PackBacker07 said:

---

cowboypack02 said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

Seems like the Trump Administration is going to defy all Congressional subpoenas. Didn't Nixon try this and the Supreme Court unanimously ruled against him?

---

Difference is that Congress actually voted to start impeachment proceedings with Nixon. Trump has already said that he would provide Congress with what they had requested if they took a vote so maybe that should be the next step before continuing.

---

I don't believe there has to be a vote before an impeachment inquiry? The inquiry could produce articles of impeachment, which then the House could potentially formally vote to impeach. And what has this administration done to earn trust on producing documents, outside of a Nixonian Supreme Court decision? Would they defy the SC also?

---

Article 1 Section 2 says that the House of Representatives has the sole power of impeachment. Not the speaker of the house, not the Democrats in the house, the entire House of Representatives.

Let's bring it to the floor for a vote. Until then i am ok with the administration telling the Democrats to pound sand.

After the stunt that the Schiff and the Democrats pulled with Volker last week it's pretty obvious to me that regardless of what the facts actually are they are out for blood. That should be a very worry some thing for any of us

cowboypack02 said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

cowboypack02 said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

Seems like the Trump Administration is going to defy all Congressional subpoenas. Didn't Nixon try this and the Supreme Court unanimously ruled against him?

---

Difference is that Congress actually voted to start impeachment proceedings with Nixon. Trump has already said that he would provide Congress with what they had requested if they took a vote so maybe that should be the next step before continuing.

---

I don't believe there has to be a vote before an impeachment inquiry? The inquiry could produce articles of impeachment, which then the House could potentially formally vote to impeach. And what has this administration done to earn trust on producing documents, outside of a Nixonian Supreme Court decision? Would they defy the SC also?

---

Article 1 Section 2 says that the House of Representatives has the sole power of impeachment. Not the speaker of the house, not the Democrats in the house, the entire House of Representatives.

Let's bring it to the floor for a vote. Until then i am ok with the administration telling the Democrats to pound sand.

After the stunt that the Schiff and the Democrats pulled with Volker last week it's pretty obvious to me that regardless of what the facts actually are they are out for blood. That should be a very worry some thing for any of us

---

Correct, but the House sets the rules, and the leader of the House is the Speaker. There is no specific outline on how to handle the process. The only vote will be on whether to ratify the articles of impeachment and thereby send them across the building to the Senate. What rules are they not following and/or circumventing? Congress has the power to check the executive branch, and it's very clear this executive branch feels they are above that.

I am trying to be very open minded about this as it's not a good look for the nation at-large, but I am going to assume you are coming at it from one side (please correct me if I am wrong). You would be ok with a Democratic administration calling impeachment unconstitutional, when it is in fact in the Constitution? And said Democratic administration not complying with Republican subpoenas? If there is nothing to hide, then there is nothing to hide. This is not a banana republic.

PackBacker07 said:

---

cowboypack02 said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

cowboypack02 said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

Seems like the Trump Administration is going to defy all Congressional subpoenas. Didn't Nixon try this and the Supreme Court unanimously ruled against him?

---

Difference is that Congress actually voted to start impeachment proceedings with Nixon. Trump has already said that he would provide Congress with what they had requested if they took a vote so maybe that should be the next step before continuing.

---

I don't believe there has to be a vote before an impeachment inquiry? The inquiry could produce articles of impeachment, which then the House could potentially formally vote to impeach. And what has this administration done to earn trust on producing documents, outside of a Nixonian Supreme Court decision? Would they defy the SC also?

---

Article 1 Section 2 says that the House of Representatives has the sole power of impeachment. Not the speaker of the house, not the Democrats in the house, the entire House of Representatives.

Let's bring it to the floor for a vote. Until then i am ok with the administration telling the Democrats to pound sand.

After the stunt that the Schiff and the Democrats pulled with Volker last week it's pretty obvious to me that regardless of what the facts actually are they are out for blood. That should be a very worry some thing for any of us

---

Correct, but the House sets the rules, and the leader of the House is the Speaker. There is no specific outline on how to handle the process. The only vote will be on whether to ratify the articles of impeachment and thereby send them across the building to the Senate. What rules are they not following and/or circumventing? Congress has the power to check the executive branch, and it's very clear this executive branch feels they are above that.

I am trying to be very open minded about this as it's not a good look for the nation at-large, but I am going to assume you are coming at it from one side (please correct me if I am wrong). You would be ok with a Democratic administration calling impeachment unconstitutional, when it is in fact in the Constitution? And said Democratic administration not complying with Republican subpoenas? If there is nothing to hide, then there is nothing to hide. This is not a banana republic.

---

I'd have a problem with any party not holding a vote before starting any type of impeachment process. The truth is that we all have a right to know how the representatives that we voted for and put in office will vote on such a thing. But we don't, because it hasn't happened. All of the representatives need to vote because when we go to the voting booth next year this will be in a lot of people's minds and they should know where the person that represents their voice stands on such a thing.

As far as the subpoenas, the house isn't issuing subpoenas yet. They are sending out letters asking for things. When they finally decide to start sending out subpoenas then the administration gets to fight it in court, as it is their right.

Everything in regards this process should be out in the open, and it's not. The investigation should be out in the open, not behind closed doors. We should know where our reps stand, and not just hear them run off at the mouth on TV. We should get to know the testimony of witnesses in full, not fed piecemeal bits to make someone look bad. We have a right to know who the whistleblower is, and which political candidate they are working for, not just believe the guy because some political says we should. But first and foremost, the house should vote to actually start the impeachment proceedings, not just say it's so because one person says it is

It's not to a vote yet because the impeachment inquiry is basically the grand jury stage of impeachment proceedings. They will eventually vote on it, but you don't lightly enter into impeachment, contrary to what the Republicans are saying these allegations are deeply troubling and should be handled as such.

ChetManley said:

---

It's not to a vote yet because the impeachment inquiry is basically the grand jury stage of impeachment proceedings. They will eventually vote on it, but you don't lightly enter into impeachment, contrary to what the Republicans are saying these allegations are deeply troubling and should be handled as such.

---

It hasn't been voted on yet because Nancy ain't got the votes. That's the pure facts as has been reported by many outlets including the right side on fox and the far left on CNN and MSNBC. As an Independent, I can't stand all of y'all's candidates. They are the reason we are in the **** we are in now.

In regard to protecting the identity of the whistleblower, there is a reason those protections are in place. Trump has already suggested that they should be killed like in the good ole days (whenever those were). As far as how tightly some aspects of this are under wraps, that's literally prosecution 101, you don't tip your hand until proceedings are underway. Today Giuliani's associates who are on tap to be questioned by the House were arrested while reportedly trying to flee the country. If everything was "out in the open" as you want it, the Trump administration would go into full out coverup mode.

Our representatives will go on the record with their vote but only after proper procedures have been followed.

What do you think the point of an investigation is exactly?

You gather all the facts, present them to the relevant parties and in this case it is then voted on. Can you link to where it's been said she "doesn't have the votes"? Regardless, if that is the case that could very well change once the investigation is complete and any of the alleged misdoings are shown to have occurred.

ChetManley said:

---

What do you think the point of an investigation is exactly?

You gather all the facts, present them to the relevant parties and in this case it is then voted on. Can you link to where it's been said she "doesn't have the votes"? Regardless, if that is the case that could very well change once the investigation is complete and any of the alleged misdoings are shown to have occurred.

---

You're on the far left. Pay attention to your CNN and MSNBC far left people. They've even said it. That's the issue. People like you on the far left and people like you on the far right. Sadly, I've reached the point that I don't care anymore. I wish y'all on both sides would get a damn room and leave the country alone. Totally and completely ruining this country. Done with this entire thread. I started it hoping for honest talk that didn't go far left or right. I should have known better. As an independent, run a damn candidate on the left who is half ass decent and same goes for the right. Until then, the country suffers because of both far right and left sides.

Hey guys first post in this thread, just wanted to add my two cents. I don't understand stand the complaint that there should be an impeachment vote now. That's kind of like agreeing taking a test on a subject you've never studied.

ChetManley said:

---

It's not to a vote yet because the impeachment inquiry is basically the grand jury stage of impeachment proceedings. They will eventually vote on it, but you don't lightly enter into impeachment, contrary to what the Republicans are saying these allegations are deeply troubling and should be handled as such.

---

If that is true, why had they already had three votes for impeachment?

Impeachment #1 - December 6, 2017. 58 Democrats voted to advance impeachment for the "high crime" of dissing NFL anthem protest

Impeachment #2 - January 19, 2019. 66 Democrats voted to advance impeachment for the "high crime" of saying ****hole countries.

Impeachment #3 - July 17, 2019. 95 Democrats voted to advance impeachment for the "high crime" of insulting The Squad

Impeachment #4 - October ??, 2019. The house refuses to vote on this one, but is instead conducting it in the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.


I don't think you can argue that you don't enter into impeachment lightly, because this is the 4th time in the last 2 years we've done this dance. If they are willing to vote on the other three impeachment why not now? Do they have less than before to impeach him on, or are they afraid that the impeachment won't pass again.

I am troubled by the fact that we have no information on these allegations outside of what the Democrats are leaking. Pelosi, Schiff, and crew are still trying to convince us that some whistle blower who has secondhand knowledge of a call is more believable than the actual call transcripts and notes.

Up to this point I haven't been convinced of Trump doing anything outside of what any other politician has done, which hasn't been impeachment worthy yet.

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

ChetManley said:

---

What do you think the point of an investigation is exactly?

You gather all the facts, present them to the relevant parties and in this case it is then voted on. Can you link to where it's been said she "doesn't have the votes"? Regardless, if that is the case that could very well change once the investigation is complete and any of the alleged misdoings are shown to have occurred.

---

You're on the far left. Pay attention to your CNN and MSNBC far left people. They've even said it. That's the issue. People like you on the far left and people like you on the far right. Sadly, I've reached the point that I don't care anymore. I wish y'all on both sides would get a damn room and leave the country alone. Totally and completely ruining this country. Done with this entire thread. I started it hoping for honest talk that didn't go far left or right. I should have known better. As an independent, run a damn candidate on the left who is half ass decent and same goes for the right. Until then, the country suffers because of both far right and left sides.

---

For a non-partisan, you really like to label people.
The far left are not the only ones favoring impeachment, or moving that way

As I stated above I'm a registered Republican. I genuinely want a properly run impeachment inquiry based on facts, whether or not if those facts lead to a formal impeachment. Rushing a process and not following protocol in an instance like this cheapens what is a necessary part of our Democracy.

IseWolf22 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

ChetManley said:

---

What do you think the point of an investigation is exactly?

You gather all the facts, present them to the relevant parties and in this case it is then voted on. Can you link to where it's been said she "doesn't have the votes"? Regardless, if that is the case that could very well change once the investigation is complete and any of the alleged misdoings are shown to have occurred.

---

You're on the far left. Pay attention to your CNN and MSNBC far left people. They've even said it. That's the issue. People like you on the far left and people like you on the far right. Sadly, I've reached the point that I don't care anymore. I wish y'all on both sides would get a damn room and leave the country alone. Totally and completely ruining this country. Done with this entire thread. I started it hoping for honest talk that didn't go far left or right. I should have known better. As an independent, run a damn candidate on the left who is half ass decent and same goes for the right. Until then, the country suffers because of both far right and left sides.

---

For a non-partisan, you really like to label people.
The far left are not the only ones favoring impeachment, or moving that way

---

Can you not read my post and see that I have constantly called out the far left and far right? Call it labeling if you want to but it's fact.

ChetManley said:

---

As I stated above I'm a registered Republican. I genuinely want a properly run impeachment inquiry based on facts, whether or not if those facts lead to a formal impeachment. Rushing a process and not following protocol in an instance like this cheapens what is a necessary part of our Democracy.

---

My dad is a registered democrat who is far right and my brother is a registered Republican who is far left. Being registered something doesn't change far left or far right.

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

ChetManley said:

---

What do you think the point of an investigation is exactly?

You gather all the facts, present them to the relevant parties and in this case it is then voted on. Can you link to where it's been said she "doesn't have the votes"? Regardless, if that is the case that could very well change once the investigation is complete and any of the alleged misdoings are shown to have occurred.

---

You're on the far left. Pay attention to your CNN and MSNBC far left people. They've even said it. That's the issue. People like you on the far left and people like you on the far right. Sadly, I've reached the point that I don't care anymore. I wish y'all on both sides would get a damn room and leave the country alone. Totally and completely ruining this country. Done with this entire thread. I started it hoping for honest talk that didn't go far left or right. I should have known better. As an independent, run a damn candidate on the left who is half ass decent and same goes for the right. Until then, the country suffers because of both far right and left sides.

---

For a non-partisan, you really like to label people.
The far left are not the only ones favoring impeachment, or moving that way

---

Can you not read my post and see that I have constantly called out the far left and far right? Call it labeling if you want to but it's fact.

---

Yes, you constantly call out far right and far left, pretty much all the time. But the rest of your posts often make me wonder what you consider "far right" and "far left."

ChetManley said:

---

As I stated above I'm a registered Republican. I genuinely want a properly run impeachment inquiry based on facts, whether or not if those facts lead to a formal impeachment. Rushing a process and not following protocol in an instance like this cheapens what is a necessary part of our Democracy.

---

I agree with you 100%.

So lets put it on the floor for a vote and go from there

I'm just confused what in these posts over the last few days has led you to wish you'd never started this thread. In my eyes it's been entirely civil and although there are differing opinions it has not devolved into right v left as you seem to think it has.

Well, after Trump decided to abandon our allies, the Kurds with the claim that he was doing it because "Our soldiers need to be coming home and we don't need to be in pointless wars" and then sending 1,000 troops to Saudi Arabia I can get on the impeachment train now. Bet a lot of you didn't see that coming!

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

Well, after Trump decided to abandon our allies, the Kurds with the claim that he was doing it because "Our soldiers need to be coming home and we don't need to be in pointless wars" and then sending 1,000 troops to Saudi Arabia I can get on the impeachment train now. Bet a lot of you didn't see that coming!

---

It's insanity.

PackBacker07 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

Well, after Trump decided to abandon our allies, the Kurds with the claim that he was doing it because "Our soldiers need to be coming home and we don't need to be in pointless wars" and then sending 1,000 troops to Saudi Arabia I can get on the impeachment train now. Bet a lot of you didn't see that coming!

---

It's insanity.

---

Pure and total insanity.

The scary thing is that he is:

- Clueless
- Egotistical / Narcissistic
- Powerful
- Greedy

That's a dangerous combination that leads to National and Global policy being shaped to personally benefit his worldview and line his pockets.

statefan91 said:

---

The scary thing is that he is:

- Clueless
- Egotistical / Narcissistic
- Powerful
- Greedy

That's a dangerous combination that leads to National and Global policy being shaped to personally benefit his worldview and line his pockets.

---

Considering we are discussing people losing their lives and the potential for another war that could cost American lives, is it possible for you to discuss that without using the lefts line of "line his pockets?" I mean, we are talking about losing lives here and while I know it's always important to get the talking points in, maybe just this once we can not do that. Maybe?

Is the relocation of American troops worthy of impeachment? or does it just make people mad?

NatePait94 said:

---

Is the relocation of American troops worthy of impeachment? or does it just make people mad?

---

Doubt it is impeachable but his bull**** excuse for doing it should be impeachable on ignorance and stupidity alone. At this point, I hope he does commit an impeachable act because what he decided to do, against all advice from people much smarter then him, is pure stupidity.

NatePait94 said:

---

Is the relocation of American troops worthy of impeachment? or does it just make people mad?

---

Regardless of if i agree with the decision to relocate troops i believe it is a policy issue, and not impeachment worthy. He isn't breaking laws by doing something he has the constitutional right to do.

I think it is just making people mad, although when the guy breathes is makes people mad so that isn't a surprise.

In saying that i do not agree with him removing the troops protecting the Kurds

I don't think the decision to abandon allies is an impeachable offense. That is a military decision well within his right as Commander in Chief. It's obviously a terrible decision and has already had unintended consequences and appears to be opening the door for ISIS to regroup, but that is his decision and something he will have to deal with the fallout of. I honestly don't think his base cares about international policy though so not sure how harmful it will be.

Now, using his position as President to urge multiple other countries to investigate a political rival could be considered an impeachable offense. I think it's pretty dishonest if someone thinks a Republican house wouldn't have jumped at the chance to impeach Obama if reports came out that he was withholding aid from Israel in exchange for them investigating Mitt Romney.

I agree.

statefan91 said:

---

I don't think the decision to abandon allies is an impeachable offense. That is a military decision well within his right as Commander in Chief. It's obviously a terrible decision and has already had unintended consequences and appears to be opening the door for ISIS to regroup, but that is his decision and something he will have to deal with the fallout of. I honestly don't think his base cares about international policy though so not sure how harmful it will be.

Now, using his position as President to urge multiple other countries to investigate a political rival could be considered an impeachable offense. I think it's pretty dishonest if someone thinks a Republican house wouldn't have jumped at the chance to impeach Obama if reports came out that he was withholding aid from Israel in exchange for them investigating Mitt Romney.

---

It's already been well documented that at least 4 Democrat senators threatened aid to Ukraine in they didn't work with Mueller to investigate Trump, I assume that you will be falling on the side of those senators being removed from office as well, since in the call Trump asked Ukraine to cooperate with Barr and Guliani who were both investigating as well

I know I'm replying to myself but I just don't understand what Republicans see in Trump.

- He's ballooned the deficit
- Created a trade war with China
- Created need for Farmer bailout ($25B+ so far)
- Destabilized Iran agreement and created increased hostilities
- Destabilized progress made in fight against ISIS and appears to be helping them find a resurgence
- Abandoned allies in the process
- No progress on coming up with a better approach to healthcare
- No progress to reducing prescription drug costs


Really all he's been able to do is not mess up the economy yet, get SC justices confirmed (more McConnell than anything), and make people feel like they don't have to hide their controversial views on immigrants and other religions.

I honestly have zero idea what you're talking about. The Mueller investigation was set up by Trump's DOJ and run by Rod R. Who was nominated by Trump. It was a legal investigation into the details of Russian interference in the election, potential obstruction of justice, and Trump's campaign involvement.

Giuliani is Trump's PERSONAL lawyer and a part of his campaign. Absolutely inappropriate for him to be involved with anything outside of that scope.

statefan91 said:

---

I know I'm replying to myself but I just don't understand what Republicans see in Trump.

- He's ballooned the deficit
- Created a trade war with China
- Created need for Farmer bailout ($25B+ so far)
- Destabilized Iran agreement and created increased hostilities
- Destabilized progress made in fight against ISIS and appears to be helping them find a resurgence
- Abandoned allies in the process
- No progress on coming up with a better approach to healthcare
- No progress to reducing prescription drug costs


Really all he's been able to do is not mess up the economy yet, get SC justices confirmed (more McConnell than anything), and make people feel like they don't have to hide their controversial views on immigrants and other religions.

---

- He's ballooned the deficit - Yes he did, and i'm not happy about it
- Created a trade war with China - We've been getting screwed by China for years in regards to manufacturing, currency manipulation, and intellectual property rights. I'm glad that someone did something about it
- Created need for Farmer bailout ($25B+ so far) - I don't like it, but i understand it
- Destabilized Iran agreement and created increased hostilities - Iran was already extremely hostile towards us, and that didn't change because of the Iran agreement. We got the short end of the stick on it and i didn't agree with the agreement from the start
- Destabilized progress made in fight against ISIS and appears to be helping them find a resurgence - You can't prove this yet, maybe eventually maybe so
- Abandoned allies in the process - I don't agree with all of the policy decisions that Trump makes
- No progress on coming up with a better approach to healthcare - I thought obamacare was suppose to be the great fix, but i guess not. I'd honestly prefer the government to stay out of my healthcare.
- No progress to reducing prescription drug costs - I'd prefer government to stay out of healthcare. All they do is screw things up

Really all he's been able to do is not mess up the economy yet, get SC justices confirmed (more McConnell than anything), and make people feel like they don't have to hide their controversial views on immigrants and other religions. Thinking that we have a problem with illegal immigration and something should be done about it isn't controversial. if you think it is that's a you problem


Finally - While i don't agree with everything that Trump does, none of the things you listed above have anything to do with impeachment. All of the items you listed are policy issues you have with the guy, not criminal issues.

statefan91 said:

---

I honestly have zero idea what you're talking about. The Mueller investigation was set up by Trump's DOJ and run by Rod R. Who was nominated by Trump. It was a legal investigation into the details of Russian interference in the election, potential obstruction of justice, and Trump's campaign involvement.

Barr and Giuliani is Trump's PERSONAL lawyer and a part of his campaign. Absolutely inappropriate for him to be involved with anything outside of that scope.

---

Washington Post Article It got almost no attention, but in May, CNN reported that Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) wrote a letter to Ukraine's prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe. In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake. Describing themselves as "strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine," the Democratic senators declared, "We have supported [the] capacity-building process and are disappointed that some in Kyiv appear to have cast aside these [democratic] principles to avoid the ire of President Trump," before demanding Lutsenko "reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation."


The Hill Earlier this month, during a bipartisan meeting in Kiev, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) delivered a pointed message to Ukraine's new president, Volodymyr Zelensky.

While choosing his words carefully, Murphy made clear by his own account that Ukraine currently enjoyed bipartisan support for its U.S. aid but that could be jeopardized if the new president acquiesced to requests by President Trump's lawyer Rudy Giuliani to investigate past corruption allegations involving Americans, including former Vice President Joe Biden's family.

I'm not sure what parrallel you're trying to draw?

- One example is an investigation into Russian Interference, Obstruction of Justice, and Trump's campaign involvement. Investigation led by Trump's DOJ and Rod R. (a Trump appointee). It was a legal investigation as I mentioned...

- Second example is a request from the President to investigate his political rival (no active investigation from DOJ) and to work with his personal lawyer who is also a part of his campaign. I seriously don't get how people don't see a problem with this.

statefan91 said:

---

I'm not sure what parrallel you're trying to draw?

- One example is an investigation into Russian Interference, Obstruction of Justice, and Trump's campaign involvement. Investigation led by Trump's DOJ and Rod R. (a Trump appointee). It was a legal investigation as I mentioned...

- Second example is a request from the President to investigate his political rival (no active investigation from DOJ) and to work with his personal lawyer who is also a part of his campaign. I seriously don't get how people don't see a problem with this.

---

I would argue that the investigation into Biden is an investigation into corruption by a american politician. Its not Trumps fault that Biden's kid got 50K for a job that he didn't understand at all and its not Trump's fault that Biden decided to brag on tape that he had would cut US aide it a prosecutor wasn't fired. I don't see how people have a problem with this