Tom wins this round

I mean it’s been proven he used charitable donations towards his own interests. That’s pretty damn corrupt. I mean his family WAS found guilty in the trial

I'm unaware of that. Do you happen to have a link handy?

@princessmonstertru Everyone turns a blind eye to certain aspects of the Trump presidency in order to further their existing opinion. If we are completely honest with ourselves we can say that he has most likely broken a law. His attitude towards rules not applying to him make is an almost certainty that he has ignored laws as The President that he should not have. On the other side, can they prove it with hard evidence? Only in minor and gray areas; really nothing worth going through impeachment to expose.

I don’t think this site allows links anymore, but you can find it pretty easily if you just look it up

Tldr of the situation though: the trump foundation held a fundraiser to give its funds to charitable organizations. However, he used it in his own presidential campaign. He owes 2 million now to 8 different charities as he was ruled guilty. the entire trump family is now banned from running charities as a result

A politician took charity money for themselves. How terrible, how scandalous, how evil. Nobody has ever done such a thing before. Completely unexpected. The worst thing an American politician has ever done.
Now, what exactly are they impeaching him over?

I mean I could tell you but you won’t listen or even consider really. Do your own research my dude, it gets tiring debating you
Did you know the money he took was supposed to go to veterans? Like goddamn dude have some respect. He didn’t need the money. He’s a fucking millionaire

And here we have a great example of a broken debate.
.
“Trump did something wrong.”
“Provide me with evidence.”
“Here is evidence.”
“But lots of people have done that.”
.
Trump is a boorish ass. Some people oppose him because it’s embarrassing to have him as president. Others support him because electing a boorish ass is a big middle finger to the “establishment” and they feel it shakes things up for the better. Either way it’s not no longer a debate on quality of his performance. It’s who get to feel like they won.

I'm just asking what he's being impeached for.

Abuse of power and obstruction of congress. Two impeachable offenses

@famousone Would it make you feel differently if Congress added campaign finance fraud to the list?

Perfect, just find some indisputable evidence of the first and get the SCOTUS to rule that executive privilege doesn't apply. After all, POTUS is equal to Congress, not subservient.

How would executive privilege apply to a presidential candidate?

Can't abuse presidential power or be subject to Congressional oversight unless you're already sworn in. Far as I'm tracking, they've been trying to impeach him since before even that.

Right but campaign finance fraud is impeachable. Not an abuse of presidential power, just a fraudulent way to get elected.

Find some indisputable evidence, hope he doesn't just pay it off, and then make it a criminal case.

Well we know he’s been found guilty of it already so that’s pretty solid. So my question stands: would you feel differently if they added something big like campaign finance fraud knowing that he has already been found guilty of it?

Trump could grab his sister's pussy right in front of him and he would find ways to sugarcoat it. Obvious TDS.

Honestly, nobody in Washington has any room to pursue that charge. Make it a criminal case and convince the Senate it's worth removing him. Then convince the constituency that it's especially bad. Then enjoy President Pence.

Oh, wait. You can't be tried twice for the same incident

@sassyllamaeswuire, i hadn't seen the Trump Foundation story, but I did just read up on it. I'm in 100% agreement that charitable organizations should never be crossed with politics and business. The Trump foundation was very wrong in doing what it did.
.
I did find a couple important details:
1) There was no guilty verdict, the case was settled (thats a significant difference).
2) the Trump Foundation officers (Donald's kids) were ordered to take classes on charitable organizations money management, they are certainly not banned from running charities.
3) although i wish it were not the case, charitable organizations are the both the norm and the primary vehicle used by politicians to increase their lifestyles via their political influence. If you want to know what I mean, research the Clinton Foundation and Clinton Initiative charities drop in "donation" level after she lost the 2016 election.

I think they’re only banned from charitable organizations in New York ;u;; it’s still really bad that he did use the charity funds to help himself. Like I get it’s not exactly uncommon, but that doesn’t make it right that other people do it, yknow?

There was no guilty verdict because it was a civil case. That doesn’t prevent criminal charges from being filed at a later date. Double jeopardy doesn’t come into play unless it’s criminal for both incidents. @famousone The question I’m getting at is, if they had Trump dead to rights on something significant, would you support the impeachment or would you be do against them Dems that it’s more important that they lose than justice be served?

@famousone I understand you love trump for whatever reason, but you can’t just turn a blind eye to the fact he is, in fact and proven so, committing impeachable offenses. Facts don’t care about your feelings. We aren’t going to send you links or anything of the sort because you’ll just bend over backwards to try and discredit any source we may send, if not outright disagree, like you always do. It’s tiring that everyone else has caught on that trump is not fit to be president, but you still defend him against proven facts you don’t want to accept.

Get him dead to rights, then. Please, do it. Legitimately. Cleanly. Enough hearsay, enough conspiring, enough witch hunts. Schiff has been promising a smoking gun for three fucking years, and everything has fallen through, or even worked to Trump's advantage.
Impeachment is meant to punish something, not find something.
Not fucking college professors, but witnesses.
We sure as fuck don't need to hear bureaucrats testify about the President of the United States not doing what they want. They work for him, not the other way around.
The whole mess is filthy, the Democrats and Statists have been trying to poach him since before he even did anything. It's a coup, it's senseless, and I'm sick and tired of their three year long temper tantrum getting in the way of actually doing work.

Article, as requested. I can't include urls in comments. Google; trump ordered to pay 2 million for illegally using charity funds for 2016 campaign.

Congressmen, speakers, media people and, by default, normal people keep throwing around the idea that there are the indisputable condemning facts regarding abuse of power and obstructing congress.
.
Although there is a media frenzy, passion, and hatred everywhere, there is no hard evidence (facts) that Trump has done those things. People hate him so much, and the accusations are so great that people are simply assuming he's guilty.
.
To famousone's point, impeachment because of anger and hatred is horrifically wrong.
.
The entirety of the FBI and the US congress cannot bring one oz of proof of guilt. Can anyone on this website offer anything?

Very few cases are won or lost fairly and dead to rights. It’s a bit of a double standard isn’t it? If the man avoids behavior that can be called criminal by the language of the law, or uses some available exception or mechanism to change a charge, uses lawyers to debate definitions and reframe things, avoid a verdict, or mitigate the crime- well he’s just being smart and using the system. If the prosecution and its support frame things so they can be interpreted against, debate definitions and use any means of the law available to ply for the outcome they want- that’s not allowed?

What happened to “everyone does it” like we applied to charity fraud? They’re all politicians- every (successful) lawyer is a politician. They aren’t fighting a war of idealism. They don’t have to “play clean” if the other guy isn’t- there’s a gentleman’s fight and there’s war. If you want to stay above the belt and fight with honor to prove you have honor, prove that you won’t sink to the other guys level- good on you. We all likely should. But when people want to win? They do what wins. They aren’t prosecuting Trump because they are better than him. They want to beat him. So I don’t see where “playing clean” comes into it. They’re going to drag anything and everything they can out and money may change hands, favors, lies. He does it, the do it, winners win- not try to be nice.

And that proves the point. When your buddy takes something- they just borrowed it without asking, or it wasn’t a big deal. Or they were somehow justified. When someone you don’t know or don’t like does it we don’t say they borrowed without asking. We say they stole. Maybe 1% of people are objective and care about the process in all this. To everyone else it’s just who wants to see the guy gone and who likes him. If you want him gone you don’t care if they make evidence out of playdough as long as he gets booted. If you like him you don’t care if he rapes the judge while you’re in court watching. You’ll say the judge had it coming and was crooked anyway. So argue all you like details. It’s not about details. If it was we wouldn’t be having this conversation. It’s who’s future you want to see become real.

I disagree. It's all about the details. Propaganda is garbage. This thing has everything to do with power, Trump has it, and they want it back. Taking away an elected official because the DNC thinks they should have won undermines the entire system. It has to come down to details. Innocent until proven guilty. Guilty has to be proven by facts (details), not determined according to who can whip up public opinion the best (thats what elections are for, not impeachments).

Guilty absolutely has to be proven. If found innocent then they should be accepted as to not having committed the acts of which they are accused. The process by which guilt or innocence is determined, in the case of a sitting President, is called impeachment. Trump should not fight impeachment, he should embrace it. He should volunteer to have everyone testify and provide every bit of information they ask for enthusiastically. Since he has done nothing wrong it will be a real fuck you to the Democrats when they fail.

He already did during the Mueller probe. Then the Dems just moved the goalposts, tried again, and still refuse to acknowledge how wrong they were.
They told him that whatever move he makes doesn't matter, so there's only one winning play.
They make themselves look worse and worse every day, he's got work to do. Never interrupt an enemy when he's in the process of destroying himself.

The Mueller probe was about Russian interference in the election and when Mueller did exactly the impartial job he said he would despite screams of Witch Hunt the Democrats had no where to stand and dropped it. The impeachment regards the Ukraine and was kicked off by a whistleblower. Just because he didn’t do one doesn’t mean he didn’t do the other. He should greet each probe and charge with a smile since he’s completely innocent.

@famousone trump was just impeached officially. You can’t just get impeached over a “witch hunt”. Many it tried and only 3 impeachment inquiries have passed, including trumps. You seriously cannot keep defending this human garbage can as if he’s done nothing wrong, and this is all unjustified.

The Russian interference that Trump had nothing to do with. No collusion and all that. And the quid pro quo that didn't exist. Or do you mean the bribe that neither Trump not Ukraine were aware of? Kicked off by a whistleblower who lied on the relevant forms, was in contact with Schiff's team prior to and during the mess, and who had no actual firsthand information.
You're a murderer and a rapist who enjoys skinning kittens. If you deny it or don't smile that means it's true. Especially if you refuse to waive your constitutional rights as a show of good faith. There's no problem since you're completely innocent, just give up everything about your entire life.
Clearly one can be impeached by a witchhunt, it just happened. And it was a foregone conclusion since before he was elected, it's all the leftists could talk about before he was even sworn in.

I'd just like to thank the Democrats in the house for generously giving up their seats to Republicans and Libertarians, and especially for ensuring four more years of keeping America great.

@princessminstertru- you said you disagree- and then literally agreed with me? That’s what I said. It’s a war between people who want to control- have the power- to dictate the direction of the country. As for the rest I wasn’t saying that it’s right for them to do this or that- I was saying that trump plays to win and gives 0 shits about being nice or playing fair. That’s something he’s said himself. These other guys are the same. They want to beat him. They play the same game as him. They’re all dirt bags- they all want to win.

Oops, my bad Guest.

@scatmandingo, the problem with Trump people testifying in a hostile congress under oath is in line with the saying "show me the man and I'll show you the crime"
.
Every criminal charge that came out of the Muller probe was a process crime (basically being caught lying or misspeaking under oath).
.
If Trump or his people were to agree to let well trained lawyers tear into them under oath, there would certainly be a handful of process crime charges there as well. Trump knows this and they chose to simply stay away. I don't blame him one bit for recommending that his people stay away.

@sassyllamaeswuire, i'm afraid an impeachment is absolutely possible based off a witch hunt. An impeachment, like what happened last night, only needs support of 51% of the House. No judge, no voter support, no proof, no evidence, no Senate approval, no journey, not even a trial. It only requires a simple vote of a Democratic majority House of Representatives.
.
In fact your line of thinking that the accusations are so serious that he must be guilty is the foundational reason that the the House Majority Leader chose to go ahead with impeachment knowing full well it'll die in the Senate.
.
Their only goal in this is to make Trump look bad in hopes that fewer people vote for him in November.
.
If that's the case, now who's using their elected power to influence elections.....

But why would trump be the only republican to be impeached on the basis of a witch hunt? We’ve had celebrity presidents before that were greatly unpopular, but they were still able to serve their time in office. If Democrats were able to impeach every republican president they didn’t like, or vise versa, we would have every president impeached at this point

To be clear though- an impeachment only requires the simple majority vote- but alone that means basically nothing. To have any effect it then has to go before the senate 1-2 more times at a 2 thirds majority and pass, AND the senate decides what it wants to do. The maximum punishment is removal from office and being banned from future office. MAXIMUM. But so long as they don’t ban him from holding office he can just run again in 2020 and if it really is a witch hunt and the people want him in office they’ll elect him again.

As for making him look bad- he’s already got that covered. That’s been covered. To death. At this point you pretty much aren’t going to convince most people who want to vote for him that anything he’s done matters, and most people who don’t like him wouldn’t like him if he cured cancer tomorrow. To the contrary- winning the trial may boost his support and losing it may do the same as people who see him as railroaded rush to the polls.

@sassyllamaeswuire, Trump is an outsider to Washington. Think about this; are two Clintons' and 3 Bushs' really the best and brightest our country has to offer? Are we really electing a president of our choosing if the only two candidates are chosen for us every cycle? That would mean there would have to be an unelected "ruling class" behind the curtains.
.
Every primary presidential candidate in the last 30 years has been chosen for us.....until Trump. That is the only reason he's getting so much opposition. It's because he found a way into the good ol boy's club. Think about how threatening it would be for that group of people who choose the two candidates every 4 years to have an outsider come into the most powerful position in the world.

I get what you are saying here but just because he’s an outsider doesn’t mean he’s a good alternative. Holding political office isn’t a simple career. Some guy off the street with no legal background simply wouldn’t be qualified. Ok, we stuck to the establishment, now can we please get someone else who is competent to hold the office?

Google and read the wikileaks email from the president of Goldman Sachs to DNC director John Podesta. The Bank president gave the director of the DNC a list of people the incoming president elect Barack Obama could choose from as appointees for his cabinet positions.
.
Think that through for a while and consider the realities that would need to be in place for that kind of a transaction to happen.

What is your evidence that things are bad in the country right now or that he's doing a bad job?
.
I would say there is a clear and stark divide between D vs R in this country which was brought on by Trump.
.
He's ego driven and a bully. He's absolutely not someone i want my kids to look up to as a role model
.
But the general quality of life increase for americans is awfully hard to deny.

If I may interject- much of this is in absolutes- which Americans? Quality of life how? My life hasn’t changed. My taxes are the same, my pay is the same, and my bills and groceries are all the same. So I’m sure some people have seen positive changes- but we can’t speak as though all Americans have. We also have to remember that some Americans have seen decreases in quality of life- and speaking objectively our national image on the international stage has certainly suffered.

But then we have intangibles. People have been helped and hurt. How do we weight those things? Largely the people who feel helped will be happy, those who feel hurt will largely be unhappy, and those unaffected can go either way based on how they feel others are treated right?

I guess i view it like this: The uniqueness of the United States is in the nickname "the land of opportunity". Its opposition would be "the land of equal outcome". There has been unprecedented job growth and unemployment decline. 5 years ago we had loads of people, including this site, complain about not finding a job. That's all but gone away. Opportunities are everywhere if people are willing to take some risk.
.
I understand what you're saying so maybe a better way for me to say it is that the increased quality of life is there for people who want to take a risk and go achieve it.
.
A universal lift in everyone's wages is simply impossible. Opportunity creation, on the other hand, is happening all around us.

No disrespect- please don’t take it that way. Again- perspective. Where I am- no one I know has had any more or less trouble finding employment than they did 5 years ago. The biggest problem I see is people finding either A: stable employment, or B: employment that can pay the basic bills of a place to live etc. quite the contrary it’s as easy as ever to find a job here- you just might be finding 2-3. So “low unemployment” isn’t necessarily a great statistic. That’s like a country with a “low divorce rate” but many people are miserable and suffering in marriage. We can’t really look at that and say: “well- we are doing great in the romance lives of our people. Look how low the divorce rate is!” But again- I know life isn’t the same everywhere and I’m sure some people have had more luck finding gainful work for themselves.

No offence taken. I think it would be very unreasonable of anyone to think that something like an increase in quality of life could be universally achieved across 330 million people.