General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs there any law that Trump might break that would start impeachment?
Or is he now our fuhrer?
dchill
(38,497 posts)I sure wouldn't touch him.
Bettie
(16,109 posts)but I fear that he is.
Apparently, there is no bridge too far these days.
msongs
(67,406 posts)FirstLight
(13,360 posts)I'm f-in' DONE
anarch
(6,535 posts)"we're finally on our own..." as the song says.
America was nice while it lasted, I guess, but now we live in Trumpland, and we have a dictator propped up by a soulless plutocracy who will do anything, without limit, to protect their personal wealth and the capitalist system that subsidizes and perpetuates it.
GReedDiamond
(5,313 posts)...if Preznit Moron Asshole sexually assaulted "Moscow" Mitch's wife - whose name I won't mention - maybe that would move Mitch to allow a fair and objective look at the evidence for impeachment in a Senate trial.
It otherwise seems that there is no other kind/type of evidence that Mitch would allow a fair hearing in a Senate impeachment trial.
KentuckyWoman
(6,679 posts)If redacted were caught in bed with Joel Osteen it would not matter.
But once Vlad is done that will be the end if ot.
Response to KentuckyWoman (Reply #7)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
watoos
(7,142 posts)but Jr. gets to set time limits and sets what questions can be asked.
Hope Hicks, behind closed doors with a White House counsel advising her what and how to answer questions.
We should have impeached Trump before the Mueller report came out. We are normalizing his flouting of the law and now he has his Roy Cohn in Barr to protect him.
Response to watoos (Reply #8)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
The sad truth.
LenaBaby61
(6,974 posts)IggleDuer
(964 posts)Hes putting on the poundage.
shanny
(6,709 posts)AlexSFCA
(6,137 posts)the precedent has been set. Obama had 8 years to change the DOJ policy and he didnt.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,858 posts)Just as there is no possible mass murder that would make people get serious about restricting gun ownership. Well, maybe if someone shot up an elementary school and killed a bunch of six year olds. Oh, wait, that's already happened and gun ownership and the right to murder is still far more sacred than the right to life. Unless. of course, you're a pregnant woman, and then the zygote's "right to life" utterly trumps your personhood.
uponit7771
(90,339 posts)Poiuyt
(18,124 posts)Of course, that's not breaking the law, yet.