Upcoming defense by GOP against impeachment and why the 2020 election should not matter

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
35,963
27,642
136
I'm already start to hear it. Bill Taylor's testimony has sent shock waves throughout the GOP bubble. Sondland has already lied and when others come in to corroborate Taylor Republicans will be left with a final defense, Don't impeach let the voters decide.

This is a false choice and here's why. Trump will continue to solicit help in rigging the vote. What did Trump do 2 days after Robert Mueller's testimony? Make the infamous phone call to Zelensky. What has he done since? Publicly ask Russia and China for help in digging up dirt on Democrats, which is illegal. We already know the Russians hacked into the voting systems of all 50 states.

What makes anyone think the Russians are beyond actually altering the votes either before or after election day? How will we be able to trust the outcome? Republicans are already blocking legislation to secure our voting systems. Why are not paper backups required in all 50 states? If the outcome is in question the odds are <0 DOJ would have an honest investigation.

There is too much at stake for this guy to remain in office.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
Trump should be impeached for both reasons.

First, just letting it go to the election shows future presidents there are no consequences for criminal activity. Second, as you mention there’s no reason to believe the 2020 election will be free and fair. We already know he’s enlisting foreign powers and the justice department to help him win.

This is easily the most significant threat to the Constitution since the civil war and we can’t leave any tool unused to try and save the country.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
58,055
12,245
136
What makes anyone think the Russians are beyond actually altering the votes either before or after election day? How will we be able to trust the outcome? Republicans are already blocking legislation to secure our voting systems. Why are not paper backups required in all 50 states? If the outcome is in question the odds are <0 DOJ would have an honest investigation.
Yes, normally you would think this is an idea that would have bipartisan support, easily.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi and ch33zw1z

TeeJay1952

Golden Member
May 28, 2004
1,540
191
106
My son asked me what does it matter. He won't get reelected.
I asked him if he thought the rich and powerful have a mandate to follow the law and he said they do. I asked if a future President can point to Trump and say If not him why can't I do these things.
I pointed out that there are lines that cannot be crossed without consequences.
Our system requires Congress control the checkbook. President administer what Congress provides and Supreme Court oversee that everything is constitutional.
Son tried the everyone does it argument. I asked him if that ever worked for him in real life. He said no, that others just got in trouble and blamed him. I said read the morning paper.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
My son asked me what does it matter. He won't get reelected.
I asked him if he thought the rich and powerful have a mandate to follow the law and he said they do. I asked if a future President can point to Trump and say If not him why can't I do these things.
I pointed out that there are lines that cannot be crossed without consequences.
Our system requires Congress control the checkbook. President administer what Congress provides and Supreme Court oversee that everything is constitutional.
Son tried the everyone does it argument. I asked him if that ever worked for him in real life. He said no, that others just got in trouble and blamed him. I said read the morning paper.

Imagine if our government is set up in a way where the president can commit as many crimes as they want and the only punishment is that they can only do so for 4 years instead of 8.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,477
6,900
136
Imagine if our government is set up in a way where the president can commit as many crimes as they want and the only punishment is that they can only do so for 4 years instead of 8.


So far, it looks as if the Repubs would be just fine with that so long as they keep power not so much for themselves but more so for keeping power away from the frightening commie socialist boogeymen they've been told would lead to the total annihilation of the very fabric of our society.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
24,802
9,004
136
Some of the more insane alt righters (Posobiec) have suggested that impeachment in the House (without removal by the Senate) would make Trump eligible for a 3rd-term. I don’t understand the logic here...but I’m guessing there is none.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,203
28,218
136
Some of the more insane alt righters (Posobiec) have suggested that impeachment in the House (without removal by the Senate) would make Trump eligible for a 3rd-term. I don’t understand the logic here...but I’m guessing there is none.
There is clear cut logic at play:

If a is good for Republicans then a is good for America
If a is bad for Republicans then a is bad for America
If a is bad for Democrats then a is good for America
If a is good for Democrats then a is bad for America

Let's apply it to some real-world examples:

Is murdering all Democrats good for America or bad for America?
Would declaring Trump permanent dictator of America be good for America?
 

simpletron

Member
Oct 31, 2008
189
14
81
Some of the more insane alt righters (Posobiec) have suggested that impeachment in the House (without removal by the Senate) would make Trump eligible for a 3rd-term. I don’t understand the logic here...but I’m guessing there is none.
The presidential term limits are spelled out in the 22nd amendment, which states the following:

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

I haven't hear this argument about a trump third term. But I guessing their logic goes something like if Trump is impeached then that invalidates the 2016 election and thus is still eligible for 2 more presidential elections.

First problem is impeachment doesn't invalidates elections. And second even if it did, he still would of acted as president for more than two years and thus eligible for 1 more presidential election.

The only possible legal way for trump to serve more than two terms lay in the realms of science fiction, ie reanimating President Truman body and imprint Trump's brain signature into Truman's brain. But even this would still have to face the question of "Is this really the same person as the person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, ie the original President Truman?"

The closest real example of a third presidential term would be for Trump to be impeached, letting Pence be president. Then Pence would be eligible for 2 more elections and you could call these two terms his second and third, with the first term being the remaining year of Trump's term.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
14,004
12,071
146
The presidential term limits are spelled out in the 22nd amendment, which states the following:

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

I haven't hear this argument about a trump third term. But I guessing their logic goes something like if Trump is impeached then that invalidates the 2016 election and thus is still eligible for 2 more presidential elections.

First problem is impeachment doesn't invalidates elections. And second even if it did, he still would of acted as president for more than two years and thus eligible for 1 more presidential election.

The only possible legal way for trump to serve more than two terms lay in the realms of science fiction, ie reanimating President Truman body and imprint Trump's brain signature into Truman's brain. But even this would still have to face the question of "Is this really the same person as the person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, ie the original President Truman?"

The closest real example of a third presidential term would be for Trump to be impeached, letting Pence be president. Then Pence would be eligible for 2 more elections and you could call these two terms his second and third, with the first term being the remaining year of Trump's term.
You say that as though the words in the Constitution mean anything to those that still defend Trump.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
45,895
32,686
136
The GOP is going to stand on the table and scream about process because the facts are terrible, like just really bad on multiple fronts. That's what this Graham effort is. We are going to be treated to some truly spectacularly overwrought false self-righteousness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,303
136
Some of the more insane alt righters (Posobiec) have suggested that impeachment in the House (without removal by the Senate) would make Trump eligible for a 3rd-term. I don’t understand the logic here...but I’m guessing there is none.

There is no logic besides their agenda to see Trump installed as King Donald the First.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,493
3,159
136
I love how republicans claim they have no say-so in the current process.
And how they are locked out of the process when democrats have hearings in private.
Hmmmmm....
I remember the democrats making the same claim when republicans controlled the house, where republicans were having secret hearings on Hillary and Benghazi and democrats were powerless.
And now... the outrage shifts.

OH THE GAMES PEOPLE PLAY.
Especially the republicans.
Everything poor house republicans now claim as unfair they themselves have done in the past not so long ago. And about all you can say is... democrats learned how to play their game from the very best. From those corrupt house republicans.
What do they call this?
Oh I remember, POETIC JUSTICE. :cool:
 

Indus

Diamond Member
May 11, 2002
9,752
6,368
136
There is clear cut logic at play:

If a is good for Republicans then a is good for America
If a is bad for Republicans then a is bad for America
If a is bad for Democrats then a is good for America
If a is good for Democrats then a is bad for America

Let's apply it to some real-world examples:

Is murdering all Democrats good for America or bad for America?
Would declaring Trump permanent dictator of America be good for America?

Read this:

 
  • Haha
Reactions: ch33zw1z

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,203
28,218
136
Read this:

I'd love nothing more than to give conservatives their own shithole country to wreck any way they see fit without fucking things up for the rest of us. They can jerk each other off in celebration of their low taxes while waiting in the bread lines their masters set up for them.
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,202
4,401
136
I'd love nothing more than to give conservatives their own shithole country to wreck any way they see fit without fucking things up for the rest of us. They can jerk each other off in celebration of their low taxes while waiting in the bread lines their masters set up for them.
That is not how conservatives work. They will spend all their money on military and then when they have screwed their own country up too much they will just invade the ones that are working.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie
Feb 4, 2009
34,506
15,737
136
I'd love nothing more than to give conservatives their own shithole country to wreck any way they see fit without fucking things up for the rest of us. They can jerk each other off in celebration of their low taxes while waiting in the bread lines their masters set up for them.

That’s pretty much what I’d expect too, coincidentally the neighboring blue states would likely need a wall to keep them from looking for better jobs, better healthcare and better schools.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,203
28,218
136
That is not how conservatives work. They will spend all their money on military and then when they have screwed their own country up too much they will just invade the ones that are working.
We would dominate the cyber and the final frontier, we have 97% of the scientists.
 

Indus

Diamond Member
May 11, 2002
9,752
6,368
136
That is not how conservatives work. They will spend all their money on military and then when they have screwed their own country up too much they will just invade the ones that are working.

I'm pretty sure we can build a wall and fill the next 2 miles full of mines too!
 
  • Love
Reactions: DarthKyrie