Impeach the leech!! - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

Impeach the leech!!
in Politics

By piloteerpiloteer 325 Pts
Pretty self explanatory here, and hopefully we can be as offensive as this site will allow us to be. 
  1. Live Poll

    Impeach the leech?

    9 votes
    1. Ya.
      22.22%
    2. Other than ya.
      77.78%



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
11%
Margin

Details +



Arguments

  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1653 Pts
    I assume you are talking about Donald Trump? I do not see any grounds for impeachment. Simply having controversial positions on some subjects is hardly sufficient to remove a democratically elected president from the office. He is not like, say, Wilson who demolished basic checks and balances and built in the mechanisms that assault the free market to this day - and even he was not impeached.

    No crime he allegedly is guilty of has been proven in any of the investigations, and our legal system has the presumption innocence principle for a reason.

    I am not thrilled about him being the president, but this is a democratic republic, and here my personal feelings do not have any legal power. Besides, the guy only has 1.5 years in the office left; just wait it out. He has been doing some good things recently, and the immigration reform he is supporting that would introduce a skill-based immigration system is something this country has needed for over a century. His trade wars, "build the wall" and early immigration ban are unfortunate, but not the end of the world, and not everything he does.
    For all his flaws, he knows when to listen to the people who know more than him. He may appear arrogant and egoistic, but he always listens to others' opinions, and they influence his actions quite a bit. A president who is willing to listen to others is a rarity these days, and it is something to be treasured. Let him be; he is getting enough heat from the media, and that will keep him accountable.
    Zombieguy1987Dylan
  • TKDBTKDB 158 Pts
    Don't worry, if maybe, another liberal, or even a liberal socialist, gets into the White House, the media will likely return, to how they, maybe treated former POTUS Obama, and barely asked any tough questions, in his direction, but he did field plenty of soft ball questions?

    And then you have the Clinton Presidency, and his experience with Impeachment?

    The media in general, educates the public, in how some of the media, formulates, it's news media outlet coverages.

    There isn't a better political drama on TV, that can compare to how some of the liberal news media outlets, educates, opinionates, and entertains, the country, as a whole, when it comes to some of the political representatives, who get voted into an office? 



    CheckerbordStrangler
  • The thing is, the only obviously impeachable offense he made so far, is "unbecoming conduct"... But there is no established ethical framework on which to hold a president accountable for... "Unbecoming conduct" is subjective at best, whether a potus is democrat or republican, it's highly unlikely to ever be enough to result in impeachment...  Wasn't enough with Promiscuous Bill, won't be enough for Lyin' Don either...

    Keep your energy for 2020...
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • I have only one question: Where did you get the impression that he listens to anybody?



    PlaffelvohfenpiloteerAlofRI
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"

  • The thing is, the only obviously impeachable offense he made so far, is "unbecoming conduct"... But there is no established ethical framework on which to hold a president accountable for... "Unbecoming conduct" is subjective at best, whether a potus is democrat or republican, it's highly unlikely to ever be enough to result in impeachment...  Wasn't enough with Promiscuous Bill, won't be enough for Lyin' Don either...

    Keep your energy for 2020...
    There's a lot more than that however the problem with impeachment vis a vis the Trump presidency is the Mitch McConnell Human Shield factor. There's simply no point in pursuing impeachment in the House only, it amounts to nothing more than a show trial and an opportunity for martyrdom via Trump's media mastery.
    And make no mistake about it, he is a master of the media.

    But I agree, save the energy for 2020 and the ultimate "impeachment": Removal from office via the vote.
    Then we can sit back and watch the Southern District of New York go to work.
    Plaffelvohfen
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"

  • MayCaesar said:
    I assume you are talking about Donald Trump? I do not see any grounds for impeachment. 
    By the way:
    The information and evidence in the Mueller Report would have landed anyone other than the POTUS in court, where he would have been tried, convicted and imprisoned. The law, as in official DOJ policy, was not clear that Mueller could do that to his own boss, it was thought by Mueller than a sitting president cannot be indicted.
    So instead, he left a roadmap, with a very large hint that Congress needed to do their job. 
    He laid everything out there for congress to act on. 
    Don’t confuse that with “do not see any grounds for impeachment”.
    piloteerPlaffelvohfenCYDdhartaAlofRI
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"

  • piloteerpiloteer 325 Pts
    @CheckerbordStrangler

    You make some pretty good points, but I can no longer hide the fact that it irks the $hit out of me that you spelled checkerboArd wrong. Welcome to DI  :p
    CheckerbordStrangler
  • piloteerpiloteer 325 Pts
  • piloteer said:
    @CheckerbordStrangler

    You make some pretty good points, but I can no longer hide the fact that it irks the $hit out of me that you spelled checkerboArd wrong. Welcome to DI  :p
    I did spell it wrong, but I had to.
    The system would not accept "Checkerboard Strangler"...too many characters.
    I've been "CS" literally everywhere in the political junkie universe since the late 1990's but on some forums I have to shorten the handle.
    piloteerAlofRI
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"

  • piloteer said:
    @piloteer ;

    I think the more important factor is whether or not impeachment would actually accomplish the goal of forcibly removing Trump from office.
    A show trial in the House followed by Democrats getting their appendages slammed by McConnell's bludgeon would do nothing but increase the hate and discontent which already threatens to render the nation ungovernable as it is right now.

    Also, given that it is likely such an action might very well consume most if not all of the remaining time till the 2020 elections, what is the point, really?
    If Trump gets reelected but the Democrats win control of both chambers of Congress, it's a safe bet that impeachment will be on the table.
    It's still a fact that conviction in the Senate would require a two thirds majority, however with Democratic Party control of both chambers, a lot more of Trump's criminal wrongdoing will be exposed to the light of day, and Republicans in the Senate can only hang on as long as their constituency supports them.

    Finding out that we really ARE nothing more than a client state of the Russian Federation for Putin to do as he sees fit might not sit so well with a lot of traditional conservatives. And despite Trump's base, Republican senators still do need electoral support from those traditional conservatives in order to remain in office.

    All that having been said however, in the real world, impeachment only hinges on one overriding factor, that being whether or not this country has the political will to get rid of Donald Trump at the polls, because if that's what the future holds, why bother with impeachment with the Southern District of New York has more than enough to put Trump away for decades?

    The Constitution provides clear remedy for corrupt leaders like Trump, but the problem is, we are in a crisis of fidelity, because half the Senate lacks the fidelity to do what their country expects of them with regard to upholding and defending the Constitution for the good of the American people.
    A crisis of fidelity is defined as a situation where the Constitution spells out a recommended action but the elected leadership is unwilling to follow the course.
    piloteerCYDdhartaAlofRI
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"

  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1653 Pts
    edited May 26
    @CheckerbordStrangler

    Mueller personally said that his investigation has not uncovered anything that would validate putting Trump on trial. It does not get any clearer than that, and the only people who still believe there is something to be found are those who do not need any facts to come to their own conclusions. Much like those who since 2016 have been sure that Trump was a Russian agent and it was just a matter of time to dig out solid evidence compromising him.

    This investigation is "Clinton's emails 2", essentially, and the results of it are about the same. There are still people who believe that Hillary Clinton should be jailed, despite the explicit recommendation of the investigator that there is nothing to act against her for.

    These things are very obvious and easy to see, but not when you are so biased against someone that even if the Universe itself turns into a living creature and tells you that they are not guilty, you will still find a way to spin it in your favor.

    To clarify, I am not a fan of Trump. I just dislike hypocrisy and double standards and expect every politician to be treated fairly. The current situation in the end comes down to, "I do not like that person X is my president, and I must find a way for it to not be the case", which is very anti-democratic. One's individual desires should not trump the democratic consensus. If no grounds for impeachment have been found, then it is pointless to deliberately look for ones. People would do better to mobilise for the next election, than to play these dirty games, trying to find any possible loophole to demote the current president.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1653 Pts
    Finding out that we really ARE nothing more than a client state of the Russian Federation for Putin to do as he sees fit might not sit so well with a lot of traditional conservatives. And despite Trump's base, Republican senators still do need electoral support from those traditional conservatives in order to remain in office.
    I sincerely hope that this is not what you genuinely believe. "The US is a client state of the Russian Federation for Putin to do as he sees fit" is a conspiracy theory comparable to Flat Earth or Reptilian Government.

    Putin is doing pretty poorly given his alleged super-powers, as the Russian economy keeps sliding downhill, and the US takes a harsher and harsher stance on Russia.

    It is possible that Putin has some pull on Trump, as he does on many prominent politicians on the West. But blowing things out of proportion in the absence of evidence is very petty, and is one of the reasons politicians like Trump are ruling the US in the first place. You do not gain decent people in the government by employing dirty games with the aim of destroying your opponents' reputation.
    piloteer
  • MayCaesar said:
    @CheckerbordStrangler

    Mueller personally said that his investigation has not uncovered anything that would validate putting Trump on trial. 
    No actually this is what Mueller said:

    “The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intents present difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

    The Office of Legal Counsel in the White House wrote in a 2000 memo that sitting presidents can’t be indicted because it would undermine their ability to oversee the nation’s criminal justice system. But he adds that doesn’t mean that a special counsel couldn’t investigate a presidential actions, since charges could be brought after they’ve left office.

     “Given those considerations, the facts known to us, and the strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of the criminal justice system, we conducted a thorough factual investigation in order to preserve the evidence when memories were fresh and documentary materials were available.”

    The Office of Legal Counsel PROHIBITS Mueller from making any such recommendations. Also, the Mueller Report is NOT and never WAS a criminal investigation, it was a counterintelligence investigation.

    Robert Swan Mueller III (/ˈmʌlər/; born August 7, 1944) is an American lawyer and government official who served as the sixth Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation from 2001 to 2013.
    In his capacity as the author of the report, he was working as special counsel, NOT as the head of a law enforcement agency. This was NOT an FBI investigation. It was not an investigation conducted by law enforcement.
    Mueller delivered his report to William Barr, the Attorney General, who might or might not share his findings with Congress. 
    As the AG, it is Barr's duty to determine if the Department of Justice is going to pursue criminal proceedings, not Mueller. Mueller provided the roadmap but if Barr and DOJ are unwilling to take the roads indicated, then we arrive at an impasse until Trump is out of office.

    NOWHERE in his report did he EVER SAY that he had "not uncovered anything that would validate putting Trump on trial."

    Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election
    Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, III Submitted Pursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 600.8(c) 



    piloteerCYDdhartaAlofRI
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"


  • MayCaesar said:
    Finding out that we really ARE nothing more than a client state of the Russian Federation for Putin to do as he sees fit might not sit so well with a lot of traditional conservatives. And despite Trump's base, Republican senators still do need electoral support from those traditional conservatives in order to remain in office.
    I sincerely hope that this is not what you genuinely believe. "The US is a client state of the Russian Federation for Putin to do as he sees fit" is a conspiracy theory comparable to Flat Earth or Reptilian Government.

    Putin is doing pretty poorly given his alleged super-powers, as the Russian economy keeps sliding downhill, and the US takes a harsher and harsher stance on Russia.

    It is possible that Putin has some pull on Trump, as he does on many prominent politicians on the West. But blowing things out of proportion in the absence of evidence is very petty, and is one of the reasons politicians like Trump are ruling the US in the first place. You do not gain decent people in the government by employing dirty games with the aim of destroying your opponents' reputation.


    Which decent people are you referring to?

    piloteerAlofRI
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"

  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1653 Pts
    @CheckerbordStrangler

    No, this is exactly what it means. You should familiarise yourself with the principle of presumption of innocence our legal system obeys: one is considered innocent until proven guilty. Unless something is uncovered that would validate putting Trump on trial, there is no trial to be had. The report neither exonerated nor condemned Trump, but since exoneration is not a requirement in the legal process, it is only the latter part that has any legal consequences.

    As of now, there is no grounds for either criminal prosecution or impeachment. You cannot impeach the president based on your gut feeling and disagreement with his policies; this is not at all what the impeachment institute exists for. Your goals are achieved through the electoral processes, not through impeachment process.
  • John_C_87John_C_87 141 Pts

    To explain something in basic principle.  congress works toward impeachment to have the Executive Officer relived from office to be replaced by the Vice President. A President is relived of command by a military relief of command. This means a burden of constitutional representation is taken on to give the President time to work on other matters of Executive Office.

    So, which is it Impeachment to have the Vice President become the acting Executive Officer or is some-one in the House of Representatives preserving the United State in constitution with a declaration? Keep in mind a woman who is creating all woman equal is properly call a Presadera as this is not having all woman join in an accusation of crime.

  • MayCaesar said:
    "Putin is doing pretty poorly given his alleged super-powers, as the Russian economy keeps sliding downhill"

    Excuse me, are we now talking about the Russian economy?
    My statement had absolutely nothing to do with the Russian economy.
    My statement is about Putin's growing political influence, in Europe and in the United States.
    My statement is a reference to Russia's increasingly weaponized agitprop capabilities.
    Most people understand that the Russian economy basically renders Russia as little more than "Nigeria with snow" or
    "A gas station masquerading as a country" but when you're a gas station masquerading as a country, you're liable to call forth whatever resources you have to push political growth on a global level that makes life a lot easier for your bottom line. 
    If you doubt the abilities of Russian intelligence, do so at your own risk but rest assured, the Russian economy is not what my statement was in reference to.
    CYDdhartaAlofRI
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"

  • MayCaesar said:
    "Putin is doing pretty poorly given his alleged super-powers, as the Russian economy keeps sliding downhill"

    Excuse me, are we now talking about the Russian economy?
    My statement had absolutely nothing to do with the Russian economy.
    My statement is about Putin's growing political influence, in Europe and in the United States.
    My statement is a reference to Russia's increasingly weaponized agitprop capabilities.
    Most people understand that the Russian economy basically renders Russia as little more than "Nigeria with snow" or
    "A gas station masquerading as a country" but when you're a gas station masquerading as a country, you're liable to call forth whatever resources you have to push political growth on a global level that makes life a lot easier for your bottom line. 
    If you doubt the abilities of Russian intelligence, do so at your own risk but rest assured, the Russian economy is not what my statement was in reference to.
    piloteerCYDdhartaAlofRI
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"

  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1653 Pts
    @CheckerbordStrangler

    I do not dispute that Putin's influence in Europe, United States, Middle East, Asia, Africa and, pretty much, everywhere else is growing. I only dispute your claim that "The US is a client state of the Russian Federation for Putin to do as he sees fit". I doubt any widely recognised state on the planet is in the hands of any other widely recognised state on the planet, for that matter.
    John_C_87
  • Take and measure the entertaining sarcasm and hyperbole with a grain of salt if you wish but while you're measuring out the salt, read this:

    Russian documents reveal desire to sow racial discord — and violence — in the U.S.

    LONDON — Russians who were linked to interference in the 2016 U.S. election discussed ambitious plans to stoke unrest and even violence inside the U.S. as recently as 2018, according to documents reviewed by NBC News.
    The documents — communications between associates of Yevgeny Prigozhin, a Kremlin-linked oligarch indicted by special counsel Robert Mueller for previous influence operations against the U.S. — laid out a new plot to manipulate and radicalize African-Americans. The plans show that Prigozhin’s circle has sought to exploit racial tensions well beyond Russia’s social media and misinformation efforts tied to the 2016 election.
    piloteer
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"

  • The blueprint, entitled “Development Strategy of a Pan-African State on U.S. Territory,” floated the idea of enlisting poor, formerly incarcerated African Americans “who have experience in organized crime groups” as well as members of “radical black movements for participation in civil disobedience actions.”

    The goal was to “destabilize the internal situation in the U.S.”

    piloteer
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"

  • @MayCaesar

    Sorry but House impeachment is not a judicial process, and Senate impeachment to convict isn't either.

    Although the subject of the charge is criminal action, it does not constitute a criminal trial; the only question under consideration is the removal of the individual from office, and the possibility of a subsequent vote preventing the removed official from ever again holding political office in the jurisdiction where he or she was removed.

    IV. CONCLUSION
            Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw
    ultimate conclusions about the President ' s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the
    President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were
    making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time , if we had confidence after a
    thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice,
    we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach
    that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a
    crime, it also does not exonerate him.



    piloteerCYDdhartaPlaffelvohfen
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"

  • John_C_87John_C_87 141 Pts

     Can we put this in perspective by saying basically that Putin as a famous celebrity should not allowed to be political as he is a political super star of the Soviet Republic.  As a super star celebrity, they should not be able to speak of politics taking shape in other nations until they themselves elect a representative as the single voice of superstars?

    Looks toward congress, the way it is taking place now is kind of like a democratic meltdown calling the flames of a republic hot.

  • John_C_87John_C_87 141 Pts
    Re-write.
    Can we put this in perspective by saying basically that Putin as a famous celeb should not allow himself to be political as he is a political super star of the Soviet Republic.  As a super star celeb, the principle of united state should be on contole of speaking about politics that take shape in other nations. Holding all superstar in a political union until they themselves elect a representative as the single voice of the power created by the industrial constant financial gains sought by the celebrity status as whole.
  • piloteerpiloteer 325 Pts
    @John_C_87

    The US is the victim of Soviet crimes, but in my mind, the victims are the guilty ones for letting it happen to them. 
  • piloteer said:
    @John_C_87

    The US is the victim of Soviet crimes, but in my mind, the victims are the guilty ones for letting it happen to them. 
    Not exactly sure what you're referring to re "Soviet" crimes. Russia has not been the Soviet Union for the last twenty-eight years. Soviet attempts at sowing discord and promulgating interference in US elections were clumsy at best back in the days of the USSR but make no mistake about it, Putin rectified that flaw in short order almost immediately upon taking power, first by assembling an all hands on deck campaign to study American politics and social structure as never before, second by rapidly upgrading Russian access to the World Wide Web so that Russian propaganda ministers could adapt to Westernized styles of communications, particularly with respect to the influence of social media.

    But surprise, your assertions still ring true anyway when you say that "the victims are the guilty ones for letting it happen to them" because in a way, we're about at the point where we were in the 1950's when Russia pioneered in outer space and it took almost a decade for the United States to "catch up" to the Soviets in space exploration and general rocketry to boot. The U.S. was caught completely unawares and we were horribly unprepared for the Soviet aerospace juggernaut that took the world by storm.

    So, in a very real sense, we are equally unaware today, and we appear to be unwilling to gather the political stomach to fight the Russians on the global stage of social media and thus we are indeed "letting it happen".
    Why, we even elected a president who is so friendly to them that he cordially invited them to sabotage us in a televised speech, just so that he could get a political leg up on the opposition. And true to form, Hillary Clinton, the worst Democratic candidate IN HISTORY, "let it happen" to her as well.


    CYDdhartapiloteer
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"

  • John_C_87John_C_87 141 Pts
    @CheckerbordStrangler ;

    The content of said Russia is held by a Soviet Republic by all intent Russia is in basic principle a Monarchy which was disposed of by Communism for a United Socialist Soviet Republic, The soviet union was an abbreviation of the connection between socialism and republic.  The soviet republic has a constitution but the constitution it created is not held in united state under general welfare it uses rule of law not independence towards a creation of liberty. 
  • John_C_87John_C_87 141 Pts
    piloteer said:
    @John_C_87

    The US is the victim of Soviet crimes, but in my mind, the victims are the guilty ones for letting it happen to them. 
    The reality by state of the union is the united states of America is a victim of U.S. crime. If it is a crime, yet. As basic principle a woman can not be President of the United State, she is Presadera. This declaration simply has no association to criminal accusation to place a woman before constitution to create all woman as equal. Russia has a Constitution it is not a United State Constitution it is a rule of law declaration.

  • John_C_87John_C_87 141 Pts
    piloteer said:
    @John_C_87

    The US is the victim of Soviet crimes, but in my mind, the victims are the guilty ones for letting it happen to them. 
    Not exactly sure what you're referring to re "Soviet" crimes. Russia has not been the Soviet Union for the last twenty-eight years. 


    They the people, are in truth still after the Russian revolution,  they are soviet it still works, and the Russian Constitution dictates law as a supreme power, which in the United State can be said places truth and whole truth as nothing but truth. Have you even read this basic principle and legal precedent Constitution? Its all Legal precedent no basic principle.

    Article 1

    The Russian Federation - Russia is a democratic federal law-bound State with a republican form of government.

    http://www.constitution.ru/en/10003000-02.htm

    First line in article one places all soviet as a group republic.


  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1076 Pts
    MayCaesar said:
    @CheckerbordStrangler

    Mueller personally said that his investigation has not uncovered anything that would validate putting Trump on trial. It does not get any clearer than that, and the only people who still believe there is something to be found are those who do not need any facts to come to their own conclusions. Much like those who since 2016 have been sure that Trump was a Russian agent and it was just a matter of time to dig out solid evidence compromising him.

    This investigation is "Clinton's emails 2", essentially, and the results of it are about the same. There are still people who believe that Hillary Clinton should be jailed, despite the explicit recommendation of the investigator that there is nothing to act against her for.

    These things are very obvious and easy to see, but not when you are so biased against someone that even if the Universe itself turns into a living creature and tells you that they are not guilty, you will still find a way to spin it in your favor.

    To clarify, I am not a fan of Trump. I just dislike hypocrisy and double standards and expect every politician to be treated fairly. The current situation in the end comes down to, "I do not like that person X is my president, and I must find a way for it to not be the case", which is very anti-democratic. One's individual desires should not trump the democratic consensus. If no grounds for impeachment have been found, then it is pointless to deliberately look for ones. People would do better to mobilise for the next election, than to play these dirty games, trying to find any possible loophole to demote the current president.

    That's about the closest to accurate post in this thread, far and away better than most posts which are delusional.  The only real error is that Spygate is hardly "Clinton's emails 2".  Spygate has little to do with Hillary and nothing to do with her emails.  The biggest thing Spygate and "Clinton's emails 2" have in common is that most of the same swamp creatures that decided Hillary wouldn't be prosecuted for her illegal actions were using their high-level positions in government to undermine the Trump campaign and later the Trump administration.  It stands to reason, the people who were expecting a quid pro quo upon Hillary's election were worried about the legal ramifications of their actions if Trump were to win instead.  People have been thrown in jail for mishandling classified materials, which Hillary is unquestionably guilty of; however the actions of the corrupt government officials who were trying to aid her are even more serious.
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1076 Pts
    piloteer said:
    @John_C_87

    The US is the victim of Soviet crimes, but in my mind, the victims are the guilty ones for letting it happen to them. 
    You mean the Hillary campaign for buying and using Russian disinformation, right?
  • John_C_87John_C_87 141 Pts

    Sorry CYDdarta that was piloteer who had posted that comment not me. Both Clinton and Trump are guilty of the same crime. Putin if committing a crime is committing the same crime as many of the actors and actresses in Hollywood. The crime Executive Officer Trump and Presadera candidate H. Clinton share is perjury as a woman cannot be placed in a united state as “President” without a basic lie being told.

    The blow by blow is that Mrs. Clinton as a lawyer is committing an act of malpractice but is not greater than other malpractices committed in the past and never questioned on constitutional principle of whole truth. Let’s be honest what woman would not want to be the first women to speak on behalf of all men as a United state before the American Constitution. Isn’t this process already taking place with the use of criminal accusations of rape are connected to abortion?

  • piloteerpiloteer 325 Pts
    @CheckerbordStrangler

    Putin was an official of the kgb during the Soviet Union, therefore he is a Soviet. Many within his cabinet, and countless other elected or appointed officials who hold office in Russia today, were elected or appointed officials when Russia was still the Soviet Union. So that would make them all Soviets. Just like all elected or appointed officials of nazi Germany will always be nazis, all elected or appointed officials of the Soviet Union will always be Soviets. 
  • piloteer said:
    @CheckerbordStrangler

    Putin was an official of the kgb during the Soviet Union, therefore he is a Soviet. Many within his cabinet, and countless other elected or appointed officials who hold office in Russia today, were elected or appointed officials when Russia was still the Soviet Union. So that would make them all Soviets. Just like all elected or appointed officials of nazi Germany will always be nazis, all elected or appointed officials of the Soviet Union will always be Soviets. 
    I get what you're saying and I am well aware of his background however Putin is on record as having dispensed with communism and the USSR a long time ago:

    Anyone who doesn't regret the passing of the Soviet Union has no heart. Anyone who wants it restored has no brains. ------Vladimir Putin

    Putin's dream is not the restoration of the old Soviet Union, his dream is the restoration of the old Imperial Russian Empire, with him as Czar.

    piloteer
    "The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
    ---Leon Russell, "Magic Mirror"

  • John_C_87John_C_87 141 Pts
    piloteer said:
    @CheckerbordStrangler

    Putin was an official of the kgb during the Soviet Union, therefore he is a Soviet. Many within his cabinet, and countless other elected or appointed officials who hold office in Russia today, were elected or appointed officials when Russia was still the Soviet Union. So that would make them all Soviets. Just like all elected or appointed officials of nazi Germany will always be nazis, all elected or appointed officials of the Soviet Union will always be Soviets. 
    In basic principle anyone born after the Russia Revolution is a soviet and the formation of a governing system was the soviet union. 
    AlofRIpiloteer
  • AlofRIAlofRI 206 Pts
    1000 legal minds of BOTH parties have said what Trump has done would get anyone else indicted and/0r imprisoned. Most of those who say no haven't read the report, certainly not the full report. I can't fathom where they were when obstruction was openly affirmed on TV, over and over. Doing NOTHING to prevent foreign actors to attack our elections and officials is "collusion" enough for ME. "If you find (anything on my opponent) I think …. you will be rewarded, generously, by the press!" Not an exact quote but what should be a memorable one.

    I certainly hope that if we are lucky enough to get a new President, that S/HE will do away with the "legalities" that allow a President to float above the law, to shred the Constitution. 
    piloteerCYDdharta
  • John_C_87John_C_87 141 Pts

    First, I have to object as a woman cannot be President she can be elected as a president but that can instantly be address with a state of the Union on Presadera. In order for a woman to speak whole truth she would be addressing a reprteatation to all woman as a united state before law. She can make a false claim to know and understand all men, or desire to be made a man surgically.

    This is the largest influence of foreign action being used to influence Executive Office Legal precedent. A woman in basic principle is still a woman after an election to office, correct? Just as a man in basic principle is still a man after election to office?

    Obstruction of justice in or out of Executive office would take place in this area of politics if the legal process had not been allowed the opportunity of malpractice, a criminal court ruling on perjury would need to take place as a means to set legal precedent. The direction of preservation in united state constitution. A woman would not still be a woman when elected by the people to office. So a woman must explain what and how she is no longer a woman.

    This is/was a job description of Presadera before entry into executive office.


  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1076 Pts
    AlofRI said:
    1000 legal minds of BOTH parties have said what Trump has done would get anyone else indicted and/0r imprisoned. Most of those who say no haven't read the report, certainly not the full report. I can't fathom where they were when obstruction was openly affirmed on TV, over and over. Doing NOTHING to prevent foreign actors to attack our elections and officials is "collusion" enough for ME. "If you find (anything on my opponent) I think …. you will be rewarded, generously, by the press!" Not an exact quote but what should be a memorable one.

    I certainly hope that if we are lucky enough to get a new President, that S/HE will do away with the "legalities" that allow a President to float above the law, to shred the Constitution. 

    Your quote is an outright lie, and nothing allows anyone to "float above the law".  The DOJ's position is that the president is the nation's chief law enforcement officer.  It isn't their place to prosecute him.  The proper method for such a prosecution is defined in the US Constitution.
  • John_C_87John_C_87 141 Pts

    There is a basic principle overlooked as a united state in the legal process of impeachment the President is set in united state with Executive officer. It is a President who is relieved of command, and this process does not have a direct impact on the appointment by the voter to Executive office, an Executive officer is the position that is impeachable by the people. A president is relived of command in two ways. One: a military tribunal. Two: an officer under the command of Executive officer acts on preservation of United states constitution.

    To relieve the acting President of command before or while an impeachment takes place on the Executive officer the House has to establish that the Vice-president or themselves are in truth preserving the united state constitution by state of the union.

    A lie created by lack of common defense is not the same as a lie told as perjury CYDdharta. Again any woman is elected to the Title Presadera she sits under oath in representation as a woman in basic principle. The official documentation must be clear of perjury to be legally binding. Even if the lie is religiously motivated. The whole argument of equality of Presidency is based off an idea of the union of marriage which addresses the birth of children. Not political power and responsibilities.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch