| Lonely_Dolphin said: How is this undemocratic? I believe the point of democracy is to keep tyrants from staying in power. Putting the nation's figurehead on trial certainly wouldn't happen in North Korea or China. It's true that the trump hate has been so in our faces for so annoyingly long, but if he really has committed crimes (I've not been paying attention so idk) then he's simply gotta go. Unless you're saying it's for sure that Trump won't be removed from office therefore this whole thing is a pointless waste of time and resources, in which case yeah I agree with you. Eh what's so bad about being passed by other nations? Currently for those not at the top rung of society, it's still better here than most places in the world, and even after being surpassed, it'll still be decent.
That is some low ass faith in humanity lol, to say republicans would still support him even after committing crimes simply because they share the same meaningless label. Why are they the ones who decide anyway? Should be a courtroom like everyone else gets. |
To say that is to badly underestimate the single-mindedness of the evangelical bloc that is primarily in the southeastern United States. Polls repeatedly show that they would literally support him no matter what crimes he committed, and they would support him even if he ultimately crashed the economy. Their single-minded objective is the overturn of rulings like Roe v. Wade and Obergefell v. Hodges. They want Trump to pack the Supreme Court. One of the reason they were so furious with Clinton is that he "cheated" them out of an opportunity to pack the court in the 1990s on the heels of the Planned Parenthood of Southeast Pennsylvania v. Casey decision. There's also still residual anger over the failed SCOTUS nomination of Robert Bork, who was opposed to Roe. After he was defeated and Douglas Ginsburg withdrew due to a history of marijuana usage, that seat went to Anthony Kennedy, an overall conservative justice who would nevertheless go on to be a swing vote in a lot of court decisions the evangelicals hated. He upheld the right to abortion in the PP v. Casey ruling, for example, although he was part of the decision that created the "undue burden" standard. Had Bork been on that court instead of Kennedy, they could have overturned Roe. They've never quite gotten over that. That isn't some "low ass faith in humanity," that's a realistic view in this case.
The Constitution gives the House the sole right of impeachment, and the Senate the sole right to try federal officials, including the President, who have been impeached. That's why they are the ones who decide. One of Congress's key roles is oversight of the federal government. Congress can impeach members of the judiciary and executive branches, including the President, and expel their own members, but the President cannot fire members of Congress, nor can the Supreme Court order their removal from office.
