Trump Impeachment Inquiry

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Should President Trump Be Impeached?

  • Yes

    Votes: 60 59.4%
  • No

    Votes: 18 17.8%
  • Undecided and awaiting evidence before making a decision

    Votes: 5 5.0%
  • Hillary Did it

    Votes: 9 8.9%
  • It Should be Left to the Election

    Votes: 6 5.9%
  • Get over it!

    Votes: 2 2.0%
  • Rudy Giuliani Did it

    Votes: 1 1.0%

  • Total voters
    101

Pioneer10

Come home Sideshow Bob
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
15,755
Reaction score
15,133
Points
123
This is insane with the DOJ: You basically have the Attorney General who controls the federal investigation and prosecution complex going with whatever the President wants. This is straight authoritanisim and a threat to the democratic rule of law. Basically it's buying immunity for anyone who commits a crime that the president supports
 

bob2the2nd

member 32
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
16,427
Reaction score
11,344
Points
123
This is insane with the DOJ: You basically have the Attorney General who controls the federal investigation and prosecution complex going with whatever the President wants. This is straight authoritanisim and a threat to the democratic rule of law. Basically it's buying immunity for anyone who commits a crime that the president supports
I mean it should have been done before now but the attorney general should not report to the president
 

Out of the Rafters at the Q

Out of the Rafters
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
5,855
Reaction score
8,118
Points
113
I mean it should have been done before now but the attorney general should not report to the president
I really don't have a problem with the DOJ reporting to the President. He's the head of the executive branch.

It's when the President abuses this power that Congress is supposed to keep him in check. This is where the breakdown has occurred.

Unfortunately, it's going to take an overhaul of the Constitution (which is unfortunately wildly unpopular and won't happen) to fix this issue. The strength of political parties has overpowered the rules we've set in place. I fear that this is one scenario where "both sides" is a fair statement--since the abuse has gone unpunished, I expect both sides to continue this trend of abuse when they have the chance.
 

Pioneer10

Come home Sideshow Bob
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
15,755
Reaction score
15,133
Points
123
I mean it should have been done before now but the attorney general should not report to the president
I think we have to think long and hard about reforms
The pardon power needs a constitutional amendment to be limited
The AG needs to be more independent (joint congressional branch?)
 

Pioneer10

Come home Sideshow Bob
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
15,755
Reaction score
15,133
Points
123
I really don't have a problem with the DOJ reporting to the President. He's the head of the executive branch.

It's when the President abuses this power that Congress is supposed to keep him in check. This is where the breakdown has occurred.

Unfortunately, it's going to take an overhaul of the Constitution (which is unfortunately wildly unpopular and won't happen) to fix this issue. The strength of political parties has overpowered the rules we've set in place. I fear that this is one scenario where "both sides" is a fair statement--since the abuse has gone unpunished, I expect both sides to continue this trend of abuse when they have the chance.
It's not an even playing field Fox News can blow up a tarmac meeting between Bill Clinton and the AG into the next Watergate and then at the same then go all defense with everything Trump does. The media has been so neutered by years and years of "liberal bias" accusation that they end up just regurgitating the talking points - it's the gaslighting of news
 

Obscured By Clouds

Milk, milk, lemonaide.........
Joined
Nov 15, 2019
Messages
201
Reaction score
234
Points
43

And of course the replies to this tweet from his supporters are insane.

"Attorney General William Barr is doing exactly what is necessary. He is enforcing the law and preventing abuse of the law. "

12 impartial jurors found him guilty. Barr and/or the DOJ intervening on behalf of the President to help his friend is abuse of law.

The sad thing is, there is a way for the President to do this. Just like with Marie Yovanovitch and running this smear campaign against her, there was no need for any of this. After the upcoming election, the President simply pardons him.
 

Sumac13

Heretic
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
672
Reaction score
687
Points
93
Did anyone NOT see this kind of stuff coming? He views himself as untouchable now. Sadly, he may be right.
Did anyone NOT see a core following not giving a damn? The followers would gladly give up the rule of law for the rule by law, so long as Trump pushes their agenda. Principles matter not.
 

Wrathe

Lurking in the shadows....
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1,731
Points
113
Did anyone NOT see a core following not giving a damn? The followers would gladly give up the rule of law for the rule by law, so long as Trump pushes their agenda. Principles matter not.
This is kinda like making an offensive racial generalization to your black "friend" and following it up with, "but not you or your family of course, you guys are cool."

Just because you don't name the conservatives by name here, it feels we're spared the wide brush as a matter of board policy only.
 

Out of the Rafters at the Q

Out of the Rafters
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
5,855
Reaction score
8,118
Points
113
This is kinda like making an offensive racial generalization to your black "friend" and following it up with, "but not you or your family of course, you guys are cool."

Just because you don't name the conservatives by name here, it feels we're spared the wide brush as a matter of board policy only.
I think it's interesting that you equate "[Trump] followers" with conservatives.

I also disagree with @Sumac13 's post. Painting large groups of people as the same is never a good idea. It's lazy.
 

Wrathe

Lurking in the shadows....
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1,731
Points
113
I think it's interesting that you equate "[Trump] followers" with conservatives.

I also disagree with @Sumac13 's post. Painting large groups of people as the same is never a good idea. It's lazy.
Probably a result of the "them vs. us" atmosphere (hopefully of old; I know we're working on cleaning that up) and honestly a lot easier than breaking up everyone into sub-groups. Gets real complicated there. Just an oversimplification for the sake of brevity.
 

Out of the Rafters at the Q

Out of the Rafters
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
5,855
Reaction score
8,118
Points
113
Probably a result of the "them vs. us" atmosphere (hopefully of old; I know we're working on cleaning that up) and honestly a lot easier than breaking up everyone into sub-groups. Gets real complicated there. Just an oversimplification for the sake of brevity.
I think the previous poster's wording was intentional. I don't think he was trying to paint all conservatives in a certain light. I think he truly meant to speak about the group he feels are "Trump followers"

Even given that distinction, I still disagree with his take. Lumping people into groups and generalizing is lazy. It's hard work to treat people (and think about others) as individuals--but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it.
 

Sumac13

Heretic
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
672
Reaction score
687
Points
93
My comment wasn't a backhanded swipe at conservatives. It was directed at a core group of individuals who are willing to defend Trump at all cost so long as he serves their agenda. While the majority of that group might be conservative, in no way am I suggesting this is true of all conservatives. In fact, I have pointed out in these forums several examples of prominent conservatives and conservative organizations calling Trump out. Admittedly, I did so as an attempt to illustrate that it is not just liberals that despise Trump. The effort nonetheless does illustrates that I do recognize that conservatives cannot be--nor should be--lumped into to a single homogenous whole.

And the aforementioned analogy was bullshit.

Lazy perhaps, but I stand by comment that the rule of law does not matter much when it comes to Trump to a core group of his supporters. Given how much he shamefully flaunts it, I fail to see how one can claim to care for the rule of law while adherently supporting Trump at the same time. But humans, liberals and conservative alike, are quite adept at cognitive dissonance.
 
Last edited:

Radio

Top