This explains that criminal acts and impeachable offenses are NOT the same thing.

Of course they can overlap but an offense does not need to be a criminal act to be an impeachable offense.

Quote

So what exactly counts as an impeachable offense?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/05/24/so-what-exactly-counts-as-an-impeachable-offense-spoiler-its-a-trick-question/

 

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

That video had no relevance to my point.

Impeachable offenses are varied and many. They are not only about treasonous conspiracy. They most certainly do include OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE and other actions unbecoming of a president as well. 

 

 

in your opinion, on what basis/bases should trump be impeached?

1 hour ago, atyclb said:

 

 

in your opinion, on what basis/bases should trump be impeached?

I didn't say he should or shouldn't be impeached at this point. 

Maybe read my posts more carefully.

8 hours ago, Becker said:

Because Mueller (who, as opposed to the traitor in the WH, is not a draft dodger) has more integrity in his left pinkie finger than Trump and his entire menagerie of swamp dwellers have combined. 

Typical non meaningful response.

46 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

1 hour ago, atyclb said:

 

 

in your opinion, on what basis/bases should trump be impeached?

I didn't say he should or shouldn't be impeached at this point. 

Maybe read my posts more carefully.

 

 

i guess because your post mentions impeachable offenses and the topic is related to trump, mueller, etc.

 

"Impeachable offenses are varied and many. They are not only about treasonous conspiracy. They most certainly do include OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE and other actions unbecoming of a president as well."

25 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

 

i guess because your post mentions impeachable offenses and the topic is related to trump, mueller, etc.

 

"Impeachable offenses are varied and many. They are not only about treasonous conspiracy. They most certainly do include OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE and other actions unbecoming of a president as well."

Wow. Where did I say in that whether he should or shouldn't be impeached! Do I think 45 committed impeachable offenses? Yes, I do. I think he's a criminally corrupt con man and has been for decades. That is not the same question as should he be impeached. Congress if they decide there is enough evidence if they ever get the unredacted Mueller report and also multiple other investigations including in New York decide the evidence is damning enough, they certainly could choose to impeach and likely could do so in Congress. But anyone that understands the basics of impeachment knows that deciding to do so or not is a POLITICAL decision. The democrats know that there is almost nothing that can be proven against 45 that would turn the SENATE into actually convicting him. Bill Clinton was impeached (perjury and obstruction of justice) and then not convicted in the senate. Republicans will tell you that was a political mistake to pursue an impeachment they couldn't convict on. So this is academic, isn't it? It's not really about literally impeaching 45 because it's already rather clear that probably won't happen ,... for POLITICAL reasons.

 

On the question of 45's obstruction of justice, we do know Mueller couldn't come to a conclusion. It was NOT up the Barr to decide there wasn't obstruction of justice. It's up to CONGRESS. The only way congress can decide that question is for them to see the full unredacted report. If they do, and they do decide that 45 is guilty of obstruction of justice, they then would have to choose whether to proceed with impeachment. That would be a political decision and I think they would choose not to proceed.

 

Other stuff may be uncovered from investigations and the southern district of New York that might greatly CHANGE the politics of going for impeachment or not though. Congress is NOT obligated to proceed with impeachment even if they think there is strong evidence of an impeachable offense.

 

If comparing to indictable criminal offenses, even with those prosecutors are always making pursue conviction or not decisions on such crimes. They don't pursue all possible cases. The jails are already too full, yeah? 

15 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Typical non meaningful response.

Well that was a completely meaningless response.

20 hours ago, atyclb said:

 

i may be wrong but it would seem the deep state were the ones trying to get rid of trump.  now they are his protectors?

No question about that. His fake narrative is about the deep state. It has always been about ensuring that he is above the law!