The Moonbats just can’t help themselves. It really is time to see legitimate psychological help, as the LA Times allows another nutter, Barbara Radnofsky to delve into her insane sore loser fantasy
Many people see chaos in the Trump administration and fear for the nation’s future. The president was duly elected, and yet this presidency has already been marked by lawsuits, an FBI investigation, policy confusion and escalating rhetoric with North Korea. Fortunately, the U.S. Constitution offers a direct, doable way to respond to such crises: impeachment.
The Founding Fathers, after all, won a revolution against a tyrannical chief executive — “Mad†King George III of England. They were fearful of a similar kind of leader taking charge in the new United States. They embedded in the Constitution an orderly process run by Congress, not the courts, to remove civil officers — the president, the vice president, federal judges, Cabinet members and others — who cause substantial harm to society. The idea, said Edmund Randolph, a leader of the Virginia delegation to the Constitutional Convention, was to circumvent “irregularly inflicted … tumults and insurrections.â€
Funny, I do not remember Democrats complaining about Obama’s ruling by executive fiat.
Impeachment is an entirely political process; it isn’t a function of criminal or civil law. As Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers, impeachable offenses are “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men or … from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may . . . be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.â€
Of course, that’s not what the actual Constitution says about what is terms for impeachment, but, hey, let’s not let facts get in the way of some good nutbaggery. Which is too much to excerpt, because they I’d just be posting the entire article. Regardless, it is interesting that Ms. Radnofsky actually lays out a case as to why President Obama should have been impeached.
These are all just deranged fantasies from sore losers who nominated a horrible candidate, one who passed out in view of the public on 9/11, failed visit several key states, was non-personable, and had a lot of baggage.
To be fair, the article simply discusses how impeachments can occur, and what might constitute an impeachable offense.
Still, it’s pure left-wing fantasy land, the kind of stuff which makes me wonder just how many recreational pharmaceuticals Democrats use. The Republicans in the House who would have to vote for impeachment were elected in 2016 by the same voters who cast heir ballots for Donald Trump. President Trump is largely doing what his supporters want him to do, save that he hasn’t gone far enough in getting things done. With 52 Republicans in the Senate, ‘twould take only 34 of them to stop removal from office in an impeachment trial, and most of those Republican senators come from the same states carried by Mr Trump.
President Trump will leave office, peaceably, on January 20, 2025.
Exactly what do the liberals think would happen if they remove Trump? Do they think that would go down peacefully?
Meh, they still think that they can seize maybe 500 million firearms from 125 million households. Commies aren’t good at math, or logic.
REmember when the impeachment of former Pres Bill Clinton was a travesty of all human life?
… good times.
William Teach: Of course, that’s not what the actual Constitution says about what is terms for impeachment
The Constitution allows for impeachment in cases of “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Violation of the Emoluments Clause might be encompassed by Bribery, and Misdemeanors is broad enough to cover most any misbehavior that seriously impacted trust in the government. However, political and popular support for impeachment, which would overturn an election, would probably require strong evidence of a statutory crime.
captainfish: Remember when the impeachment of former Pres Bill Clinton was a travesty of all human life? … good times.
Yeah, it was pretty silly when they tried to overturn the election based on lying about a consensual affair. Good example, though.
Thank God the impeachment of President Clinton failed! Had Governor George Bush been running against President Gore, rather than Vice President Gore, Mr Gore would probably have found 527 extra votes in Florida.
Yep, perjury before a federal grand jury and obstruction of justice by a sitting President shouldn’t be such a big deal.
Quite simply the Democratic party has become communists. HRC is a communist as is Obama.
The interference in the 2016 election was meant to help HRC not Trump. Everybody the world over is looking for dirt on Trump and none has been found. So badly do they want it that the FBI offered to pay for the Fake Dossier on trump, while Obama was president and the FBI was run by Lynch.
Your country is in serious danger of being totally absorbed by communism from within. Putin didn’t want Trump to win. He wanted his good buddy HRC to win so they could continue to profit from a political whore who would sell off this country for a few bucks.
The democratic party are Communists. I can’t stress that enough. The American people are starting to get it. It, I think is why the Democrats keep losing more local, state and national political seats with each passing election as the people really start to realize the agenda of the left is simple anarchy until America collapses.
But, but, she was the very best the libs had to offer. A telling commentary on the state of their party.
Yet she got more votes than tRump.
Not the ones that counted, loser.
304-227.
Hillary got more votes.
Donald got more legal votes.
The Washington Nationals got more runs and more hits in the NLDS than did the Chicago Cubs, but ’twas the Cubs who advanced to the NLCS. Funny how the rules work, isn’t it?
The wisdom of the Framers was confirmed in 2000 and 2016, saving our country from the left.