I would change CEO for King, and there are very specific and direct messages about democracy vs kingdom, separation of powers and how our democracy works. I don’t think there’s mixed messages at all. The Cons ution makes the bar for removal extremely high, and rightly so, I think. At the same time, it’s not so impossibly high that it cannot be overcome if democracy is clearly in peril.
USA, thanks to the oligarchy's coup d'etat over the past 45 years, is WAY PAST and WAY DOWN from your naive theoretical bull
USA was not founded as democracy, and never has been
The white, male, slave-owning, land-owning FFs, aka the colonial oligarchy of 18th century, were horrified by the demos actually electing people, so they screwed democracy with the Electoral College, and blocked (hysterically incapable, emotional) women, Native Americans, and blacks from voting.
Do you think the articles of impeachment drawn up by the house are warranted?
Good luck getting an actual take from that guy.
I use "CEO" loosely. He's accustomed to making unilateral decisions, firing people on a whim and being the big cheese. Now he's the big Cheetos, but he lacks the understanding of how government actually works. This could be a wakeup call for people wanting "change at all costs". Putting someone in office who doesn't know anything about diplomacy or politics is risky business. I think some of his cons uents thought they could control him. You have to admit though he's draining at least part of the swamp.
I think it's all partisan politics. The stats support my opinion, especially the voting records.
Remove partisan politics from the equation. Based on the evidence, do you think the articles of impeachment drawn up by the house were warranted?
There would be no impeachment without partisan politics. If the articles aren't supported by both sides, they are partisan, unless you think one side holds all the virtue coins.
It's akin to a flop with a small amount of contact. Fans of one team feel it's a foul, the other side feels it's a flop. What the ref does often is more about the flow of the game than what either side wants. There's no ref in this process, just the teams making moves. If the judiciary gets involved, that's different.
So you’re incapable of looking at the evidence on its face and making a determination as to whether or not the two articles drawn up by the house are impeachable offenses. That’s staggering to me.
Maybe if you asked him the same question -
but added:
"lets say Obama did...a, b & c - "
im sure he would have a solid "opinion" then lololol
There are plenty instances where biased accusations get dismissed even if there's evidence of wrong doing. The left was crying impeachment before Trump was even elected and have been for 3 years. Do you trust the government to do the right thing? Yes or no?
I voted for Obama twice. I didn't think Bill should have been impeached. You can change your user name but you're still the same low information dip .
det stonewalling
Do you trust the government to do the right thing? Yes or no
u still the same doxxMC lololol
That wasn't the question you were asked to answer.
I trust myself to be able to make a judgment on whether impeachment was warranted.
You don't trust yourself or are somehow reluctant to say what that judgment is.
Whether or not I trust the government to do the “right thing“ is immaterial. Based on the evidence presented, did Trump’s behavior meet the criteria for impeachment as described by in the cons ution?
So you won't answer whether or not you trust the federal government but you want me to?
Why are you so afraid to express any opinion about anything to do with Trump?
Why are you so afraid to express any opinion about anything to do with Trump?
DMC = the Susan Collins of spurstalk lol
2020 presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard voted “present,” meaning that she did not vote for or against. “I also could not in good conscience vote for impeachment because removal of a sitting president must not be the culmination of a partisan process,” she said in a statement following the vote.
The first article of impeachment accusing Trump of abuse of power was adopted by a majority in the House with 230 votes. No Republicans voted in favor.
Not bipartisan
And you're the Silverblk Mystix of Spurstalk.
I don’t see how it’s pertinent to my question. I asked you to remove partisan politics from the equation and weigh in with your personal opinion based on the definition of impeachment as described in the cons ution and the evidence presented.
For some reason, that’s a difficult thing for you to do. Are you not familiar with the evidence? Are you unfamiliar with provisions of the us cons ution regarding impeachment?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote