Daniel Halliday
Sep 25 · Last update 3 mo. ago.

Should Donald Trump be impeached?

Speaker of the United States' House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, has announced the beginning of an impeachment inquiry against Donald Trump yesterday, following the president admitting to discussing democratic front-runner Joe Biden with the Ukrainian President. Trump is being accused of pressuring President Volodymyr Zelensky to invest Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, who has links to a Ukrainian oligarch, in order to make political gains ahead of the 2020 presidential election. Trump denied the accusations and has warned his impeachment will hurt the US economy, but nonetheless faces further inquiries into his actions as president despite being investigated from 2017-2019 by Robert Mueller. So should Trump be impeached? Is the evidence strong enough this time? Or is Trump right to warn of the negative economic fall-out?
Stats of Viewpoints
Yes, but sadly impeachment to misrepresent bigger issues
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Yes, he has a long list of impeachable offenses
1 agrees
0 disagrees
This will backfire for democrats
1 agrees
0 disagrees
No - the latest “witch hunt garbage”
1 agrees
0 disagrees
Yes, so that any sealed indictment can be enacted
1 agrees
0 disagrees
The need for better legal guidelines
1 agrees
0 disagrees
No, democrats have been guilty of exactly the same thing in the past
1 agrees
0 disagrees
No, Ukrainegate is just the next fake news narrative
1 agrees
0 disagrees
Viewpoints
Add New Viewpoint

Yes, but sadly impeachment to misrepresent bigger issues

The political squabbling and misreporting around Trump’s impeachment is being used to derail the narrative surrounding the real problem in Ukraine and the U.S.’s relations with Ukraine. Part of the scandal is Trumps alleged threat to withhold military aid from Ukraine, but no one in the media is asking the most important bigger picture question, what is that military aid for? And the uncomfortable answer is that the U.S. is funding a proxy war against Russia in eastern Ukraine. In reality it would probably be better for everyone to freeze military aid to Ukraine, but this is never brought up, Obama refused military aid when in office but it is thought that due to the abundance Russia collusion allegations surrounding Trump coming into office he caved so Washington war-hawk pressure and continued to fuel a useless proxy war with Russia.

But the question needs to be asked, who really benefits from this situation of ignoring the horrible unstable situation in Ukraine while launching an attack on Trump? Weapons manufacturers have held fund raisers for and donated a large amount of money to Adam Schiff, while being the biggest proponents of a proxy war in Ukraine. Adam Schiff is also personally leading the impeachment proceedings against Trump, which perfectly redirects the media narrative and should represent a very clear conflict of interests. Instead the whole situation just reinforces a disastrous cold war mind-set while adopting a narrative of trying to challenge Trump, the whole thing would be laughable if the real underlying issue wasn’t to tragic.

youtu.be/A6by-4RQ1ZY?t=680 cbc.ca/news/world/ukraine-corruption-trump-impeachment-aftermath-1.5324809 nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/ukraine-explained-what-vladimir-putin-doing-n192011

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Nov 24
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
But the question needs to be asked, who really benefits from this situation of ignoring the horrible unstable situation in Ukraine while launching an attack on Trump? Weapons manufacturers have held fund raisers for and donated a large amount of money to Adam Schiff, while being the biggest proponents of a proxy war in Ukraine. Adam Schiff is also personally leading the impeachment proceedings against Trump, which perfectly redirects the media narrative and should represent a very clear conflict of interests. Instead the whole situation just reinforces a disastrous cold war mind-set while adopting a narrative of trying to challenge Trump, the whole thing would be laughable if the real underlying issue wasn’t to tragic.

Yes, he has a long list of impeachable offenses

Since Trump has taken office he has conducted one of the most controversial presidencies in recent history and many believe much of this conduct to be comprised of impeachable or indictable offenses. Trump has previously been involved in numerous state and federal criminal lawsuits and investigations, involving foreign collusion, campaign financing, and the Trump Organisation benefiting from business deals without the approval of Congress. Additionally his own former attorney, Michael Cohen, has even implicated Trump in a felony, involving hush money being paid to a pornographic film star, Stormy Daniels.

But the most obvious corruption of Trump's presidency remains his failure to properly relinquish his business ties while in the White House, and the subsequent clear profiteering Trump and people around him are engaged in. The clearest example of this is the use of Trump owned businesses, such as golf resorts and hotels, to hold official state meetings and events by Trump and his senior staff such as Attorney General William Barr. Now, if the whistleblowers comments are found to be accurate and Trump’s comments made to the Ukrainian prime minister constitute political pressure to benefit his own reelection campaign he should be impeached. But arguably he should have already been impeached for a long list of other offenses that are much more heinous and serious, and that fact that he wasn't further highlights the problems with democracy in America.

truthout.org/articles/trump-can-and-should-be-indicted flickr.com/photos/backbone_campaign/37517323474 aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/pelosi-house-start-impeachment-inquiry-trump-190924210119626.html vox.com/2019/8/28/20836544/william-barr-trump-hotel-party-emoluments-corruption

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Nov 24
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
But the most obvious corruption of Trump's presidency remains his failure to properly relinquish his business ties while in the White House, and the subsequent clear profiteering Trump and people around him are engaged in. The clearest example of this is the use of Trump owned businesses, such as golf resorts and hotels, to hold official state meetings and events by Trump and his senior staff such as Attorney General William Barr. Now, if the whistleblowers comments are found to be accurate and Trump’s comments made to the Ukrainian prime minister constitute political pressure to benefit his own reelection campaign he should be impeached. But arguably he should have already been impeached for a long list of other offenses that are much more heinous and serious, and that fact that he wasn't further highlights the problems with democracy in America.

This will backfire for democrats

Even if you hate Trump, impeaching him is a bad idea politically. No president has been removed from office following impeachment, with an impeachment trial needing a supermajority of the Senate to vote to impeach Trump, this would be unlikely considering the Republican support Trump enjoys. Trump will likely then spin failed impeachment proceedings to his benefit using it to justify the conspiracy theory claims he often tweets and talks about. Furthermore, this whole case draws attention to corruption in the Democratic Party too, as it involves Joe Biden’s son who may have been awarded an unfair position in Ukraine due to an Obama era-deal.

Impeachment might pass the house but not the senate, and after the first hearing the proceedings are already becoming a joke, with witness testimonies being laughable. Trump is only vaguely implicated in wrongdoing here, where as the democratic front runner is going to have his history and that of his family investigated, making this impeachment the bad choice and bad timing that will probably help secure Trump’s win in the 2020 presidential election. These impeachment proceedings will not address the deep decay that has beset American politics, but instead may highlight the failings on both sides of the political aisle, further solidifying the anti-establishment rhetoric that Trump used to get into power in the first place. Impeachment will strengthen Trump and further weaken the squabbling mess of the Democratic Party.

theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/25/beware-democrats-impeaching-trump-will-be-a-disaster twitter.com/KyleKulinski/status/1197242884040343553 eddierockerz.com/2019/09/27/chris-hedges-the-problem-with-impeachment youtube.com/watch?v=RjGHoLUgMRw youtube.com/watch?v=60dgwCbyv54

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Nov 24
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
Even if you hate Trump, impeaching him is a bad idea politically. No president has been removed from office following impeachment, with an impeachment trial needing a supermajority of the Senate to vote to impeach Trump, this would be unlikely considering the Republican support Trump enjoys. Trump will likely then spin failed impeachment proceedings to his benefit using it to justify the conspiracy theory claims he often tweets and talks about. Furthermore, this whole case draws attention to corruption in the Democratic Party too, as it involves Joe Biden’s son who may have been awarded an unfair position in Ukraine due to an Obama era-deal.

No - the latest “witch hunt garbage”

Trump has called this a con from the democrats, a crooked media, and a whistleblower source that wasn’t even there to witness his phone call, comparing them to a spy. Both Trump and Ukraine’s President, Volodymyr Zelensky have expressed their denial of the allegations surrounding impeachment, placing all impeachment proceedings solely upon the account of a faceless, nameless whistleblower. Following years of the Mueller Inquiry that found no evidence of collusion with Russia, Trump has correctly labelled efforts to impeach him as what they really are, “witch hunt garbage” [1].

But it’s not just the two men involved that have called out inconsistencies in the proceedings, with Representative Jim Jordan pointing out how weak the evidence is that the impeachment proceedings are based on. When questioned in the first impeachment hearing the US ambassador to Ukraine, William B. Taylor, claimed to have understood there was coercion on Trump’s part based on a convoluted and misleading statement by Gordon Sondland, which was itself based on hearsay and full of contradictions. However Representative Lee Zeldin went further and described the impeachment hearing as a “clown show” and a “fairytale”, adding that “Adam Schiff is misleading you [the media] and you’re playing along with it” [2]. The inquiry is so weak Trump is now openly stating that he wants it to go to trial, as it is becoming clearer and clearer for what it is, a massive waste of time and a witch hunt.

bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49800181 talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-implies-punishing-source-whistleblower time.com/5686305/zelensky-ukraine-denies-trump-pressure/n [1] washingtonexaminer.com/news/witch-hunt-garbage-trump-responds-to-pelosi-endorsing-impeachment-inquiry youtube.com/watch?v=JCSBd580P2A [2] rawstory.com/2019/10/gops-lee-zeldin-loses-it-after-intel-hearing-the-country-is-getting-screwed-by-the-liberal-democratic-base aljazeera.com/news/2019/11/trump-impeachment-trial-191122171011263.html

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Nov 24
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
But it’s not just the two men involved that have called out inconsistencies in the proceedings, with Representative Jim Jordan pointing out how weak the evidence is that the impeachment proceedings are based on. When questioned in the first impeachment hearing the US ambassador to Ukraine, William B. Taylor, claimed to have understood there was coercion on Trump’s part based on a convoluted and misleading statement by Gordon Sondland, which was itself based on hearsay and full of contradictions. However Representative Lee Zeldin went further and described the impeachment hearing as a “clown show” and a “fairytale”, adding that “Adam Schiff is misleading you [the media] and you’re playing along with it” [2]. The inquiry is so weak Trump is now openly stating that he wants it to go to trial, as it is becoming clearer and clearer for what it is, a massive waste of time and a witch hunt.

Yes, so that any sealed indictment can be enacted

Many have speculated that Donald Trump may already be subject to a sealed indictment, meaning that he can already be implicated in a crime but will not be charged with the crime until he leaves office. Both Special Counsel Robert Mueller and Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff, who have carried out separate investigations of Donald Trump’s presidency, have both indicated that Trump could be indicted and many have taken their words to indicate that the president may already be under a sealed indictment. He should be impeached and removed from office so he can be punished for any crimes that were redacted from the Mueller Inquiry that may have been seal until he leaves office.

According to Louise Mensch blog Patribotics sources in the intelligence and justice communities have stated that a sealed indictment has already been granted against Trump. Likewise according to Adam Schiff, one of the lead investigators in the Trump impeachment inquiry, following the earlier Mueller investigation he believes the Justice Department felt bound to not indict a sitting president, with Schiff stating that he believes Trump should be indicted when he leaves office. Legal experts agree that Trump could be indicted when removed from office, so yes, impeachment proceeding should go ahead and Trump should be removed from office so that he can be indicted and charged with the crimes he has committed before doing any more damage.

reddit.com/r/The_Mueller/comments/chao02/trump_should_be_indicted politifact.com/punditfact/article/2019/jul/26/could-trump-be-indicted-after-leaving-office-muell patribotics.blog/2017/05/14/exclusive-sealed-indictment-granted-against-donald-trump breitbart.com/clips/2019/07/21/schiff-trump-should-be-indicted-when-he-leaves-office

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Nov 24
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
Many have speculated that Donald Trump may already be subject to a sealed indictment, meaning that he can already be implicated in a crime but will not be charged with the crime until he leaves office. Both Special Counsel Robert Mueller and Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff, who have carried out separate investigations of Donald Trump’s presidency, have both indicated that Trump could be indicted and many have taken their words to indicate that the president may already be under a sealed indictment. He should be impeached and removed from office so he can be punished for any crimes that were redacted from the Mueller Inquiry that may have been seal until he leaves office.

The need for better legal guidelines

Both the likelihood and legitimacy of Trump being successfully impeached or indicted remains unclear, and looking to the constitution or back at history doesn’t offer much clarity either. With Nixon resigning and being pardoned after leaving office, and Clinton being impeached but the Justice Department asserting the indictment was out of bounds, the question of criminal proceedings being bought against a sitting president remain unclear, and whether this lies within the scope of the US constitution is hotly debated also. There remains a clear need for revised legal guidelines surrounding this very nuanced area then, as the constitution only makes reference to "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" [1].

Should Trump’s clear embrace of racist narratives not have been something to impeach him for? Racism doesn’t necessarily have to lead to him being indicted, but should definitely be impeachable, as a president so eager to sow divisions in a society should be removed from office as they cannot possibly be conducting their job well. The Muslim ban alone should have been enough then, this push to impeach Trump now over such an additionally nuanced issue is just a terrible case of too little too late. But more should be done to clarify future issues involving presidents sowing discord, encouraging foreign meddling or indeed profiting from their time in office.

usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/08/24/can-president-donald-trump-indicted/1072572002 abajournal.com/news/article/can_a_sitting_president_be_indicted_the_constitution_doesnt_give_a_definiti [1] heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/2/essays/100/standards-for-impeachment

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Nov 24
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
Should Trump’s clear embrace of racist narratives not have been something to impeach him for? Racism doesn’t necessarily have to lead to him being indicted, but should definitely be impeachable, as a president so eager to sow divisions in a society should be removed from office as they cannot possibly be conducting their job well. The Muslim ban alone should have been enough then, this push to impeach Trump now over such an additionally nuanced issue is just a terrible case of too little too late. But more should be done to clarify future issues involving presidents sowing discord, encouraging foreign meddling or indeed profiting from their time in office.

No, democrats have been guilty of exactly the same thing in the past

As horrible as it sounds to defend as corrupt an individual as Trump, it is unfair to impeach Trump for something multiple democrats are themselves guilty of. At a Council on Foreign Relations conference in 2018, Joe Biden admitted to have threatened to withhold a billion-dollar loan to Ukraine until former Ukrainian President, Petro Poroshenko, fired a Ukrainian State Prosecutor who was investigating Joe Biden’s son, nearly the exact same corrupt act of political meddling that Trump now stands accused of. The State Prosecutor in question, Viktor Shokin, has since come forward and said that he had "been told to back off an investigation into the natural gas firm where Hunter Biden served on the board of directors" [1]. But while this may not have broken any laws, it remains a clear conflict of interest, and the clear pattern of Hunter Biden's business dealings seem to clearly follow is father's life in politics, a further conflict of interest that strongly implies corruption.

But this corruption is not limited to the Biden family, there are a multitude of similar cases where democrats are accusing Trump of something that democrats are in fact themselves guilty of, for example the deep connections between Kremlin-funded interests with John Podesta and the Clintons. The Clintons in particular enjoy closer questionable ties to Russia than Trump, and have been implicated in aiding a Russian company, Rosatom, in "a campaign of bribery, extortion, money laundering and racketeering to gain control over U.S. nuclear assets in the private sector" [2]. This case of corruption seems to have been known by the Obama administration who failed to do anything about it, implicating many democrats in corruption or complicity with it. Meanwhile Trump's approval rating has risen to the highest it has been all year amidst this impeachment inquiry, indicating public awareness of such blatant double standards is clearer to the public than democrats seem willing to believe.

theepochtimes.com/newly-published-ukrainian-prosecutors-sworn-affidavit-i-was-forced-out-in-2016-because-of-joe-biden_3098683.html cfr.org/event/foreign-affairs-issue-launch-former-vice-president-joe-biden pjmedia.com/trending/2017/03/29/russiagate-hillary-clinton-and-john-podestas-troubling-ties-to-russia [1] pjmedia.com/trending/former-ukraine-prosecutor-told-to-back-off-investigation-of-hunter-bidens-company thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived heavy.com/news/2019/09/joe-biden-ukraine [2] investors.com/politics/editorials/obama-administration-hillary-clinton-covered-up-their-deep-corrupt-ties-to-russia

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Nov 23
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
https://www.theepochtimes.com/newly-published-ukrainian-prosecutors-sworn-affidavit-i-was-forced-out-in-2016-because-of-joe-biden_3098683.html https://www.cfr.org/event/foreign-affairs-issue-launch-former-vice-president-joe-biden https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/03/29/russiagate-hillary-clinton-and-john-podestas-troubling-ties-to-russia/ [1] https://pjmedia.com/trending/former-ukraine-prosecutor-told-to-back-off-investigation-of-hunter-bidens-company/ https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived https://heavy.com/news/2019/09/joe-biden-ukraine/ [2] https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/obama-administration-hillary-clinton-covered-up-their-deep-corrupt-ties-to-russia/

No, Ukrainegate is just the next fake news narrative

A multitude of independent journalists, most of whom oppose Trump, have proven the mainstream media’s coverage of the Russiagate scandal to be biased reportage, that lacked evidence, and presented conspiracy theories as news. The establishment of a similar scandal narrative, so soon after Russiagate fell apart, should be questioned. Much of this seems due to a lack of journalistic integrity or intentional manipulation by various intelligence organisations, as there have been several pieces of evidence and leaks that reveal that US and British intelligence organisation’s where involved in many of the Russiagate allegations.

The whistleblower at the heart of this next evidence free scandal that looks set to dominate US politics for the foreseeable future, Ukrainegate, is widely considered to by a CIA agent, a significant detail considering Nanci Pelosi decided to proceed with impeachment based on this account. Now that the Mueller inquiry is over, this is the next Trump smear campaign from the intelligence community and the failed journalism of the mainstream media. This is being perpetrated to keep people distracted from the real issues, an effort to have Americans looking at a complete non-issue instead of real issues, such as global warming, historical new heights of wealth inequality, and the recent attempts by the US government to lie the country into a war with Iran.

qutnyti.wordpress.com/2019/08/03/was-the-uk-intelligence-aiding-the-attempted-coup-against-trump-through-the-russiagate-affair dailycaller.com/2019/09/26/report-whistleblower-cia-seconded-white-house consortiumnews.com/2019/07/29/russiagate-as-organized-distraction

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Oct 14
Created
Translate