The secret plot to depose Trump

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Saturday, February 7, 2026 22:19
VIEWED: 36601
PAGE 8 of 49

Quote:

---

they just can't say it and still get reelected.- SECONDRATE

---

So, in other words ...

Trump is more popular than establishment Republicans with the Republican base AND with independent voters, AND ...

It IS a secret plot because "they just can't say it", AND ...

They, and you, have no problem with the deep state employing extra-legal means to get rid of an elected President, AND ...

Therefore they, and you, hate democracy and our democratic institutions because you're Ok with overturning the results if you don't like them.

Does that just about say it all?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

"Steele dossier was prepared in Britain"

Noose tightens around Steele, as US State Department exposes UK spy's "political ties"

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

they just can't say it and still get reelected.- SECONDRATE

---

So, in other words ...

Trump is more popular than establishment Republicans with the Republican base AND with independent voters, AND ...

It IS a secret plot because "they just can't say it", AND ...

They, and you, have no problem with the deep state employing extra-legal means to get rid of an elected President, AND ...

Therefore they, and you, hate democracy and our democratic institutions because you're Ok with overturning the results if you don't like them.

Does that just about say it all?

---

mmmmmm.
You missed "Democratic Republic" among the things he hates. Aka The Constitution. So the "extra-legal" likely should have been extra-Constitutional.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
"Steele dossier was prepared in Britain"

Noose tightens around Steele, as US State Department exposes UK spy's "political ties"

---

The first story thumbnail and headline seem to interchange Ukraine and Britain.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

they just can't say it and still get reelected.- SECONDRATE

---

So, in other words ...

Trump is more popular than establishment Republicans with the Republican base AND with independent voters, AND ...

It IS a secret plot because "they just can't say it", AND ...

They, and you, have no problem with the deep state employing extra-legal means to get rid of an elected President, AND ...

Therefore they, and you, hate democracy and our democratic institutions because you're Ok with overturning the results if you don't like them.

Does that just about say it all?

---

The Trump voters don't get a vote in the House of Representatives. Your romantic notion that we ever lived in a Democracy where the Trump voters decide impeachment is incorrect:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/05/congress-subpoena-fight-tr
ump-impeachment-mueller-john-roberts.html

The House, without calling a single witness or demanding a single document, could impeach the president based on the current record alone. There is little doubt that Volume II of the Mueller report, even as redacted, suffices to prove multiple acts of obstruction of justice. More than 800 former federal prosecutors — myself included — have signed on to a letter explaining how the Mueller report proves an indictable case of obstruction. Coupled with the allegations of complicity in campaign finance crimes against “Individual 1” in the Southern District of New York, as well as Trump’s resistance to House subpoenas — which was an impeachment count against President Richard Nixon — the current record is more than sufficient to draft a formidable bill of impeachment.

The House would then designate a subset of its members to serve as “managers” in the impeachment process. The managers are basically the president’s prosecutors. They present the evidence to the Senate, select the witnesses they wish to call, choose the documents they wish to submit, and make opening and final arguments in support of conviction.

Once the managers are chosen, the case would move to the Senate. And under the Senate rules that have governed all impeachment proceedings since 1986, there is a speedy and efficient vehicle for holding exactly the kind of hearings that House Democrats have been seeking.

Crucially, a Senate impeachment trial could not get mired in multiple layers of district court and appellate court litigation. Under Article I, Section 3, Clause 6 of the Constitution, “when the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” As the “Presiding Officer,” under Senate impeachment Rule V, the chief justice has the power “to make and issue … all orders, mandates, writs, and precepts authorized by these rules or by the Senate.” The chief justice likewise has full authority to “direct all the forms of proceedings while the Senate is sitting for the purpose of trying an impeachment, and all forms during the trial not otherwise specially provided for.” According to the Senate rules, it is the chief justice as presiding officer who gets to “rule on all questions of evidence including, but not limited to, questions of relevancy, materiality, and redundancy of evidence and incidental questions.” And while Rule VII permits a member of the Senate to demand a Senate vote on the chief’s rulings, it is difficult to imagine even Mitch McConnell seeking to overrule Chief Justice John Roberts. Indeed, no senator challenged a single ruling by Chief Justice William Rehnquist during the Bill Clinton impeachment trial.

Whatever then happens for any given witness or exhibit, the chief’s rulings are apt to be prompt and efficient. There would be no reams of legal briefing, no extended oral arguments, no endless appeals. The parties would cut right to the chase, and the substance of the Mueller report allegations — not to mention the role of Individual 1 in providing hush money on the eve of the 2016 election — would play out on live TV.

I'd love to see it happen. I'

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

they just can't say it and still get reelected.- SECONDRATE

---

So, in other words ...

Trump is more popular than establishment Republicans with the Republican base AND with independent voters, AND ...

It IS a secret plot because "they just can't say it", AND ...

They, and you, have no problem with the deep state employing extra-legal means to get rid of an elected President, AND ...

Therefore they, and you, hate democracy and our democratic institutions because you're Ok with overturning the results if you don't like them.

Does that just about say it all?

---

The Trump voters don't get a vote in the House of Representatives. Your romantic notion that we ever lived in a Democracy where the Trump voters decide impeachment is incorrect:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/05/congress-subpoena-fight-tr
ump-impeachment-mueller-john-roberts.html

The House, without calling a single witness or demanding a single document, could impeach the president based on the current record alone. There is little doubt that Volume II of the Mueller report, even as redacted, suffices to prove multiple acts of obstruction of justice. More than 800 former federal prosecutors — myself included — have signed on to a letter explaining how the Mueller report proves an indictable case of obstruction. Coupled with the allegations of complicity in campaign finance crimes against “Individual 1” in the Southern District of New York, as well as Trump’s resistance to House subpoenas — which was an impeachment count against President Richard Nixon — the current record is more than sufficient to draft a formidable bill of impeachment.

The House would then designate a subset of its members to serve as “managers” in the impeachment process. The managers are basically the president’s prosecutors. They present the evidence to the Senate, select the witnesses they wish to call, choose the documents they wish to submit, and make opening and final arguments in support of conviction.

Once the managers are chosen, the case would move to the Senate. And under the Senate rules that have governed all impeachment proceedings since 1986, there is a speedy and efficient vehicle for holding exactly the kind of hearings that House Democrats have been seeking.

Crucially, a Senate impeachment trial could not get mired in multiple layers of district court and appellate court litigation. Under Article I, Section 3, Clause 6 of the Constitution, “when the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” As the “Presiding Officer,” under Senate impeachment Rule V, the chief justice has the power “to make and issue … all orders, mandates, writs, and precepts authorized by these rules or by the Senate.” The chief justice likewise has full authority to “direct all the forms of proceedings while the Senate is sitting for the purpose of trying an impeachment, and all forms during the trial not otherwise specially provided for.” According to the Senate rules, it is the chief justice as presiding officer who gets to “rule on all questions of evidence including, but not limited to, questions of relevancy, materiality, and redundancy of evidence and incidental questions.” And while Rule VII permits a member of the Senate to demand a Senate vote on the chief’s rulings, it is difficult to imagine even Mitch McConnell seeking to overrule Chief Justice John Roberts. Indeed, no senator challenged a single ruling by Chief Justice William Rehnquist during the Bill Clinton impeachment trial.

Whatever then happens for any given witness or exhibit, the chief’s rulings are apt to be prompt and efficient. There would be no reams of legal briefing, no extended oral arguments, no endless appeals. The parties would cut right to the chase, and the substance of the Mueller report allegations — not to mention the role of Individual 1 in providing hush money on the eve of the 2016 election — would play out on live TV.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME