In the end does it really matter? As Gerald Ford said, an impeachable offense is whatever the House wants it to mean. So if congress wants to remove the president then they can whether they prove a crime or not. They could remove him for wearing the wrong color tie if they so felt.

In the end does it really matter? As Gerald Ford said, an impeachable offense is whatever the House wants it to mean. So if congress wants to remove the president then they can whether they prove a crime or not. They could remove him for wearing the wrong color tie if they so felt.

what Gerald Ford says does not "trump" the Constitution...

In the end does it really matter? As Gerald Ford said, an impeachable offense is whatever the House wants it to mean. So if congress wants to remove the president then they can whether they prove a crime or not. They could remove him for wearing the wrong color tie if they so felt.

Wearing a wrong colored tie is equivalent to a “high crime or misdemeanor”?  Right...

Wearing a wrong colored tie is equivalent to a “high crime or misdemeanor”?  Right...

"high crimes" are not  clearly defined in the constitution and in this case congress makes the call so absent a constitutional definition yes, it means whatever congress decides it to mean.

what Gerald Ford says does not "trump" the Constitution...

There is nothing in the constitution to Trump here. The constitution outlines a removal process for the president and lists an undefined "high crimes" as one of the justifications. Since congress has the ultimate job of deciding what a high crime amounts to then congress can interpret it to mean whatever they want it to mean. On top of that this power belongs to congress alone so even the SCOTUS couldn't overturn an impeachment and removal. So Gerald Ford was basically correct.

In the end does it really matter? As Gerald Ford said, an impeachable offense is whatever the House wants it to mean. So if congress wants to remove the president then they can whether they prove a crime or not. They could remove him for wearing the wrong color tie if they so felt.

For some act to be deemed a crime requires that a LAW defining the act as a crime exist.  Are you that ignorant of basic English?  Try Googling "crime" and see if it says "...or whatever Congress decides is a crime after the fact."


Yes, it really does matter.

Even Adam "The Evidence is Ironclad!" Schiff said he's not sure if he'll vote for impeachment.  Really??  That tells you how much of a sham this whole mock investigation has been.

There's a reason only 2 presidents have been impeached in 231 years.  There's a reason ZERO presidents have ever been removed from office through impeachment.

For you to even ask that question, and then say Congress can remove the President for anything they feel like, demonstrates you really don't have a firm grasp on the facts.

No, they can't remove the president for "no crime."  They can't remove him for wearing the wrong color anything.

Is this really the state of our education system?  READ THE CONSTITUTION!!

In addition to Johnson and Clinton, only two other U.S. presidents have faced formal impeachment inquiries in the
House of Representatives: Richard Nixon and Donald Trump. Many other presidents have been threatened with
impeachment by political foes without gaining any real traction in Congress.

The framers of the Constitution intentionally made it difficult for Congress to remove a sitting president. The impeachment
process starts in the House of Representatives with a formal impeachment inquiry. If the House Judiciary Committee finds
sufficient grounds, its members write and pass articles of impeachment, which then go to the full House for a vote.

A simple majority in the House is all that’s needed to formally impeach a president. But that doesn’t mean he or she is out
of a job. The final stage is the Senate impeachment trial. Only if two-thirds of the Senate find the president guilty of the
crimes laid out in the articles of impeachment is the POTUS removed from office.

Although Congress has impeached and removed eight federal officials—all federal judges—no president has ever been found
guilty during a Senate impeachment trial. Andrew Johnson came awfully close, though; he barely escaped a guilty verdict by
one vote.

Johnson was impeached in the House of Representatives by 126 votes to 47, but narrowly avoided a two-thirds guilty verdict
in the Senate by a single vote. After his acquittal, he served out the rest of his term and became the first (and only) former U.S.
president to be elected to the Senate.

Clinton was plagued by legal troubles and scandals from the moment he entered the White House. In 1993, Clinton and his First Lady,
Hillary, were the subject of a Justice Department investigation into the so-called Whitewater controversy, a botched business deal
from their days in Arkansas. And in 1994, Clinton was sued for sexual harassment by Paula Jones, who claimed Clinton exposed
himself to her in a hotel room in 1991.

Interestingly, it was a combination of both legal cases that would ultimately lead to Clinton’s impeachment. Independent counsel
Kenneth Starr was appointed by the Justice Department to investigate the Whitewater affair, but he couldn’t find any impeachable
evidence. Meanwhile, lawyers for Jones got a tip that Clinton had an affair with a 21-year-old White House intern named Monica Lewinsky,
a claim that both Lewinsky and Clinton denied under oath.

Starr switched the focus of his investigation when he received 20 hours of taped phone conversations between Lewinsky and Linda Tripp,
a former White House colleague, in which Lewinsky alludes to the affair. Starr then got the FBI to fit Tripp with a wire to meet with Lewinsky
at a Ritz-Carlton hotel outside Washington, DC, when Lewinsky again admitted to a sexual relationship with the president.

When the story went public, Clinton was forced to address the accusations on national television.

“I want you to listen to me,” Clinton famously said. “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to
lie, not a single time, never.”

Starr’s investigative team ended up producing a long and lurid report detailing Clinton’s sexual dalliances with Lewinsky and providing
evidence that Clinton lied under oath (perjury) in an effort to obstruct the Starr investigation.

On December 19, 1998, the House of Representatives voted along party lines to impeach Clinton on two separate counts: perjury and
obstruction of justice. But in the ensuing five-week Senate trial, Clinton was acquitted on both counts.

Despite a very public and embarrassing scandal, and being only the second president in history to be impeached, Clinton’s job approval
rating peaked at 73 percent in 1999.

Despite being complicit in one of the greatest political scandals in U.S. presidential history, Richard Nixon was never impeached. He
resigned before the House of Representatives had a chance to impeach him. If he hadn’t quit, Nixon would likely have been the first
president ever impeached and removed from office, given the crimes he committed to cover up his involvement in the Watergate break-ins.

https://www.history.com/news/how-many-presidents-impeached

For some act to be deemed a crime requires that a LAW defining the act as a crime exist.  Are you that ignorant of basic English?  Try Googling "crime" and see if it says "...or whatever Congress decides is a crime after the fact."


Yes, it really does matter.

Even Adam "The Evidence is Ironclad!" Schiff said he's not sure if he'll vote for impeachment.  Really??  That tells you how much of a sham this whole mock investigation has been.
There's a reason only 2 presidents have been impeached in 231 years.  There's a reason ZERO presidents have ever been removed from office through impeachment.
For you to even ask that question, and then say Congress can remove the President for anything they feel like, demonstrates you really don't have a firm grasp on the facts.
No, they can't remove the president for "no crime."  They can't remove him for wearing the wrong color anything.
Is this really the state of our education system?  READ THE CONSTITUTION!!
https://www.history.com/news/how-many-presidents-impeached

Wow, that went right over your head. Let me spell it out for you:

Congress has the sole power to remove the president and no other individual or agency can overrule that decision. So you can make any argument you want about whether there was a violation or not but if congress votes to have the president removed it happens because they have the final say. Therefore the decision to remove the president stands but because it is the right one but because it is the final one.

In Nixon V. United states the supreme court ruled that impeachment was a political matter not a criminal one and that it could not review the impeachment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_v._United_States

So yes, congress can impeach a president for whatever they want.

Maybe you should look up the facts before acting like a douche to others so you don't look so foolish.

Wow, that went right over your head. Let me spell it out for you:

Congress has the sole power to remove the president

AS LONG AS THEY ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONSTITUTION

and no other individual or agency can overrule that decision.

You left out the most important part, as usual.


Having the authority to impeach doesn't grant them the authority to ignore the Constitution.

Article I, Section 2:  The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Article I, Section 3:  The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Article II, Section 4:  The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

No crime means no impeachment and no trial.  It's plain English.  "...on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."  Without actual criminal charges, there can be no impeachment.  Subsequently, the Senate can't convict a president of a non-crime, i.e. "wearing the wrong color tie."

You really need to read the Constitution instead of pretending you already know what it says.

I know some of you are going to scream about what I am going to say here.    I don’t give a fuck! 

I really do understand the Dems points and side in the impeachment of Trump. I don’t agree with it, but I understand it. He terrifies them. All of them. They have been so lawless for so long, if he stays in office for another term, some of them are going down. And the rest of them might somehow be implicated. Because, let’s face it, by ignoring all the crimes committed by their peers and not doing their constitutional duties and investigate these charges, they are just as guilty. IMHO

But besides the crime aspect, he terrifies them because Thrump doesn’t care about his political career. So they have no sway over him. They cannot destroy his career nor his reputation. The only choice they have is to do whatever they can to keep him from being reelected. The lies flying around are so perverse that even the average joe on the street can’t answer this basic question. "What Has Trump Done That Is Impeachable?"

I know some of you are going to scream about what I am going to say here.    I don’t give a fuck! 

I really do understand the Dems points and side in the impeachment of Trump. I don’t agree with it, but I understand it. He terrifies them. All of them. They have been so lawless for so long, if he stays in office for another term, some of them are going down. And the rest of them might somehow be implicated. Because, let’s face it, by ignoring all the crimes committed by their peers and not doing their constitutional duties and investigate these charges, they are just as guilty. IMHO

But besides the crime aspect, he terrifies them because Thrump doesn’t care about his political career. So they have no sway over him. They cannot destroy his career nor his reputation. The only choice they have is to do whatever they can to keep him from being reelected. The lies flying around are so perverse that even the average joe on the street can’t answer this basic question. "What Has Trump Done That Is Impeachable?"

True.  The rats that infest the swamp did what they did: spying on Trump and his team, protecting Hillary, etc.; precisely because they knew once she was in office, they would not only be safe from accountability but richly rewarded.

Election night 2016 was their "Oh, shit!!" moment.  Everything since has been an attempt to cover their own asses.

Biden is corrupt.  His son is a corrupt loser, too.  Just heard that Hunter was reportedly smoking crack in a strip club, one which he visited one a month for a couple of evenings at a time.  He used a credit card with NO NAME on it.  I have it feeling he was concealing his identity because he was conducting himself in ways that could be used against him and his father.

Sleazy Hunter and Creepy Joe.  Two peas from the same pod.

A lot of truth here.  Trump is really upsetting their gravy train.  Most elected already knew and were part of it.

Trump is a true outsider and is exposing the sweet deal the bastards had going.   

This scares hell out of them because at the least, the peasants are becoming aware of them.

I know some of you are going to scream about what I am going to say here.    I don’t give a fuck! 

I really do understand the Dems points and side in the impeachment of Trump. I don’t agree with it, but I understand it. He terrifies them. All of them. They have been so lawless for so long, if he stays in office for another term, some of them are going down. And the rest of them might somehow be implicated. Because, let’s face it, by ignoring all the crimes committed by their peers and not doing their constitutional duties and investigate these charges, they are just as guilty. IMHO

But besides the crime aspect, he terrifies them because Thrump doesn’t care about his political career. So they have no sway over him. They cannot destroy his career nor his reputation. The only choice they have is to do whatever they can to keep him from being reelected. The lies flying around are so perverse that even the average joe on the street can’t answer this basic question. "What Has Trump Done That Is Impeachable?"

A lot of truth here.  Trump is really upsetting their gravy train.  Most elected already knew and were part of it.

Trump is a true outsider and is exposing the sweet deal the bastards had going.   

This scares hell out of them because at the least, the peasants are becoming aware of them.

Robt,
You have brought up the most important point  "the sweet deal the bastards had going".
The federal government was never designed to be a Government run by professional
politicians and lifetime union bureaucrats, it was meant to be run by farmers, merchants,
tradesmen, builders, and such.
Short of complete obliteration of most Large American cities, I see no way to go back
to the good "Ole days",  but maybe, just maybe we'll see less of these Professional
politicians and more of the rude, crude, peasant class,  walking the halls of power.

I know some of you are going to scream about what I am going to say here.    I don’t give a fuck! 

I really do understand the Dems points and side in the impeachment of Trump. I don’t agree with it, but I understand it. He terrifies them. All of them. They have been so lawless for so long, if he stays in office for another term, some of them are going down. And the rest of them might somehow be implicated. Because, let’s face it, by ignoring all the crimes committed by their peers and not doing their constitutional duties and investigate these charges, they are just as guilty. IMHO

But besides the crime aspect, he terrifies them because Thrump doesn’t care about his political career. So they have no sway over him. They cannot destroy his career nor his reputation. The only choice they have is to do whatever they can to keep him from being reelected. The lies flying around are so perverse that even the average joe on the street can’t answer this basic question. "What Has Trump Done That Is Impeachable?"

I agree with a lot of what you said. It’s not that that infuriated me. It’s the masses that eat up anything anti-Trump as truth and not try to get facts and decide for themselves. Purely emotionally based reactions to Mr. Meenie Wrong Tie Color Bad Orange Man.

I like the title of this thread as it exposes the liberal and his/her/them FEELINGs about President Trump.
Trump is playing 4D chess and libtard is playing checkers.
MAGA! winning

I agree with a lot of what you said. It’s not that that infuriated me. It’s the masses that eat up anything anti-Trump as truth and not try to get facts and decide for themselves. Purely emotionally based reactions to Mr. Meenie Wrong Tie Color Bad Orange Man.

Sorry, my first comment was more sarcasm than anything else.

It is interesting to actually listen to Dems like Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler and understand where they are coming from. They actually have a point in how they feel. They firmly believe that Trump asking Russia during the debates is treason. And Trumps use of executive privilege amounts to obstruction of congress. Then there is the quid pro quo of Trump holding back funds in exchange for an investigation into his political opponent. Not to mention bribery and abuse of power. They honestly believe what they are saying. And they intend to use the proof they have to impeach the president. Everything they say, is true and there is no proof to the contrary. As a matter of fact they have had all this evidence for years now and they are going to use it against the president. Everything they say is the truth. We all know it is, including you.

Because no one is that stupid, right? They must know something we don’t. They have to be right in their feelings, otherwise they would be the biggest morons in the world to use something that is not true to be successful at impeaching the president. And they will be successful. That’s proof that they are right, a self fulfilling prophecy. And those of us that support Trump know nothing. Make sense, right? Logical, right? How can you be wrong when Trump is impeached by the House? They don’t want to impeach Trump. But they have the constitutional obligation to do it. They are taking the moral high ground. It’s tough to try and convince those who don’t care otherwise. ANd they don’t care.

Rush calls the “Masses” as you call them, low information voters. It’s true. They only take in one side because that side is also telling them what the other side is saying. They have been brainwashed. But how do you tell anyone who has been brainwashed that they have been brainwashed? They don’t go out to find the truth or even just an opposing view because they don’t want to. They are afraid to. They already think they know the truth. And if it turns out that everything they know as the truth for the last 3 years has been a complete and total lie, I think you will see suicides increase significantly. The irony here is that if they do commit suicide they will probably use a gun. And of course the Dems will blame Trump.....

This is all sarcasm, obviously. It is true the Dems are that stupid. Because they think we are really that stupid. Those of us that have educated ourselves on this subject know better.

You left out the most important part, as usual.


Having the authority to impeach doesn't grant them the authority to ignore the Constitution.

No crime means no impeachment and no trial.  It's plain English.  "...on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."  Without actual criminal charges, there can be no impeachment.  Subsequently, the Senate can't convict a president of a non-crime, i.e. "wearing the wrong color tie."

You really need to read the Constitution instead of pretending you already know what it says.

And when the SCOTUS refuses to weigh in then who is going to overturn congress' decision? If congress just skipped a proscribed step then they might step in but the SCOTUS has already said they aren't going to get into the political question. Interpreting what constitutes a "high crime"could be determined to be one of those political questions.

But lets say they would take up the issue. The next question is "What is high crimes and misdemeanors?". Well as it turns out, it isn't as simple as a plain reading as you would like to ignorantly believe.

Impeachment dates back to the 1300s in Britain and the term high crimes and misdemeanors was used in 1386. In that time often impeachment occurred for things that weren't criminal in nature. This continued for hundreds of years.
In 1774 a chief justice was impeached for something that was not criminal yet the language high crimes and misdemeanors was used. Among those who voted to impeach? Multiple founding fathers.
Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist papers argued for impeachment for abuse or violation of public trust. Multiple other founding fathers described non-criminal reasons that could justify impeachment.
This first American impeachment was of senator William Blount in 1797. Of the 5 things he was impeached for, only 1 was criminal.
Multiple judges have been impeached for non criminal things including insanity and drunkenness.

The history goes on but long story short, your claim that high crimes and misdemeanors only refers to violations of criminal statutes is not supported by the facts.


I suggest you read more about the constitution instead of just reading and hearing what you want to find. Here is some light reading to start you off.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/what-does-high-crimes-and-misdemeanors-actually-mean/600343/

And when the SCOTUS refuses to weigh in then who is going to overturn congress' decision? If congress just skipped a proscribed step then they might step in but the SCOTUS has already said they aren't going to get into the political question. Interpreting what constitutes a "high crime"could be determined to be one of those political questions.

But lets say they would take up the issue. The next question is "What is high crimes and misdemeanors?". Well as it turns out, it isn't as simple as a plain reading as you would like to ignorantly believe.

Impeachment dates back to the 1300s in Britain and the term high crimes and misdemeanors was used in 1386. In that time often impeachment occurred for things that weren't criminal in nature. This continued for hundreds of years.
In 1774 a chief justice was impeached for something that was not criminal yet the language high crimes and misdemeanors was used. Among those who voted to impeach? Multiple founding fathers.
Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist papers argued for impeachment for abuse or violation of public trust. Multiple other founding fathers described non-criminal reasons that could justify impeachment.
This first American impeachment was of senator William Blount in 1797. Of the 5 things he was impeached for, only 1 was criminal.
Multiple judges have been impeached for non criminal things including insanity and drunkenness.

The history goes on but long story short, your claim that high crimes and misdemeanors only refers to violations of criminal statutes is not supported by the facts.


I suggest you read more about the constitution instead of just reading and hearing what you want to find. Here is some light reading to start you off.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/what-does-high-crimes-and-misdemeanors-actually-mean/600343/

Did you even try to read what I posted?  The Senate holds a trial.  The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over the trial.  It takes 2/3 of the Senate to convict and remove a President.

You're getting way ahead of the situation asking about SCOTUS getting involved.

"High crime."  The operative word is "CRIME."  Geesh.  How obtuse can one person be?

Dems want him out so bad because hes not part of the club. They know he will bring them down for decades of abuse of power.

December should be interesting.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Dems want him out so bad because hes not part of the club. They know he will bring them down for decades of abuse of power.

December should be interesting.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Even though 2 (almost 3) presidents have been impeached, exactly ZERO have been convicted by the Senate and removed from office.

Trump's not moving until 2024.  Everyone should just accept it.