Trump and impeachment

[Xing]

He absolutely should be impeached, but the Dems need to be very careful about how they handle it politically.

Leaning towards this. Sadly, doing what is right often leads to horrific political consequences, and trying to impeach Trump would probably just backfire and motivate Republicans to turn out to defend their god daddy.

[Koharu]

You impeach if you have the votes for removal in the Senate. If you don't, it just stupid political theater.

Andrew Johnson begs to differ.

[Yank2133]

He absolutely should be impeached, but the Dems need to be very careful about how they handle it politically.

Leaning towards this. Sadly, doing what is right often leads to horrific political consequences, and trying to impeach Trump would probably just backfire and motivate Republicans to turn out to defend their god daddy.

The Trumps fan being energize isn't what worries me. It is the fact that 2020 becomes about impeachment and this means Healthcare (Trump's biggest weakness) is on the back burner.

[Yank2133]

You impeach if you have the votes for removal in the Senate. If you don't, it just stupid political theater.

Andrew Johnson begs to differ.

This is a different era. Hyperpartisanship basically makes impeachment and removal impossible.

[HisGrace]

You impeach if you have the votes for removal in the Senate. If you don't, it just stupid political theater.

Andrew Johnson begs to differ.

Pretty sure Johnson was done politically even before the impeachment attempt. That was just to try and keep him from firing the old cabinet during the fight over the Tenure of Office Act.

[7,052,770]

You impeach if you have the votes for removal in the Senate. If you don't, it just stupid political theater.

Disagree. If Republican senators want to put their names down in history as the people who kept Trump in office, so be it.

[Xing]

You impeach if you have the votes for removal in the Senate. If you don't, it just stupid political theater.

Disagree. If Republican senators want to put their names down in history as the people who kept Trump in office, so be it.

What consequences will they face in their lifetime for doing so, though?

[Yank2133]

You impeach if you have the votes for removal in the Senate. If you don't, it just stupid political theater.

Disagree. If Republican senators want to put their names down in history as the people who kept Trump in office, so be it.

I don't think they give a **** about that.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Richard Nixon was named an Unindicted Co-Conspirator in the indictments of Haldeman and Ehrlichman, and even this did not create a majority for impeachment.  If that was as far as it got, Nixon would have been unpopular, but he would not have been removed.

There's no smoking gun in Mueller's report.  There's no statement stating Trump obstructed justice, and no naming Trump as an Unindicted Co-Conspirator.  Trump has certainly not avoided the appearance of impropriety, but to say that the report justifies impeachment is wishful thinking.

[dead0man]

yes, but for general incompetence reasons, not for the report.

[Green Line]

He should have been impeached January 2017..  do it NOW

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

My thoughts

Should Trump be impeached?  Yes, absolutely.

Will Trump be impeached?  No way.

The cowardly Republicans in the House and Senate are so fixated on propping up and protecting Trump at all costs, that although he would be impeached by the Democrats in the House, there would simply not be the numbers in the Senate for Trump to be tried and  removed from office in the Republican controlled Senate.

impeachment is not removal. Trump can easily be impeached by the House. However, he's unlikely to be removed/convicted by the Senate.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Trump should not be impeached, honestly. They couldn't find clear examples of collusion, and obstruction of Justice was not a clear connection either ...

Richard Nixon was named an Unindicted Co-Conspirator in the indictments of Haldeman and Ehrlichman, and even this did not create a majority for impeachment.  If that was as far as it got, Nixon would have been unpopular, but he would not have been removed.

There's no smoking gun in Mueller's report.  There's no statement stating Trump obstructed justice, and no naming Trump as an Unindicted Co-Conspirator.  Trump has certainly not avoided the appearance of impropriety, but to say that the report justifies impeachment is wishful thinking.

No, both of you are wrong.

[T'Chenka]

"We're going to impeach the mother____er!" - Rashida Tlaib

[Farmlands]

The last thing I want is Trump in charge of the country for even one more day, but trying to impeach him would only result in failure and vindication of Trump's legitimacy in the eyes of the voters. It would also leave the democrats looking like the republicans in 1998, by which I mean a vindictive, partisan group. We imperatively need to defeat him in 2020 and that's that.

[Crumpets]

The last thing I want is Trump in charge of the country for even one more day, but trying to impeach him would only result in failure and vindication of Trump's legitimacy in the eyes of the voters. It would also leave the democrats looking like the republicans in 1998, by which I mean a vindictive, partisan group. We imperatively need to defeat him in 2020 and that's that.

1. Trump's approval rating was 20 points lower than Clinton's was even before the release of the report, and it could end up dropping further.

2. Bush won the 2000 election. Well, kind of, but it's not like impeachment catapulted Gore to victory.

[°Leprechaun]

President Pence? No thanks. Therefore NO.

[Koharu]

You impeach if you have the votes for removal in the Senate. If you don't, it just stupid political theater.

Andrew Johnson begs to differ.

This is a different era. Hyperpartisanship basically makes impeachment and removal impossible.

Removal, yes. Impeachment, no. Lolol at thinking that wasn't a hyper-partisan era.

[SteveRogers]

Richard Nixon was named an Unindicted Co-Conspirator in the indictments of Haldeman and Ehrlichman, and even this did not create a majority for impeachment.  If that was as far as it got, Nixon would have been unpopular, but he would not have been removed.

There's no smoking gun in Mueller's report.  There's no statement stating Trump obstructed justice, and no naming Trump as an Unindicted Co-Conspirator.  Trump has certainly not avoided the appearance of impropriety, but to say that the report justifies impeachment is wishful thinking.

The “smoking gun” tape in Watergate was just a recording of Nixon and his chief of staff discussing a plan to ask the CIA to ask the FBI to shut down its investigation. How is that different than Trump repeatedly ordering his officials to find a way to shut down the investigation?

[Koharu]

Clinton's impeachment was a partisan-politics-motivated "circus," to use a Republican phrase. The other two historical presidential impeachments did not result in a boon to the president.  Johnson was forced to reign in his behavior and Nixon was forced to resign. Trump's behavior goes above and beyond what impeachment was established for, and Trump's remaining unimpeached eats away at the foundations of our democracy. Assuming that the next election will simply erase the damage done this far is short-sighted and naive.

Congress's reaction to Trump sets the standard for future presidents. If Congress refuses to act with an overtly corrupt president who flaunts his behavior in public, and now a mandate from a non-partisan investigator, there is no way they will limit the actions of a more insidious, but less overtly corrupt, president in the future. Even if Trump is not removed from office, the degradation of the democracy is slowed by impeachment, as it will be noted that corruption will still be countered in some way.

[Badger]

Trump should not be impeached, honestly. They couldn't find clear examples of collusion, and obstruction of Justice was not a clear connection either ...

Richard Nixon was named an Unindicted Co-Conspirator in the indictments of Haldeman and Ehrlichman, and even this did not create a majority for impeachment.  If that was as far as it got, Nixon would have been unpopular, but he would not have been removed.

There's no smoking gun in Mueller's report.  There's no statement stating Trump obstructed justice, and no naming Trump as an Unindicted Co-Conspirator.  Trump has certainly not avoided the appearance of impropriety, but to say that the report justifies impeachment is wishful thinking.

No, both of you are wrong.

Completely wrong. As in two plus two equals five wrong. Neither of you have read even excerpts of the report if you believe this. You are both spouting pure b*******. Fuzzy, you're better than this.

[J. J.]

If you can't impeach someone who lies to the FBI & who has clearly tried to obstruct an investigation then you're saying a person should be above the law if he has enough power. Your entire constitution becomes toilet paper & your Republic meaningless, existing in name only.

1998?

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

No, wait until after the 2020, election, and prosecute his son, who is the tie to the Trump Towers meeting against Trump himself.  There's no reason to impeach Trump, with McConnell as Leader of the Senate, and Joni Ernst, and Collins and SMC and Murkowski, won't move to convence, their collegues to convict.

[Orser67]

No. In a democracy, elected officials are ultimately accountable to the voters rather than to other politicians. Presidential impeachment should be saved for situations when there's clear and compelling evidence that the president committed a major crime, and a solid majority of the public (as expressed through Congress) favors removing the president from office. Based on continuing Republican support for Trump, it's clear that an insufficient number of voters want to remove Trump via impeachment.

[Badger]

If you can't impeach someone who lies to the FBI & who has clearly tried to obstruct an investigation then you're saying a person should be above the law if he has enough power. Your entire constitution becomes toilet paper & your Republic meaningless, existing in name only.

1998?

A. Impeachment did occur in 1998. Clinton was simply acquitted.

B. Literally none of those things listed occurred or were committed by Clinton in any way related to his impeachment, or arguably at all during his administration. He had some ethical issues to be sure, But none of those things were involved.

Once again, reality and you are quickly divorced.