emmjay
Full Member
Posts: 1,734
|
Post by emmjay on Oct 1, 2019 0:29:15 GMT -5
Just curious, Rich: what would it take for you to think impeachment was warranted? Is there anything?
|
|
|
Post by maurinsky on Oct 1, 2019 7:24:10 GMT -5
Fuck. I mean, I loath him and think he's a cancer, a danger, and an embarrassment. But impeachment, especially of this president under these terms, and more especially if it's a successful (is that the right word?) impeachment? It will tear us apart. IF we get to that point, I hope he can be made to see it and will quit to save remaining face, and/or because he gets offered some sort of immunity. (Would that be legal? Probably not? "We won't file federal charges if you quite instead of let us remove you via impeachment, which we absolutely have the votes to do." ) Oh, and then we are stuck w/ Pence. Oh, and if this happens on a certain timeline, the primaries and nomination are AFU, and we might even have a case where the R nominee can't be on the ballot in some places if deadlines are missed. I realize there are a lot of leaps here, but it's scary. I'm not totally understanding the glee over impeachment. It something that may be a necessary evil, but that still makes it an evil. All of this has the potential to be very, very bad for the US. We are already torn apart. People in positions of power should be held accountable.
|
|
|
Post by Sprockey on Oct 1, 2019 7:55:39 GMT -5
Can someone explain the moving of documents to a more secure server issue?
Is there a difference between a top secret server and a codeword server?
|
|
|
Post by Tpatt100 on Oct 1, 2019 8:06:05 GMT -5
People defending him keep dodging the fact that he is unpresidential and also not a leader. He always puts his ego first above his country and does so repeatedly when sucking up to foreign leaders.
I remember when being an “elitist” or saying “I” one too many times during a speech was a bad thing.
|
|
|
Post by Tpatt100 on Oct 1, 2019 8:08:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Sprockey on Oct 1, 2019 8:16:20 GMT -5
Tpatt100 said: I don't disagree. I think he is a vile human- but if we are going to impeach him it has to be based on facts beyond that. Impeaching a President is (and should be) a pretty big deal. Adam Schiff shouldn't be outlining the "essence" of Trump's call with the Ukrainian President in front of Congress. He should be quoting the transcript released by the WH verbatim. There is no need to interject his opinion or flower it up. www.cnn.com/2019/09/27/politics/fact-check-adam-schiff-trumps-ukraine-call/index.html
|
|
|
Post by maurinsky on Oct 1, 2019 8:16:31 GMT -5
A lawyer on Twitter found a case in Chicago where someone did get a parking ticket based on hearsay.
|
|
emmjay
Full Member
Posts: 1,734
|
Post by emmjay on Oct 1, 2019 8:45:44 GMT -5
Can someone explain the moving of documents to a more secure server issue? Is there a difference between a top secret server and a codeword server? I think it depends on intent. Were they moved for national security reasons? Or were they moved because Trump was trying to hide them/they could damage him politically?
|
|
|
Post by Sprockey on Oct 1, 2019 8:50:44 GMT -5
I have to believe there is a classification system that describes each case (and who is responsible for deciding).
Can it be at the discretion of the President?
|
|
emmjay
Full Member
Posts: 1,734
|
Post by emmjay on Oct 1, 2019 9:14:18 GMT -5
I’m sure there is some kind of official protocol. When I worked in a federal agency, they had very specific rules about document retention. I would also say that even if normally it is at the discretion of the president, he still can’t change the rules to cover up evidence of his own wrongdoing.
|
|
|
Post by RichB on Oct 1, 2019 9:52:49 GMT -5
What is your source for this? I'm reading that Federalist claim is false. I have also read that the Federalist claim wasn't true www.cnn.com/2019/09/30/politics/donald-trump-inspector-general-whistleblower-complaint-conspiracy-fact-check/index.htmlThe IC IG released a statement today confirming the rules were not changed "In a statement issued late Monday afternoon, the inspector general of the intelligence community (ICIG) said that the form submitted by the whistleblower on August 12, 2019, was the same one the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018. The statement reiterated the fact that having firsthand knowledge of the event has never been required in order to submit a whistleblower complaint. "Although the form requests information about whether the Complainant possesses first-hand knowledge about the matter about which he or she is lodging the complaint, there is no such requirement set forth in the statute." "In fact," the ICIG's statement continues, "by law the Complainant...need not possess first-hand information in order to file a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern. The ICIG cannot add conditions to the filing of an urgent concern that do not exist in law." From your link:
This does not mean that the inspector general would reject a complaint if it presented only secondhand knowledge, but that firsthand information would be needed for the complaint to be found credible and passed further up the chain of command.
This seems like a distinction without a difference to me. The previous form basically saying "We'll accept secondhand knowledge but won't do anything with it" is for all intents and purposes saying that you need firsthand knowledge. The new form isn't dismissive of second-hand knowledge at all - it is just a check box.
CNN - facts first. Bullshit. They're pushing their spin/agenda.
|
|
|
Post by RichB on Oct 1, 2019 9:58:38 GMT -5
Just curious, Rich: what would it take for you to think impeachment was warranted? Is there anything?
Stupid question. Of course there are many things that would warrant impeachment. Having a phone call with a foreign leader isn't one of them. Unless the transcript has been completely falsified, the complaint and the media reporting on this story have been completely overblown. Just like the Russian collusion hoax. The Dems and their media cronies (which is about 99% of the mainstream media) have been beating the impeachment drum since election day and they will only have themselves to blame when Trump wins re-election because people who don't drink that particular flavor of Kool-Aid don't agree with overturning the results of an election simply because the losers are really, really, really unhappy about it. There are plenty of banana republics that will indulge such nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by RichB on Oct 1, 2019 10:00:19 GMT -5
People defending him keep dodging the fact that he is unpresidential and also not a leader. He always puts his ego first above his country and does so repeatedly when sucking up to foreign leaders. I remember when being an “elitist” or saying “I” one too many times during a speech was a bad thing.
I agree that he acts in a manner that leaves an awful lot to be desired. But we don't remove leaders because they're jerks. The process for that is the next election, not impeachment.
|
|
|
Post by RichB on Oct 1, 2019 10:01:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Sprockey on Oct 1, 2019 10:01:38 GMT -5
CNN aside;
Is the ICIG statement false?
|
|
|
Post by RichB on Oct 1, 2019 10:03:39 GMT -5
Tpatt100 said: I don't disagree. I think he is a vile human- but if we are going to impeach him it has to be based on facts beyond that. Impeaching a President is (and should be) a pretty big deal. Adam Schiff shouldn't be outlining the "essence" of Trump's call with the Ukrainian President in front of Congress. He should be quoting the transcript released by the WH verbatim. There is no need to interject his opinion or flower it up. www.cnn.com/2019/09/27/politics/fact-check-adam-schiff-trumps-ukraine-call/index.html
Jeez, it's so blatant that even CNN can't provide cover for Schiff.
|
|
|
Post by RichB on Oct 1, 2019 10:05:37 GMT -5
Can someone explain the moving of documents to a more secure server issue? Is there a difference between a top secret server and a codeword server? I think it depends on intent. Were they moved for national security reasons? Or were they moved because Trump was trying to hide them/they could damage him politically?
Or did they get moved so that foreign leaders won't be hesitant to talk with the American President (not just the current one, but future ones, too) because the swamp leaks like a sieve?
|
|
emmjay
Full Member
Posts: 1,734
|
Post by emmjay on Oct 1, 2019 10:13:36 GMT -5
Just curious, Rich: what would it take for you to think impeachment was warranted? Is there anything?
Stupid question. Of course there are many things that would warrant impeachment. Having a phone call with a foreign leader isn't one of them. Unless the transcript has been completely falsified, the complaint and the media reporting on this story have been completely overblown. Just like the Russian collusion hoax. The Dems and their media cronies (which is about 99% of the mainstream media) have been beating the impeachment drum since election day and they will only have themselves to blame when Trump wins re-election because people who don't drink that particular flavor of Kool-Aid don't agree with overturning the results of an election simply because the losers are really, really, really unhappy about it. There are plenty of banana republics that will indulge such nonsense.
Yes, I can see by your reasoned response that my question was ridiculous. PS: you forgot to mention the “Deep State”
|
|
|
Post by RichB on Oct 1, 2019 10:15:32 GMT -5
CNN aside; Is the ICIG statement false?
The Federalist article says that things changed starting in May, 2018. So this seems to confirm that.
|
|
|
Post by RichB on Oct 1, 2019 10:17:37 GMT -5
Stupid question. Of course there are many things that would warrant impeachment. Having a phone call with a foreign leader isn't one of them. Unless the transcript has been completely falsified, the complaint and the media reporting on this story have been completely overblown. Just like the Russian collusion hoax. The Dems and their media cronies (which is about 99% of the mainstream media) have been beating the impeachment drum since election day and they will only have themselves to blame when Trump wins re-election because people who don't drink that particular flavor of Kool-Aid don't agree with overturning the results of an election simply because the losers are really, really, really unhappy about it. There are plenty of banana republics that will indulge such nonsense.
Yes, I can see by your reasoned response that my question was ridiculous. PS: you forgot to mention the “Deep State”
You actually believe that you asked a reasonable question?
|
|