Trump's Defenders: What would it Take?

[leov]

Trump is impudent fellow...so?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Let's say that it's provable that Trump tried to extort the Biden
investigation in exchange for military aid. It's clearly wrong.
Given that, what is the best way to handle it?
Sanctions are in order, so that there's a disincentive for presidents
to behave thus.
- Remove him, & replace him with Pence?
- Impeachment but not removal?
- Censure?
- Other?
Different people will have different goals, so answers will vary.
I don't know what's best.
But I'd prefer some sanction which does the job, but leaves him in office.
(No President Pence.)

Thanks for sharing your view. Do you favor leaving him in office because you don’t want to see a President Pence, or because you think that punishment fits the crime (so to speak)?

 

[Nakosis]

To those who do not think what Trump has done is wrong or impeachable, or that nothing has been "proved", I have a simple question.

What would, in your view, be an example of something Trump may have done, or has been accused of doing, related to Ukraine that you would have to admit is impeachable, if it was true?

For reference, below is a summary of the articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon:

Finally, and most pertinently, the House Judiciary Committee approved three articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon: the first for obstruction of justice, the second for abuse of power, and the third for defying House subpoenas during its impeachment investigation. Article 3 obviously did not allege a crime. But even in the first two articles, which did involve some potentially criminal conduct, the committee was at pains to avoid any reference to criminal statutes. Rather, as the committee staff observed in its careful study of the question, “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is a phrase that reaches far beyond crimes to embrace “exceeding the powers of the office in derogation of those of another branch of government,” “behaving in a manner grossly incompatible with the proper function of the office,” and “employing the power of the office for an improper purpose or personal gain.”​

Source: The Common Misconception About ‘High Crimes and Misdemeanors’

Also for reference, below is what the whistleblower complaint accused Trump of doing:

"In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals. The President’s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort."​

Follow up question: do you view any of these hypothetical things as less-than-impeachable, but still wrong, and worthy of some official response (such as censure by the Senate)?

Nixon wasn't impeached, he left office when a number of republicans turn against him.
What it would take is a bi-partisan vote against Trump. With only the democrats voting against Trump, it looks more like a grab for power then justice. Unless the democrats get a significant number of republicans on board, impeachment will only strengthen Trump position among republicans.

 

[Salvador]

You think?

Trump Has Spent $115 Million On Golf Trips ― Or 287 Years Of Presidential Salary

With his Thanksgiving vacation, President Donald Trump’s golf hobby has now cost Americans an estimated $115 million in travel and security expenses ― the equivalent of 287 years of the presidential salary he frequently boasts about not taking.

Of that amount, many hundreds of thousands ― perhaps millions ― of dollars have gone into his own cash registers, as Secret Service agents, White House staff and other administration officials stay and eat at his hotels and golf courses.

The exact amount cannot be determined because the White House refuses to reveal how many Trump aides have been staying at his properties when he visits them and will not turn over receipts for the charges incurred.

... Trump Has Spent $115 Million On Golf Trips ― Or 287 Years Of Presidential Salary

Please keep in mind, Trump donates his Presidential salary towards charitable causes or various governmental agencies..

What agencies has President Trump donated his salary to?

 

[anna.]

Yep. And for some folks, Pence would be worse because without all the drama and incompetence, he might actually be more effective in implementing the far-right agenda.

Eh. I think it's already been happening anyway, McConnell's been blocking in the Senate, the State Dept. and Homeland Security Depts. among others are in disarray, the 'COC' is pitting the military against itself, and so on. Trump's the chaos front while they're busy in the back, so Pence being president just puts it out in the open but at least Trump would be gone and we can hope for 2020.

What a debacle they put in office. Trump will go down in history as the worst, most damaging president we've ever had. He can't be out of there soon enough for me.

 

[anna.]

Please keep in mind, Trump donates his Presidential salary towards charitable causes or various governmental agencies..

What agencies has President Trump donated his salary to?

Keep in mind his donation is dwarfed by the income to his properties paid by our taxes - the ones he said he'd divest from but never did.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Kind of a moot point. I could ask you the same question, basically. what would it take for you to admit that Adam Schiff and his cohorts are trying their best to overthrow an election and unseat a duly elected President?

That's certainly far more serious than anything Trump has done.

 

[anna.]

Nixon wasn't impeached, he left office when a number of republicans turn against him.
What it would take is a bi-partisan vote against Trump. With only the democrats voting against Trump, it looks more like a grab for power then justice. Unless the democrats get a significant number of republicans on board, impeachment will only strengthen Trump position among republicans.

Impeachment puts Trump in the record books as demonstrably corrupt, and shows the Dems as the party bringing him to account, true patriots like Vindman, Yovanovitch et al. for being courageous enough to testify and the Republicans for being the cowardly, power-grabbing sycophants they are.

 

[Nakosis]

Impeachment puts Trump in the record books as demonstrably corrupt, and shows the Dems as the party bringing him to account, true patriots like Vindman, Yovanovitch et al. for being courageous enough to testify and the Republicans for being the cowardly, power-grabbing sycophants they are.

That's not very pi-partisan.

 

[Polymath257]

What makes you think that there is not a plan to railroad Pence? That leaves President Pelosi.

And I really doubt the Dems want her in. She is much more effective as Speaker of the House.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Nixon wasn't impeached, he left office when a number of republicans turn against him.
What it would take is a bi-partisan vote against Trump. With only the democrats voting against Trump, it looks more like a grab for power then justice. Unless the democrats get a significant number of republicans on board, impeachment will only strengthen Trump position among republicans.

Ok, but the question in the OP is what would it take to convince you?

 

[Polymath257]

Nixon wasn't impeached, he left office when a number of republicans turn against him.
What it would take is a bi-partisan vote against Trump. With only the democrats voting against Trump, it looks more like a grab for power then justice. Unless the democrats get a significant number of republicans on board, impeachment will only strengthen Trump position among republicans.

And once again, the question is what it would take to shift the Reps. As far as I can see, they will stick behind Trump right to the end of our government.

 

[anna.]

That's not very pi-partisan.

pi-partisan? That's a new one on me.

 

[Salvador]

To those who do not think what Trump has done is wrong or impeachable, or that nothing has been "proved", I have a simple question.

What would, in your view, be an example of something Trump may have done, or has been accused of doing, related to Ukraine that you would have to admit is impeachable, if it was true?

For reference, below is a summary of the articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon:

Finally, and most pertinently, the House Judiciary Committee approved three articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon: the first for obstruction of justice, the second for abuse of power, and the third for defying House subpoenas during its impeachment investigation. Article 3 obviously did not allege a crime. But even in the first two articles, which did involve some potentially criminal conduct, the committee was at pains to avoid any reference to criminal statutes. Rather, as the committee staff observed in its careful study of the question, “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is a phrase that reaches far beyond crimes to embrace “exceeding the powers of the office in derogation of those of another branch of government,” “behaving in a manner grossly incompatible with the proper function of the office,” and “employing the power of the office for an improper purpose or personal gain.”​

Source: The Common Misconception About ‘High Crimes and Misdemeanors’

Also for reference, below is what the whistleblower complaint accused Trump of doing:

"In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals. The President’s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort."​

Follow up question: do you view any of these hypothetical things as less-than-impeachable, but still wrong, and worthy of some official response (such as censure by the Senate)?

If our P.O.T.U.S. were not to have made any effort of getting the new Ukrainian President help us determine if any U.S. foreign aid had been funneled back towards the Democratic National Committee or Hillary Clinton 2016 Presidential campaign by way of Hunter Biden donating to them a substantial sum of his multi-million dollar salary from Burisma who had done lots of work for the corrupt Ukrainian government, then I would not have donated $2,700 to the Trump re-election campaign for him getting re-elected as our 45th President.

 

[anna.]

And once again, the question is what it would take to shift the Reps. As far as I can see, they will stick behind Trump right to the end of our government.

Yep. They have too much invested to walk away, and I wouldn't be surprised if more than a few have Kompromat on them that keeps them from saying anything. Who can explain before and after Lindsey Graham, for example?

 

[Nakosis]

Ok, but the question in the OP is what would it take to convince you?

Not up to me. No need to convince me of anything

 

[Nakosis]

pi-partisan? That's a new one on me.

New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu, a Republican; and District 1 Executive Councilor Michael Cryans, a Democrat, worked together on Sunday to determine a winner in the Great NH Pie Festival at the New Hampshire Farm Museum in Milton.


Imagine that!


Republicans and Democrats can get together to choose a winner at a New Hampshire pie-baking contest, but in Washington they can't even agree whether the weather is warm and sticky or hot and humid.
'Pi-partisan' effort at Farm Museum gives DC pols roadmap to get stuff done

 

[Nakosis]

And once again, the question is what it would take to shift the Reps. As far as I can see, they will stick behind Trump right to the end of our government.

Good question, since most who voted for him did so because of policy and not character, I'd suspect he'd have to abandon enough conservative policies, start to support liberal policies.

I think it's a mistake that democrats continue to attack Trumps character. They should focus on policy.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Kind of a moot point. I could ask you the same question, basically. what would it take for you to admit that Adam Schiff and his cohorts are trying their best to overthrow an election and unseat a duly elected President?

I think @Polymath257 answered you brilliantly, but I'd like to follow up, with perhaps less force and clarity.

Yes, Trump was duly elected -- as have all Presidents been. But do you suppose that being duly elected makes you somehow immune from wrongdoing? Do you think an election confers perfection on all your actions?

Of course you don't. And that is why the framers included these processes -- to ensure that if someone elected to great power used that power inappropriately, the Union had a mechanism to deal with it.

Do you suppose they should not have done so?

 

[Revoltingest]

Thanks for sharing your view. Do you favor leaving him in office because you don’t want to see a President Pence, or because you think that punishment fits the crime (so to speak)?

The crime is yet to be determined.
But yes, I prefer Trump to Pence.