Drifter
American
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 68,483
The use of coup is intentional and comes with a full understanding of the colloquial meaning of the word.
The intent is to introduce the term into the common vernacular and define the impeachment process as an illegal attempt to usurp power by Congress rather than an obligatory legislative action when a President has committed a serious crime.
Cute... I don't even watch it.
It's always quite predictable when guys like Rado are quiet for most of the time in a thread like this and then come out of the woodwork.
Haha sorry meant Gator Nate.excuse me?
Haha sorry meant Gator Nate.
Mm:
1. It appears that activity appropriate to the charge took place, so the Democrats are both justified and pretty much obliged to impeach Trump.
2. Your view regarding the Dems' motivation is merely an opinion - and speculation - and not demonstrable fact. In this, it's similar to my opinion about the roots of Brexit (with Trump, Johnson, Farage et al conspiring together); I can't prove that, so it remains simply an opinion.
Oh but I am serious. From this side of 'the pond' it looks like the Democrats for their own political purposes want to remove Trump and replace him with the VP, presumably because they believe they will have a better chance against Pence. The Democrats are using the constitutional impeachment process to enact a coup**, a political coup, but the problem is they know from the get go that it wont be successful, so it becomes a failed coup. It could be argued that using the impeachment process in this way, when they know it will not be successful in removing the President, is itself an abuse of power, by the Democrats.
(** as defined in the Little Oxford Dictionary (fourth edition 1969) p121)
I see you’re also not familiar with the term “indictment”.it appears
That's a real indictment of the newbie system.It appears Trump has a Caf account.
This guy...
Correct in terms of both Steve!
it appears - to whom, Democrats maybe, not Republicans, hence merely an opinion?
Your view regarding the Dem's motivation is merely an opinion - it appears so!
The thing is that the Democrats know already that this impeachment process is a 'lame duck'' process, its going nowhere, so why put the country through this 'hoax', as Trump calls it, more balls for him to hit out of the park! Hence in these terms it has to be seen as an attempted 'coup'
You could further argue that much like our own Labour Party, the Democrats are failing to live up to the role of a serious 'Opposition'.
Haha, no. This is the barfly presidency. A comments page administration. You will never get any sense from these people.It's funny because a lot of his supporters are actually this stupid. Case in point; this thread.
Surely somewhere in the world there's someone that could argue in favor of Trump by using logic and arguments instead of yeah, but Biden and Hillary and also, dems are liars.
Surely?
It's funny because a lot of his supporters are actually this stupid. Case in point; this thread.
Surely somewhere in the world there's someone that could argue in favor of Trump by using logic and arguments instead of yeah, but Biden and Hillary and also, dems are liars.
Surely?
I just let this pass me by but have caught up a bit with the to and fro. You're on a wind up, right?
The use of coup is intentional and comes with a full understanding of the colloquial meaning of the word.
The intent is to introduce the term into the common vernacular and define the impeachment process as an illegal attempt to usurp power by Congress rather than an obligatory legislative action when a President has committed a serious crime.
So in your view they should have done nothing?Not really, I am just surprised at how impotent the Democrats seem to be/are in the face of a man they believe to be stupid, a buffoon, a racist and God knows what else. Surely someone of that ilk should be easy meat? However Trump appears to be giving them the run-around and so they have come up with the idea of using the impeachment process to get rid of him.
OK, fair enough this is a major constitutional weapon, but they are using a serious constitutional process, effectively as part of a coup to get rid of Trump; but the trouble is the figures don't add up, they will not get the two thirds needed in the Senate and they know this going in, but still they put the country through this process.
Why have they done this? Surely there has to be a fifty-fifty chance at least of seeing the process through, otherwise what is the point? Won't Trump garner even more support if he is vindicated by the Senate?
I would have thought that if you are going to try to 'stick it' to the most powerful man on earth, you should at least load both barrels?
Surely somewhere in the world there's someone that could argue in favor of Trump by using logic and arguments instead of yeah, but Biden and Hillary and also, dems are liars.
Surely?
So in your view they should have done nothing?
I fail to see how they could feasibly loaded both barrels with a senate that had openly said they are not impartial.
Not really, I am just surprised at how impotent the Democrats seem to be/are in the face of a man they believe to be stupid, a buffoon, a racist and God knows what else. Surely someone of that ilk should be easy meat? However Trump appears to be giving them the run-around and so they have come up with the idea of using the impeachment process to get rid of him.
OK, fair enough this is a major constitutional weapon, but they are using a serious constitutional process, effectively as part of a coup to get rid of Trump; but the trouble is the figures don't add up, they will not get the two thirds needed in the Senate and they know this going in, but still they put the country through this process.
Why have they done this? Surely there has to be a fifty-fifty chance at least of seeing the process through, otherwise what is the point? Won't Trump garner even more support if he is vindicated by the Senate?
I would have thought that if you are going to try to 'stick it' to the most powerful man on earth, you should at least load both barrels?
No, but they have been after Trump since he took office. They appear to be continually opposing the man not his ideology, hence since they have not been able to lay a glove on him, then whatever the impeachment plays like in the US, to the outside world it looks like another attempt to 'get Trump' and a ham-fisted one at that. The numbers across both houses do not add up and there has be no sign whatsoever that enough Republicans would vote against in the Senate to get a guilty verdict. This is not a surprise, not an unknown, not an unforeseeable outcome, it is as clear as day.
Hence, for the Democrats to proceed on this basis then this has indeed become a 'coup,' they have taken a serious constitutional process and used it very wantonly, simply just as a big stick to beat Trump about the head, to embarrass, to wound, but knowing it cannot to kill. I'm afraid that's what it looks like to all but the most ardent Democrats. The fact that Pelosi had to hold up her hand to prevent Democrats cheering at the announcement of Article 1, says it all, that shot went around the world!
Attacking the process because you can’t dispute his actions. How familiar.
I am not attacking the process, just the use of it when the outcome is already known, waste of taxpayers dollars don't you think?
I am not attacking the process, just the use of it when the outcome is already known, waste of taxpayers dollars don't you think?
Imagine how many kids we could have caged with those dollars.I am not attacking the process, just the use of it when the outcome is already known, waste of taxpayers dollars don't you think?
But he is getting away with it, isn't he?Do you think they should just ignore his actions and let him get away with it all together because the senate is complicit?
No.I am not attacking the process, just the use of it when the outcome is already known, waste of taxpayers dollars don't you think?
The process was created by the Framers before the first political parties existed in the US.Clearly the process cannot enforce a bi-partisan approach as one might have thought the founding fathers would have expected it to do
That's how it works in the US. You don't not impeach because there aren't enough votes in the Senate to convict. You impeach based on the conduct and evidence before you.
The process was created by the Framers before the first political parties existed in the US.
That may well be the case, but surely if there is absolutely no chance of a conviction, then to proceed is a waste of money? Certainly in the UK the CPS regularly do not prosecute unless they believe there is a good chance of a conviction.
"When a man unprincipled in private life[,] desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper . . . despotic in his ordinary demeanour — known to have scoffed in private at the principles of liberty — when such a man is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity — to join in the cry of danger to liberty — to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion — to flatter and fall in with all the non sense of the zealots of the day — It may justly be suspected that his object is to throw things into confusion that he may 'ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.'"