Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday November 01 2019, @02:18PM   Printer-friendly
from the Red-Queen-Race dept.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50246324

"The US House of Representatives has passed a resolution to formally proceed with the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.

The measure details how the inquiry will move into a more public phase. It was not a vote on whether the president should be removed from office.

This was the first test of support in the Democratic-controlled House for the impeachment process.

The White House condemned the vote, which passed along party lines.

Only two Democrats - representing districts that Mr Trump won handily in 2016 - voted against the resolution, along with all Republicans, for a total count of 232 in favour and 196 against."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01 2019, @04:01PM (7 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01 2019, @04:01PM (#914629)

    Much as I'd like to see Trump booted from the oval office into a prison cell, I don't think he's actually done anything impeachable. Which, considering the amount of noxious shit he's pulled, is a sad state of affairs.

    Just out of curiosity, what do you think would be compelling grounds for impeachment? Does he have to shoot someone in the middle of 5th Ave in front of a crowd of onlookers? What would push you over the line to be in favor of impeachment?

    For my part, I think Trump should be impeached just for being an embarrassment to the nation.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=2, Total=3
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday November 02 2019, @12:41AM (6 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday November 02 2019, @12:41AM (#914885) Journal
    Not the earlier poster, but evidence of a felony would suffice.
    • (Score: 2) by Pino P on Saturday November 02 2019, @02:44PM (4 children)

      by Pino P (4721) on Saturday November 02 2019, @02:44PM (#915037) Journal

      Volume II of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election [wikipedia.org] lists ten counts of obstruction of justice [wikipedia.org]. Under federal sentencing guidelines that apply to everybody but the President of the United States, obstruction adds two levels to the sentence for any other federal crime, which can elevate a misdemeanor to a felony. And given how elected officials are in a unique position to obstruct justice, obstruction is among the "high crimes" (abuses of an office's power) that can get a President removed from office.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday November 02 2019, @07:27PM (3 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday November 02 2019, @07:27PM (#915092) Journal

        lists ten counts of obstruction of justice

        Alleged.

        • (Score: 2) by Pino P on Sunday November 03 2019, @01:54PM (1 child)

          by Pino P (4721) on Sunday November 03 2019, @01:54PM (#915316) Journal

          And it's the House's job to follow up on these allegations of bribery, obstruction, and other high crimes, and lay the evidence before the Senate.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 04 2019, @04:02AM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 04 2019, @04:02AM (#915586) Journal

            And it's the House's job to follow up on these allegations of bribery, obstruction, and other high crimes, and lay the evidence before the Senate.

            Only if there's evidence for the allegations. Trials are punishments in themselves and shouldn't be allowed on frivolously contexts. Just because a prosecutor can "indict a ham sandwich" doesn't mean that the threshold is appropriate. I think it's notable here that there's never been probable cause for the Mueller fishing expedition and none of the charges mentioned have anything to do with the purported purpose of the investigation.

        • (Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Monday November 04 2019, @08:22PM

          by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us (6553) on Monday November 04 2019, @08:22PM (#915897) Journal

          Then let them be tried.

          --
          This sig for rent.
    • (Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Saturday November 09 2019, @10:43PM

      by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Saturday November 09 2019, @10:43PM (#918423) Journal
      Obstruction of justice is such a felony. Interfering with witnesses subpoenaed to appear before a congressional investigation into obstruction of justice has a nice ring to it.

      Obstruction was the charge that brought Nixon down, both in the eyes of the public and the republicans in the senate. He resigned when he was told that the votes weren't there to save his ass.

      Of course, treason is also supported by trying to make it look like Ukraine, and not Russia, was behind the hacks of Clinton's email. And he can't pardon himself for treason since any action he took after any treasonous act is null and void.

      --
      SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.