#impeachable offenses

[spectroscopic-gayety]

#poli #americans is this true? <-prev

Am American, and sadly,

No. This is not true.

Here’s a politifacts article summarizing why it’s fake, but the short of it is that the US Senate (and House!) is majority republicans and they are very unlikely to impeach.

The tweet screenshotted is from “PoliticsVideoChannel”, a 6-months old political news “source” with only 3 videos on their YouTube channel.

Apparently they have a history of largely speculative political content with no other sources to corroborate. For example, I found this from them on Reddit:

It’s the same tactic. Just like how trump wasn’t imprisoned in 2023, he very likely won’t be impeached with a republican congress (from current information, date: 1/25/25)

[morgan5451]

THEY TRIED TO USE THIS AGAINST TRUMP. TURNABOUT IS FAIR PLAY.

[technofeudalism]

"South Korea fought fascism with liberal democracy!" every South Korean president in history has been impeached or worse and the last one declared martial law and lawmakers had to storm the parliament building to stop him. not exactly the example i would be using, no offense. not sure South Korea is out of hot water.

[judebert]

IMPEACH

Liars! Terrorists! Christo-fascist puppets! Corporate-fascist puppets! Traitors to democracy!

[foone]

Frankly, I think being the president is an impeachable offense

[simply-ivanka]

Suddenly Democrats Care About the Border

Biden and Schumer begin to see their political vulnerability.

By John Thune -- Wall Street Journal Opinion/ May 20, 2024

Trailing in the polls and desperate less than six months before Election Day, President Biden and Senate Democrats are trying something new: their best impersonations of Republicans.

The architects of the Biden border crisis—the worst in American history—suddenly want the American people to know they’re on the case. After three-plus years of mismanaging border security, resulting in more than nine million entries through the southern border, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is telegraphing that he may force Senate floor votes related to the border.

That’s his prerogative as leader, but I don’t expect anyone to buy this political theater. For starters, Mr. Biden has authority to take action at the border and to do so today. It’s the same authority he used to issue a multitude of executive actions relaxing border security, including rescinding the national emergency at the southern border, halting border-wall construction, ending the Remain in Mexico policy, and discouraging Immigration and Customs Enforcement from apprehending illegal immigrants.

The president this month ordered the removal of criminals and potential terrorists. This is a switch from the policy he started shortly after his inauguration, and the new order was made only after hundreds of people on the terrorist watchlist were encountered in between ports of entry on his watch. Vote for me, and I’ll clean up the historic mess I made is hardly an effective campaign pitch, and a few meaningless Senate votes won’t erase my Democratic colleagues’ long records of enabling illegal immigration.

In this Congress alone, Senate Democrats have banded together to protect taxpayer-funded flights for illegal immigrants to different states in the U.S. and keep federal dollars flowing to sanctuary cities. Democrats blocked votes on a litany of common-sense border-security and enforcement measures, including a proposal from Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R., Tenn.) that would have let state and local law enforcement detain criminal illegal aliens until ICE can deport them. They even stopped legislation from Sen. Ted Budd (R., N.C.) that would deem assaulting a law-enforcement officer a deportable offense.

Not one Senate Democrat supported H.R. 2, House Republicans’ signature border bill, after Senate Republicans twice forced it to be considered.

But now Democrats need voters in Montana, Ohio, Nevada and Pennsylvania to believe they’re serious about the border. They aren’t motivated by national security. They’re concerned about their own political vulnerability. They’ve recognized, albeit too late, that the chaos of an open border is a political liability.

If Mr. Schumer devotes floor time to debating border legislation, he should expect some difficult conversations ahead—the same kinds of conversations we would have had in the Senate if every Democrat hadn’t voted to dismiss the impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas without a trial.

It’s abundantly clear that the American people want an end to lawlessness at the southern border. They want the president to do his job and defend America’s borders. The bad political bet that Mr. Biden and Mr. Schumer are making is that voters will hire the arsonists to put out the fire.

Mr. Thune, a South Dakota Republican, is Senate minority whip.

[contemplatingoutlander]

Surprise, surprise! Another GOP "star witness" against the Bidens also has lots of ties to Russia.

One central issue in the Bobulinski timeline—his long-standing connections to a sanctioned Russian oligarch behind state-controlled energy company Rosneft—appears far more close and complex than he has suggested, including in his House testimony. Bobulinski was a partner with Hunter Biden and a small circle of other associates in a proposed 2017 investment deal involving their startup entity, called “SinoHawk,” and privately owned Chinese energy firm CEFC. In 2020, Bobulinski went public with claims that the finances involved not just Hunter Biden, but his father Joe Biden, who was out of office at the time of the negotiations. Republicans have pointed to Bobulinski’s claims as evidence of potential wrongdoing, and his allegations have fueled unproven but widespread speculation about a bribery scandal—even though many of these claims have been debunked, and years of GOP investigations have turned up no evidence of impeachable offenses. But as the inquiry has unspooled the details surrounding the proposal, Bobulinski’s own connections to Russia have come into clearer focus.

[stephen-barry]

Trump firing these inspector generals without notifying Congress is an impeachable offense.

https://www.dworkinsubstack.com/p/heres-why-its-not-too-early-to-call

If President Kamala Harris did this, would Republicans call for her impeachment?

So why are democrats so "shy" when Trump commits lots of impeachable acts?

[the-political-kitten]

Hmmmm.... now, why would the Republicans not take this opportunity? Because perhaps there is no there there?

That is epic!!!!

[darkmaga-returns]

Considering why some are kicked out, and the criteria for who should be let in. By JD Breen Premium Insights

February 4, 2025

As noted in my recent “inaugural address”, there isn’t much a president is authorized to do. In a nutshell, he must execute the few constitutional laws Congress passes, and veto the rest.

Repelling and expelling invaders is obviously among the permitted functions of his restricted role. Not only should a president deport anyone who illegally enters American territory; to honor his oath, he has no choice.

If citizens don’t like the laws, they should convince Congress to change them. But if statutes are constitutional (as those ousting illegals obviously are), the president is obligated to execute them. To do otherwise is an impeachable offense.

Misunderstood Amendment

Eliciting recent uproar was Trump’s executive order rescinding “birthright citizenship”. Critics claim this directive violates of the first clause of the 14th Amendment.

But it doesn’t. At least not according to the man who wrote it. Let’s review the relevant language:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

Senator Jacob Howard, who authored these words, elaborated on what “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” meant, and to which people it didn’t apply:

“This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, [or] who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.” [emphasis added]

In other words, Trump is right about this. At the very least, it’s not obvious he’s wrong.

[jangillman]

Jan Gillman-Westgarth

I woke up and as I had my morning coffee, I realized that everything is about to change. No matter how I vote, no matter what I say, something evil has invaded our nation, and our lives are never going to be the same.

I have been confused by the hostility of family and friends. I look at people I have known all my life--so hate-filled that they agree with opinions they would never express as their own. I think that I may well have entered the Twilight Zone.

You can't justify this insanity. We have become a nation that has lost its collective mind!

• If a man pretends to be a woman, you are required to pretend with him.

• Somehow it’s un-American for the census to count how many Americans are in America.

• Russians influencing our elections are bad, but illegals voting in our elections are good.

• It was cool for Joe Biden to "blackmail" the President of Ukraine, but it’s an impeachable offense if Donald Trump inquires about it.

• Twenty is too young to drink a beer, but eighteen is old enough to vote.

• People who have never owned slaves should pay slavery reparations to people who have never been slaves.

• People who have never been to college should pay the debts of college students who took out huge loans for their degrees.

• Immigrants with tuberculosis and polio are welcome, but you’d better be able to prove your dog is vaccinated.

• Irish doctors and German engineers who want to immigrate to the US must go through a rigorous vetting process, but any illiterate gang-bangers who jump the southern fence are welcome.

• $5 billion for border security is too expensive, but $1.5 trillion for “free” health care is not.

• If you cheat to get into college you go to prison, but if you cheat to get into the country you go to college for free.

• People who say there is no such thing as gender are demanding a female President.

• We see other countries going Socialist and collapsing, but it seems like a great plan to us.

• Some people are held responsible for things that happened before they were born, and other people are not held responsible for what they are doing right now.

• Criminals are caught-and-released to hurt more people, but stopping them is bad because it's a violation of THEIR rights.

• And pointing out all this hypocrisy somehow makes us "racists"?!

Nothing makes sense anymore, no values, no morals, no civility and people are dying of a Chinese virus, but it’s racist to refer to it as Chinese even though it began in China. We are clearly living in an upside down world where right is wrong and wrong is right, where moral is immoral and immoral is moral, where good is evil and evil is good, where killing murderers is wrong, but killing innocent babies is right.

Wake up America, the great unsinkable ship Titanic America has hit an iceberg, is taking on water, and is sinking fast. The choice is yours to make. What will it be? Time is short, make your choice wisely!

(Not my words but very accurate and disturbing!)

Feel free to copy and paste. I did.

See 2 Timothy 4:3 and 2 Timothy 3:1-5

[robin-the-blind-sniper-rifle]

I definitely would like to say, now that everything is over, it is not the time to stop fighting. The Biden Administration needs to spend its last two months in office preparing to stop the orange from pardoning himself. The first thing to be done is to do everything they possibly can to protect the Department of Justice from being abolished. Here’s why.

In 1974, two years after the first revelation of Watergate and Nixon’s treason, the US Department of Justice implemented an addition to the constitution stating that the president is not allowed to pardon himself under the fundamental rule that no one can be a judge in his own case. Unfortunately, this addendum is quite vague, but it still exists as long as the Department of Justice exists. Henceforth why we should protect it.

I’m sure the question is “why does the addendum matter if it’s broad and based on a fundamental principle that not everyone shares?” Here’s why.

The idea of a presidential pardon originated from the royal pardon the king of Britain had. While it was on paper, the royal pardon of the king meant nothing. He was the king, and the king could do no wrong under the monarchical system, therefore making himself invulnerable to any offenses unless he were deposed or executed. Why does this matter? We’re not a monarchy, that’s not how this country operates (ideally).

Exactly.

The president is not the king. The president is the president until he isn’t for one reason or another. The president is meant to be bound by the limits of the Constitution and a self pardon would mean an imposition of said Constitution. Allowing a president to pardon himself would mean allowing him to project his power past his term, past his authority, in a way that doesn’t sit well with the system or the people.

The concerns with the way such a broken system (the one we have now) would operate under this framework are very valid. He wants to stack the Senate with yes men who will make flimsy legal arguments for his case; he wants to stack the courts with judges who support him; he wants to wipe his prosecutors from existence. But here’s what he doesn’t think about, something we need to hold onto.

In a world where he does pardon or attempt to pardon himself, it is easily grounds for impeachment, simple as that. He can try to do it and then it’s up to the courts to decide which way they want to go with it in terms of allowance. I won’t pretend to know or even guess the outcome of such a debate because there is no precedent and it could go either way.

But.

People like us, like Jack Smith (the special counsel of the Department of Justice still prosecuting the orange) still exist. So sign petitions, whatever you can find. Don’t embroil yourself in doomsday media. Most importantly, hold onto the hope that justice will be done.

We didn’t get a blue president, but we can still put the orange one behind bars the way he deserves

[hey-pretty-mama-its-johnny-bravo]

If you don’t feel like you can vote for one of the presidential candidates, vote for Ukraine. If you feel like your vote can’t save Palestine, vote to save Ukraine.

It may be hard to justify voting in this year’s presidential election, but if you want to do some good and help people with your vote, their is a very clear option.

Ukraine has been in a war for its survival for more than two years now. Casualties in the conflict so far have likely surpassed half a million and continue to grow with each passing day.

Since the beginning, Russia has repeatedly targeted civilian infrastructure with missile strikes. A report from June 2024 gave a figure of 11,126 civilians killed and 21,863 wounded since the beginning of the invasion in February 2022.

Since the early days of the invasion, experts have made reports accusing the Russian state of genocidal acts in occupied Ukraine.

In 2023, Russia pulled out of the grain deal that allowed the export of Ukrainian grain, which accounts for about a tenth of the global supply and is especially vital for food-insecure nations. Though grain exports from Ukraine have recovered, this can be accounted mostly to Russia’s inability to effectively prevent them, and they have bombed grain storage infrastructure that supports these exports. There is no strategic excuse for such actions.

For now, the war is grinding on with little hope of an end any time soon. Ukraine, understandably, is not willing to cede its sovereignty, its territory, and many of its people to Russian oppression. They have fought on against incredible odds, but they are extremely reliant on foreign support, be it financial, humanitarian, or military to continue and make progress in their battle for survival.

The aid that Ukraine needs has been repeatedly blocked by Republicans. It would be dishonest not to mention that these aid packages have also included funds for Israel’s actions in Gaza, which are as terrible or worse than those prosecuted by Russia. But the two can and should be separate, and Republicans have certainly treated them as such.

Donald Trump has frequently complimented Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, and was famously impeached (the first time) for reportedly threatening to withhold military aid from Ukraine unless the Ukrainian president provided dirt on Biden’s son.

Statements by two of Trump’s key advisers show that, if elected, he would withhold further military aid from Ukraine unless the country entered peace talks with Russia. Thus far, Russia has refused to consider any terms that would include a withdrawal from Ukraine’s internationally recognized borders. The plan also includes a “ceasefire based on prevailing battle lines during peace talks.” Effectively, Ukraine would be pressured into a ceasefire that leaves its territory under the Russian boot.

It’s important to note that the United States is not the only country providing aid to Ukraine, military or otherwise. But there is no other country that can provide military aid at the same level. There simply is no one else that can make up the difference. For Ukraine to go on the offensive and liberate their territory from foreign occupation, there simply is no other alternative to what the United States can provide.

Without continued aid, the war in Ukraine will continue to stagnate. Casualties will continue to mount. The people of Ukraine will continue to suffer as power infrastructure is destroyed by Russian missile strikes. Russian civilians will continue to suffer as their sons are conscripted (disproportionately from rural areas and ethnic minorities) to die for their oligarchs in a war that never needed to happen.

If you don’t feel like you can vote for anything else, vote to give Ukraine what it needs to defend itself and its people. The alternative is genocide and the legitimation of conquest and annexation.