Trump Impeachment (Public Hearing)

[Montegriffo]

i wouldnt say partisan but monte being ignorant of specific US policies seems accurate in this case. whatevs

war powers act, 1973, intended to limit executive war authority, in practice has given executive even more war authority. especially when they ignore it

Just pointing out that the US is a nation not unfamiliar with going to war. No different from Britain or France or Spain before them.
War has never been an activity for which public consent is sought. To expect otherwise is to show a lack of understanding about how power works.
If pointing that out is considered to be "trolling" then I don't know what to say.
Other than don't be such a snowflake.

[The Conservative]

i wouldnt say partisan but monte being ignorant of specific US policies seems accurate in this case. whatevs

war powers act, 1973, intended to limit executive war authority, in practice has given executive even more war authority. especially when they ignore it

Just pointing out that the US is a nation not unfamiliar with going to war. No different from Britain or France or Spain before them.
War has never been an activity for which public consent is sought. To expect otherwise is to show a lack of understanding about how power works.
If pointing that out is considered to be "trolling" then I don't know what to say.
Other than don't be such a snowflake.

Please stay out of US politics, talking out of your ass is not a good look for you.

[pineapplemike]

monte, is violating the war powers act more or less impeachable than trump's phone call with ukraine?

[Montegriffo]

monte, is violating the war powers act more or less impeachable than trump's phone call with ukraine?

Apparently I'm not allowed an opinion on US politics.

[pineapplemike]

admitting subservience to TC isnt a good look either but to each his own, we all already know the correct answer anyway

[Montegriffo]

monte, is violating the war powers act more or less impeachable than trump's phone call with ukraine?

After a quick search it seems to me that it has probably been violated by every President since it was passed into law.
Even Trump may have violated it with his attack on the Syrian airbase.
Plenty of speculation that it is unconstitutional anyway.
At the end of the day, if the President is to have the title of Commander in Chief then he has ultimate authority over the military.
As for whether Trump should be impeached or not that depends upon whether you think a President should be held to account for wrongdoings or not.
It's a massively floored procedure anyway. A 2/3rds majority in a partisan Senate makes it nearly impossible to obtain a conviction.
On the other hand, if no action or threat of action was ever taken to bring a President to order then there's little to stop one breaking whatever laws they want to for personal gain.

[Montegriffo]

admitting subservience to TC isnt a good look either but to each his own, we all already know the correct answer anyway

That was just stalling while I read up on the war powers resolution.
The day I'm subservient to the likes of TC you can take me out the back and put a bullet in my brain.

[The Conservative]

admitting subservience to TC isnt a good look either but to each his own, we all already know the correct answer anyway

Yes, we do, submitting to me would make life so much easier though...but if he doesn't just admit when he is wrong... it will save us all pages of bullshit while trying to argue his point using pretzel logic that he only understands.

[The Conservative]

monte, is violating the war powers act more or less impeachable than trump's phone call with ukraine?

After a quick search it seems to me that it has probably been violated by every President since it was passed into law.
Even Trump may have violated it with his attack on the Syrian airbase.
Plenty of speculation that it is unconstitutional anyway.
At the end of the day, if the President is to have the title of Commander in Chief then he has ultimate authority over the military.
As for whether Trump should be impeached or not that depends upon whether you think a President should be held to account for wrongdoings or not.
It's a massively floored procedure anyway. A 2/3rds majority in a partisan Senate makes it nearly impossible to obtain a conviction.
On the other hand, if no action or threat of action was ever taken to bring a President to order then there's little to stop one breaking whatever laws they want to for personal gain.

It is meant to be tough to pass because it requires bipartisan support, which isn't going to happen.

Oh, and a side note, you either break the warsaw act or you don't, there is no maybe...

[Montegriffo]

monte, is violating the war powers act more or less impeachable than trump's phone call with ukraine?

After a quick search it seems to me that it has probably been violated by every President since it was passed into law.
Even Trump may have violated it with his attack on the Syrian airbase.
Plenty of speculation that it is unconstitutional anyway.
At the end of the day, if the President is to have the title of Commander in Chief then he has ultimate authority over the military.
As for whether Trump should be impeached or not that depends upon whether you think a President should be held to account for wrongdoings or not.
It's a massively floored procedure anyway. A 2/3rds majority in a partisan Senate makes it nearly impossible to obtain a conviction.
On the other hand, if no action or threat of action was ever taken to bring a President to order then there's little to stop one breaking whatever laws they want to for personal gain.

It is meant to be tough to pass because it requires bipartisan support, which isn't going to happen.

Oh, and a side note, you either break the warsaw act or you don't, there is no maybe...

Is the Warsaw act related to the Warsaw Pact?