Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, November 16, 2017

Five Democrats have introduced articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump, a long-shot effort that stands little chance in the Republican-led House. The five articles accused the president of obstruction of justice, undermining the independence of the federal judiciary and other offenses. Rep. Steve Cohen of Tennessee led the effort, saying in a statement Wednesday "the time has come to make clear to the American people and to this President that his train of injuries to our Constitution must be brought to an end through impeachment." Republicans hold the majority in the House and are unlikely to act on the impeachment articles. Democratic leaders largely oppose the effort, fearing that it only riles up the GOP base that is strongly supportive of the unpopular president.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

FTA
"a long-shot effort that stands little chance in the Republican-led House"

In case folks haven't been paying attention, Trump doesn't have many staunch supporters in the Republican establishment. The likes of Graham and McCain would put a bullet in him if they thought they could get away with it.

#1 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2017-11-15 11:02 AM | Reply

They are on the right track by filing under Obstruction of Justice (which fits neatly within almost all legal theories for impeachment) but its too early, they need to wait for Mueller to get more information.

#2 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-11-15 11:23 AM | Reply

The likes of Graham and McCain would put a bullet in him if they thought they could get away with it.

#1 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

all options are still open at this time.....

#3 | Posted by kudzu at 2017-11-15 01:48 PM | Reply

"its too early"

lol

The Republican motto.

#4 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-15 03:04 PM | Reply

"its too early"
lol
The Republican motto.

#4 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY

In this case, it's reality.

#5 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-11-15 04:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This really is a stupid move by these six reps.

Steny Hoyer and Nancy Pelosi are opposed to this.

Essentially, they are trying to have him removed for policy differences.

#6 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-11-15 04:38 PM | Reply

Essentially, they are trying to have him removed for policy differences.

The five articles accuse Trump of obstruction of justice, violation of the foreign emoluments clause, violation of the domestic emoluments clause, undermining the federal judiciary, and undermining the freedom of the press.
Ah, no.

#7 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-11-15 05:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Tony,

The only ones that are remotely worth discussing are the emoluments.

The rest are partisan garbage.

#8 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-11-15 06:24 PM | Reply

The only ones that are remotely worth discussing are the emoluments.

Then they're not "policy differences" are they?

#9 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-11-15 06:31 PM | Reply

Then they're not "policy differences" are they?

#9 | POSTED BY TONYROMA

When I was referring to "policy differences" I was referring to his judicial nominees. Looking back, I couldn't have been LESS clear. Sorry about that.

Much of this is "partisan BS". Investigate the Russia stuff and the emolument stuff to the nth degree.

Curbing freedom of the press? Really? He has certainly made a few remarks that were concerning. Having said that, he is well-ahead of his predecessor on this issue and I can guarantee none of these reps made a peep when the prior administration was spying on reporters.

#10 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-11-15 09:46 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

"The only ones that are remotely worth discussing are the emoluments. "

Horse crap. His taunting of Kim Jung Un is a valid reason to remove this lunatic from office. Thinking back, wouldn't it have been preferable to have removed G.W. Bush from office for trying to lie us into a disastrous war in Iraq? Would have saved thousands of lives and trillions of dollars. Now we have a worse lunatic threatening nuclear war with a nation that also has nuclear weapons and who is an ally of China. This nut needs to be put in an institution for the mentally ill. And all this talk about "crimes and misdemeanors," those crimes are anything Congress says they are. They could impeach him for his awful hair if they wanted to.

#11 | Posted by danni at 2017-11-16 06:27 AM | Reply

The rest are partisan garbage.
#8 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

So is a consensual BJ. Do you still not understand what impeachment is?

#12 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-11-16 05:30 PM | Reply

They are on the right track by filing under Obstruction of Justice (which fits neatly within almost all legal theories for impeachment) but its too early, they need to wait for Mueller to get more information.

#2 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Agreed. Especially with a Republican House.

#13 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-11-16 05:31 PM | Reply

Only five? like, the Jackson 5?

Why aren't Pelosi and Schumer leading an avalanche of dem's into this....Corky?

#14 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2017-11-16 05:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Wait...I thought the Russia stuff was a nothingburger. What changed since last year?

#15 | Posted by chuffy at 2017-11-16 06:12 PM | Reply

MAGA!

#16 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2017-11-16 06:15 PM | Reply

The rest are partisan garbage.
#8 | POSTED BY JEFFJ
----
So is a consensual BJ. Do you still not understand what impeachment is?

#12 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES

Don't be a hack. That's not what it was about.

#17 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-11-16 07:21 PM | Reply

In this case, it's reality.

#5 | Posted by JeffJ

No it's not. You don't need prosecutorial evidence for impeachment. All you need is votes.

Trump either collaborated with putin to get elected, or he's so incompetent that he hired a bunch of people who collaborated with putin.

Those are the only two possiblities, and either one of them is worthy of immediate removal from office.

Treason or gross incompetence. Which one do you think belongs in the oval office?

#18 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-16 07:44 PM | Reply

In this case, it's reality.
#5 | Posted by JeffJ

No it's not.
#18 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

It's Jeff's reality.

At least that is how he hopes reality is.

But, we already know Jeff sometimes has a little problem with Reality.

#19 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-16 08:02 PM | Reply

They could impeach him for his awful hair if they wanted to.
#11 | Posted by danni

You don't need prosecutorial evidence for impeachment. All you need is votes.
#18 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

Fortunately, for the country, Congress has been more circumspect and less flippant about its power.

Impeachment: An Overview of Constitutional Provisions, Procedure, and Practice www.senate.gov

At page 22, "What Kinds of Conduct May Give Rise to an Impeachment?"

#20 | Posted by et_al at 2017-11-16 08:14 PM | Reply

"Fortunately, for the country, Congress has been more circumspect and less flippant about its power."

You realize that Republicans are in control of both houses of Congress?

Are you actually calling today's Republicans clown circus "circumspect"?

Have you seen the garbage that they have been and are still trying trying to shove down our throats for purely ideological purposes?

"Circumspect" is definitely not the word I would use to describe this Congress.

#21 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-16 08:34 PM | Reply

"Fortunately, for the country, Congress has been more circumspect and less flippant about its power."

Voted to repeal Obamacare 62 times when it didn't count, zero times when it mattered.

Not at all flippant.

How fortunate we are!

#22 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-16 08:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Very fortunate. Would you rather they be successful in that repeal? Of course not. Better they're just propagandists that get nothing done.

#23 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-11-17 08:41 AM | Reply

""We have taken this action because of great concerns for the country and our Constitution and our national security and our democracy," Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., said at a news conference to announce the effort."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!! Way to try to make people believe that Dems have ANY notion of what national security is. Please stick to your strengths like social responsibility and safety nets and let the adults concern themselves with America's defense. To run national security, you have to make tough decisions that don't always work for the betterment of everyone involved...aka, it's exactly what Dems can't do. That's like asking a Rep to not sexually harass women, it's just not going to happen.

#24 | Posted by humtake at 2017-11-17 12:20 PM | Reply

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!! Way to try to make people believe that Dems have ANY notion of what national security is. Please stick to your strengths like social responsibility and safety nets and let the adults concern themselves with America's defense. To run national security, you have to make tough decisions that don't always work for the betterment of everyone involved...aka, it's exactly what Dems can't do. That's like asking a Rep to not sexually harass women, it's just not going to happen.

#24 | Posted by humtake

Yeah that's why dubya protected us for the terrorists so well. Oh wait.

And nothing says NATIONAL SECURITY like a twitter war between maniacs with nukes, right stupid?

#25 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-17 01:08 PM | Reply

Treason or gross incompetence. Which one do you think belongs in the oval office?
#18 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

Obviously Rs see a place for both. But Ds better be careful what the wish for. In the extremely unlikely event they got rid of Trump by whatever means they'd end up with President Pence. Would that be any better?

#26 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2017-11-17 03:27 PM | Reply

Impeachment doesn't require an actual crime. One of the Articles of Impeachment against Andrew Johnson was that he "bad-mouthed" Congress:

ARTICLE 10.That said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, unmindful of the high duties of his high office and the dignity and proprieties thereof, and of the harmony and courtesies which ought to exist and be maintained between the executive and legislative branches of the Government of the United States, designing and intending to set aside the rightful authorities and powers of Congress, did attempt to bring into disgrace, ridicule, hatred, contempt and reproach, the Congress of the United States, and the several branches thereof, to impair and destroy the regard and respect of all the good people of the United States for the Congress and the legislative power thereof, which all officers of the government ought inviolably to preserve and maintain, and to excite the odium and resentment of all good people of the United States against Congress and the laws by it duly and constitutionally enacted; and in pursuance of his said design and intent, openly and publicly and before divers assemblages of citizens of the United States, convened in divers parts thereof, to meet and receive said Andrew Johnson as the Chief Magistrate of the United States, did, on the eighteenth day of August, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-six, and on divers other days and times, as well before as afterwards, make and declare, with a loud voice, certain intemperate, inflammatory and scandalous harangues, and therein utter loud threats and bitter menaces, as well against Congress as the laws of the United States duly enacted thereby, amid the cries, jeers and laughter of the multitudes then assembled in hearing, which are set forth in the several specifications hereinafter written. www.senate.gov

The other Articles are primarily about his firing of his Secretary of War (also not a "crime").

#27 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2017-11-17 04:09 PM | Reply

Obviously Rs see a place for both. But Ds better be careful what the wish for. In the extremely unlikely event they got rid of Trump by whatever means they'd end up with President Pence. Would that be any better?

#26 | Posted by SomebodyElse

Not in most ways, but the planet would be safer.

And repubs' power would be weakened which is better for everyone in the long run.

#28 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-17 04:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort