Poll

Where do you currently stand on the impeachment/removal from office of President Trump?

Against impeachment, and furthermore this is a witch hunt.
8 (12.9%)
Against impeachment, evidence evidence of wrongdoing is lacking
2 (3.2%)
Against impeachment, the wrongdoing is not worthy of impeachment
1 (1.6%)
For impeachment, but against removal (a rebuke of the presdients actions)
3 (4.8%)
For impeachment, for removal
44 (71%)
I can't decide. I will wait and see as inquiry proceeds.
4 (6.5%)
I haven't followed this closely enough to have an opinion.
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 62

Author Topic: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)  (Read 72847 times)

feckless, JSD, Hawkeye199 and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1665 on: December 04, 2019, 01:06:14 AM »

Online Hoopvortex

  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 470
  • Tommy Points: 79
It's a trans-national web of corruption and criminality masquerading as "Country First" in their respective countries.

As Samuel Johnson once wrote, “Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.“
· Team executive on Brown’s future: “All-Star. Multiple times. Just like Jayson. Everyone loves Kawhi and PG as a wing duo. We think we have our own version growing right here in Boston. It’s gonna take a couple more years, but those guys are stars. And neither has an ego. They just want to play and win.”

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1666 on: December 04, 2019, 05:32:50 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18055
  • Tommy Points: 1194
Quote
Patriot: the person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about

Mark Twain

Dead in the Senate folks, be prepared.  They are already looking for ways not to hold a vote to avoid this happening.

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1667 on: December 04, 2019, 07:18:03 AM »

Online Hoopvortex

  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 470
  • Tommy Points: 79
Dead in the Senate folks, be prepared.  They are already looking for ways not to hold a vote to avoid this happening.

What is “this” and who are “they”?

If the Judiciary committee, the only question is how many articles they will vote on and what they will be. Oh and whether one of them will be called Bribery or Extortion. The evidence is [dang]ing; the minority in the Intelligence Committee created a noisy sideshow complaining about the process, but did not manage to cast any doubt at all on the testimony.

If the House, the only question is whether there will be any Republicans to vote for impeachment. History is watching them, as the melodramatic expression goes. Time to stand up for the Republic and our precious Constitution.

If the Senate, a vote is unavoidable, once the trial takes place - and it will take place. History may be watching, but we will certainly be watching the constituents of Collins, Gardner, Murkowski, Romney, and a couple of others.
· Team executive on Brown’s future: “All-Star. Multiple times. Just like Jayson. Everyone loves Kawhi and PG as a wing duo. We think we have our own version growing right here in Boston. It’s gonna take a couple more years, but those guys are stars. And neither has an ego. They just want to play and win.”

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1668 on: December 04, 2019, 05:19:39 PM »

Offline heyvik

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1536
  • Tommy Points: 60
Has anyone seen the Judiciary Hearings today?


Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1669 on: December 04, 2019, 05:46:31 PM »

Offline Amonkey

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1490
  • Tommy Points: 156
Has anyone seen the Judiciary Hearings today?



Didn't see but been reading bits and pieces of it while working. Doesn't seem very [dang]ing since the witness can be easily categorized as biased due who called them (Dems and Reps). I think Karney (spl?) did a disservice by throwing the Barron Trump joke in there. That was a perfect thing for opponents to hang on and keep the attention away from the actual matter of the legality of impeachment and whether Trump committed those offenses, which should have been the only focus of today's hearings.
Baby Jesus!

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1670 on: December 04, 2019, 06:27:33 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 39593
  • Tommy Points: -27313
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Has anyone seen the Judiciary Hearings today?

Completely useless. In summary, liberal law professors who have hated Trump since his inauguration still hate Trump.  It added nothing, and was a waste of Congressional time.

I wish the hearings would stick to substance rather than opinion.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2019, 06:32:53 PM by Roy H. »
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1671 on: December 04, 2019, 06:43:28 PM »

Online Sophomore

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2243
  • Tommy Points: 372
Has anyone seen the Judiciary Hearings today?

Completely useless. In summary, liberal law professors who have hated Trump since his inauguration still hate Trump.  It added nothing, and was a waste of Congressional time.

I wish the hearings would stick to substance rather than opinion.

The Republicans chose one of those law professors. And he argued against impeachment. Given all the arguments about the original understanding of impeachment and the precedents, having a few law profs on seems reasonable enough.

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1672 on: December 04, 2019, 06:56:49 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 39593
  • Tommy Points: -27313
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Has anyone seen the Judiciary Hearings today?

Completely useless. In summary, liberal law professors who have hated Trump since his inauguration still hate Trump.  It added nothing, and was a waste of Congressional time.

I wish the hearings would stick to substance rather than opinion.

The Republicans chose one of those law professors. And he argued against impeachment. Given all the arguments about the original understanding of impeachment and the precedents, having a few law profs on seems reasonable enough.

Law professors who have made a whole host of anti-Trump statements, though, long before Ukraine.  It just weakens their case, if anything.  They couldn't find anybody who wasn't an anti-Trump radical to legally support the case for impeachment?  Surely they could have, but they chose this tactic.  It's a waste, because any rationally minded person is just going to see the obvious bias.

The Republicans put on an anti-Trumper who didn't support impeachment.  The Democrats should have put on some neutral professors with no obvious bias.  Hell, call Ken Starr, and ask him about obstruction of justice.

But ultimately, the biggest reason why it was a giant waste of time is because the Constitution is largely silent regarding how to define high crimes and misdemeanors; it's left completely to Congress' discretion, which they should exercise as they see fit.
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1673 on: December 04, 2019, 07:29:10 PM »

Online Sophomore

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2243
  • Tommy Points: 372
Has anyone seen the Judiciary Hearings today?

Completely useless. In summary, liberal law professors who have hated Trump since his inauguration still hate Trump.  It added nothing, and was a waste of Congressional time.

I wish the hearings would stick to substance rather than opinion.

The Republicans chose one of those law professors. And he argued against impeachment. Given all the arguments about the original understanding of impeachment and the precedents, having a few law profs on seems reasonable enough.

Law professors who have made a whole host of anti-Trump statements, though, long before Ukraine.  It just weakens their case, if anything.  They couldn't find anybody who wasn't an anti-Trump radical to legally support the case for impeachment?  Surely they could have, but they chose this tactic.  It's a waste, because any rationally minded person is just going to see the obvious bias.

The Republicans put on an anti-Trumper who didn't support impeachment.  The Democrats should have put on some neutral professors with no obvious bias.  Hell, call Ken Starr, and ask him about obstruction of justice.

But ultimately, the biggest reason why it was a giant waste of time is because the Constitution is largely silent regarding how to define high crimes and misdemeanors; it's left completely to Congress' discretion, which they should exercise as they see fit.

I agree with you that Congress has a lot of latitude to interpret the phrase, although I don’t think the discretion is truly unbounded - or at least, ideally, articles will be grounded in a persuasive understanding of what impeachment is for, based on precedent, the original debates, and an understanding of the constitutional structure. E.g., it’s not literally statute crimes only, and obstruction of an inquiry is a very big deal. Whatever else may happen, the law profs can at least try to offer sounder arguments.

I’m not naive enough to think that many ppl will be convinced (or would be by the members choosing a different set of witnesses). But it matters to me that advocates can at least offer a case that impeachment is consistent with the Constitutional history, precedents, structure. What if they sounded instead like Mr Cipollone’s strident argument for essentially unlimited presidential power? If that were the situation the impeachment process really would stall. https://twitter.com/greggnunziata/status/1181685021926662144?s=20



Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1674 on: December 04, 2019, 07:39:37 PM »

Offline Surferdad

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10855
  • Tommy Points: 729
  • "He fiddles...and diddles..."
Dead in the Senate folks, be prepared.  They are already looking for ways not to hold a vote to avoid this happening.

What is “this” and who are “they”?

If the Judiciary committee, the only question is how many articles they will vote on and what they will be. Oh and whether one of them will be called Bribery or Extortion. The evidence is [dang]ing; the minority in the Intelligence Committee created a noisy sideshow complaining about the process, but did not manage to cast any doubt at all on the testimony.

If the House, the only question is whether there will be any Republicans to vote for impeachment. History is watching them, as the melodramatic expression goes. Time to stand up for the Republic and our precious Constitution.

If the Senate, a vote is unavoidable, once the trial takes place - and it will take place. History may be watching, but we will certainly be watching the constituents of Collins, Gardner, Murkowski, Romney, and a couple of others.
Like most people I'm not expecting he will be removed from office by the Senate.  The consolation prize will be that, if he serves the remainder of his term, he:
1) cannot be pardoned when he leaves office.
2) cannot pardon anyone until then.
3) can be tried on criminal charges as an ordinary citizen.
IMO, this is almost the better outcome.

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1675 on: December 04, 2019, 08:02:22 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 39593
  • Tommy Points: -27313
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Dead in the Senate folks, be prepared.  They are already looking for ways not to hold a vote to avoid this happening.

What is “this” and who are “they”?

If the Judiciary committee, the only question is how many articles they will vote on and what they will be. Oh and whether one of them will be called Bribery or Extortion. The evidence is [dang]ing; the minority in the Intelligence Committee created a noisy sideshow complaining about the process, but did not manage to cast any doubt at all on the testimony.

If the House, the only question is whether there will be any Republicans to vote for impeachment. History is watching them, as the melodramatic expression goes. Time to stand up for the Republic and our precious Constitution.

If the Senate, a vote is unavoidable, once the trial takes place - and it will take place. History may be watching, but we will certainly be watching the constituents of Collins, Gardner, Murkowski, Romney, and a couple of others.
Like most people I'm not expecting he will be removed from office by the Senate.  The consolation prize will be that, if he serves the remainder of his term, he:
1) cannot be pardoned when he leaves office.
2) cannot pardon anyone until then.
3) can be tried on criminal charges as an ordinary citizen.
IMO, this is almost the better outcome.

Regarding #2, I think he still retains the right to pardon others.
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1676 on: December 05, 2019, 04:15:35 PM »

Online Hoopvortex

  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 470
  • Tommy Points: 79
Dead in the Senate folks, be prepared.  They are already looking for ways not to hold a vote to avoid this happening.

What is “this” and who are “they”?

If the Judiciary committee, the only question is how many articles they will vote on and what they will be. Oh and whether one of them will be called Bribery or Extortion. The evidence is [dang]ing; the minority in the Intelligence Committee created a noisy sideshow complaining about the process, but did not manage to cast any doubt at all on the testimony.

If the House, the only question is whether there will be any Republicans to vote for impeachment. History is watching them, as the melodramatic expression goes. Time to stand up for the Republic and our precious Constitution.

If the Senate, a vote is unavoidable, once the trial takes place - and it will take place. History may be watching, but we will certainly be watching the constituents of Collins, Gardner, Murkowski, Romney, and a couple of others.
Like most people I'm not expecting he will be removed from office by the Senate.  The consolation prize will be that, if he serves the remainder of his term, he:
1) cannot be pardoned when he leaves office.
2) cannot pardon anyone until then.
3) can be tried on criminal charges as an ordinary citizen.
IMO, this is almost the better outcome.

I'm not expecting it, either, to their shame. We've come to this, apparently: Republican senators placing their party's interest above the nation's. But my firm conviction is that their opportunism and cynicism will lead to the demise of the Republican Party.

As for your consolation prizes, I don't understand your 1) and 2). Predictably, if the Senate declines to remove him from office he would claim exoneration and continue as before.

Your opinion that he "can be tried on criminal charges as an ordinary citizen" being almost the better outcome is pretty much where I come down on it, with an emphasis on the "almost". The best outcome IMO is for him to be removed from office as soon as possible. His presidency has been a catastrophe for our government (the hollowing-out of our superb State Department being only one of his many depredations); and the risk of the exploding budget deficit and the trade wars to our economy pose too great a risk.

More fundamentally, we are a nation with a Constitution, and our Congress as well as our President are sworn to uphold it. Will the Congress, at least, honor their oath?

The Intelligence Committee Republicans did not even bother to dispute the testimony as to the facts of this sordid episode, opting instead to complain about secret processes, hearsay, and Hunter Biden. The president was offered the courtesy of having his attorneys present for the Judiciary Committee hearings, but he has declined. Evidently he does not intend to dispute the facts or present witnesses or documents that contradict the facts as established; indeed, he has withheld them, and despite lawful subpoenas. As a judge would tell any jury, we may infer thereby that the evidence withheld supports guilt.

An impeachment resembles an indictment, but it is not one. Impeachment is in our Constitution not to hold individuals accountable for their individual lawbreaking, but to protect the nation from the abuse of their office.  The case before us is a textbook example: it is exactly what the Founders feared, and for the sake of the nation we must hold Donald Trump accountable.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2019, 04:21:22 PM by Hoopvortex »
· Team executive on Brown’s future: “All-Star. Multiple times. Just like Jayson. Everyone loves Kawhi and PG as a wing duo. We think we have our own version growing right here in Boston. It’s gonna take a couple more years, but those guys are stars. And neither has an ego. They just want to play and win.”

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1677 on: December 05, 2019, 06:00:21 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18055
  • Tommy Points: 1194
Quote
Republican senators placing their party's interest above the nation's.

Better than prosecuting on hearsay and opinion.   

Quote
What is “this” and who are “they”?

People in swing areas of the country, there are at least 7 democrats that do know favor impeachment and there will be more after the recess I would wager and some townhalls.   There could be some GOP switch sides too, time will tell.

Quote
House Democrats are on recess and back in their districts this week, gauging how their constituents feel about impeachment. Public opinion has moved toward support of the impeachment inquiry, but many Democratic strategists remain especially concerned that the 31 House Democrats who represent districts that backed President Donald Trump in 2016 could face a backlash if they ultimately vote to impeach him.

Absent that cover, swing-district Democrats are heading toward difficult choices in the weeks ahead. Most of them appear on track to vote for articles of impeachment; all but seven have endorsed the impeachment inquiry. But whether they support impeachment or not, their fate in 2020 may hinge less on their individual votes than on the country’s verdict on the overall impeachment process—and even more so on how it assesses Trump’s term in office.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/10/impeachment-house-democrats-2020/599755/

The author goes on to say that they would be best to vote in a party block, but we all know whatever is said to folks on recess will drive their votes because politicians want to be re-elected.

Quote
According to Washington Post reporter Rachel Blade, speaking to CNN on Sunday, “behind the scenes” an increasing number of Democrats in swing districts are getting “cold feet” about going through with an impeachment vote on President Donald Trump.

There is some talk among these folks of limiting the scope of impeachment.  People outside of the liberal coasts where they are safe have to worry about re-elected.

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1678 on: Yesterday at 06:06:20 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 38928
  • Tommy Points: 6285
The manner in which some of the Republican Congresspeople conducted themselves in today's hearing was embarrassing, especially the poster of Schiff on a milk carton. Did they think they were back in high school? I understand this committee is loaded with hyper-partisans, but man, you couldn't conduct yourselves with a little decorum? You had to go full on Trump reality television today. Gaetz must be pushing for a high level cabinet position in the Trump 2020 administration the way he has acted in defending Trump with the completely idiotic stuff he has pulled since the inquiry began. 

Re: This Ukraine thing (aka, the impeachment thing, hearings underway)
« Reply #1679 on: Yesterday at 06:30:54 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 39593
  • Tommy Points: -27313
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
The manner in which some of the Republican Congresspeople conducted themselves in today's hearing was embarrassing, especially the poster of Schiff on a milk carton. Did they think they were back in high school :-\? I understand this committee is loaded with hyper-partisans, but man, you couldn't conduct yourselves with a little decorum? You had to go full on Trump reality television today. Gaetz must be pushing for a high level cabinet position in the Trump 2020 administration the way he has acted in defending Trump with the completely idiotic stuff he has pulled since the inquiry began.

I agree, but this isn't anything new for either party.  Remember this?





It's beneath Congress, but why stop?  Their voters keep re-electing them.
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...