[That_Guy]

Editorial: House should censure, not impeach, Trump
The Detroit News. Published 11:00 p.m. ET Nov. 23, 2019


With the second week of the House impeachment inquiry finished and the testimony from the most potent witnesses on the record, Democrats still don't have the strong case they're seeking to justify removing President Donald Trump from office.

The president acted inappropriately in asking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to open an investigation into the son of political rival Joe Biden, the former vice president and current Democratic presidential candidate. That much is clear from a synopsis of the phone call between the two leaders released by the White House.

Also, there is reason to believe that Trump or his surrogates gave the impression that continued military aid to Ukraine was contingent upon an investigation of Joe and Hunter Biden.

Less clear is whether that message was directly conveyed by the White House in a manner that represented a quid pro quo. Wednesday's star witness, Gordon Sondland, the European Union ambassador appointed by Trump, was all over the place in his testimony.

He began his session before the House Intelligence Committee by stating there was a request for an exchange of favors. He later admitted he only presumed such a request. And finally he recounted a conversation with Trump in which the president told him he wanted nothing from Zelenskiy.

Still, military assistance to Ukraine was withheld for a short period. That's a fact. But it was also released without the Ukrainians conducting an investigation of the Bidens.

The evidence is too much based on hearsay and too conflicting to support impeachment. There is enough, however, to merit a censure charge.

From what we’ve heard so far, it seems clear that Trump was holding aid to Ukraine over the head of the new president in return for an investigation into Biden, and that he was using his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani to deliver that message. Yet there is no direct evidence on the record so far to prove this, and Giuliani’s involvement offers Trump some deniability.

Unless more damning evidence is ahead, the Democrats don't have a case that will stand up in the Senate, where the Republican majority will preside over a trial that could remove the president should the House impeach him.

The Democratic-controlled House should consider shifting toward a formal resolution of censure against Trump, rather than an impeachment.

Censure amounts to a public shaming. It declares that a president has behaved in a manner ill befitting his office. Certainly, that can be said of Trump in the Ukrainian affair.

But it also recognizes the offense does not merit removal from office. That, too, seems appropriate, given the inconclusive testimony so far.

A formal censure by the House requires a simple majority vote, and does not need to be affirmed by the Senate, and vice-versa. The potential of getting bipartisan support for a censure is far greater than for impeachment.

Censure is no slap on the wrist. It's a grave matter. While four presidents have been reprimanded by Congress — Andrew Jackson, James Buchanan, Abraham Lincoln and William Howard Taft — only one has been actually censured. That was Jackson, who was censured by the Senate in 1834, an action that was later expunged.

A censure, then, would put Trump in rare company. It would also bring a more expedient end to the divisive and distracting proceedings now underway. And from a crass political consideration, it would give Democrats what they're looking for — a powerful weapon to use against Trump in the 2020 campaign.

If the House chooses censure over impeachment, the practical result is the same. He'll still be in office, but will serve under the condemnation of the House, and perhaps even the Senate.

And voters will determine, as they should, Trump's fate next November.

LINK

[erp]

Lol!

You guys are such transparent losers.

So you acknowledge that impeachment is a fantasy and now just want to impact the election by trying to hang a scarlet letter on Trumps neck?

Ain’t gonna work. Get used to four more years.

[grimreefer]

So Schitt started to back pedal and now the sheep are falling in line...


:o

(yeah. Not Really)

[zurg]

Please please please please let us do SOMETHING to hurt him! Baaaaaa! Mommy! He’s so mean! He took our presidency from us!

[whwr55]

Our friends on the left are afraid of a hearing in the Senate, lots of stuff will hit the fan

This post has been edited by whwr55: 25 November 2019 - 11:10 PM

[Howsithangin]

whwr55, on 25 November 2019 - 11:09 PM, said:

Our friends on the left are afraid of a hearing in the Senate, lots of stuff will hit the fan

this

[Moderator T]

Why censure? I've heard from liberal posters here and elsewhere that the Dems had it in the bag. I thought they were going to vote to impeach in the House due to the mountains of evidence combined with hours of testimony from first hand witnesses, send it to the Senate where Republicans would be forced to compromise and give them everything they want, then vote where swing state Republicans and Mitt Romney would have no choice to remove Trump from office.

[Liz]

Moderator T, on 25 November 2019 - 11:38 PM, said:

Why censure? I've heard from liberal posters here and elsewhere that the Dems had it in the bag. I thought they were going to vote to impeach in the House due to the mountains of evidence combined with hours of testimony from first hand witnesses, send it to the Senate where Republicans would be forced to compromise and give them everything they want, then vote where swing state Republicans and Mitt Romney would have no choice to remove Trump from office.

:)

[MontyPython]

ROFL

:lol:

It never gets old. Like a great old favorite comedy movie; Even though you've already seen it a couple dozen times, it's still hilarious.

These days every time I see any of these bozos on TV (Schiff, Pelosi, Nadler, etc) my mind just automatically pictures them with clown makeup, LOL.

ROFL

[Joe the Pagan]

MontyPython, on 26 November 2019 - 12:39 AM, said:

ROFL

:lol:

It never gets old. Like a great old favorite comedy movie; Even though you've already seen it a couple dozen times, it's still hilarious.

These days every time I see any of these bozos on TV (Schiff, Pelosi, Nadler, etc) my mind just automatically pictures them with clown makeup, LOL.

ROFL

With or without Julius Fucik's Entrance of the Gladiators on calliope.

[grimreefer]

MontyPython, on 26 November 2019 - 12:39 AM, said:

ROFL

:lol:

It never gets old. Like a great old favorite comedy movie; Even though you've already seen it a couple dozen times, it's still hilarious.

These days every time I see any of these bozos on TV (Schiff, Pelosi, Nadler, etc) my mind just automatically pictures them with clown makeup, LOL.

ROFL

You're not the only one. Schittles the Clown:

http://www.rightnation.us/forums/uploads/1574525148/gallery_6133_220_50099.jpg

[Noclevermoniker]

:biglaugh:
Goalposts on high speed rails.

What a pathetic bunch Of_Losers

[MontyPython]

LOLOLOL

Perfect.

The music in Pagan's post #10 plus the picture in Reefer's post #11, ROFLMAO.

Perfect.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[GrimV]

trial balloon
/ˈtrī(ə)l bəˈlo͞on/
noun
a tentative measure taken or statement made to see how a new policy will be received.

[Rock N' Roll Right Winger]

The dems and That_Guy make the Dark Knight look like an amateur! :lol:

PA

THET

IC! :biglaugh:

[JerryL]

"The president acted inappropriately in asking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to open an investigation into the son of political rival Joe Biden, the former vice president and current Democratic presidential candidate. That much is clear from a synopsis of the phone call between the two leaders released by the White House."


:bs:

It is NOT clear. The only way this is even an issue is if Trump asked for the investigation to gain political advantage over Joe Biden in the upcoming election.

First, Joe Biden is NOT the candidate for president so NOT DJT's opponent. He is one of many in the klown kar that is the Democrat party primary. That is all.
Second, there are more than enough valid indicators of corruption and influence peddling by the Bidens to warrant an investigation.
Third, draining the swamp is what Trump was elected to do by those who voted for him. Biden, after more than 3 decades, is definitely Swamp.
Finally, it is his JOB as the top LEO to root out corruption in government.

[Taggart Transcontinental]

They realized that if this goes to the Senate their old man will be taken down. When you turn over those rocks all the rest of the roaches will scurry away. Pelosi's son, Kerry and others will be implicated. Add to that the crap Obama was pulling in office with the unmasking of names of people. To steal a phrase, this is YUGE! They were breaking the law daily. So much for a scandal free administration.

[Ladybird]

The Dems should finish what they started. Trump won't be removed, of course, and may very well be re-elected (Nixon was), but it's the right thing to do. When the slime from this scummy administration is too much even for his loyal cultists, he will slink away and the Republican brand will be damaged for years after. We'll be stuck with his judges for a few decades, but elections have consequences.

[erp]

Ladybird, on 26 November 2019 - 07:27 AM, said:

The Dems should finish what they started. Trump won't be removed, of course, and may very well be re-elected (Nixon was), but it's the right thing to do. When the slime from this scummy administration is too much even for his loyal cultists, he will slink away and the Republican brand will be damaged for years after. We'll be stuck with his judges for a few decades, but elections have consequences.

Such vitriol.

Yes, he will be re-elected. But no, there will not be any damage to the GOP. The damage is being done to the democrats. They have played their hand with emotion, not logic and reason. And they will continue to flail after Trump re-elected.


As for his judges? This is a very good thing. So good, in fact, that it will be Trumps legacy. He just might have saved us from ruin. You are welcome.

[Tea Party Hooligan]

Moderator T, on 25 November 2019 - 11:38 PM, said:

Why censure? I've heard from liberal posters here and elsewhere that the Dems had it in the bag. I thought they were going to vote to impeach in the House due to the mountains of evidence combined with hours of testimony from first hand witnesses, send it to the Senate where Republicans would be forced to compromise and give them everything they want, then vote where swing state Republicans and Mitt Romney would have no choice to remove Trump from office.

Remember waaaaay back when they had him dead to rights with Stormy Daniels? Remember when they had him caught red handed with the "Russian collusion" bs? Then they wanted to make him look bad with his Supreme Court Justice pick?

When Stormy turned into a light drizzle, they had to try again. They can't help themselves. They started the impeachment chant 2 DAYS after the election! He hadn't even taken office, yet, and they were blubbering like a gaggle of spoiled brats that didn't get their way. They have been trying anything and everything their little pea brains can think of to get rid of him and they can't. Since they started this latest circus I was daring them to impeach him. I still am, because there will be a whole bunch of crap floating to the top that they can't afford to let out. They have expended a lot of time and tax payer money over the last 4 years and got nuthin' to show for it but shining a light on their stupidity and real motives.

I laugh at all the little pointy headed leftists that scream, holler, and stomp their feet like the petulant little doorknobs that they are. They need to be taken to the woodshed for a little attitude adjustment.