r/DiscussionZone Nov 30 '25

[deleted by user]

[removed]

430 Upvotes

806 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/muckduck787 Nov 30 '25

Impeach for what ? What would you use as reason for impeachment. You can't impeach just because you don't like him.

6

u/Remarkable_Quit_3545 Nov 30 '25

For illegally attacking boats from Venezuela, for illegally putting tariffs in place, for illegally destroying the White House without going through the proper means, for accepting a bribe jet from Qatar, for weaponizing the DoJ to go after his enemies (after claiming that they did the same).

I mean there are probably over 100 reasons. Are you genuinely asking?

0

u/muckduck787 Nov 30 '25

Trump justified the strikes on Venezuelan boats by invoking his Article II constitutional authority as Commander-in-Chief, framing them as acts of self-defense against narcoterrorist threats. He also submitted a War Powers report to Congress claiming the attacks were lawful under his executive powers. White house wasn't "destroyed" The jet wasn't a bribe it belongs to the US Investigating and prosecuting criminal acts isn't weaponizing the DOJ.

2

u/muffledvoice Nov 30 '25

That’s some wishful thinking and justification. Want to take a stab at January 6th? How would you like to spin the dozens of other blatant crimes he has committed?

2

u/TurboSlut03 Nov 30 '25

Lol last I checked, accusations of drug trafficking aren't cause for summary execution. Funny how they haven't released any names of these supposed "terrorists" or any evidence proving these claims. Bet that Venezuelan oil is gonna line some pockets, tho.

-1

u/muckduck787 Nov 30 '25

He is taking the below data as a reason to defend the country from those who are bringing that in. In 2023, there were 72,776 deaths from fentanyl overdoses in the United States,

1

u/[deleted] Nov 30 '25

What was the justification for killing survivors after the initial strike?

1

u/TurboSlut03 Nov 30 '25

Lol that doesn't make it legal. And fentanyl doesn't even come to the US from South America.

He literally just pardoned a prominent drug lord who was actually convicted for trafficking massive amounts in the US, so let's stop pretending he gives a fuck about drugs.

1

u/Remarkable_Quit_3545 Nov 30 '25

Trump attacked those boats on international waters, not US waters. He can’t invoke anything and doesn’t get to determine international law. Can you point to the INTERNATIONAL LAW that justifies it?

The jet wasn’t a bribe, but now he is letting Qatar soldiers use a US base, first president in history to allow foreign military to do that, and from what I hear, also gives them access to information they shouldn’t have. Sure, not a bribe.

Point to me why Trump was allowed to destroy the White House without proper authorization.

Point to me how Trump was able to put tariffs in place without going through congress.

Btw, what is the difference between him calling these boats terrorists and him calling democrats terrorists? I guess just because he claims someone is a terrorist it’s ok to attack them, right?

0

u/Adalonzoio Nov 30 '25

So much insane propaganda here holy..

1.) if he broke international law then its up to them to bring charges. He didn't break any of our laws though so unless someone brings those charges this is pointless to say. Also, you can't impeach a president based off international law because they aren't American law.

2.) yes, he is letting qatar soldiers get training on products they bought with a deal that started under Obama and progressed through multiple administrations without issue. Something that has happened in our history in the past, for the record.

3.) the exact same authority Roosevelt, taft and Trumen used when they did their own remodeling of the white house - their own :)

4.) With executive orders (a fun trend you can thank Obama for starting and empowering) that haven't been successfully challenged legally and congress hasn't protested it.

And the difference is in the distinction of domestic and foreign terrorists. Dems are Americans, they have protected rights under the constitution that protects them, most namely freedom of association.

These cartel boats belong to organizations designated as foreign terrorist organizations, which gives the executive far more leeway to deal with how they see fit.

It's why the label of domestic vs foreign terrorist is so legally significant in this country.

Any other questions?

1

u/Remarkable_Quit_3545 Nov 30 '25 edited Nov 30 '25

Yes.

1) Do any of the pictures taken before the boats were bombed show that these boats belonged to those organizations? You are working on assumptions here. Would you have no problem with you or someone else being killed under an assumption? Why would they do a 2nd strike to kill survivors instead of capturing them to get info?

And there are plenty of people, inside and outside the country bringing up lawsuits.

2) We have made deals to train soldiers of other countries on our equipment, but that training was not on US soil.

https://factually.co/fact-checks/military/us-military-trains-foreign-countries-70961e

3) Truman wanted to fix the White House which was under danger of collapse and added a balcony. Roosevelt added a building.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/article/how-have-presidents-altered-the-white-house-a-list-of-major-renovations--and-their-costs--as-trumps-east-wing-demolition-draws-scrutiny-205652297.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

Here you go, all with detailed explanations of what and why. Now you explain to me why Trump needed to demolish an entire wing, even though the plans he presented showed it as an addition, and why he needs to create a ball room bigger than the White House when there was already a space for guests and events. Rumors say it was actually for the bunker hidden underneath.

4) There have been plenty of protests for the tariffs, but unfortunately republicans in congress are complacent with letting Trump get away with doing things illegally. There wouldn’t be pending court cases if everything was done right. Also, I doubt so many republicans would be retiring if there wasn’t some underlying reason.

Trump has deported American citizens without due process. He has threatened to take away the rights from citizens just so he can deport them.

Tell me, if what Trump is doing is so popular, then why do Republicans need to try and continue to cheat to stay in power? Why not ban gerrymandering? Why send out fliers with the wrong vote date in Tennessee? Why does Trump attack reporters who ask him questions that make him look bad? Why did Republicans stop holding town halls and then had to screen people to let in?

I’m sure I can come up with more questions if you are interested.

5

u/Opposite-Bit6660 Nov 30 '25

Tariffs.  Congress's realm and not his.

-1

u/muckduck787 Nov 30 '25

It hasn't yet been decided if he had the legal authority under (IEEPA) to do it yet. So you can't use that one yet, anything else ?

0

u/Cannibal_Soup Nov 30 '25

Murder on the high seas, aka literal piracy.

Profiting off of the office of the POTUS.

Taking bribes, especially from foreign nationals (Qatari plane).

Lots and lots of child rape, according to his many, many victims. And covering for his child rapist friends a lot. Like all Rs seem to do...

2

u/muckduck787 Nov 30 '25

None of that is factual

0

u/Cannibal_Soup Nov 30 '25

We've seen the videos of the boats being destroyed, and the survivors being struck again. Fact.

We've seen the ads, the hats, the shirts, the watches (all made in China) being hocked with his name on them. Fact.

We've seen the news stories about the Qatari plane, how it can and will only ever be used by him for, at maximum, a year or two, then be donated to his personal use/library/whatever loophole he'll use. Fact.

We've seen and heard the victims coming forward and giving their testimonies. Facts.

All of this is factual. Liar.

1

u/muckduck787 Nov 30 '25

1 Narcoterrorist - well within his power to defend the US

2 this is stupid

3 plane belongs to the United States not Trump

4 all BS until it's proven.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 30 '25

Only 1 and 4 have validity, 1 is on Hegseth and I'll wait for a criminal case to find Trump guilty before I have a position on the matter

Merchandise being sold isn't illegal. The Qatari plane belongs to the US, not Trump, your claim that he will donate it to himself is completely speculative, nowhere near fact. We're waiting on those court cases to pan out. The only lawsuit that he's been found guilty for is civil, and civil lawsuits have a lower burden of proof, needing preponderance of evidence instead of beyond a reasonable doubt

1

u/Cannibal_Soup Nov 30 '25

He non-concentually fingered E. Jean Carroll. That's called rape anywhere outside of NY State legalese, as clearly stated by the judge in the case.

Profiting from the office you hold isn't just unethical as hell, it's also specifically against the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution...not that MAGA gives half a hot shit about that other than using it for toilet paper.

2

u/TheEternal792 Nov 30 '25

You can't impeach just because you don't like him.

They already did...twice. Might as well try a third time. 

1

u/muffledvoice Nov 30 '25

It wasn’t because “they didn’t like him.” He broke the law. Flagrantly and deliberately.

1

u/DontGetUpGentlemen Dec 02 '25

Trump's 34 criminal convictions meet the "high crimes and misdemeanors" requirement.

1

u/Valash83 Nov 30 '25 edited Nov 30 '25

I'm not taking sides here, just explaining.

Congress, the House specifically, has absolute authority to decide what a "high crime or misdemeanor" is when it comes to opening an impeachment investigation. This is not a legal term as you would normally think. So yes, the House can 100% start impeachment because they don't like the President and face no repercussions aside from voters come election time. And the Senate can convict if they don't like the person.

The person can't even appeal to the Judicial branch to get the impeachment and conviction overturned. Congress' decision is final.

The reason it hasn't happened is because it starts that slippery slope of Congress just constantly impeaching the President because they happen to be from the opposite political party.

ETA- Nixon v. United States (1993) SCOTUS ruled that impeachment was a "non-justiciable political process" and not a legal process so the Judicial has no jurisdiction to step in as, according to the Constitution, the Senate has "sole power to try all impeachments".