Trump WANTS to be impeached.

Nope. There are 4 instances of obstruction that meet all the legal requirements.

 

In 20 Tweets, GOP Rep. Justin Amash Lays Out Case For Impeachment

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/justin-amash-tweets-trump-impeachment

 

In addition - while on the topic of propaganda - SCOTUS is not elected. They are appointed based on the agenda of the Establishment. Then they then sit there for life and the people have no ability to get rid of them. (Sans electing a majority of congress solely on the basis of getting rid of some errant justice - which is an absurd bar)

SCOTUS is supposed to interpret law and the constitution on the basis of the founding principles = Individual liberty is above the legitimate authority of Gov't. In other words - The Gov't is not supposed to be making any law that messes with individual liberty - of its own volition.

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
-- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781-82

So the legitimate authority if Gov't - with respect to individual liberty - is protection from direct harm - murder, rape, theft and so on - one person on another.

Individual liberty ends where the nose of another begins - this is where Gov't authority is supposed to begin and end.

The only way the Gov't is supposed to be able to mess with individual liberty is through a change to the social contract - construct by which we the people give some authority (Gov't) power to punish.

The bar is not 50+1 - nor is it "Simple majority mandate" - that some dude got elected. The bar is overwhelming majority - at least 2/3rds in order for such a law to be legitimate. Not that we have to have a referendum every time as in some cases it is obvious.

Take heroin/meth vs Pot for example. Obviously Gov't would have a hard time getting 2/3rds in a referendum banning pot - especially for medical purposes. These days the reverse is almost true. Heroin/Meth - should not be a problem. I do not see some big outcry from the public for legalization (as is the case with pot).

The reason for this bar is that if something is so bad and obviously dangerous to the public that the Gov't should be given power to punish - then an overwhelming majority will agree. Who thinks 5 yr old should be able to play cops and robbers with real guns ?

Both Classical Liberalism and Republicanism refer to 50+1/ Simple majority mandate as "Tyranny of the Majority" .

The whole point of a constitutional republic is

Now .. while the raging masses do not know the founding principles - principles by which law and the constitution are to be interpreted - one would hope that a sitting member of congress does.

Clearly something is rotten in the land of SCOTUS - every sitting member of should be removed for dereliction of duty - failure to interpret law and the constitution on the basis of the founding principles. I gave one example (Pot) - I can rattle of a bunch more at the drop of the hat.

12 years of school and we manage not to teach a kid the principles on which this nation was founded .. Legitimacy of authority - what are the legitimate powers of Gov't and why .. and so on.

Where is the mainstream media ? Sure we hear political and bureaucratic pundits regularly spout platitudes "The Constitution - Rule of Law" but where is the rational discussion of these in an attempt to educate the public. Nowhere. I watch both left and right media - in almost every other segment you will hear some bureaucrat, politician, or media editorialist touting these platitudes while promoting the opposite.

It is a "Necessary Illusion" that we follow the founding principles and the rule of law - that our justice system has not drifted far down the path of Kangarooland. This is true of many other Western Democracies as well. It is the nature of the beast I suppose. The founders put in safeguards to protect against Tyranny to limit the power of Gov't.

For 200 years the Gov't has been trying to get that power back - and it has succeeded.

 

You got nothing

 

You mean the ones Mueller found no cause to prosecute, but you, in your imminent wisdom, don't agree with???
So full of it.

 

Your posts have triggered some old memories. When I was a young man, I spent a lot of time reading the writings of the founding fathers. They weren't just trying to set up a workable government, they were trying to establish a country that allowed personal freedom to flourish. They often referred to congress as citizen legislators. The idea from the beginning, was that citizens would serve a term or two, and then return to their private life. This development of an essentially permanent political class was not part of the plan.

A constant pattern is that the longer one stays in government, the more corrupt they are likely to become. Of those cops, prosecutors, and politicians who get caught wrongdoing, it is usually the seasoned ones. Something about the power going to their heads, which only grows over time.

 

You have got that one absolutely right.

 

How many times must it be pointed out that Mueller adhered to the OLC policy of not indicting a sitting prez?

Do you suffer from short term memory loss?

 

Trump is realizing that being President with actual oversight is no fun... Nancy is getting under his skin big time - lol

 

Pelosi needs to sh-t or get off the pot.

Impeach or not. Choose, and then we’ll move in one direction or the other.

 

No president has been harassed (undeservedly so) as much as Trump. It’s amazing he’s accomplished so much with the media and the Washington bureaucracy against him since before he took office.

Life is hard when you go against the grain. It certainly wasn’t easy for Washington and the Founding Fathers.

 

fake news

 

The dems want to impeach him so what are they waiting on? Why haven't these gutless democrats already impeached Trump? Even though they would not get the votes in the Senate why not go ahead and do it?

 

Trump really doesn't care one way or the other since his goal is to constantly demonstrate to voters that the Dem Party leadership is strictly partisan at the expense of this nation, and insane with it to boot. He can easily do that as a response every time ANY of those lunatics open his or her mouth. Impeach him/don't impeach him . . . and . . . Donald still wins with the voters. ALL the Dem Party leadership is doing with this stuff is to make themselves look very, very bad.

 

The policy being referred to by yourself does not, under any circumstances, state that the recommendation of indictment cannot be made regarding the president of the united states. There was nothing prohibiting Robert Mueller from making the recommendation, and yet he chose not to. Explain why such is the case?

 

That's the genius of Nancy Pelosi, she'll hold back the gates until the force become too strong to stop. In the mean time, her presence, the position and the power she wields, makes Trump act weird. But then isn't that her plan, to prod him into spinning out of control.

 

Mueller did write about Congress taking action against the abuse of power of the president.

 

Which was done simply so it would not be his neck on the chopping block when it comes to the efforts of impeaching a duly-elected president of the united states for purely political reasons, on such weak evidence that would never stand up to scrutiny at trial in a court of law.

In essence, Robert Mueller trolled both political parties equally. He knew the liberal democrat party wanted Donald Trump to be impeached, so he told them to do the work themselves.

 

I've read the report, and I'm sure the blacked out parts are worse. So go blow your smoke elsewhere.

 

And many were sure that Hillary Clinton was going to win the election for president of the united states.

Being "sure" of something does not mean it is factually correct, as it is nothing more than a private belief devoid of scientific verification.

 

There never will be a demand from the public for impeachment, unless they find out Trump had someone murdered.

The public knows he's been treated unfairly, so they don't care if he blows off a little steam.

 

I've seen Trump in public with Putin. You can keep your eyes closed, but it doesn't change reality. Why are you all still fighting off Hillary? Is Trump's insecurity also the insecurity of his base. You know, Trump won't get the same help in 2020. Your's and his goose is cooked, one way or the other.

 

The above response sounds a great deal like a threat being directed at another member.

 

I think most people do not like him. in fact, I'd be willing to bet that most conservatives don't really like him, but he is their champion and he is all they have.

 

I won't be the one crying when Trump loses his office.