Poll: Articles of Impeachment against President Trump

[2A_Tom]

Read my mind. I remember "The Chosen One" spewing all his lies for 8 years of his dumpster fire.

But, aside from hating his agenda we did not wish for his destruction.

 

[sparky32]

But, aside from hating his agenda we did not wish for his destruction.

True

 

[churchmouse]

But, aside from hating his agenda we did not wish for his destruction.

Just wished he and his Hubby would fad away.

 

[sparky32]

Just wished he and his Hubby would fad away.

 

[jamil]

I'm not that gracious. There is no one reasonable on the side of those arguing that the articles of impeachment as-passed by the House are valid/reasonable. They are utterly absurd charges for non-impeachable offenses.

I’ve said since day of seeing the transcript that it’s an inkblot test. There’s enough for a reasonable suspicion that Trump did it. The question was about belief. Belief and reason make an interesting partnership. Which comes first? The research suggests it’s belief. Given the transcript one could reasonably believe either.

 

[chipbennett]

I’ve said since day of seeing the transcript that it’s an inkblot test. There’s enough for a reasonable suspicion that Trump did it. The question was about belief. Belief and reason make an interesting partnership. Which comes first? The research suggests it’s belief. Given the transcript one could reasonably believe either.

Which means that there isn't nearly enough evidence to support an article of impeachment for alleged action that is, at best, presumed.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Read my mind. I remember "The Chosen One" spewing all his lies for 8 years of his dumpster fire.

Uh.... Trump hasn't been in office 8 years.

 

[Kutnupe14]

But, aside from hating his agenda we did not wish for his destruction.

That depends on who you count as "we."

 

[Kutnupe14]

No it isn’t. It’s not just you. It’s him. Or maybe his supporters. They’re all bad faith. You just care about this one.

Scope and scale.

 

[jamil]

Which means that there isn't nearly enough evidence to support an article of impeachment for alleged action that is, at best, presumed.

That’s been my argument since the beginning. But the question was about reasonable not rational. There’s a difference.

 

[jamil]

Scope and scale.

Some of it is just surface noise. And you see it as something that’s more than it is. That’s just my opinion. But yours is just your opinion. I don’t see the scorn is anywhere near proportional with what would be rationally due.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Some of it is just surface noise. And you see it as something that’s more than it is. That’s just my opinion. But yours is just your opinion. I don’t see the scorn is anywhere near proportional with what would be rationally due.

Everyone is entitled to their wrong opinions. Even me.

 

[chipbennett]

That’s been my argument since the beginning. But the question was about reasonable not rational. There’s a difference.

This is a strange rabbit hole. It may or may not be reasonable for someone to believe that Trump committed "abuse of power" based on that person's reading of the call transcript. Regardless, it is utterly unreasonable and not rational to believe that the call transcript (the only actual evidence presented) provides sufficient evidence for an impeachable offense.

The articles of impeachment are both unreasonable and not rational, regardless how "reasonable" anyone's belief is that Trump may have committed high crimes and misdemeanors based on nothing more than the published call transcript.

 

[sparky32]

Uh.... Trump hasn't been in office 8 years.

Haha clever. But now that you bring it up he will be there for 8 years thanks to these impeachment crazy dems

 

[2A_Tom]

Uh.... Trump hasn't been in office 8 years.

That depends on who you count as "we."

Having it both ways is the definition of hypocrisy, schizophrenia and Trump derangement syndrome.

 

[IndyGal65]

Uh.... Trump hasn't been in office 8 years.

Yet.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Haha clever. But now that you bring it up he will be there for 8 years thanks to these impeachment crazy dems

He may win re-election. With the state of the American electorate, I think that’s a good possibility.

 

[2A_Tom]

Electorate much better informed and honest than in 2008, eh?

 

[bwframe]

He may win re-election. With the state of the American electorate, I think that’s a good possibility.

Yep.

Bitter clinger, deplorable, russian nazi racists we all are...

 

[Dead Duck]

Uh.... Trump hasn't been in office [STRIKE]8[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]years[/STRIKE] 12 years.

FIFY

Yet.