GwensBackOnHerBS
27409
615
27
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5849707-democrats-decline-trump-impeachment/
Apr 27, 2026 9:30 PM
GwensBackOnHerBS
27409
615
27
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5849707-democrats-decline-trump-impeachment/
newsguycraigevans
That's the wrong answer, bud.
2Soon4Baboon
I think the calculation is that if Trump loses the house and senate then he'll just be a lame duck. Then he will continue to hemorrhage poll numbers giving the dems an easier run in 28........ but ALSO this Jeffries assclown is AIPAC bought so he probably just wants to keep the genocide going in Palestine.
backrideup9
Why would it be, impeachment doesnt do shit. He could have 36 impeachments are still be in office. Priority should be to root around in the basement and see if they can dig up someone to throw his fat ass in prison.
SisyphusRollin
There are "leftists" here literally arguing that the virtue signaling of that is more important than stopping war.
ItsATrap
Then Jeffries isn't a high priority for re-election.
18booma
Can he be a high priority for getting primaried (assuming his seat is up for elections in these midterms)? Him and Chuck Schumer are more concerned with keeping Israel happy, than they are with winning elections or helping Americans.
ItsATrap
Jeffries is up because he's in the House, everyone in the House is up every 2 years every time, so Hakeem COULD be primaried.
Sadly, Schumer, who is significantly worse, isn't up in the senate until 2028.
DogGuyInCatWorld
Focus on the job at hand, blue wave comes first.
Oatmealman1
No, that's fine, impeachment isn't enough anyway. The top priority will have to be imprisoning trump and EVERY Republican traitor that supported him.
18booma
Yeah, but Jeffries' top priority isn't resisting Trump. All he does is mention abstract problems with no proposal for substantive policy. He's trying to co-opt Mamdani's affordability program without pursuing national-scale affordability policies, like universal healthcare for example.
KatInTheCorner
If he thinks Trump isn't a threat, that's just idiotic. Buuuut if this is him tactfully saying that if there is a majority we can just stonewall him until he dies because it is very clearly impending... It's still stupid and chicken shit, but at least I understand it a little more.
yamsonyamsonyams
Whaaaat a corporate democrat is delusional?
cabalin
It’s wishful thinking that Democrats can impeach AND CONVICT Trump. I’d rather see Democrats blocking everything he wants to do and overriding all his veto’s of bills to actually help the American people. That, and investigation of all Republican’s blatant corruption.
SecurityBadger
Good. They wasted two years last time with nothing to show for it. Spend their time attempting to build our gov't back into functioning institutions, and cut funding for his fascist schemes. Let the courts deal with him in retirement.
tzahtman
Fuuuuuck you Jeffries
sochilln
Exactly.
I was looking for this comment to either updoot or post.
ItsACrazyWorld
People need to stop thinking that mid terms are going to change anything. I get downvoted every fucking time I say that democrats are utterly worthless and arent going to do shit. Even if they have a super majority. This entire country is utter garbage. Look who we elected.. twice.. that tells you everything you need to know. People who vote republican arent going to change their votes. Ever. The electoral college isnt going anywhere. The only way to change anything is to burn it all down.
ImJustHereAtThisPoint
Are you surprised?
2015Chefj
No.
KingdomsCrown
https://media4.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1cW83cnp1OXN0aHkwNGs0dHUwcjB0Z3I0NXFmOHUzM2ViOTk4M2xwcCZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/Y8SqjWuohk8Rq/200w.webp
LordHosk
Jeffries refuses to do anything that will make waves or upset a single billionaire. He is a leader of the "reach out to the moderate republican" crowd that lost the last presidential election.
chufly
How well did impeachment work last time? Focus on stopping his shit. Give the magatards ammunition
joeyecho101
Look, I'm not a Trump supporter. But he's already been impeached twice. If the Dems try it again they'll just embarrass themselves.
INeedMoreGifMeMoreJustOneMore
Terrible headline, terrible communication. Yes, you'll never ACTUALLY be able to impeach him AND convict him, and yes, there are other more important things to tackle. But now he just sounds like he doesn't care about Trump's crimes, which I very much hope WASN'T HIS INTENTION!
AllTheGoodOnesWereGone
I mean, if you're going around saying that you're going to toss all of them in prison for the rest of their lives, then you guarantee they will do EVERYTHING they can to prevent the elections from happening.
GhostTater
The DNC playbook, and I am being 100% literal, says to never be the photo hung up in the locker room, meaning don't be the cause that the other side can coalesce its base around. And the DNC demonstrably does not learn from its failures. Hopefully it can learn from its victories, e.g. Mandami, but you'd have to believe that a morality more convincing than the desire to preserve heritage institutional power can prevail, so... Tough sell to those not interested in buying.
SisyphusRollin
Mandami won on the same day two centrist democrats won in other states by larger margins. "Learn from its victories" you mean "cater to what I know only" its fucking so insane to see this repeated bullshit. NEOLIBERAL BIDEN was just in office and you guys are like "tehy can't win" jesus christ.
GhostTater
I've managed several State and National candidacies and the data collected by the DNC itself shows that its policy of backing farther right "centrists" loses more votes from the most likely Dem voters than it gains from all other categories. The advisors they send to squeeze us by the coin-purse and take over our campaigns KNOW this..."but it will work HERE, this time."
SisyphusRollin
Yes, I'll trust random guy making claims that go against everything we've witnessed in real time. It literally JUST WORKED we JUST HAD THE PRESIDENCY and shit, you guys with the "they can't win" have to pretend Biden doesn't exist, pretend Mamdani could win in say AZ etc. You guys are just unaware of basics and then you go out and lie to spread misinformation.
Arcadian1
So Hillary.
TheobromineAddict
Please work on something you can actually accomplish.
TrueNorthernLights
Maybe they're just taking a page from the Republicunts and straight up lying.
albakSPrince
Unless the Democrats can get a super majority, a successful impeachment is a long shot. They still have party members who are now republican stooges (fetterman) and they should put all their time into "clawing back" all the money spent and profits made from fraud and corruption. Reinstate all the regulations protecting water air and public lands. Secure SS, medicare and the VA.
thegoodowl
FoxPesdassi
Even if they managed to impeach AND convict, it's not like President Vance would be an improvement. Better to leave fat, disgusting Jabba on the throne, showing all the MAGAts the truth about what he's been all along, than to let Bib Fortuna take over and be just as evil but *competent* about it.
LaffertyDanie1
It's unfortunate but this is pragmatic, with no chance of a Senate conviction it's senseless to pursue and burn legislative time and political capital.
KyleZombie
We need to primary this traitorous fuck.
ickyickywoopwoo
Is he the most useless house majority leader of all time.
GratuaCuun
If they don't take the senate (and that's highly unlikely) impeachment is a waste of time
Better to hamstring the fucker with investigations and shit
11Weasel11
Yeah, it's not just a senate majority. You need 2/3 to convict. Never gonna happen, better things to investigate and spend resources on.
StOfKillers
But none of those investigations will mount to anything either. You think the justice department will do anything? Or, let me guess, once he’s not president they’ll get him - oh wait…
Oatmealman1
There's a better word that starts with H that would be the perfect solution to all of the traitorous nazis.
RobertAG25772
They’ll do that other thing. But our chances of taking the Senate (not of getting to 67) get better day by day. The worse he makes things now, the better we’ll be positioned to make things later. Let’s not forget that we’d never have Obamacare w/o Bush burying himself in the godawful Iraq war. Remember, every action brings an equal and opposite reaction.
iquestionthepinappleeveryday
Hmmmm… I don’t know - that had a lot more to do with identity politics than a widespread hatred of the Iraq war.
SometimesOthertimesAnytime
I believe what they are saying is that the Iraq War eventually cost the Republicans the presidency and congress, thus making the ACA possible.
eion85
Impeachment usually involves hearings and investigations too.
GratuaCuun
And consumes resources and efforts that could be better spent making his life hell - what's the point of pursuing a foregone conclusion of a failed conviction,
eion85
The impeachments weren't just about conviction. They forced a public accounting, made Republicans choose sides, & clearly got under Trump's skin enough that he's spent years trying to erase them. "Foregone conclusion" ignores the political and historical cost they imposed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_expungements_of_the_impeachments_of_Donald_Trump
eion85
Blocked. Guess he forgot Trump lost in 2020 after he made his parting shot.
wmzer0mw1
Trump lost because of how he handled covid. Most americans really didnt give a shit about the impeachement. In fact. Most americans, who dont already vote left, think it was a leftist conspiracy
GratuaCuun
Yes, I remember well how much that messaging mattered when he got elected again https://media1.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1MnpjMmJ2bG00aGRvNnEzZzEwcWF5YnNlb3prdmNuZDU5NnRwcmF2ZiZlcD12MV9naWZzX3RyZW5kaW5nJmN0PWc/pqMa2mIr8quEZgPgqi/200w.webp
KuldFyt
Impeachment makes it harder for a court to block a congressional investigation, and a democratic Congress would still be up against a judicial branch that has been thoroughly stacked by Trump. It's likely to be the most resource-efficient way to make subpoenas stick.
eion85
If he hadn't said "of course not" when asked the question and instead went into the next part of his response “I’ve made clear from the very beginning that our top priority is going to be to drive down the high cost of living," & continued with " and if Donald Trump is believed to be guilty of impeachable crimes that have driven up the cost of living I absolutely will consider Impeachment as an option," is be willing to blame a corporate media rag like the Hill for this.
But he didn't do that.
Shaows
They need to win the Senate majority too, right?
unluckyandbored
They need to win EVERY SINGLE SENATE SEAT that's currently up for grabs to have any hope of a conviction. There is a 0% chance that will happen. So there is a 0% chance a Trump impeachment will lead to a removal from office. Even if they do impeach him in the house, it would be a largely performative gesture. They can't remove him. They know it, and the GOP knows it.
frozenlake247
Then say that. “Impeachment wouldn’t be a top priority because it won’t make any real difference without enough folks in the senate willing to convict”.
Rockafella83
Their jobs is to shake the tree so bad they’ll regret every dollar they made getting rich off this presidency. I will run committee after committee until every last one of either resign or force to do so.
AOC will be terrific can’t wait to see it happen for once c-span will be quite entertaining. Who’s the apprentice now ?!
IhopeUgetwhatUvoted4
The US needs a major over haul, one person isn't the problem.
gobblinal
50% of the Peoples' representatives in the House. 2/3 of the State representatives in the Senate. Those are f'g backwards if you ask me. The Senate has WAY more power than it should have for being such a bass-ackwards lopsided system of representation.
dracklen
That was unfortunately always the point. The union was only agreed to on the principle that the less populated states still got an equal share in control of key parts of government :(.
gobblinal
I agree that the states should all have an equal voice in the government, but the CONTROL comes from the people. And I'm sorry if more people across the country are not fascists, it doesn't give your podunk little state the power to override that and put a fascist President in charge.
But then again, the states have NEVER been "united". It's 50(-ish) separate fiefdoms all vying for the most control over everyone else.
TheobromineAddict
Not just a majority...a supermajority. 2/3.
Whatdoyousaytoanicecupoftea
Thats when they wear their underpants over their trousers
emu314159127001
Can't convict without the Senate. Waste of time if you don't get those votes
XXXSpork
67 votes in the senate are required to remove
SometimesOthertimesAnytime
Additionally, the last time democrats held a 2/3 majority was in 1967. The last time they held a 60-person majority was in 2010.
mychesthairlookslikeacatsass
Not just that, they need JD Vance to sign off if he is t
mikeatike
He is just the tiebreaker vote. But a 2/3 is just impossible right now.
iquestionthepinappleeveryday
Yes - and that’s why what he says is smart
Skywatcher16
no, its why its reasonable. telling you base that their wants arent your priority is the OPPOSITE of smart. even if its the truth.
Skywatcher16
you dont answer, or pivot to something else the base also wants. only an idiot says "im not doing what you want. please vote for me. "
Meowsma
You misspelled "disqualifying for the leader of the opposition party".
keebs63
Yes, I too support my elected representatives wasting their time and effort on an entirely pointless charade that has been shown to backfire every time it's been tried before. /s
Meowsma
Better than tacitly endorsing the lawless behavior of this administration, like Jeffries wants. The only way we can possibly dig ourselves out of this constitutional shitshow is to hold accountable, and it's Congress's *job* to do that for the Executive and Judicial branches via impeachment. I don't pretend that Trump, or even anyone, will be removed, but the opposition HAS to show some kind of backbone here, and hey, if Trump's legacy is that he was impeached eighteen times, that's a bonus.
Meowsma
I want less than nothing to do with any representative who isn't raising hell and calling for justice to be served on behalf of the American people in any way possible.
GwensBackOnHerBS
A conviction in the senate requires a 2/3 vote.
yeahhedugit
Do it anyway. Might get lucky.
TheOldSchoolisBack
A simple majority would allow the Dems to set the rules of the trial. Part of how the GOP defused the first impeach,ent was by not allowing witnesses.
Still unlikely to convict, but you can shine a light on how bad things are.
Superchao
I get the frustration, but I think I agree with Jeffries. An impeachment would be purely theatrical unless they also have the Senate. He's been impeached twice. It didn't do shit.
GwensBackOnHerBS
You're not wrong, but like... messaging.
TsukariYoshi
Most of politics is purely theatrical. I fucking hate when someone dismisses something as just theatrical - how the fuck do you think you get public support on your side without shedding light on the things you want to deal with?
shitheadtookmyname
If they don't do it, it's just going to continue to feel like the Democrats don't give a f*** what's going on?
Revnis
That's the issue on democratic voters, if they do impeach him yet again it's why the fuck isn't he removed so dems aren't doing enough, and if they don't impeach him it's why the fuck dems aren't doing enough. However what the should do if they retake both chambers is put a screaching halt to all that bullshit.
shitheadtookmyname
We know it's Republicans if the impeachment happens. We're all pissed off they aren't trying ANYTHING
Except give Israel money for genocides
ReverseSyzygy
yes/no.
In a sense theatrical, since conviction won't happen. But it will be public, and would force GOP to acquit him (again.) This could be ammo for 2028. "This is the GOP. This is who they are. They show you over and over."
crazyspelling
I'm tired of the Dems doing stuff just so they can run on it later. I feel like 26 years of that is how we got in this mess to begin with. Why bother solving a popular problem when you can fundraise on it?
shitheadtookmyname
Not just that, but why would I vote for Democrats if they won't even try to fight? They just seem like a bunch of cucks who roll over
HIVp0sit1ve69
That's a thing. They are proud of the asshats they have become.
TheWombatStrikesAgain
I mean, they're also protecting child rapists, and everyone knows that too. For a lot of voters there is no bottom.
Superchao
I think that's my problem with it. It would literally just be to score political points. It would not help John Q Public. If anyone doesn't know what kind of people the GOP are, they have to be blind by this point. If you needed to demonstrate it, acquitting the president isn't even in the top 10 of horrible things they've done.
GratuaCuun
And bigly - with a full 60+ majority to pass anything
You've got a better chance of Fetterman being a decent human being
Ac1dBurn72
Have we tried cognitive re-calibration? Just thinking out loud.
eion85
Or enough of a majority to eliminate the Filibuster through Senate rules, which doesn't take much of a majority.
eion85
Blocked, but the Democrats already eliminated the Filibuster on nominations in 2013.
And they tried as recently as 2022 to impose a talking filibuster, which was only stopped by those traitors Manchin and Sinema.
GratuaCuun
No way the dems would have the balls to kill the filibuster
fdt69
The Constitution specifies 2/3rds concurrence for conviction in the Senate. The filibuster is something else entirely and defined only by Senate rules. And, if memory serves, arose from opposition to the burgeoning civil rights movement of the early 20th century. So the Senate could change the filibuster but could not change the rules for impeachment without a constitutional amendment.
emu314159127001
The 60 vote cloture (end debate and force a vote) rule goes back to 1806, but you could filibuster by literally taking the floor and continuously talking, without breaks or sitting down. In the 70s they decided to forego the literal requirement and make the 60 vote thing default except for something called "reconciliation," and more recently appointment confirmation. You can still old school filibuster by yourself if you want.
None of this is in the constitution and can be changed any time.
eion85
The person I was responding to was discussing how to pass legislation, which would still require a 2/3rds vote to override a veto.
The Filibuster in the US Senate goes all the way back to its first session.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate
fdt69
My memory was faulty, then, and I stand corrected. I conflated articles I’ve seen such as https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/aug/04/history-filibuster-jim-crow-relic/ with origin.
SometimesOthertimesAnytime
I hate it, but I kind of get it. Since it will take a 2/3 majority for removal, the impeachment will just be for show because they won't have the votes to remove him. And since he has been impeached already, it isn't going to matter to him any.
eion85
I think if the impeachments didn't frustrate and annoy Trump he wouldn't have been trying to get them voided, and wouldn't have pushed to impeach Biden so much.
GratuaCuun
Not to mention that it would waste time - resources - and media attention that would allow Trump to do more shit while using the dems efforts as cover
StOfKillers
So, what do they do for 2 years then? If it’s not worth impeaching him then it’s not worth trying to pass legislation that’ll never overcome a veto too.
gobblinal
I get how doing something that has no hope of success isn't any fun, but for f's sake, the Dems better do SOMETHING if they ever want to be on a ballot again. Right now, the GoP are far more visible than the Dems are and people don't vote for people that do nothing.
PineappleLoopsBroether
I get it too, but I’m unimpressed by our side’s complacent representation.
SirDucken
Twice
mksu
Impeach Vance and Rubio too.
StOfKillers
This. You’ll never get legislation passed while he’s president because you won’t have that kind of majority. Spend two years impeaching fucking everyone.
frozenlake247
Agreed, but…
The issue as I see it is the poor communication and focus on dismissing the idea rather than stating why it isn’t worth pursuing or, better yet, talking about things that will be done as soon as they have a the numbers.
Dismissing seemingly obvious steps without explanation or clear alternative plans is dispiriting and fuels the opposition.
These guys look more like complacent roadblocks than opposition leaders.
NeverTrustThisNewInternetThingy
Vote to get the 2/3 then!
unluckyandbored
In order to do that, the Democrats have to hold every single seat they currently have, and flip every GOP seat currently up for re-election.
NeverTrustThisNewInternetThingy
It's not the Democrats that have to do shit, it's the people that want the freedom of America, authoritarianism is the opposite of land of the free, so vote as your live depends on it, it literally does!!! (Get your point though;))
JStengah
I wouldn't mind that if they had showed any indication at all they would do other things to oppose him. Instead their plan has been to do nothing and hope people are mad enough at Trump to give them a majority at the midterms. Then, if they get a majority, their plan not to constantly go after Trump, but to pass things that Trump will just take credit for. They're going to continue to act like he's just a president they disagree with rather than an existential threat to our democracy.
datphone777365
Or is accelerationism betting on their base staying withem while temporarily farming angry rightwingers...
Its spicy, but i mean it is working to an extent... But is it planned or dumb luck.
SisyphusRollin
Dude, why do you simp for the right wing and shit? This is just absolutely a bunch of fucking lying nonsense. "do nothing" I'll ask you a simple question, where is the national guard in CA. Whats going on with the deportations and the courts, whats going on with the DHS? Pay the fuck attention and stop playing into the rights hands by literally parroting their messaging of the left.
KyleZombie
Dude, why do YOU simp for the right wing?
SisyphusRollin
Lol.
KyleZombie
You sound MAGA as fuck, bro.
SisyphusRollin
Lol. You guys are so fucking confused on reality.
SisyphusRollin
I figured you out! You're in a cult so anyone not in your cult is in your "enemy" cult. That makes sense. Why do you hate Bernie Sanders? Tell me why you think Bernie Sanders is now a NeolIberal plant?
SisyphusRollin
I'm MAGA by promoting how much I loved Biden being the most progressive POTUS in my lifetime. I'm maga by supporting passing progressive legislation. Lol. I'm MAGA because I pay attention and know things like how the Dems are fighting back and how they don't have control of either house. I'm MAGA because I'm NOT in the cult on the left. Oh shit, thats it! THAT IT
JStengah
I'm not the one that's simping and needs to start paying attention. Every action and opposition that's slowed down Trump so far has come from Dems outside of Congress. The Dems leading congress have explicitly said their plan is to lie low and wait for midterms rather than do what they could to throw obstructions in his way.
SisyphusRollin
So you're a right wing troll. How sad. Making shit up like this, do you get a lot of leftists to believe you?
JStengah
KyleZombie
Arguing against impeachment is the most MAGA thing you can do, pedophile.
Imademyselfsquirtle
Impeachments mean jack shit. They are just words.
KyleZombie
Doing nothing at all means even less. Now stop talking.
datphone777365
The irony in this is.... Trumpian in scale...
KyleZombie
You don't know what irony means.
datphone777365
The irony if that post...
https://media1.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1Z2Q0ZGRtaHZzc3JoMXYzeWFkZDFnMjhlamRyZ2JoYzBwd2Z1cDRlaSZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/Vsl4fGedmYFRC/200w.webp
Imademyselfsquirtle
You wanna talk about doing something? Both political parties need to remove him from office. End.
KyleZombie
I think you should do something, like graduate from high school.
KyleZombie
They have a name for that. It's called... wait for it... IMPEACHMENT.
KyleZombie
What do you think it's called when a president is removed from office?
TheNoirAntagonist
So what I am hearing is, do nothing because repeated examples of disciplinary efforts mean nothing if you are rich and powerful enough.
If a person I doing fucked up shit you call them out or you start investigative probes looking at everything they are doing to charge them or their cabinet of doing.
I want the record to show that every effort was attempted to unseat persons and organizations responsible for the injustices done to these people whose civil liberties have been infringed upon.
freshthrowaway1138
"do nothing"
This level of ignorance is why Democracy, and voter like you, is just so difficult to defend. It's like you think there is only one tool that can be used to hold bad actors to account. You've learned the "impeach" buzzword and think it's the only solution- even if it's been shown to waste resources and time that could be spent on more effective actions.
You want to ACT like something is being done, because you don't know about anything else that actually could be done.
TheNoirAntagonist
I understand fully the amount of time hearings and investigation pull from legislative time in impeachment cases.
But I also understand that most civil and criminal court hearings that press felony accounts or sue for damages are often not public.
These efforts that should be commended also never show the people what leverages of power are being used on their account. Impeachment is a public record of wrongdoing levied against a member of the government. Because of the attention span of 1/2
TheNoirAntagonist
Of the public with every new flashbang the current administration has been hurling every couple of weeks. There needs to be a public address of how irregular these actions are and how concerning they can be and what methods of recourse can be applied in counteraction.
It also provides legal groundwork against federal agencies used as secret police to round up without trial, warrant, or access to legal representation. Legal framework to then sue and provide judicial controls on federal agencies
freshthrowaway1138
I'll combine all your comments into this thread.
While I read through your comments I see a trend that you want to pursue a set of actions because of how it "should work". You want to follow precise actions as defined because it should be what we do. Unfortunately, that's not how the real world works. Not all actions work. Think of it like going after Al Capone. He was a gangster. He should have been prosecuted for murder, violence, and all the rest. He wasn't. The Gov tried but it just didn't/
KyleZombie
You have NO FUCKING IDEAS of your own so what the FUCK are you criticizing??
freshthrowaway1138
I know what has been done and what didn't fix the problem. If I go to a mechanic to fix my car, I don't tell him to keep trying to fix the part that he's already replaced. We've already had multiple impeachments of Trump. It accomplished nothing. So why keep doing it?
The reality is that no, I don't know all the options available; but at least I'm not trying to force those in office to keep playing the same game. To stop the GOP we need to be smarter than them.
KyleZombie
We do it because we hold presidents accountable for their crimes against their country. You want to let him get away with everything. Fuck all that.
KyleZombie
So what COULD be done instead? You failed to mention a single thing...
freshthrowaway1138
Here's the thing: I'm not an expert, so I don't know all the options available. Let me put it this way, I know how to fix certain things. If someone has something that doesn't work, I don't ask them what steps they want me to take to fix it, I ask what outcome they want. They come to me for tech expertise. Being an elected representative is a job that requires expertise and has access to folks with expertise. So I want them to stop the President's actions. I don't know what techniques to use.
KyleZombie
If you don't even know what the options are then kindly shut the fuck up, you MAGA simp.
TheNoirAntagonist
I'm not saying it's the only solution but from the framework of the constitution is the primary means to try members of the government for high crimes and treason. Infringement of the constitution by denying the rights it affords should require an immediate response by the means the constitution applies.
Other legal methods for punishment or account should be applied but if literally infringement on the constitution is not addressed by impeachment than what is the point of it. 1/2
TheNoirAntagonist
Why follow any laws if we don't care about the groundwork of our legal framework.
I once again don't think it should be the on means but to go well a secret police state is breaching the 1st 4th 5th 6th 14th amendment we shouldn't apply methods laid down in article 2 second 4 of the constitution because we don't have the votes so I guess we should give up on that one specific angle of approach feels like a defeatest attitude.
I want presidence for the US people to sue senators and 2/3
TheNoirAntagonist
The only means* correction to line 3 above.
The bottom line is I want presidence to, in the case provable infringement of constitution rights, where indictments of felonies are leveraged, for acts committed by members of the government in full view of and without recourse from sitting members of the government those peoples whose right have been infringed upon should be able to sue any member that knowingly impeded justice and punishment of members of the government for these injustices.