Jump to content

Do you think Trump will be impeached or forced to resign?


Scott

Do you believe Trump will be impeached or forced to resign?  

511 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 6.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

There is also the 25th amendment.

 

 

 

 

https://www.vox.com/mischiefs-of-faction/2017/5/18/15658236/25th-amendment-impeachment-issues

 

People who think there is no chance of impeachment are tripping. Reports are the white house staff has started to study impeachment as a proactive tactic. 

The only people who think he is mental are the mental Democrats 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Made up stuff?

You clearly are not following the news.

Firing Comey and then openly admitting it was about the Russia investigation.

That in itself may lead to an obstruction of justice case based on Comey's notes.

And much more. 

CNN 

Nobody considers CNN a credible news source 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm  betting impeachment proceeding followed by a resignation before a removal from office. If he waits to be removed he's more likely to brought up on criminal charges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rob13 said:

I'm  betting impeachment proceeding followed by a resignation before a removal from office. If he waits to be removed he's more likely to brought up on criminal charges.

Even the beginnings of a strong threat of impeachment could lead to a resignation. He's got stuff to protect ... his loyal base of deplorables, his family business empire, his likely new right wing media empire, his narrative as a victim. If he can spin losing as a win, that fits with his lifetime pattern. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Rob13 said:

I'm  betting impeachment proceeding followed by a resignation before a removal from office. If he waits to be removed he's more likely to brought up on criminal charges.

Under more normal circumstances (if it could be termed that), with a more normal President, what you say would be the case, but I really don't think the intelligence and law enforcement communities are going to let Trump get away so easily.

 

The FBI have to show to this and any future President that the FBI must remain independent and slandering and bullying by Presidents is not permitted. I think the FBI will try and bury Trump on this occasion, a mere impeachment is not enough!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gone in 6 months. Probably a resignation with some kind of immunity. 1st stop as Pres is Saudi Arabia. If anyone needed proof that he's a nutter, it's right there in that decision. Bonkers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is how it will go down.

A couple of tweets about no loyalty from the GOP, no support etc.

A non senseical interview with hanity/fox talking about they are out to get me etc. Lots of paranoid delusional stuff.

A resignation for family, health, business etc. All the while playing the victim of the establishment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stander said:

In order to get the president impeached, he actually needs to break the law, not just hurt the feelings of liberals and the MSM

 

Just has to be enough evidence to convince the House members that an impeachment is warranted.  Biggest thing lacking now is enough House members willing to break ranks and vote against trump. The way things are moving,  2018 will most likely take care of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me this was and is about the Supreme Court appointees. I'd like to see a conservative bench for years to come.

 

I like VP Pence a lot and President Trump needs a full term to do what he's promised and get America back on track.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rob13 said:

 

Just has to be enough evidence to convince the House members that an impeachment is warranted.  Biggest thing lacking now is enough House members willing to break ranks and vote against trump. The way things are moving,  2018 will most likely take care of that.

But aren't they more likely to dump Trump in anticipation/fear of what might well happen to them in 2018? Give Pence a go, it couldn't be worse ...could be their thinking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The foolish fantasies of the 'Impeach Trump' crowd    ------story below Its not going to happen.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/the-foolish-fantasies-of-the-impeach-trump-crowd/ar-BBBiBZa

 

Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.

The appointment of former FBI Director Robert Mueller as the special counsel overseeing the Russia probe has muted, at least a bit, and at least for now, the clamorous calls from the left to impeach President Trump. Nonetheless, millions of liberals throughout the country are surely still salivating over the prospect of impeaching our scandal-plagued president.

 

Sorry to disappoint you, but it's almost certainly not going to happen.

To remove Trump from office via impeachment, you need a two-thirds majority of the Senate. Even if all 48 Democrats and Democratic-aligned independents voted in lockstep to impeach, you'd still need 19 Republican senators to join them. That's a fantasy — at least based on what we know now, both about Russia and about the GOP-held Senate. It probably wouldn't even happen if, as Trump himself once imagined, the president shot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue.

Remember, neither of America's impeached presidents, Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, was actually convicted and removed from office via such a Senate vote. Why? Because it's really, really hard to do.

Still, such obstacles haven't stopped people from proposing an even more convoluted path to kicking Trump out of office: invoking the 25th Amendment of the Constitution.

Drafted in the aftermath of John F. Kennedy's assassination — which made heart attack victim Lyndon Johnson the president, and left two senior citizens next in the line of succession — and ratified during the Cold War, it deals with the subject of presidential disability or incapacity.

Section 3, allowing the president to temporarily transfer power to the vice president, has been invoked three times. Each case was exceedingly temporary and involved colonoscopies. But it's Section 4 that Trump's critics have in mind. Here's how it begins:

 

Whenever the vice president and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the president pro tempore of the Senate and the speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the vice president shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as acting president. [25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution]

 

Voila! President Mike Pence.

Remember, though, that this section has long been taken seriously but not literally, as the Trump-era catchphrase goes. It was intended for situations in which the president was incapacitated but unwilling or unable to transfer power. It wasn't even invoked after Ronald Reagan was shot in 1981.

But okay: What if the vice president and the Cabinet decided the president is simply "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office," not due to illness, injury, or some other problem but simply because he is, well, unable?

That's the case many critics are making against Trump. And they're definitely not all liberal critics.

New York Times columnist Ross Douthat — one of the country's leading conservative writers and thinkers — argues that Trump's "incapacity to really govern, to truly execute the serious duties that fall to him to carry out, is nevertheless testified to daily — not by his enemies or external critics, but by precisely the men and women whom the Constitution asks to stand in judgment on him, the men and women who serve around him in the White House and the Cabinet."

Douthat isn't wrong ... until you think about the implication of him calling to remove Trump using the 25th Amendment. Giving a mostly unelected group of people the power to sideline the president because in their subjective judgment he is not good at his job? That doesn't sound like an amazing precedent to set, even if you are among the many who share that judgment, especially by people who are constantly complaining about Trump's subversion of democratic norms.

Maybe the fact that "self-selected loyalists" would make the initial decision, rather than a hostile opposition party in Congress, would be a safeguard against this precedent being abused. But the characteristics that Trump's successors would have to share with him to be vulnerable to 25th Amendment abuse aren't just his flaws. Any outsider president who brings insiders into his government could be at risk of a palace coup.

It's entirely plausible that Trump blurted out classified intelligence to impress the Russians. It's equally believable that Syria hawks inside the administration who don't want to work more closely with Russia on ISIS leaked an unflattering portrayal of such information-sharing. We don't really know.

Suggesting Trump's removal via the 25th Amendment is all but unprecedented. The only comparable 25th Amendment chatter came not in connection to a man-child president like Trump — it was regarding the politically sainted Ronald Reagan. According to his presidential biographer Edmund Morris, Reagan's penultimate White House chief of staff, Howard Baker, was advised per Washington conventional wisdom that the 40th president was "inattentive, inept," and "lazy" and should be ready to invoke the amendment against him.

Western voters are increasingly responding to elite indifference and technocratic failures by voting for dubious populist candidates. It does not seem terribly wise for elites to respond to that by using obscure constitutional mechanisms (in this case, that have never previously been utilized for their intended purpose) to negate the masses' electoral choices.

Finally, this scheme wouldn't actually make it easier to be rid of Trump. The 25th Amendment "solution" needs a two-thirds majority in the Senate, too — oh, and also a two-thirds majority of the House. Otherwise, the transfer of power is temporary. So much for all that.

Throughout the last two years, smart people have laid out sober cases for Trump's unfitness for office, only to offer procedural gimmicks, wishful thinking, and play-acting in response to the challenges he poses.

Trump has a problem with reality. So, too, do his critics.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, stander said:

In order to get the president impeached, he actually needs to break the law, not just hurt the feelings of liberals and the MSM

So is getting a BJ against the law? I better tell my wife she's making me a 3 times a day fellon.  :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of what any of as thinks this plane is on autopilot now and the facts will take it where the facts take it.

This whole thing is a shorted affair.

IMO Trump never wanted to be President.

 Trump is a BS artist, his run for president IMO and the opinion of many others, was a publicity stunt a way to keep him in the limelight and provide him with the adulation he so craves.He never thought he would win, as did everyone else, He thought he would loose , claim he was unfairly defeated by illegal and nefarious means .

He was already setting the stage for that.Trump did not win Hillary lost.

And proceed to set up an opposition in exile, complete with rallies, adulation and a he would monetize  this  with the Trump TV and Radio network.

In the primary I supported Sanders, I said in this Forum that Hillary was damaged goods, she had too many skeletons in her  closet, as they  are slowly released  by her opposition she would be defeated.

In this case the position was the Russians,  The Russians feared Hillary .

So here we are now, Trump is president, the adulation is being replaced by hate and scorn.

In the past the leaks that came out of the White house were directed toward each of the operatives as they jockeyed for position In this  white house  the leaks are directed at the President

. Even his own people don' like him.

He is seventy years old by the time he gets out of this all that;s in front of him during his remaining years is hard work , attacks and ridicule . 

I see him escaping to friendly territory, i.e Mar-a-lago  friendly countries, rallies with his base. 

and when he gets tired of this , a medical condition that if not resign, would prevent him for seeking re-election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering that under Obama/Hilary it has been accepted that the US would have lost the massive Saudi orders and the jobs that go with them and under Obama the Chinese government systematically dismantled C.I.A. spying operations in the country starting in 2010, killing or imprisoning more than a dozen sources over two years and crippling intelligence gathering there for years afterwards (shades of the Clinton era), what would be the gain?

 

Nope, Trump may not be perfect but he is a huge improvement on the previous regime and America will vote for jobs and security every time.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...