• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Articles Of Impeachment Filed

Cheerful Charlie

Cheerful Charlie

Contributor
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Messages
9,355
Location
Houston, Texas
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/07/con...t-donald-trump-and-say-republicans-will-join/

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) has formally filed articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump. According to a statement, Sherman and Rep. Al Green (D-TX) are filing for impeachment over what they believe is the president’s mishandling of the firing of former FBI Director James Comey, as well as revelations from the ongoing investigation into the Trump campaign’s collusion with Russia.
“Filing Articles of Impeachment is the first step on a very long road,” the statement reads. “But if the impulsive incompetency continues, then eventually—many, many months from now—Republicans will join the impeachment effort.”



-------


And off we go!
 
Well, it's mostly a symbolic endeavor for now. A Republican House won't ever vote for it. In 2019, it may be more viable.
 
blastula said:
Well, it's mostly a symbolic endeavor for now. A Republican House won't ever vote for it. In 2019, it may be more viable.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's symbolic.
I think they're getting some procedural steps out of the way, to have something in place for whenever the tipping point is reached.
I mean, if the committee thrashes out the language while it has no chance on a full vote, then when it DOES have a chance, months of paperwork may be saved.

And maybe it'll be like Nixon. Show FFvC that the votes are there, maybe he'll start tweeting his 'hounded out of office' defense and quit.
 
Keith&Co. said:
blastula said:
Well, it's mostly a symbolic endeavor for now. A Republican House won't ever vote for it. In 2019, it may be more viable.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's symbolic.
I think they're getting some procedural steps out of the way, to have something in place for whenever the tipping point is reached.
I mean, if the committee thrashes out the language while it has no chance on a full vote, then when it DOES have a chance, months of paperwork may be saved.

And maybe it'll be like Nixon. Show FFvC that the votes are there, maybe he'll start tweeting his 'hounded out of office' defense and quit.
Click to expand...

Well he certainly can't claim he's not a crook.
 
blastula said:
pdf of Article

But they should have checked with WP first who could try to tell them why they are not allowed to do this.

How the Impeachment Process Works - The New York Times
Click to expand...

The NYT article also says

But several legal specialists across party lines cautioned that talk of impeachment was premature while the facts remained unclear;

This is what I have been saying all along. The impeachment process for collusion with Russia is still somewhat bogged. Now it is moving towards Comey. This is a political trial but proper presentation of facts is still required.

The description of the impeachment process given in that article is incomplete. This has to go through House judiciary committees in Congress. I've quoted this already.

It is better to quote US legal sources.

This one is dated to 2005 but I may be corrected if any revisions have been issued since:

https://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/98-806.pdf

The House of Representatives: “Sole Impeachment Power”
A. Initiation.
Impeachment proceedings may be commenced in the House of Representatives by
a Member declaring a charge of impeachment on his or her own initiative,1
by a Member presenting a memorial listing charges under oath,2 or by a Member depositing a resolution in the hopper, which is then referred to the appropriate committee.3
The impeachment process may be triggered by non-Members, such as when the Judicial Conference of the United States suggests that the House may wish to consider
impeachment of a federaljudge,4 where an Independent Counsel advises the House of any substantial and credible information which he or she believes might constitute grounds for impeachment,5 by message from the President,6 by a charge from a State or territorial legislature or grand
jury,7 or, finally, by petition.8

Resolutions regarding impeachment may be of two types. A resolution impeaching
a particular individual who is within the category of impeachable officers under Art. II,
Sec. 4 of the Constitution is usually referred directly to the House Committee on the
Judiciary.


A resolution to authorize an investigation as to whether grounds exist for the
House to exercise its impeachment power is referred to the House Committee on Rules.9
Generally, such a resolution is then referred to the House Judiciary Committee.10 In the
House impeachment investigation with respect to President Richard M. Nixon, a resolution reported out of the House Judiciary Committee, H.Res. 803,11 was called up for
immediate consideration as a privileged matter.


This is the problem. The Press don't look at the whole picture. There actually are rules throughout the procedure. There is no precise format for presenting information.
 
Elixir said:
blastula said:
pdf of Article

But they should have checked with WP first who could try to tell them why they are not allowed to do this.

How the Impeachment Process Works - The New York Times
Click to expand...

Al Green sings Take Me Up The River ?
Click to expand...

Except it's a pretty sloppy report. See my reply complete with syntax errors. Premature actions could end up backfiring. More careful research is required and simply using media orchestration will not always work on the long run.

In my own view not only is this premature but it is just a display of political gymnastics enfeebled by a lack of proper presentation but hyped up in the media.
 
WP, "in your own view" translates to me as, "What I wish to believe"... based on my interactions with you. Your "view" is through specially colored lenses that allow you to remove all context and treat every element of fact as an isolated and independent event.

If Trump did shoot someone on 5th avenue, you would dissect each step to show how he did nothing wrong.

It's not illegal to own a gun
It's not illegal to want to kill someone
It's not illegal to say you want to kill someone
It's not illegal to be walking north on the sidewalk of 5th avenue
It's not illegal to fire a gun you legally own
It's not illegal to refuse medical aid to a gunshot victim if you believe the scene is unsafe for you
It's not illegal to run southbound on the sidewalk of 5th avenue
It's not illegal to pack a suitcase
It's not illegal to board an aircraft
It's not illegal to transfer all of your money to a Russian bank
It's not illegal to fly to Russia.
 
Malintent said:
WP, "in your own view" translates to me as, "What I wish to believe"... based on my interactions with you. Your "view" is through specially colored lenses that allow you to remove all context and treat every element of fact as an isolated and independent event.

If Trump did shoot someone on 5th avenue, you would dissect each step to show how he did nothing wrong.

It's not illegal to own a gun...
Click to expand...
Plus, it's only speculation to connect Trump to the shooting. He was thirty feet away at the time.
 
Malintent said:
WP, "in your own view" translates to me as, "What I wish to believe"... based on my interactions with you. Your "view" is through specially colored lenses that allow you to remove all context and treat every element of fact as an isolated and independent event.

If Trump did shoot someone on 5th avenue, you would dissect each step to show how he did nothing wrong.

It's not illegal to own a gun
It's not illegal to want to kill someone
It's not illegal to say you want to kill someone
It's not illegal to be walking north on the sidewalk of 5th avenue
It's not illegal to fire a gun you legally own
It's not illegal to refuse medical aid to a gunshot victim if you believe the scene is unsafe for you
It's not illegal to run southbound on the sidewalk of 5th avenue
It's not illegal to pack a suitcase
It's not illegal to board an aircraft
It's not illegal to transfer all of your money to a Russian bank
It's not illegal to fly to Russia.
Click to expand...

Not necessary. The prime question would be did he shoot the gun. Supporting information (working backwards) can he be placed in the area during the time the person was shot. Were there witnesses.

However if there are no witnesses, questions like did he board an aircraft (travel from another place) would be relevant.

However if Trump did want to shoot someone he would most likely delegate this to someone else.
 
Elixir said:
whichphilosophy said:
The prime question would be did he shoot the gun.
Click to expand...

WHAT gun? I don't see any gun. Do you have the gun? There is no evidence, and eyewitnesses are unreliable. [/captain obvious]
Click to expand...

I should have said fire a gun. It sounds like he fired a weapon and shot a gun.
Forensics are more reliable then. Are there powder marks on his hands or later on his coat. Does evidence put him at the scene, or even in the same town. Was there a motive. Is there surveillance footage? Did the eye witnesses see an Orangutan in a black coat. Now in this instance a witness is more likely to be reliable as it is something unusual. :)
 
Deepak said:
Keith&Co. said:
I don't think it's symbolic.
I think they're getting some procedural steps out of the way, to have something in place for whenever the tipping point is reached.
I mean, if the committee thrashes out the language while it has no chance on a full vote, then when it DOES have a chance, months of paperwork may be saved.

And maybe it'll be like Nixon. Show FFvC that the votes are there, maybe he'll start tweeting his 'hounded out of office' defense and quit.
Click to expand...

Well he certainly can't claim he's not a crook.
Click to expand...

Of course he can. Have you been paying attention? This man doesn't care about truth. He's a pathological liar with narcissistic personality disorder. Who knows what claims will come out of the fantasy world he lives in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom