Third Party & Independents Archives

How Long Before President Trump Gets Impeached?

Should Donald Trump become the next President of the United States, people are asking how long will it be before his big mouth and outrageous personality will get him impeached.

Trump is going to have to pick a running mate. Possibly one of the hardliners in the GOP in order to satisfy that party that is afraid of him. It might be present Speaker of the House Paul Ryan or some other hardline Republican. That would only turn things into another nightmare because Trump is just advertising that he won’t make a full term as President.

Looking at some of the bigoted and vitriolic statements he's made during the campaign should have gotten any other candidate or person in public service fired. He's getting away with it because he's wealthy and won't break a sweat financially if he wins or loses.

Trump would be pushing the envelope of character should he continue his tirades while in office. Any bigoted remark he makes after taking the oath would be grounds for impeachment alone. The Democrats and Republican hierarchies will be on him in a second flat should he continue to lambaste ethnic people and women as he's done his entire presidential campaign.

He also poses a major legal threat. His bigoted commentary can be used against him in court should any minorities or women in government feel his actions are in violation of the laws regarding race, creed, sex, etc.. One need only point to his campaign as evidence of his mindset and that would be evidence enough to prosecute and perhaps even win. Trump is a time bomb just waiting to go off, and once he's in office, it's not a fair stretch that he'll put his foot in his mouth the first week.

This would bring about a constant maelstrom in the courts with people petitioning for redress that could clog things up for years. Trump is a liability and just one tiny mistake once he's in the White House could snowball into something no one can rescue him from.

What would be the fallout? He'd either have to resign or he'd be kicked out, leaving his Vice President, probably a hardline Republican, to take his place who would then replace the vacant Vice Presidency with another hardline Republican. This would turn back the clock to the GWB years and another wave of wars, economic turmoil, and wealthy based scams.

The Banksters would love it. No one barely went to jail under Obama so with hardline Republicans once again in power, there's no telling the damage they could do.

It's not a figment of the imagination. Donald Trump is a liability to the GOP and the office of the president. It shouldn't take him more than a few days, if not weeks to light the fire of impeachment.

Posted by GregB at May 27, 2016 6:09 PM
Comments
Comment #404935

What happened to the first amendment?

I didn’t see LBJ get impeached for saying the n word. I didn’t see WJC get impeached for lying to a grand jury and raping women. Hillbilly didn’t get impeached for looting the white house when she left.

Why the uproar about Trump when he ignores the petty hurt feelings of the liberal left these days.

Trump is only showing everyone how thin the PC skin is and how shallow their threats are. The only way the PC crowd gets their way is because those they attack let them.

If Trump wants to call a Mexican rapist a rapist he has every right to. It’s not an impeachable offense unless he lets it be one.

Posted by: Weary Willie at May 27, 2016 6:48 PM
Comment #404939

Trump will not be president.

But if so, he might face impeachment over the Trump University lawsuit. Fraud is a felony. The trial is supposed to be this fall.

Also, if he gave unlawful orders to the military, such as approval of torture (which he has done) and killing the innocent relatives of terrorists (which he has done), that would be impeachable too. Trump calls the Geneva Convention a problem. He has no idea.

Ordering the national guard to police Muslim neighborhoods would be an impeachable offense.

Posted by: phx8 at May 27, 2016 8:12 PM
Comment #404941

phx8,

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought impeachment can only be used for offenses conducted while a President is in office, thus rendering any issue regarding Trump University mott.

Posted by: Warren Porter at May 27, 2016 8:46 PM
Comment #404942

He didn’t say he would kill innocent relatives. He said he would go after them. Aiding and abetting a crime.

phx8, why aren’t you calling for Obama’s impeachment? He has been killing innocent relatives since he got elected!

Posted by: Weary Willie at May 27, 2016 10:09 PM
Comment #404944

WP,
I believe you are right, although there is a example in the House right now, where the GOP is considering impeaching the head of the IRS for being misleading. The standard of “high crimes and misdemeanors” is being ignored. Presumably that will go nowhere. In the early history of the US impeachment was used as a tool to attack political enemies, and we saw it recently when the GOP House drafted 50 articles of impeachment, had the special prosecutor dismiss them all due to lack of evidence, and settle on an obscure he said/she said case involving a woman named Paula Jones. The point was never to prove the case. The point was to enable a fishing expedition into a sitting president’s sexual history while on the witness stand.

If the trial was held before the election and a verdict of guilty reached, how would we deal with seating a felon in the White House? I don’t know. As long as we’re dealing with far fetched hypotheticals, maybe Trump could pardon himself.

WW,
Name a case in which Obama targeted the innocent relatives of a terrorist for death.

There have been cases where innocents died when they were in the vicinity of a terrorist being targeted, but the relatives themselves were never the target. There have also been mistakes. Having said that, there is a good case that even legal ‘collateral damage’ ultimately does more harm than good, since it can turn a populace against the bombers.

Posted by: phx8 at May 27, 2016 11:21 PM
Comment #404945

Why should I bother when you’ve just done it for me?

The level of ignorance you profess is astounding, phx8.

the Hellfire missile has a ‘kill radius’ of 50 feet (15 metres) and a ‘wounding radius’ of 65 feet (20 metres); the GBU-12 Paveway II has a ‘casualty radius’ of between 200 and 300 feet (within which 50 per cent of people will be killed)
People who will admit it believe anyone in the kill radius of these weapons are targets.

More than 2,400 dead as Obama’s drone campaign marks five years

It appears Obama doesn’t care about the people around his intended victim. His MSM will gladly mention only the so-called terrorist being killed, but ignores the dozens of innocent victims in the same room i.e. target.

None is so blind as those who will not see


Posted by: Weary Willie at May 28, 2016 9:05 AM
Comment #404947

WW,
“The level of ignorance you profess is astounding, phx8.”

Perhaps. It is based on my experience in the Strategic Air Command as a B-52 Bombardier, where I was certified for nuclear, conventional, and chemical warfare. This involved extensive training, beginning with officer training. Every USAF officer learns about the Geneva Convention and the definitions of lawful and unlawful orders. As a Radar Navigator, this was a great concern, given the nature of the mission and the kinds of casualties B-52’s can inflict. Admittedly, I am unfamiliar with Hellfire missiles; however, I am very familiar with various types of gravity bombs and nuclear missiles. Bomb Damage Assessment (BDA) was a routine part of every mission’s follow-up. I am also familiar with ways bomb runs can go wrong. This was studied in order to avoid dong the same. It included mistakes that resulted in friendly fire incidents, and detailed results on just what happened to American ground troops when one B-52 accidentally bombed them.

Missile strikes by drones do not go after targets of opportunity. They go after what are believed to be terrorists, based on intelligence. The decision to make a strike goes through a chain of command, which can include Obama. The decisions are made by ordinary Americans serving in the military who are highly trained. They are not made by Obama and blindly carried out. Obama is giving lawful orders and so is his chain of command, and each person in that chain believes they are following lawful orders.

To suggest that the Commander-in-Chief, Obama, and your fellow Americans in the military are committing war crimes is disgraceful. You might as well celebrate Memorial Day by spitting on the graves of veterans.

But that’s just my ignorance showing.

Posted by: phx8 at May 28, 2016 12:19 PM
Comment #404948

What kind of world do you think we would be living in if D.W. Eisenhower’s warning of the Military Industrial Complex had been heeded?

How many fewer graves would there be if war wasn’t needed to maintain our economy? An economy that developed way too fast and in wasteful and unnecessary ways?

Posted by: Weary Willie at May 28, 2016 4:37 PM
Comment #404949

The MLC and isolationism are a different topic.

The question is, would the next president face impeachment? I would argue that, as unlikely as it is that he would ever win in the first place, Trump would face the possibility, based on what he has said to date. Torture is a war crime, and purposefully targeting innocent civilians who are relatives of terrorists is too, yet Trump has openly advocated both. And no, contrary to what Trump said, the military would not obey unlawful orders just because he insisted.

Sending law enforcement into Muslim neighborhoods to patrol would also be impeachable.

In the highly unlikely chance that any of this would ever occur, Trump would have few supporters. When informed that he “rattled” world leaders, Trump said that was good. He wanted to be “unpredictable.” But in a world of nuclear and biological weapons, making other countries uncertain risks disaster, because it encourages them to strike first.

He has already alienated the Brits. The P.M. very publicly called Trump “divisive, stupid, and wrong.” The Mayor of London said Trump was ignorant. Trump responded that it looked like we would not get along with the British. Think about that. We would not get along with one of our best allies, and that’s just for openers. Now, that’s not impeachable, but it gives an indication of just how little support Trump would receive. Think about how many people in Congress he has already alienated with his bullying and name-calling. Republicans might give him lip service about support and endorsements, but they will dump him in a heartbeat if it ever gets hot enough for an impeachment.

Posted by: phx8 at May 28, 2016 5:26 PM
Comment #404950

Trump would get impeached if he didn’t secure the border with Mexico. He would also get impeached if he caved in to political correctness or apologized on demand. He probably would get impeached if he put the Mayor of London’s opinion ahead of the American people’s.

We’re also not talking about establishment, those that would try to impeach. We’re talking about the American People who voted for him. If he gets elected it will be by Americans across the board, not just R or D. If the American People see establishment standing in the way of what Trump is trying to do there is no way they would let congress carry out an impeachment.


Posted by: Weary Willie at May 28, 2016 5:57 PM
Comment #404951

WW,

Obviously, you have no clue what impeachment is even about. It is not for vindictive voters upset with a policy decision. It is a tool for censuring or removing from office a President who has perpetuated high crimes or misdemeanors against the nation. Violating established law, such as the Geneva Conventions would fall under those categories.

Posted by: Warren Porter at May 28, 2016 9:12 PM
Comment #404952

There’s really no way to tell how things are going to turn out. We’re in uncharted territory. I think the establishment’s only beef with Trump is that he’s going to consider waste what others consider a livelihood.

When you consider what the establishment has done to people like Tom Delay and Newt Gingrich, they may believe they can do the same to Trump. If they try it over issues the American people think are legitimate, well, it might get ugly.

I actually think it will get ugly in November if Trump wins. The Right took Obama’s reelection with grace. I don’t think the perpetually offended on college campuses and professional grievance chasers are going to take it sitting down.

You thought Republicans were trying to stop a president? Just wait to see what those who oppose Trump will resort to to bring his presidency down.

Posted by: Weary Willie at May 28, 2016 11:26 PM
Comment #404953
The Right took Obama’s reelection with grace

LMFAO! I didn’t realize it was time for the Watchblog comedy hour.

Posted by: Warren Porter at May 29, 2016 2:01 AM
Comment #404955

Let’s wait till after the election and compare the reactions of Republicans after Obama was reelected to that of those who “feel the Bern”.

Posted by: Weary Willie at May 29, 2016 8:47 AM
Comment #404956

“The Right took Obama’s reelection with grace.”

Yeah, I nearly choked when I read that.

The Trump campaign is already getting ugly. Hispanics are not going to take this sitting down. Immigration has been their primary issue for the past few years and it constantly leads on their biggest news stations, Telemundo and Univision. Many of us do not notice because it is in Spanish, of course, but they hear what Trump and other Republicans have been saying loud and clear.

It is a message of hatred and bigotry. They heard all those comments by Trump and Congressman Steven King and others. They won’t stand for it. That’s no coincidence that there was so much unrest when Trump showed up in Albuquerque and San Diego. Full scale riots in the future would not surprise me.

And Trump just keeps adding fuel to the fire. While in New Mexico the only Latina governor in the country, Susana Martinez, refused to be seen with Trump and would not endorse him. Trump responded in the usual way, by attacking her.

Trump just attacked the judge in the Trump University trial, U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel. Trump called him a “hater” and pointed out he was probably Mexican. Let’s see how bullying a US District Court judge goes for him. Heh. That’s bound to work out well! The trial is scheduled for November 28th. There are multiple suits, by the way, both by individuals and by the NY Attorney General.

By the way, note the difference between Trump and Hillary Clinton. HRC will not face indictment or trial over the e-mail issue, and there was not compromise of security. It was no more than a violation of some bureaucratic protocols. Trump, on the other hand, will face trial, and I’m beginning to think the various lawsuits will not settle.

So if Trump wins the White House- an unlikely prospect- and then is convicted of fraud, he could very well face impeachment shortly after taking office.

Posted by: phx8 at May 29, 2016 1:15 PM
Comment #404959

We’ll have to wait and see.

Posted by: Weary Willie at May 30, 2016 1:05 AM
Comment #419449

What is the problem about impeaching trump? He has done, thr k k k, and all the white supremacists. This should be enough along with what he has been doing with migrants and everything negative, the so called Wall that makes no sense for the American people to pay for. We got rid of Nixon, now to make our future better, impeach this radical.

Posted by: DC TIMMONS at August 16, 2017 8:49 AM
Post a comment