What Is The Difference Between Impeachment For Trump, Versus Previous Presidents?

Having the Senate ignore the evidence (McConnell's announcement) & refuse to listen to witnesses, because they are committed to protecting Trump above & beyond protecting the Constitution, will result in proclaiming & enacting this President as actually ABOVE THE LAW. Whether intentionally or not, McConnell & his Republican sycophants will make this & future Presidents effectively beyond the reach of the law, & unresponsive to it for the first time in American history. Their actions will reverberate down the decades of our future & do damage no one seems to be seriously contemplating now. That is sad.

 

Jerry Nadler has to be the dumbest democrat (slightly ahead of Pelosi} for saying the Senate is on trial! Imagine a prosecutor in a U.S court saying that to a jury

 

There was real evidence that Clinton committed perjury and obstruction of justice in a federal court! The House passed to articles of impeach that are are not only absurd, but have ZERO evidence! This is all about trying to punish Trump for getting elected! we'll see what the American people have to say about this nonsense in November!

 

Unfortunately, McConnell & his Republican sycophants are striving to prove your point entirely wrong. They are trying to elevate Trump to a position ABOVE THE LAW, where he will be beyond reach of persecution regardless of what he does. That's the danger of McConnell & the Republicans making the impeachment trial in the Senate a wholly political exercise rather than a real trial based on evidence & the testimonies of witnesses. McConnell & the Republicans are now working in concert with Trump to demonize government, devalue the Constitution, & elevate Trump to what he has always sought--ONE MAN RULE.

 

The impeachment of Trump is a serious attempt by patriots to protect the Constitution & our personal freedoms from an authoritative President, who ignores the law, & respects no boundaries on his personal powers.

 

With the inquiry held in the basement in the intel committee so Schiff would be the only voice to lie about the testimony, lies he's still telling; Dem Committee Chairs threatening to harass the administration with a mountain of subpoena's, Trump had every right to filter compliance through the courts. It was the Dem temper tantrum and childish behavior that is responsible for Trump forcing the courts to get involved. Democrats weren't serious enough to show up.

 

44 Presidents before Trump invoked executive privilege. No difference except the temper tantrum over failing to win Saul Alinsky's 3rd term.

 

No prior President both refused to respond to Congressional subpoenas & ordered those working in the Executive Branch under his direction, to ignore those subpoenas too. Inherent with that order was a powerful threat of loss of employment for those who disregarded his instructions. That makes Trump's actions different & more extreme than any of his predecessors. It also places him in the legal position of obstructing the Constitutional duties of Congress in their oversight responsibilities. Trump has a right to fight Congress in the courts. Trump has a right to defend himself in the Senate trial. Trump has a right to submit supporting evidence, or witnesses, in that trial. But no President, including Trump, has a right to defy legal subpoenas entirely & order his department to do so too. That's going beyond the law & placing Trump in open defiance of the Constitution he himself swore an oath to "preserve, protect & defend." Trump is wrong here, & needs to be called on it.

 

That's a lie. Obama ignored 9 Congressional subpoenas. Holder lied to Congress. Clapper lied to Congress. Congressional Republicans went out of their way to give Obama room to operate. Democrats threw a temper tantrum and signaled that their only job was to obstruct Trump. And, BTW, Trump keeps winning despite Democrat obstruction.

 

You should be ashamed of yourself for your brazen lies: Here's just one
The Facts Behind Obama’s Executive Privilege Claim
President Obama has invoked executive privilege to keep documents from Congress about botched Operation Fast and Furious. Just what is executive privilege, and what might happen next?

by Cora Currier

June 21, 2012, 12:45 p.m. EDT

Yesterday, the Obama administration invoked executive privilege to prevent the release of certain documents to Congress related to Operation Fast and Furious, the arms-trafficking sting gone awry that came to light last year. (As we've detailed, federal agents lost track of hundreds of guns sold to suspected gun smugglers, many of which later turned up at crime scenes in Mexico).

,,,,,

So what is executive privilege?

The president can invoke executive privilege in order to withhold some internal executive branch communications from the other branches of government. The privilege is based on the separation of powers between the branches.

Executive privilege has been invoked since the U.S.'s early days but isn't in the Constitution. It was only in 1974, when Richard Nixon tried to prevent the release of White House tapes during the Watergate investigation, that the Supreme Court upheld its constitutionality, and set some parameters for it. The Court ruled that no claim on executive privilege is absolute, and can also be overcome if evidence is needed in a criminal trial. (For a full legal history, see this report from the Congressional Research Service.)


https://www.propublica.org/article/the-facts-behind-obamas-executive-privilege-claim

 

Trump keeps winning because the positions of power in this conflict are controlled by Republicans. Trump isn't winning because he's innocent of wrongdoing. Do you remember McConnell saying in 2009, right after Obama's inauguration, that he saw his job & the job of his fellow Republicans, was to obstruct Obama & make him a one term President? McConnell kept that promise to obstruct.

 

Denying requests for witnesses as irrelevant is exactly the same as denying requests for witnesses..... period.

 

Well in this case there is no law broken so...

 

I'm not disputing that the power of Executive Privilege exists, or that every President in my lifetime has used it. I also recognize the right of any President to use Executive Privilege to avoid responding to some specific subpoenas, but those individual cases should be ultimately decided in court. But no President has the right to ignore ALL Congressional subpoenas, & that's precisely what Trump did. As a co-equal branch of government, Congress has certain powers not given to the President. One of those was the power of impeachment, & under Constitutional law, the President is subject to Congressional subpoenas connected to impeachment hearings. Trump was wrong to globally obstruct any responses to those Congressional subpoenas--an illegal act itself subject to impeachment. Trump is clearly guilty of obstructing his own Congressional impeachment hearings & investigations. That's half of the official impeachment charges against him. The other half should be determined by examination of the evidence & thru witness testimony, though chances of that happening under the current Republican leadership seems remote at best.

 

True, but at least he was thoughtful & respectful enough to give valid reasons for the denial.

 

Democrats are great at telling us no one is above the law, not even the president. But they can't prove which law the president broke. So they just keep saying, "No one is above the law", and some people fall for their innuendo.

 

USMCA, China Phase I ,,,, Obama had 8 years to keep jobs in the US. Instead, he did nothing to help American workers.

You can play dumb about McConnell's statement ,,, what he stated was that he would work to prevent Obama from radically change the US into the authoritarian state Obama campaigned to create. Fact is that Obama got his judges, he got his totalitarian healthcare, he got his massive increase in spending to reward his friends and punish his enemies.

 

Obstruction of justice is against the law. The Democrats claim that by withholding all documents, discouraging people from testifying, and ignoring subpoenas he has obstructed justice.
Abuse of power is against the law. withholding funds allotted by Congress is not a power that the President has. The Democrats claim that withholding money Congress voted to send the Ukraine he exceeded the power given him by the Constitution. They also claim that there was a quid pro quo in withholding those funds until the Ukraine announced they would investigate the Bidens which is a violation of Article II Section 4 of the constitution.
People may or may not agree with what they claim, but they are based in law.
That is why I feel there needs to be a fair and impartial trial in the Senate with witnesses and with documents. I don't understand why a trial that is fair and impartial has so many people opposed to it. It is the only way to ever resolve any of this.

 

I'm a Democrat. The latest law to be identified as broken by Trump is called the "Impoundment Control Act," which forbids the President from distributing funds appropriated by Congress for specific purposes. Trump broke that law when he withheld military financial aid from Ukraine while demanding Ukrainian action against his assumed political opponent of 2020, Joe Biden, for personal gain. Trump has also repeatedly broken another law designated in the Constitution, saying that no politician (including the President) can allow any foreign country or leader, to be involved in our domestic elections. Trump publicly invited Russia, China & Ukraine to become involved in the 2016 & 2020 elections to benefit himself. Lastly, there is a specific law forbidding the President from using the powers of his office to benefit himself financially. Yet, since the beginning, Trump has invited foreign officials to stay in his hotels in Washington, DC & Florida. He often schedules official meetings with them there, & has made a great deal of money from those official foreign visits--all illegal. Trump supporters ignore the negative impacts of these infractions, & defend Trump thru it all. Yet, if any Democrat did any of these things while in power, Republicans would be apoplexic. But with Trump, they inexplicably support such behaviors in unison. Protecting & empowering a President--ANY President, regardless of party affiliation--with such profane personal qualities, is a desecration of the oath any public servant takes upon entering office, & a convincing cause for dismissal from office at the next election.

 

1. Obama inherited a recently demolished economy from GW Bush, & managed to avoid having it decline into a major depression. That in itself deserves praise. Yet, Republicans are so biased & rigid, they are incapable of offering praise where it is due. Obama inherited an economy that was losing 3/4 of a million jobs per month, & over time resurrected it to adding about 190,000 new jobs per month beginning in 2010, & after. That's a pretty impressive record, which doesn't deserve the attacks constantly leveled at him by ungrateful & heavily biased Republicans.
2. Obama didn't campaign to implement a "authoritarian state." Far from it. Obama turned out to be far more moderate than the impression he gave during the campaign, & Republicans were smart enough to know it. But they were too intent on political warfare to ever admit it publicly. I didn't understand it at the time, thinking racism was a part of history. But I was wrong. I now realize much of the anti-Obama sentiment was based on pure racism, & that saddens me. Racism divides us as a nation & as a people. Racism benefits no one, but harms everyone it touches in ways that aren't always recognized. America will NEVER be great as long as it holds on to any racism--nor does it deserve to.
Obama got two Supreme Court nominees approved, but was blocked illegally by McConnell on his third. McConnell was thinking & acting in behalf of politics & party, not the country. McConnell believes he's doing his job by forcing ultra-conservative judges onto the courts. But most Americans are liberal socially while moderately conservative fiscally. McConnell is actually inflicting judges over America's court system who don't reflect the majority of Americans in their social views, & will be the source of constant & consistent pain for those caught up in the legal system--especially those of color. That's not helpful to America. Indeed, it magnifies the division & intensifies the pain experienced by an ever growing number of Americans, & contributes to the ever increasing negativity most Americans hold for their own government. I can see no way this is good for America. I believe Kentucky voters could benefit America in a notable way, if they would retire McConnell & replace him with someone more friendly to the mainstream.
The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was intended to open access to healthcare for millions of Americans. I have never understood the intensity of the emotional opposition to the program. As an American, I still care about the welfare of other Americans around me. For me, a successful America is one in which every American gains benefits from being an American. But I am constantly astounded by the number of Americans who don't share that view with me--many violently opposing it. There is a movement to make healthcare a natural right of citizenship. I support it. Lack of good health can make life an empty vessel. Every American should have the opportunity to pursue their personal dreams, & good health is imperative to that effort. Obamacare didn't solve the problem, but it improved the lives of millions, & that in itself, made it worthwhile.

Obama had to increase spending to assist the recovery of the economy. Without that, we'd have ended up in a bad depression, which would have been far worse. Trump inherited a healthy economy from Obama, & has still managed to increase our deficit another $trillion. Why is Republican rage reserved for Obama, when Trump is an equal or worse offender when it comes to spending? Is it racism again?

Whatever Obama did as President, it was for what he interpreted as best for the country. I watch Trump, & whatever he does as President has been for what he regards as best for himself personally. Every decision he makes is based on how or if it benefits himself somehow. I've never seen him make a decision of any importance based on how it will affect the country. I'm not sure he's capable of that. America suffers as long as he's President. Why would any voter wish to continue this miserable administration? Almost any Republican would be an improvement over Trump. Why not find a better candidate?

 

Trump refused to take part in the impeachment proceedings.

The White House on Friday rejected an invitation to take part in impeachment hearings before the House Judiciary Committee.

In a brief letter to Committee Chairman Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., White House counsel Pat Cipollone sharply attacked the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump as "completely baseless" and said House Democrats had "violated basic principles of due process and fundamental fairness."

Cipollone did not explicitly answer whether the White House would take part in the Judiciary Committee hearing scheduled for Monday, but a senior administration official told NBC News "the letter means that the White House will not participate in the House proceeding."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/tr...s-invitation-participate-impeachment-n1097021

Trump admitted twice that he invited foreign interference in our Presidential election. Trump's chief of staff admitted to the bribery charges or quid pro quo. The GAO said "the White House’s Office of Management and Budget violated the Impoundment Control Act when it withheld nearly $400 million this summer for “a policy reason."

The Republicans in the House chose to defend a guilty President. That is what is different.

 

I disagree with the cause of the meltdown. Obama was a Senator at the time. Culpability lies with many, but the major actors were Andrew Cuomo (see his July 29, 1999 HUD memo), Pelosi, and Reid along with Bush. I can document, but let's slide down to your last paragraph. Obama was not a wealthy man when he entered the White House. He left with an $8M home in DC and a $15M home in Martha's Vineyard on a $400K annual salary. No doubt there were Emolument Clause violations in the mix.
Trump committed to donating his Presidential Salary and profits from his businesses that flowed from foreign guests. His children work for the people at no charge. Here are Trump's donations:

Trump Organization says it donated $151,470 to US Treasury
By Cristina Alesci and Sophie Tatum, CNN
Updated 5:16 PM ET, Fri March 9, 2018

Washington (CNN)The Trump Organization says it donated more than $150,000 to the US Treasury, representing the profits it made at its hotels and similar properties from foreign governments over the past year.

President Donald Trump's various business interests have raised concerns among ethics watchdogs. The Trump Organization's announcement last month that it had delivered on a pledge to donate foreign government profits from its hotels to the US Treasury had raised questions due to its lack of immediate detail.

On Friday, the company said the voluntary donation totaled $151,470, according to a statement from George Sorial, the executive vice president and chief compliance counsel for the Trump Organization.

"This annual donation represents profits from foreign government patronage for the period beginning January 20, 2017 through December 31, 2017 and was calculated in accordance with our policy and the Uniform System of Accounts for the Lodging Industry," Sorial said in the statement. "Although not a legal requirement, this voluntary donation fulfills our pledge to donate profits from foreign government patronage at our hotels and similar business during President Trump's term in office."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/09/politics/trump-organization-treasury-department/index.html

Trump Org donates nearly $200k to cover foreign profits
By BERNARD CONDONFebruary 25, 2019

NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump’s company said on Monday that it donated nearly $200,000 to the U.S. Treasury to make good on its promise two years ago to hand over profits from foreign governments using its properties.

The Trump Organization said a check for $191,538 sent to Treasury represents profits from embassy parties, hotel stays and other foreign government spending at its Washington hotel and other properties last year.

https://apnews.com/a4349ac80a7048bdb61f017fffd9623f

Trump has repeatedly followed up on his pledge to donate his presidential salary. The following list documents what government projects or departments have been chosen to benefit from Trump’s quarterly paychecks so far:

Trump's salary contributions to the Treasury amount to over $78,000 / quarter, his $100,000 quarterly salary minus tax
https://www.snopes.com/news/2019/12/13/president-trump-salary-donation/

So much for Trump being motivated by self interest. Now, tell us how Obama was selfless.

 

Like Pavlov's dog he just barked irrelevant. In Schiff's case irrelevant simply means does not support his objective.

 

McConnell said he would work to keep Obama from being successful. Since Obama promised to fundamentally change the government that was an eminently appropriate response, and any talk of impeachment was squelched by McConnell and Boehner.

 

You should bone up of the law regarding Obstruction of Justice. There are many specific actions listed that can constitute obstruction of justice. Withholding witnesses and documents from congress is not included. You should also bone up on the statute regarding Abuse of Office. Withholding allocated funds is not even in the ballpark. (Though Obama arresting the videoer he blamed for Benghazi would be covered.) The president most certainly has the constitutional authority to withhold funds.