doing now they could’ve went after Obama on many occasions.

Fast n furious, daca, Iran deal, him going to Cuba, him getting caught on hot mic with Medvedev...

Republicans too could’ve had endless investigations subpoena his entire administration n try to catch them on perjury trap

of course bias msm would’ve then call out republicans n accuse them of abuse of power n attempting a coup against a democratically elected president. Trying to remove a president from office on bogus charges would then be viewed as “constitutional crisis”

 

[DoomPatrol]

democrats are trying to impeach trump n are still not sure themselves what actual crimes he committed.

they just wanna have endless investigations n n hope to eventually find something, if not then pretend what they found is “impeachable offence”

It’s textbook fishing expedition.

if republicans did same thing democrats are doing now they could’ve went after Obama on many occasions.

Fast n furious, daca, Iran deal, him going to Cuba, him getting caught on hot mic with Medvedev...

Republicans too could’ve had endless investigations subpoena his entire administration n try to catch them on perjury trap

of course bias msm would’ve then call out republicans n accuse them of abuse of power n attempting a coup against a democratically elected president. Trying to remove a president from office on bogus charges would then be viewed as “constitutional crisis”

How many times are you going to use the term impeachment incorrectly? And how many times are you going to pretend like we don't know exactly why he's being impeached and that the impeachment proceedings are the investigation to find the evidence?

This is textbook impeachment proceedings.

Fast and Furious, the ATF Gunwalking scandal, wasn't criminal or against American interests for personal gain. It was just stupid and irresponsible. The only person who would have been held criminally liable would have been Bill Newell, the Phoenix ATF supervisor who wanted to do the gun walks. There was no high level discussion regarding that situation involving President Obama as far I'm aware of.

DACA wasn't criminal or against American interests for personal gain. It was just something that Republicans are against, and it was passed legally and openly.

President Obama going to Cuba is no more criminal or for personal gain than President Trump going to visit the North Korean dictator or having several private meetings with Vladimir Putin. This was done legally and through the correct channels.

The only thing remotely similar about the President Medvedev situation is that he asked for time after the election to begin negotiations, but it wasn't for personal gain it was for American/Russian relations and it certainly didn't involve withholding any aid that was congressionally approved.

See your big problem, other than being a shamefully and willfully ignorant suck dick of course, is that I'm perfectly happy to say when Democrats do something stupid and illegal. I am not beholden to the Democratic party or any candidates. I wouldn't even say I'm a Democrat. I'm a moderate who picks the best choice out of the options. What President Trump has done is repeatedly break laws and get away with it and do political acts for personal gain while his party pretends he's perfect because they can't admit they let a scumbag hijack their party.

Now go take a fucking American Government community college course and learn what an impeachment is before you say more dumb shit. Your ignorance is honestly just astounding.

 

[grimballer]

How many times are you going to use the term impeachment incorrectly? And how many times are you going to pretend like we don't know exactly why he's being impeached and that the impeachment proceedings are the investigation to find the evidence?

This is textbook impeachment proceedings.

Fast and Furious, the ATF Gunwalking scandal, wasn't criminal or against American interests for personal gain. It was just stupid and irresponsible. The only person who would have been held criminally liable would have been Bill Newell, the Phoenix ATF supervisor who wanted to do the gun walks. There was no high level discussion regarding that situation involving President Obama as far I'm aware of.

DACA wasn't criminal or against American interests for personal gain. It was just something that Republicans are against, and it was passed legally and openly.

President Obama going to Cuba is no more criminal or for personal gain than President Trump going to visit the North Korean dictator or having several private meetings with Vladimir Putin. This was done legally and through the correct channels.

The only thing remotely similar about the President Medvedev situation is that he asked for time after the election to begin negotiations, but it wasn't for personal gain it was for American/Russian relations and it certainly didn't involve withholding any aid that was congressionally approved.

See your big problem, other than being a shamefully and willfully ignorant suck dick of course, is that I'm perfectly happy to say when Democrats do something stupid and illegal. I am not beholden to the Democratic party or any candidates. I wouldn't even say I'm a Democrat. I'm a moderate who picks the best choice out of the options. What President Trump has done is repeatedly break laws and get away with it and do political acts for personal gain while his party pretends he's perfect because they can't admit they let a scumbag hijack their party.

Now go take a fucking American Government community college course and learn what an impeachment is before you say more dumb shit. Your ignorance is honestly just astounding.

look it’s pretty obvious you’re not as smart as you think you are. Actually you’re pretty dumb.

All you do is listen to msnbc/cnn talking points n then come here n parrot what you heard from their “experts”.

In theory the house can impeach a president for whatever reason.

however in reality you need a by partisan support n 2/3 majority in senate to actually impeach the president

so to avoid partisan n political hit jobs impeachment is usually reserved for serious offences with solid proof of wrong doing.

the “I don’t like him, so he must be guilty of something” approach democrats are using right now isn’t good nuff.

but don’t take my sherdogger opinion on the matter, here’s an opinion of an actual expert. Law professor n liberal/democrat who’s been banned from msnbc/cnn cause he doesn’t toe the party line:



you welcome!

 

[DoomPatrol]

look it’s pretty obvious you’re not as smart as you think you are. Actually you’re pretty dumb.

All you do is listen to msnbc/cnn talking points n then come here n parrot what you heard from their “experts”.

In theory the house can impeach a president for whatever reason.

however in reality you need a by partisan support n 2/3 majority in senate to actually impeach the president

so to avoid partisan n political hit jobs impeachment is usually reserved for serious offences with solid proof of wrong doing.

the “I don’t like him, so he must be guilty of something” approach democrats are using right now isn’t good nuff.

but don’t take my sherdogger opinion on the matter, here’s an opinion of an actual expert. Law professor n liberal/democrat who’s been banned from msnbc/cnn cause he doesn’t toe the party line:



you welcome!

This isn't they don't like him so they impeach him. Bribery and misuse of office is perfectly fit within the framework of impeachment. Here's a little article from this small law school called... HARVARD. The overwhelming opinion for over 150 years from countless reviews of impeachment is that you're wrong and the single video you love to post is wrong too.

https://harvardlawreview.org/2018/12/high-crimes-without-law/

"a list that included the “misapplication of funds,” “abuse of official power,” “neglect of duty,” “encroachment on or contempts of Parliament’s prerogatives,” and corruption."

Trump's impeachment didn't occur until the investigation revealed testimony from highly respected government officials was brought forward. This is like John Gotti whining that the government was looking for an excuse to convict him. Well no shit. When you're a known criminal, people with a sense of justice are going to go after you. Trump is a known criminal with a history of asking for political favors for personal gain against rivals. When the pieces make sense, you investigate.

 

[Andy Capp]

It is arbitrary.


That is why as long as Republicans control the Senate, Trump will never be impeached. No matter what the evidence shows, they can simply say that it is not a "high crime" and therefore it is not impeachable.

I think if the people heard the whole story he would be be but there are some people refusing to testify.

 

[Last Samurai]

I think if the people heard the whole story he would be be but there are some people refusing to testify.

The Senators know full well what happened. They don't care.

 

[Andy Capp]

The Senators know full well what happened. They don't care.

Indeed, and it's the reason it's impossible to have any respect for their supporters. Here's hoping there are far fewer of them after this.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Pretty much why we can ignore anyone who goes on and on about "where's the crime?" Who gives a shit, impeachment doesn't require the commission of a crime. It requires an abuse or violation of some public trust.

But the knee jerk defenders won' touch that with a 10 foot pole, they're keep trying to steer the conversation into an area that's completely irrelevant.

What's the definition of is, we've arrived

Again

 

[fordman7795]

Actually Trumps behavior and the accusations against him are exactly grounds for impeachment. Clearly you don't even know what the fuck an impeachment proceeding is. Here's a hint... It's a formal investigation into alleged misconduct. Criminal charges and removal from office are options that can occur after the findings of an impeachment. The impeachment occurs to decide if he committed any crimes or if he was involved in misconduct, not because they know for a fact he committed a crime. So again, maybe you should shut the fuck up because you don't even know what an impeachment is.

Trump is being impeached because several government officials, all highly respected and holding high office, have claimed misconduct in relation to his actions towards Ukraine. That's grounds for an impeachment. This has nothing to do with a Democratic hissy-fit and everything to do with the fact that Trump likely engaged in unethical extortion to have political rivals looked into. Democrats don't like Trump because we've known from the beginning that he was a piece of shit.

"The notion that only criminal conduct can constitute sufficient grounds for impeachment does not comport with either the views of the founders or with historical practice.[1] Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist 65, described impeachable offenses as arising from "the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust."[3] Such offenses were "political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself."[3] According to this reasoning, impeachable conduct could include behavior that violates an official's duty to the country, even if such conduct is not necessarily a prosecutable offense. Indeed, in the past both houses of Congress have given the phrase "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" a broad reading, finding that impeachable offenses need not be limited to criminal conduct."

Impeachment of Walter L. Nixon, Jr., H.Rept. 101-36 at 5 (1989).

Cole, J. P.; Garvey, T. (October 29, 2015). "Report No. R44260, Impeachment and Removal"(PDF). Congressional Research Service. pp. 15–16. Retrieved September 22, 2016.

This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain. An earlier version from 2005 is at https://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/98-806.pdf.

One thing you did not reply to was the part about Clinton committing crimes. Can you share your opinion on why Clinton was acquitted?

 

[DoomPatrol]

One thing you did not reply to was the part about Clinton committing crimes. Can you share your opinion on why Clinton was acquitted?

Of which crime? I think he should have been convicted of the perjury charge personally. I'm not into partisan politics brother. I'm happy to call bullshit on Democrats too. I'm on the American people's side.

 

[fordman7795]

Of which crime? I think he should have been convicted of the perjury charge personally. I'm not into partisan politics brother. I'm happy to call bullshit on Democrats too. I'm on the American people's side.

I absolutely hate the stance of american political parties today of voting on the side of your party just because. “Oh this is a Republican sponsored Bill so I will vote no just because”. And the impeachment proceedings are a circus. 99.9% or maybe all of the Democrats already have their mind made up on impeachment so why even have the media circus? But back to slick silly. The perjury charge, lying under oath, how can one say he should be acquired of that? That’s crazy. I always hear the “he was impeached because of a blowjob”. Lol, no, he lied under oath (a felony? I believe). A high crime. But demos acquitted him of that. The whole impeachment thing happened before I was an adult so back then I had no opinion. Looking back it, it’s absurd.