Sidebar

Politics: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
bobstod

bobstod

All-American
Oct 13, 1999
2,282
11
157
83
Magnolia Springs, AL. USA
I do not want the members of foreign policy apparatus thinking that they, not elected officials, determine what U.S. foreign policy is, because the next president is going to want to implement her thinking on foreign policy, and if that conflicts with what the members of the foreign policy apparatus think is proper, tough. They can get over it. The honorable path is to provide their input to the foreign policy process, listen to the president, and then, as long as that decision is not illegal, implement the policy, request reassignment, or resign in protest. T/W's post

Earlier in this post you stated that it would be wise for the president to hear the advice of his foreign policy advisers and the state department. I believe that is essential, and to act without that step borders on presidential overreach. This president doesn't seem to believe there is any line he cannot cross involving the powers of his office. Your concern for precedent later in the post wold be appropriate here.

As for the portion I quoted above, of course I, or any knowledgable American would expect foreign service personnel to apply settled American Policy without bias or political taint to the best of their ability, as they swear to and have a proud history of doing. They should also expect, as in the present case, that if a separate channel of influence which runs counter to the settled policy they have been faithfully adhering to should appear, that they should report it up the chain of command. I think, again in the present case, the diplomats so far heard from have all followed that logical and moral step.

I sincerely hope that your concern about State Department personnel hijacking foreign policy in the future is no more than a passing worry. I don't see any evidence among the career diplomats that would cause me to fear that. On the political appointees, however, I have great cause for concern. Sondlund's apparent perjury, and Bolton's teasing coyness raise my hackles.

 
Last edited:
Jon

Jon

Hall of Fame
Feb 22, 2002
15,648
12,576
282
Atlanta 'Burbs
called him from a restaurant in a foreign capitol and held the phone away from his ear at full volume

the best people

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/tr...dland-call-democratic-lawmakers-says-n1084071
Holmes said he was able to hear the conversation because Sondland held the phone away from his ear due to how loudly the president was speaking, according to the statement. He told lawmakers he didn’t take notes of the conversation, but that he has a clear recollection of it, and that he immediately told Embassy staff about the call
Click to expand...
 
selmaborntidefan

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,736
287
54
Let's cut right through all the bull:

the Republicans are now deploying the "OJ Simpson's lawyers" defense (minus the race card).


It goes like this: unless you actually SAW Trump commit the entire crime from start to finish, Trump is innocent.

(I'm inclined to ask how many of them actually saw what they impeached Clinton for from start to finish, but I digress).
 
U

uafanataum

All-American
Oct 18, 2014
2,917
1,366
182
bobstod said:
You score a point on me, T/W. I agree that the president is not bound by the foreign policy already in place, but can change foreign policy in significant ways. However, it has never been accepted as wise to change foreign policy on a whim, as he did in Syria, nor has it been accepted as legal, when done for for personal gain, as he did in Ukraine. The argument now rising in his defense is that since the aid eventually flowed, and the public statement never happened, no crime was committed. That argument is exactly the same as saying that although the accused fired his pistol with intent to kill, he missed and is therefore innocent of any crime. No one can deny that the president requested the leader of another nation to provide assistance in an act that would benefit him in an upcoming US election. That in itself is a crime. Withholding military aid to coerce that assistance is bribery. Any contention that the president did not, in fact, act to withhold that aid is null and void: who else can do it? His refusal to allow anyone who can verify that to testify is evidence of obstruction.

I respect your ability to argue your case, T/W, but the facts do not support your case.
Click to expand...
The system is in place for a reason as tidewater has shown. The constitution gives the president alot of power when it comes to foreign policy. The problem is they expected future generations to only elect people with a conscience to the white house (not a high bar I think.) If somehow we elected someone like Trump to office they gave us a way to fix the problem (impeachment.) The American voters have failed, not the way our government was set up. First off we elected Trump. Second, we elected a congress that will probably not impeach Trump. He may actually get away with this and it will be the citizenry's fault because we were given a way to fix these issues but instead we elected a bunch of corrupt, self serving politicians.
 
AlexanderFan

AlexanderFan

Hall of Fame
Jul 23, 2004
11,222
7,750
187
Birmingham
https://www.dailywire.com/news/pelo...-to-prove-he-is-innocent?utm_campaign=dwbrand

If you have information you’re innocent provide it, otherwise we’re continuing.

This at all costs to get him impeached is setting a dangerous precedent for the rest of us.


https://www.dailywire.com/news/watc...cturing-the-nation-apart?utm_campaign=dwbrand

This fella here will probably be suicided three times for stepping out of party lines and speaking against them. I feel bad for him, but if any politician of any party thinks they’re getting elected to actually handle the business of governing this country they haven’t been paying attention lately.

The solution is simple: put someone in place to win the election in a year. Dems have a better shot at that than getting the Senate to ok this impeachment sham.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
92tide

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,314
45,170
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
AlexanderFan said:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/pelo...-to-prove-he-is-innocent?utm_campaign=dwbrand

If you have information you’re innocent provide it, otherwise we’re continuing.

This at all costs to get him impeached is setting a dangerous precedent for the rest of us.


https://www.dailywire.com/news/watc...cturing-the-nation-apart?utm_campaign=dwbrand

This fella here will probably be suicided three times for stepping out of party lines and speaking against them. I feel bad for him, but if any politician of any party thinks they’re getting elected to actually handle the business of governing this country they haven’t been paying attention lately.

The solution is simple: put someone in place to win the election in a year. Dems have a better shot at that than getting the Senate to ok this impeachment sham.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
i think ignoring the blatant lawlessness is what is setting the dangerous precedent.

what is it that makes this impeachment a sham?
 
AlexanderFan

AlexanderFan

Hall of Fame
Jul 23, 2004
11,222
7,750
187
Birmingham
92tide said:
i think ignoring the blatant lawlessness is what is setting the dangerous precedent.

what is it that makes this impeachment a sham?
Click to expand...
If it’s so blatant, where’s the proof? That’s all this takes is proof of wrongdoing. Even a Democratic congressman is saying there’s nothing new in these hearings. Nothing. Pelosi is going to move forward with a vote regardless, and this sham will probably cost the Dems any chance at winning the election next year as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
92tide

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,314
45,170
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
AlexanderFan said:
If it’s so blatant, where’s the proof? That’s all this takes is proof of wrongdoing. Even a Democratic congressman is saying there’s nothing new in these hearings. Nothing. Pelosi is going to move forward with a vote regardless, and this sham will probably cost the Dems any chance at winning the election next year as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
there has been non-stop proof (including the administration actually admitting to the ukraine stuff and saying "so what, get over it") and several people convicted. i know the current spin is to pretend none of these things have actually happened, but it doesn't seem to be catching on outside of the fever swamps.

i hope that you are betting large amounts of money on this "sham" backfiring.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a> <br /> <!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \--> <p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.

Top Bottom