Trump's Defenders: What would it Take?

[fantome profane]

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?

If it would make you happy I will admit to that right now. That is exactly what they are doing.

The founding fathers deliberately wrote into the constitution a mechanism to unseat a sitting President under very specific circumstances. Not only can they do this, they must do this. Each one swore an oath to do exactly this.

A President is not a king, not even a temporary king. Every democratic nation that I know of has a mechanism for unseating the chief executive between elections. It is sometimes necessary.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

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

There’s no NEED for you to answer the question posed in the OP, but, that is the question. To be clear, are you saying you WILL not answer it? Why not?

 

[Nakosis]

There’s no NEED for you to answer the question posed in the OP, but, that is the question. To be clear, are you saying you WILL not answer it? Why not?

All it takes for impeachment is a vote of the House. Doesn't take evidence, doesn't take proof. It takes convincing enough congress people to vote for impeachment. I can't answer for them. So to answer your question, having scalp reduction surgery is impeachable if congress decides it is.

For myself, I don't care so I don't have an answer for you. Who is POTUS is among one of the least important questions in my life, although I have to admit, Trump's presidency has been pretty entertaining. Maybe Sanders will get elected, doubt it but maybe if he did the entertainment would continue. Otherwise, I can find entertainment elsewhere.

My opinion however is if you want to get Trump out of office, impeachment is a mistake.

 

[anna.]

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

That's even funnier because I was thinking 3.14...

 

[anna.]

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.

The House has passed how many bills now that are stalled in the GOP controlled Senate? Didn't McConnell say he was going to be the Grim Reaper?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

My opinion however is if you want to get Trump out of office, impeachment is a mistake.

I agree with you on that point. If he is impeached it should not be because we want to get him out of office.

It should be because his actions leave us no other choice, but to impeach him, or risk setting a dangerous precedent.

 

[BSM1]

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?

Trouble is there is absolutely no evidence of any of Trump's alleged wrong doings.

 

[Jollybear]

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)?

What trump did in relation to ukraine is niether impeachable OR wrong. In fact.....ITS NOBLE!

 

[Subduction Zone]

What trump did in relation to ukraine is niether impeachable OR wrong. In fact.....ITS NOBLE!

Wrong on both counts. It was slimy to say the least. Seriously do you not know what he did?

 

[BSM1]

Wrong on both counts. It was slimy to say the least. Seriously do you not know what he did?

What do you think he did?

 

[Revoltingest]

Trouble is there is absolutely no evidence of any of Trump's alleged wrong doings.

Or, as is usually the case, there's evidence both for & against.

 

[PureX]

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.

Republican policy is an ever changing and wildly contradictory target, though. When democrats are in power, they are staunch defenders of deficit control. Yet when they get power, they spend and spend and spend like drunken sailors on shore leave. So what exactly IS their policy on the deficit? The only policy they ever actually stand by is no taxes for the rich, while their very expensive wars and massive corporate give-aways are paid for by the rest of us, at the expense of public health, social security, the environment, and national integrity.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Trouble is there is absolutely no evidence of any of Trump's alleged wrong doings.

Then fine, let the House vote not to impeach, if all those hearings turned up no evidence. Or to impeach, if what they heard seems like evidence to them.

I'm not entirely certain, however, that I would say "there is absolutely no evidence." I do recall watching some parts of the hearings, and reading the papers afterwards. But then, I don't get a vote, do I?

 

[BSM1]

Then fine, let the House vote not to impeach, if all those hearings turned up no evidence. Or to impeach, if what they heard seems like evidence to them.

I'm not entirely certain, however, that I would say "there is absolutely no evidence." I do recall watching some parts of the hearings, and reading the papers afterwards. But then, I don't get a vote, do I?

That's the normal way it's done. No one is trying to stop it. You notice the Dems are starting to grow very reticent to make the next move.

 

[BSM1]

Then fine, let the House vote not to impeach, if all those hearings turned up no evidence. Or to impeach, if what they heard seems like evidence to them.

I'm not entirely certain, however, that I would say "there is absolutely no evidence." I do recall watching some parts of the hearings, and reading the papers afterwards. But then, I don't get a vote, do I?

Why don't you tell us what impeachable offense the hearings have uncovered?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

He could shoot all Democrats in Congress, murder 4 Supreme Court Justices, declare himself to be an emperor and he'd be cheered on by members of the Trump cult.

I'll wager the poster ruled out that as possible, One should be realistic in reading short answers.

That's deflection. The question wasn't whether anybody considered that scenario possible, but rather, would any Trump supporter turn against him after mass murder? It seems not. I suppose the ones capable of doing that already have abandoned Trump.

But my major point here is that no Trump supporter will even address the question in the OP.

That's not very bi-partisan.

Those days are gone for me for good. I'm as partisan as I can be. I no longer think in terms of America as an entity, because much of it I don't care about any more. The conservatives have lost my interest.

there is absolutely no evidence of any of Trump's alleged wrong doings

Sure there is, but there'd be more if they hadn't redacted most of the Mueller report, given Trump immunity from prosecution while president, and blocking the release of his tax returns.

can you answer the question in the OP? Is it possible for Trump to do anything that would cause you to say impeachment is the correct course of action?

< sound of crickets chirping >
< sound of a pin dropping in the next room >
< sound of a coyote faintly baying on a distant mountaintop >
< sound of a distant, barely audible ship's whistle through the fog with a buoy clanging >
< sound of a distant, barely audible rooster crowing dawn >
< sound of a slowly dripping faucet in the next room >
< sound of distant leaves rustling >
< sound of chimes lightly ringing >
< sound of distant, barely audible inner city car alarm at 3 AM >
< faint sound of a train passing a great distance away >
< sound of a mouse gnawing on a crumb of bread in the far corner of the room >
< sound of paint drying >
< sound of sun rising >

I'm sure you've noticed that not one Trump supported has named a single act, however heinous, that would cause them to want him impeached much less tried criminally.

 

[BSM1]

That's deflection. The question wasn't whether anybody considered that scenario possible, but rather, would any Trump supporter turn against him after mass murder? It seems not. I suppose the ones capable of doing that already have abandoned Trump.

But my major point here is that no Trump supporter will even address the question in the OP.



Those days are gone for me for good. I'm as partisan as I can be. I no longer think in terms of America as an entity, because much of it I don't care about any more. The conservatives have lost my interest.



Sure there is, but there'd be more if they hadn't redacted most of the Mueller report, given Trump immunity from prosecution while president, and blocking the release of his tax returns.



< sound of crickets chirping >
< sound of a pin dropping in the next room >
< sound of a coyote faintly baying on a distant mountaintop >
< sound of a distant, barely audible ship's whistle through the fog with a buoy clanging >
< sound of a distant, barely audible rooster crowing dawn >
< sound of a slowly dripping faucet in the next room >
< sound of distant leaves rustling >
< sound of chimes lightly ringing >
< sound of distant, barely audible inner city car alarm at 3 AM >
< faint sound of a train passing a great distance away >
< sound of a mouse gnawing on a crumb of bread in the far corner of the room >
< sound of paint drying >
< sound of sun rising >

I'm sure you've noticed that not one Trump supported has named a single act, however heinous, that would cause them to want him impeached much less tried criminally.

That must really sting....

 

[wellwisher]

Yes, that is exactly what they are trying to do. And that is what the Constitution gives them the power to do under these circumstances.

Now, can you answer the question in the OP? Is it possible for Trump to do anything that would cause you to say impeachment is the correct course of action?

Say the Democrats change and stop their gaming and scamming tactics and decided to go along with Trump's agenda. This would change the dynamics. Instead of wasting time in litigation and foot dragging, doing nothing for the country. if they went along with Trump, Trump would be held more responsible of this actions.

Right now, the constant Democrats gaming, hostility and negativity gives Trump an excuse and high moral ground, since any reasonable person can see the lopsided injustice; an army of leftist against one man. In the minds of fair minded people, the victim gets to hit the bully, back, even if the bully complains. But if the bully injustice was to stop, Trump would be more accountable for attacking. When fake news insults Trump, people root for Trump, the victim, when it hits the bully back. But he would not be allowed to hit back if not provoked.

For example, the Democrats under Obama had a cushy relationship with Russia and Ukraine, that involved Ukraine working with the Democrats to go after Trump in 2016. Obama also disarmed Ukraine so Russia could annex Ukrainian Territory with no resistance from Ukraine or the US.

This dirty pool against Trump in 2016, gives Trump the high moral ground, when it comes to dealing with Ukraine. Ukraine tried to injure him, politically at the highest levels. Biden and son, on the other hand got a nice golden parachute from Ukraine. it is reasonable for a victim to be cautious.

Had the Biden and Obama corruption not occurred and involved Trump, the same behavior by Trump would seen differently by his base. Instead of seeing a wronged man making sure he will not get kicked again, it would be a president applying pressure, for no reason other than self gain.

The Democrats are trying to cover run up their crimes, so it looks like Trump is free lancing and the aggressor, and not the victim who is reacting to the many Democrat criminal scams against him.

I would like to see the Senate Impeachment Trial so the Democrat scams can be made more public. Fake news has been able to avoid the truth, but t will not be able to avoid it for long when such a trial began.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

What trump did in relation to ukraine is niether impeachable OR wrong. In fact.....ITS NOBLE!

Thanks.

So the main argument I was hearing from the President’s defenders, prior to the televised hearings, was that there was a lack of convincing EVIDENCE that Trump did the things the whistleblower accused him of doing.

It sounds like your argument is very different from that. You aren’t disputing what he did or claiming there’s a lack of evidence. You are saying sure, he did it, and it was “noble”.

Is that correct? Just want to make sure I understand because this seems to be one of TWO very different arguments defending the President on this issue.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's deflection. The question wasn't whether anybody considered that scenario possible, but rather, would any Trump supporter turn against him after mass murder? It seems not.

You're far more cynical than even I.
To take an extreme hypothetical, & speculate
an absurd reaction....that's just not believable.