-
Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.
Trump Impeachment: Public Hearings Have Begun
- Thread starter IncredulousP
- Start date
- Views 42,373
- Replies 628
- Likes 4
- Status
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2013
- Messages
- 17,736
- Trophies
- 3
- Location
- The Lands Between
- Website
- gbatemp.net
- XP
- 8,529
- Country
That's wholly expected of any president, though I wouldn't consider it particularly productive. Judges can't solve any of our problems on a national level, they can only contribute to (or aid in the corruption of) our justice system.
Also, that's obviously a satirical article, but the House has no say in confirming those judges regardless.
Last edited by Xzi,
Hey look, Trump finally won the popular vote in something.
Regardless of whether he's removed from office or not further in the process, this is a VERY significant moment in US history, and something that Trump will carry with him for the rest of his life.
I'm glad to see that house Democrats looked past all of the "it's a waste of time, waste of taxpayer money, it's a sham, it's a travesty, fake news, kangaroo court" etc and upheld the constitutional processes as they see appropriate.
I'm glad to see that house Democrats looked past all of the "it's a waste of time, waste of taxpayer money, it's a sham, it's a travesty, fake news, kangaroo court" etc and upheld the constitutional processes as they see appropriate.
Last edited by Sicklyboy,
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2015
- Messages
- 2,004
- Trophies
- 1
- Location
- Site 19
- Website
- catgirlsin.space
- XP
- 3,441
- Country
And so Trump joins the ranks of Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton as the presidents who have been impeached (Nixon was never impeached, he resigned before the vote went through the House).
Honestly, I think this is probably as far as it goes. While Mitch McConnell has stated he wants to make it a serious trial because he's confident nothing goes wrong, Republicans will probably vote along party lines. That said there's a possible chance that it could go through. It honestly depends on how many Republicans will vote out of line. The margins are relatively small (53-45 and 2 independent seats and who knows how those will vote), so you need at least 4 to vote out of line in addition to the independent seats.
For the record, during the House vote to adopt the impeachment articles, 1 republican voted yes whilst 3 democrats voted no.
This could be interesting.
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
Also for the sake of clarity, Tulsi Gabbard is the only one who voted present (aka neither for nor against) and released this statement afterwards explaining why:
--
Personal opinion: This is a tone argument fallacy. Whilst I know that a tone argument is sometimes warranted, in this case it really is not. This is just wishy-washing the waters. The task should have just been to determine whether Trump is guilty of what he is accused of or not. She says she thinks he is, so she should have voted yes, but she didn't. This I would say is a very dissapointing thing for anyone who supports her.
Honestly, I think this is probably as far as it goes. While Mitch McConnell has stated he wants to make it a serious trial because he's confident nothing goes wrong, Republicans will probably vote along party lines. That said there's a possible chance that it could go through. It honestly depends on how many Republicans will vote out of line. The margins are relatively small (53-45 and 2 independent seats and who knows how those will vote), so you need at least 4 to vote out of line in addition to the independent seats.
For the record, during the House vote to adopt the impeachment articles, 1 republican voted yes whilst 3 democrats voted no.
This could be interesting.
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
Also for the sake of clarity, Tulsi Gabbard is the only one who voted present (aka neither for nor against) and released this statement afterwards explaining why:
Source: https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/18/politics/tulsi-gabbard-present-impeachment/index.htmlTulsi Gabbard said:
--
Personal opinion: This is a tone argument fallacy. Whilst I know that a tone argument is sometimes warranted, in this case it really is not. This is just wishy-washing the waters. The task should have just been to determine whether Trump is guilty of what he is accused of or not. She says she thinks he is, so she should have voted yes, but she didn't. This I would say is a very dissapointing thing for anyone who supports her.
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2015
- Messages
- 2,004
- Trophies
- 1
- Location
- Site 19
- Website
- catgirlsin.space
- XP
- 3,441
- Country
Right now, it means he will be put on a trial where the Senate acts as the jury. Do not confuse this for any actual legal proceedings and regulations that apply for a normal trial, even if they are similar. There are no rules within regards to how the jury forms their decision. The House acts as prosecution and both the House and Senate can call witnesses.
As for Trump, this is mostly just a rather big blemish on him for now. He can still run in 2020 and still holds office unless the Senate deems him guilty.
Note that the Senate does not actually deem him guilty, that is a separate trial that would come afterwards which would determine punishment and the like. This is just to remove the man from office.
I thank you and I hope that he found guilty and if he isn't then I hope that he will not be elect next years due that people are open their eyes but I know Trump supporters are the rotten who doesn't care.
We shall wait and see. Hopefully that he is guilty and no longer to be president.
You need 2/3 majority (67 votes) to impeach, its not a simple majority of 51 votes.
Not a single republican voted yes on impeachment on both articles in the house:
In the senate there is pretty much 0 chance of getting 20 defections (assuming both I's vote yes), the only defections I might see is susan colins (she will probably vote in party lines though) and mitt romney (who seems to have a hate boner for trump)
Last edited by Joe88,
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2015
- Messages
- 2,004
- Trophies
- 1
- Location
- Site 19
- Website
- catgirlsin.space
- XP
- 3,441
- Country
Oh. Nevermind then. Guess I was misinformed.
Welp, that's where it probably ends then unless some miracle happens.
Also, I guess the statistic image I was shown rolled the independent vote into the republican vote so that explains that.
Last edited by Ev1l0rd,
While votes were being taken for the first article, there was one Republican vote for some amount of time that was in favor, but eventually went to against. I'm imagining that was just a fat finger.
So this is weird. A lot of people are saying the President hasn't actually been impeached until the House delivers jurisdiction of the articles over to the Senate. Even one of the Professors who testified for Democrats during the Judiciary Committee hearings says this.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...-delay-could-be-serious-problem-for-democrats
Right now, since Pelosi isn't sending them to the Senate and the House is in recess till next year ... well, I couldn't put it any better than this dude:
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...-delay-could-be-serious-problem-for-democrats
Right now, since Pelosi isn't sending them to the Senate and the House is in recess till next year ... well, I couldn't put it any better than this dude:
It does not need to be sent to the senate for the impeachment to be valid. the house has the sole power over impeachment. The senate can vote to convict or exonerate, that is there powers. Even if the senate does exonerate, it will still not remove the impeachment, it will just not result in the removal of the president. However it has never been held up like this before, but then again the holding up of a supreme court justice pick by the senate majority leader has never been done before until recently(Merrick garland's vote being held up by Mitch Mcconnell).
See the constitutional provisions below:
Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 provides:
The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
Article I, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7 provide:
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present.
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
Article II, Section 2 provides:
[The President] ... shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.
Article II, Section 4 provides:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Last edited by omgcat,
Tell that to Professor Feldman. You know, the one the Judiciary Committee Democrats called as an expert witness on the law of impeachment.
Or are you saying Professor Feldman's opinion on impeachment law is no good?
I guess the flipside to that ... if you're right and Professor Feldman is wrong ... is that the Senate can go ahead and get on with it then. The President has been impeached, no need to wait for the House. Because as you pointed out above, the House has the sole power of impeachment. But once the elected official is impeached, the House is done with it. All the power over the rest of it is with the Senate.
Which is it then?
Last edited by Hanafuda,
It now goes to trial on the Senate. Bill Clinton was impeached but not removed. it could easily be the same situation here. Impeachment being "valid or not" is irrelevant(Since that can be subjective). It now goes to trial in the senate and what happens next gets determined there.
Last edited by WD_GASTER2,
Nevermind the fact Trump has been using the Impeachment heavily as ammunition in all of his rallies - and that his approval ratings are increasing for it. The narrative being he will win in 2020 and a "bogus impeachment" is the only way the dems can make him lose. Also, it does bring the matter of Joe Biden's son suspicious business in Ukraine, and Trump can now safely use that as well. This impeachment is all a ploy by him and the dems fell right in.
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2013
- Messages
- 17,736
- Trophies
- 3
- Location
- The Lands Between
- Website
- gbatemp.net
- XP
- 8,529
- Country
He did the same with the Mueller investigation, and Democrats won in 2018 by a large margin. They also won several state races this year while the impeachment inquiry was ongoing. The idea that he's playing to some grand strategy is bull. He's just another rich dipshit who has never in his life faced any consequences for his actions and thus believes himself to be above the law. His "brand" becomes more toxic by the day, and his presidency is now forever stained, regardless of what happens in the Senate.
Last edited by Xzi,
I hope this attack carried out by trump's orders shifts things in the republican senate i feel he just signed his own political suicide note with that stunt now let's see if the senate wakesa up and hands down a favorable sentance AND start criminal proceedings remember JFK was the only other person to order a (failed) assassination on fidel castro that was state sponsered this was not Trump just took his first step into warcrimes I knew shit like this would start if trump was elected he basicly started WW3
Last edited by chrisrlink,
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- No one is chatting at the moment.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@
RedColoredStars:
There is an actual trailer with footage too. lol. Going to watch it tonight. Grabbed it from... a place. -
-
@
SylverReZ:
@Psionic Roshambo, JonTron's back yet again until he disappears into the void for another 6 or so months.+1 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
