What is the threshold to be met to warrant the removal of a President?

You sure?

Impeachment of Bill Clinton

 

What the hell does any of that nonsense have to do with my questions. I asked you about your statements in regards to the Rules of impeachment changing depending, you said, to "context"

I'll take the opposite of... whatever you're taking. It's the safest bet in the world because "Solid evidence" in right-wing Strawman lingo simply means "whatever Trump says".

 

High crimes and misdemeanors as determined by the SENATE.

 

According to RCP averages you have close to half of all Americans favoring impeachment and removal, close to half against. I'd say you first criteria was met, 47% is close enough to 50%, but a far cry from two third's or 67% for removal. FYI, the percentage of all Americans on Nixon two days before he resigned was 57% for removal vs. 31% against with 11% undecided. Now the 57% who thought Nixon needed to go was short of two thirds, but almost double those who opposed his removal. If you removed the undecided you come real close to two thirds. I do agree with your 50% number for impeachment by the house, but I would lower your 67% or two thirds down to 60% of the total population because of the undecideds or the not sure's for removal from office. Or a two to one margin in favor of removal vs. against removal eliminating the undecideds. A 60-30 margin not counting the undecided's would constitute two thirds in my book.

Below is the breakdown of all Americans, then by party of those in favor of impeachment and removal of Trump and those against his removal. The numbers compare 13 Nov when the hearings on impeachment began to today.

Trump’s approval 13 Nov 43.9%, 14 Jan 44.5%


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html


13 Nov ALL Adults, nationwide for impeachment and removal, 48.5%, 14 Jan 47.1% all Adults, nationwide for impeachment and removal.


13 Nov Democrats for impeachment and removal 84%, 14 Jan Democrats for impeachment and removal 83%.


13 Nov Republicans for impeachment and removal 12%, 14 Jan Republicans for impeachment and removal 8%.


13 Nov Independents for impeachment and removal 38%, 14 Jan Independents for impeachment and removal 45%.


13 Nov all adults, nationwide against impeachment and removal 45.7%, 14 Jan all adult, nationwide against impeachment and removal 47.4%


13 Nov Democrats against impeachment and removal 6%, 14 Jan Democrats against impeachment and removal 10%.


13 Nov Republicans against impeachment and removal 80%, 14 Jan Republicans against impeachment and removal 89%.


13 Nov Independents against impeachment and removal 39%, 14 Jan Independents against impeachment and removal 46%.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...ment_and_removal_of_president_trump-6957.html

The final Nixon numbers broke down by party taken 2-5 Aug 1974.
Everyone 57% for removal, 31% against 11% undecided
Republicans 31% for removal, 59% against 10% undecided
Democrats 71% for removal, 19% against, 10% undecided
Independents 55% for removal, 31% against, 14% undecided.

You can if you like compare Nixon's numbers to Trump's as of today. You can tell just by looking at the numbers, Nixon's impeachment was a whole lot less partisan.

https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/sites/default/files/2018-07/93025.pdf

 

Learn what context means, might be a good start! Seems to me if you're gonna use the word in the first sentence you might want to understand the ramifications of doing so You did ask when do the rules apply RIGHT ¯\_(º¸º)_/¯

 

You would think after accusing so many people of not understanding you or as you put it "Don't read" one would think MAYBE, just maybe it isn't the many but simply the ONE lmfao ¯\_(º¸º)_/¯

 

Thanks for those figures but I don't know if the partisanship is a true measure between Nixon and the IMPOTUS given that the nation was considerably LESS divided then than it is now.

If Nixon had the same CULT following that the IMPOTUS does today then that comparison would be appropriate.

 

Any criminal behavior that would send you or I to prison. You cannot prosecute a sitting president but congress can impeach him and send him home.

 

And if you are fair you would admit to the dems hating trump and hollering impeachment since day one.

But I noticed you were not fair and only mentioned trump voters. And you called them a cult! The haters are just as much a cult

You are too biased to be relevant . Not trustworthy. No standards.

 

Egregious PF Rule VIOLATIONS ignored and removed for DEROGATORY reasons!

For starters you are taking what I said OUT OF CONTEXT!

Secondly it is only the extremist FRINGE of Dems who wanted your criminal IMPOTUS impeached "from day one"!

Thirdly you do NOT appear to understand the meaning of the term "cult" but that is your problem, not mine!

Finally your nefarious attempt at FLAMEBAITING says VOLUMES!

Try sticking to the OP topic instead of puerile ad hom attacks.

 

Oh your cult comment wasnt flame baiting ? Look when someone is full of bs pointing that out is personal. So dont post bs like calling his voters a cult. Someone will call out biased bs.

And of course the perp will try to weasel out of it. It's part of their partisan game. Such people dont give a damn about truth or ethics. The end justifies the means .

Intolerable. Frankly I am sick of it . I didn't vote for the bastard so this has nothing to do with it. Just sick of the intentional bs.

 

No, it was NOT flamebaiting because it was not directed at anyone but instead it is the APPROPRIATE DESCRIPTIVE TERM to use to IDENTIFY WHY there is a DISCREPANCY between Nixon and the IMPOTUS when it comes to impeachment.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/cult

Using apt terminology to convey the meaning of something that is having a significant effect on the opinions of the electorate is how one engages in civil discourse on this topic.

That YOU are taking this PERSONALLY and flinging around spurious ad homs is YOUR PROBLEM, not mine.

Since you appear to be unable to engage in civil discourse on this topic you have effectively disqualified yourself from any further meaningful interaction as far as I am concerned.

Have a nice day!

 

Yeah, I understand. Today's political era is defined by division, polarization and ultra high partisanship. This wasn't the case or as you state, partisanship was much less during Nixon. Back in 1974 each party still had their liberal and conservative wings, the ideological divide was much less because of that. The Northeast was still basically Rockefeller liberal Republican territory while the south was solid Democratic Conservative. Neither party hated the other as they do today. Party leaders worked with the other party leaders across the aisle on most things. Party line voting hadn't come into being yet.

Yet the over all number, the comparison works when one is evaluating the possibility of success or not. The biggest difference in my opinion from 1974 to today is the Democrats controlled the senate back in 1974 with 58 Democrats vs 42 Republicans. The Democrats or pro impeachment/removal faction need only 9 Republican senators. According to Barry Goldwater, they got them, they had them. Today the Democrats, pro impeachment/removal faction need at a minimum of 20 Republican senators due to the GOP control of the senate and the Democrats having 47 instead of 58 senators. They may need in reality 22 since Manchin WV and Jones AL could vote not guilty. Trump has a 60% plus approval rating in those two states.

 

Trump tried to use foreign powers to cheat in the 2016 election, and now tried using foreign powers to win the 2020 election

the Senate will give Trump a mulligan, it will be up to the people to vote him out in November

 

"Lindsey Graham: A president who doesn't comply with Congressional requests for information is subject to impeachment."

https://twitter.com/BillKristol/status/1181682899424350209

 

If you want to remove him win the next election.

 

I absolutely agree that the make up of the Senate is the key to the outcome for the IMPOTUS just as it was for Clinton.

The GOP was essentially blinded by their own ideology back then and convinced themselves that the Dems would vote to remove the Philanderer-in-Chief. Given that the entire impeachment rested solely upon a blowjob with everything based upon the subsequent entrapment and attempts to claim EP it became a political farce.

While the charges against the IMPOTUS are actual crimes coupled with with claims of "absolute immunity" a nonpartisan Senate would probably convict and remove him IMO.

However what we have in reality is a highly partisan Senate majority that would amputate their own gonads with a butter knife rather than face the wrath of the IMPOTUS supporters at the polls. Hence the outcome is a foregone conclusion.

There is a positive side which is that the GOP will now have to run with the IMPOTUS in 2020 on the ballot and that will be a primary motivating factor for the Progressives GOTV efforts.

If the IMPOTUS loses he would then be in a situation of attempting to pardon himself as opposed to the situation where Pence would have pardoned him. A Pence pardon would pass muster with the courts but I have my doubts that an IMPOTUS self pardon would be accepted because that would be tantamount to giving whomever sat in the Oval office in the future a "license to kill" IMO.

 

I don't think the removal vote one way or the other is going to affect many senate races. Of those GOP senate seats up for reelection in the competitive range, Collins Maine, Gardner Colorado, McSally Arizona, Tillis NC and perhaps Ernst Iowa. Gardner is a goner regardless of how he votes. Tillis and McSally will vote not guilty mainly because their states are split 50-50 over Trumps's removal. Ernst's vote might be had, but again Iowa is another 50-50 state. That leaves Collins, Maine wants Trump gone. So if Collins votes not guilty, she will lose in the general. If Collins votes guilty, she'll either be primaried out or the Republican Trump supporters won't show up to vote for her.

Jones on the other side of the aisle is in the same position as Collins. A guilty vote dooms whatever slim chances he has for reelection in the general. A not guilty dampens Democratic support for him in a very deep red state. He also loses either way.

The House impeachment vote may have a larger effect. 31 of the 40 seats the Democrats picked up in 2018 where from districts Trump won in 2016. The GOP candidate's running in those 31 districts certainly will use the now incumbent freshman Democrats vote on the articles as campaign fodder in hopes of unseating them. That might work in a third of them, maybe more. These 31 districts for the most part have been traditionally Republican. It would be a move back to their normal party representation if republicans won some of those seats back.

In other words, these votes on impeachment may hurt House Democrats more than Senate Republicans. At least that's the way I look at it now, today. Which can change in the future. Time will tell.

 

Clinton, Perjury, obstruction of justice 10 other charges.

Trump, tried catch us with our hand in the cookie jar, refuses to kill himself.

 

Trump supporters don’t need no stinking facts!

 

you will notice that Trump was not impeached till he attempted to bribe a foreign country into interfering in the American election. And yes a lot of Democrats hate Trump for his lies and hypocrisy but I would suggest a lot of Republicans equally hated Hillary who has now been totally vindicated of all Republican lies.

 

WOW! That took a mega amount of denial and personal opinion to come up with that!

Well done CourtJester, you have earned your pay today

 

Glad to see that I have a dissenting opinion that is totally fact free. But that is usually the best you can do so at least you sort of tried.

 

Thank you, I try to be accurate with my compliments and criticisms CourtJester

 

The statistical comparison you send is very interesting. I should clarify that when I said 67% I didn't meant to imply that these should be based on polls. It's just a "general" sort of "intuitive" way of putting saying that the evidence should be much more solid than the evidence necessary to Impeach. I just used that percentage based on the requirement in the Constitution to have the vote of 67% Senators to remove. Of course, there are many other elements to consider, such as how honest, how patriotic or how partisan the Senators in office happen to be.

I think it's important to make it difficult to remove a President. An act like this is a heavy blow to our Democratic process. And it is possible that it could be abused in the future.

In reality, there is no doubt in my mind that if the Senate allows the documents and witnesses, that "theoretical" 67% margin will be more than exceeded. Which doesn't mean that even 67% of the Senators will move to impeach. Because I just don't see that many true patriots in the Republican side. But I may be proven wrong. I sure hope I am...