Opinion POTWR 2019 Vol 5: Based On Known Facts, Would You Remove Trump From Office?

[zebby23]

You don't speak for all Americans, though.

Interesting that you don’t need to believe your president? Because “R”?

Wonder how you would react if we replaced Trump with Obama.

 

[zebby23]

Doesn't change anything.

You still don't speak for all Americans.

Show me where I said that I speak for all Americans?

You don’t care that the president can’t be believed? Or are you incapable of actually having discussion?

All because “R” lol

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

Where does it say that being a disgrace isn't enough to warrant removal from office?

It's not one specific lie. It's his pattern of dishonesty that's added up. I don't have a laundry list of 'em. But I've certainly come to expect his words to bear little resemblance to reality.

I'm sorry Cubo, but this is indistinguishable from you simply saying "I don't like him."

All you're doing is making statements about how you perceive the President's character. None of it is objectively true.

When asked for specifics, you only give a reason why you shouldn't have to give specifics.

How do you expect your arguments to be taken seriously if you put so little rigor into such an important topic?

 

[zebby23]

Doesn't change anything I just stated.

You still don't speak for all Americans.

You say everything that comes out of his mouth is a lie.....but there are millions upon millions who believe otherwise.

Are you saying that Trump doesn’t lie all the time?

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

He has copies of all the checks that Trump paid him to reimburse him for the hush money. Trump is on an audio recording approving, and discussing, making said payments. There is irrefutable proof of his involvement in this felonious activity.

Incorrect. The recorede message which was released last JULY indicates NOTHING about a payment, or when it was made nor HOW it was made. This has been shot down for over 7 months now and you guys keep running with it as if its some form of proof. It isnt, and that is why NOTHING has come of it after all this time.

This is what I mean. There are no KNOWN FACTS. Just a whole lot of dis-information thanks to near 24/7 news coverage of this non-issue created to cover the actual collusion, the media with the DNC over Sanders.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/20/us/politics/michael-cohen-trump-tape.html

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

Your entire premise is exactly how the government has taken down mobsters for decades. You are insanely wrong

Rico cases are not normal cases...just stop.

https://witnesses.uslegal.com/credibility-of-witnesses/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credible_witness

 

[BarryDillon]

Incorrect. The recorede message which was released last JULY indicates NOTHING about a payment, or when it was made nor HOW it was made. This has been shot down for over 7 months now and you guys keep running with it as if its some form of proof. It isnt, and that is why NOTHING has come of it after all this time.

This is what I mean. There are no KNOWN FACTS. Just a whole lot of dis-information thanks to near 24/7 news coverage of this non-issue created to cover the actual collusion, the media with the DNC over Sanders.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/20/us/politics/michael-cohen-trump-tape.html

Cohen has been charged and is going to prison. That counts as something happening.

Also, your characterization of the tape is extremely dishonest. It's literally a conversation about paying the hush money. Trump offers to pay with cash, and Cohen says, "No, no, I'll take care of it.".

You're also ignoring the existence of the reimbursement checks, which is asinine, since we know they exist. We've already publicly seen one of them, and congress will have the rest soon. Obviously, SDNY already has all the items in question and more.

 

[second sight]

Yes, I would choose to remove him for the firing of Comey, and I've held to that. I don't consider that to be a realistic outcome, but that is my opinion.

looks like half the fbi needs to be fired

 

[zebby23]

The problem also with many republicans is that Trump was 100% correct when he said he could stand on 5th Avenue and shoot someone and he wouldn’t lose support. How do you deal with people like this?

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

Cohen has been charged and is going to prison. That counts as something happening.

Also, your characterization of the tape is extremely dishonest. It's literally a conversation about paying the hush money.

1. Cohen LIED, that is why HE is going to prison. Cohen is Cohen, Trump is Trump.
2. I posted a LINK TO AN ARTICLE...it isnt "my" characterization about it...and its a LEFT leaning rag so no dismissals from you will stand.

Facts. Only. Or you have nothing. Which is what you have. Nothing.

 

[BarryDillon]

1. Cohen LIED, that is why HE is going to prison. Cohen is Cohen, Trump is Trump.
2. I posted a LINK TO AN ARTICLE...it isnt "my" characterization about it...and its a LEFT leaning rag so no dismissals from you will stand.

Facts. Only. Or you have nothing. Which is what you have. Nothing.

1. Partially true. Please actually read the charging document. They engaged in a criminal conspiracy together.
2. You still haven't addressed the merits of my argument.

I laid out facts, you dismissing them isn't an argument. If Trump wasn't involved, why is he on tape discussing the payments beforehand?

If Trump wasn't involved, why did he pay the money back to Cohen?

Rudy Guiliani went on national TV on behalf of the President and told everyone that the payments happened, and that Trump was reimbursing Cohen for said payments. The argument being that there was no campaign finance violation.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

This is about impeaching Trump. Cohen breaking laws are a different topic and he provided no "facts" that Trump was involved. He is also a person that can now not be fully trusted. He perjured himself already and now his stance on who and what Trump is has been a total reversal.

You do not go from defending someone to going on a long rant about how evil they are without being coheresed in some way. His entire opening statement was a scary show how a person can be forced to say things.

And if you want to claim that Cohen always believed these things it means he can be trusted even less due to the then simple "fact" that he knowingly was working with an evil wicked person that is a mass murderer in the waiting, willingly, until he was caught.

Either way, Cohen is not a trustworthy person and everything he says and does should be tossed out as they would in any court of law when a witness has no credibility.

So Cohen lied when he took the plea deal, or he did the illegal shit behind Trump's back?

I'm sorry Cubo, but this is indistinguishable from you simply saying "I don't like him."

All you're doing is making statements about how you perceive the President's character. None of it is objectively true.

When asked for specifics, you only give a reason why you shouldn't have to give specifics.

How do you expect your arguments to be taken seriously if you put so little rigor into such an important topic?

No, it isn't.

Go ahead and tell me you've never heard his say anything you were certain was untrue.

Here's some specifics that make up the pattern of dishonesty.

It's my opinion and I'm not trying to convince anyone to share it.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

@Cubo de Sangre

It’s tough to have a semi intelligent conversation with someone when all they post is memes to be honest.

Back on ignore he goes lol

Sorry, bro. Good help is hard to find around here. Thanks for your patience.

 

[JamesRussler]

Not only would I not remove Trump from office (I voted for him, and I approve of the job he’s doing), but there is no way anyone can lawfully remove Trump from office.

There is only one lawful way a healthy sitting president can be involuntarily “removed” from office before the end of his term: impeachment. The standard for impeachment is “high crimes and misdemeanors.” To date, I have seen no evidence that Trump committed a crime, let alone a “high crime,” even though rabid partisans in the FBI and DOJ have been vigorously investigating him for at least two years. Moreover, there is substantial evidence indicating that those investigations were unfounded and illegally instituted, based on falsified evidence, for purely political reasons. What we have been witnessing is an attempted coup. Those who participated in the attempted coup (perhaps hundreds of people) should be charged accordingly. In my opinion, this is the biggest scandal in U.S. history.

Setting the legality of Trump-haters’ investigations aside, we have very little guidance on what constitutes a “high crime or misdemeanor.” Some have suggested that Congress has plenary authority to make that determination, but it appears that it is still fundamentally a question of law reserved for judicial review (i.e., a question for the Court). The Framers clearly saw a distinction between “high crimes and misdemeanors” and ordinary crimes; otherwise they would have simply used the word “crimes.” Crimes that don’t, at minimum, qualify as “crimes of moral turpitude” arguably cannot constitute HC&M. Moreover, crimes that don’t directly implicate the national interest arguably shouldn’t be HC&M either. So if Congress voted to impeach Trump for unpaid parking tickets, I believe Trump could appeal that determination and likely succeed. The same result would apply to campaign finance violations, simple assaults, or even felony possession of drugs or firearms. “High crimes and misdemeanors” are not “ordinary crimes and misdemeanors.”

But what about crimes such as perjury or false statements? Those are traditionally considered “crimes of moral turpitude.” After all, Clinton was impeached for perjury, and Republicans didn’t complain. IMO, perjury constituting HC&M would have to involve a complete lie on a bonafide matter of public importance, under oath, in public, and on the floor of Congress, or in open court. I won’t say the Bill Clinton impeachment was justified (investigating his sexual affairs really wasn’t in the public’s interest), but Clinton clearly lied under oath—far worse than any of the “lies” our fact-checking Leftist friends accuse Trump of making. If Clinton had lied about selling uranium to Russia or leaking classified national security documents, that would arguably be a HC&M (provided the lie was under oath, and in open court / on the floor of Congress). The generic “false statements” or “obstruction” charges would be insufficient.

IMO, HC&M arguably should include a limited amount of crimes that do not directly implicate the national interest—crimes ordinarily considered the worst things you can do. That list would include crimes such as murder, rape, pedophilia, torture, and other such reprehensible acts. I doubt anyone disagrees that these are “high crimes,” but from a Constititional perspective, it’s debatable whether such crimes (which are traditionally considered state offenses) should qualify as HC&M.

How does any of this apply to Trump? It doesn’t. Nothing Trump has done remotely qualifies as a “high crime or misdemeanor.” Trump should not be, and cannot be removed as POTUS. Anyone who answered “yes” in your poll simply does not respect our Constitution or the will of its People.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

So Cohen lied when he took the plea deal, or he did the illegal shit behind Trump's back?

You know the answer to this already. He lied under oath, about a bunch of things especially about his own taxes.

This is why you will not be able to find any news article in any of the MSM media "after" the hearing about Cohen giving proof against Trump, but will find MANY articles about that leading up to the hearing.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

No, it isn't.

Go ahead and tell me you've never heard his say anything you were certain was untrue.

Here's some specifics that make up the pattern of dishonesty.

It's my opinion and I'm not trying to convince anyone to share it.

Your opinion is what I'm interested in, not some article you googled three minutes before you posted it.

Why are you personally unable to articulate a single lie, yet you believe some nebulas unproven lie rises to the occasion of removing a sitting President?

I'm trying to help you Cubo, you're giving in to faulty logic and groupthink.

 

[Andy Capp]

I feel like I need to elaborate on my position. I knew Trump would be a total train wreck when he was elected. I don't think he should ever have held office. But now that he's there, you Americans did this to yourselves. My only real concern at this point is the damage this will do to Canada. Right now it doesn't look too bad for us but for the negative impact on politics in this country.

Regardless, in the context of political (and social) reality, I think it's best if the process plays out and Mueller gives his report. If Trump is provably guilty of a criminal conspiracy involving the Russians, it should be possible to make the case clear even to the layman. Then, refusal to take action against Trump will be seen as further corruption on the part of the Republicans.

If the case cannot be made, I would say people in possession of the facts will still ensure he is primaried.

 

[BarryDillon]

1. No. Cohen ALLEGES a conspiracy. It is not a FACT. If it were a "fact" the media would be talking about it being a "fact" no stop.
2. You do not get to dismiss my post and then claim I havent addressed your argument.

I presented you with PROOF what you said was incorrect via the very media you got your information from. Deal with THAT and move along. Your opinion is not wanted nor will be taken into consideration when FACTS are required.

You're still refusing to address the evidence I've provided you with. The signed check(signed by Trump himself) is hard evidence. The audio recording of Trump discussing the payments is hard evidence.

You don't have to care that he committed felonies, but you don't get to lie and pretend that those things don't exist.

 

[BarryDillon]

Not only would I not remove Trump from office (I voted for him, and I approve of the job he’s doing), but there is no way anyone can lawfully remove Trump from office.

There is only one lawful way a healthy sitting president can be involuntarily “removed” from office before the end of his term: impeachment. The standard for impeachment is “high crimes and misdemeanors.” To date, I have seen no evidence that Trump committed a crime, let alone a “high crime,” even though rabid partisans in the FBI and DOJ have been vigorously investigating him for at least two years. Moreover, there is substantial evidence indicating that those investigations were unfounded and illegally instituted, based on falsified evidence, for purely political reasons. What we have been witnessing is an attempted coup. Those who participated in the attempted coup (perhaps hundreds of people) should be charged accordingly. In my opinion, this is the biggest scandal in U.S. history.

Setting the legality of Trump-haters’ investigations aside, we have very little guidance on what constitutes a “high crime or misdemeanor.” Some have suggested that Congress has plenary authority to make that determination, but it appears that it is still fundamentally a question of law reserved for judicial review (i.e., a question for the Court). The Framers clearly saw a distinction between “high crimes and misdemeanors” and ordinary crimes; otherwise they would have simply used the word “crimes.” Crimes that don’t, at minimum, qualify as “crimes of moral turpitude” arguably cannot constitute HC&M. Moreover, crimes that don’t directly implicate the national interest arguably shouldn’t be HC&M either. So if Congress voted to impeach Trump for unpaid parking tickets, I believe Trump could appeal that determination and likely succeed. The same result would apply to campaign finance violations, simple assaults, or even felony possession of drugs or firearms. “High crimes and misdemeanors” are not “ordinary crimes and misdemeanors.”

But what about crimes such as perjury or false statements? Those are traditionally considered “crimes of moral turpitude.” After all, Clinton was impeached for perjury, and Republicans didn’t complain. IMO, perjury constituting HC&M would have to involve a complete lie on a bonafide matter of public importance, under oath, in public, and on the floor of Congress, or in open court. I won’t say the Bill Clinton impeachment was justified (investigating his sexual affairs really wasn’t in the public’s interest), but Clinton clearly lied under oath—far worse than any of the “lies” our fact-checking Leftist friends accuse Trump of making. If Clinton had lied about selling uranium to Russia or leaking classified national security documents, that would arguably be a HC&M (provided the lie was under oath, and in open court / on the floor of Congress). The generic “false statements” or “obstruction” charges would be insufficient.

IMO, HC&M arguably should include a limited amount of crimes that do not directly implicate the national interest—crimes ordinarily considered the worst things you can do. That list would include crimes such as murder, rape, pedophilia, torture, and other such reprehensible acts. I doubt anyone disagrees that these are “high crimes,” but from a Constititional perspective, it’s debatable whether such crimes (which are traditionally considered state offenses) should qualify as HC&M.

How does any of this apply to Trump? It doesn’t. Nothing Trump has done remotely qualifies as a “high crime or misdemeanor.” Trump should not be, and cannot be removed as POTUS. Anyone who answered “yes” in your poll simply does not respect our Constitution or the will of its People.

He has committed verifiable, proven, felonies already. More to come.

 

[JamesRussler]

No evidence of a crime huh?

Wow some of you have on some thick ass blinders.

With all due respect Zebby, the Left was accusing Trump of being a criminal, without evidence, long before any of these investigations opened. You assumed that just because he’s an asshole, he must also be a criminal.