Representative Mike Lawler, a New York Republican, wrote on X: "This is absurd on its face. The United States has not declared war since 1942 and has conducted over 125 different military actions since that time, including in Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Presidents of both parties have relied on Article II authority, as well as AUMFs [Authorizations for Use of Military Force], to conduct targeted strikes and have not been subject to impeachment. In 2011, Barack Obama conducted an 8 month campaign in Libya to topple Gaddafi."
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
Primary. Every. Single. One.
a P.E.S.O. for president Taco's followers, good pitch
One taco? That'll be 128 PESOs.
Edit: that's about 6€ or $7.50 USD. These must be LA tacos.
la tacos
Never had French tacos before, are we talking poutine french or France french?
Put him in a bigger peach this time, so he can't get out
Bigpeachment
Donnie and the giant peachment
Are they trying to avoid JP Mandel becoming president?
There is a new website tracking whether politicians will go on the record to be against bribery.
I wonder if they will note this?
Traitors, every last one
Why people keep thinking the democrats will ever be more than passive bystanders to corruption and greed. They benefit regardless who's in charge as long as it's not left of them
Here is the full list of Democrats that voted to table the articles of impeachment.
Find yours, call them, and let them know they've failed to represent the people interests.
Ro Khanna doing his standard move of cycling back and forth between pretending to be a progressive and just being utterly spineless.
I truly hope "refused to impeach President Trump" becomes a purity test in the next primary. That's a lot of incumbents to kick to the curb, but with this vote it's well warranted.
Thank you. One of my representatives, Gabe Vasquez, is on the list and I messaged him. Funny that he put out a press release condemning the actions of bombing Iran but doesn't want to support impeachment. What a turd.
And then send them out to pasture like Andrew Cuomo.
It can be done. Do it enough, and you'll have a party that actually represents the people.
Don’t do this. Just primary them.
Do both, so they know why they lost.
It's so other Democrats know why they lost. The message is for them but they won't get it until it starts happening.
But they impeached him before, so their stance is that he got better and is no longer a threat to democracy?
They just don't feel the need to hide anymore. Most of your "Democrats" are just Republicans with a different paint job.
They are just Republicans that aren't comfortable rounding up minorities into camps. They are cool if Republicans want to do it, but they are afraid of being associated with it for now
Also, the lobbies need their strawmen in both parties
Their stance is Trump came out of his two impeachments politically stronger than he went into them, and unless 14 GOP Senators decide to switch their allegiance all of a sudden the act of impeachment is practically useless.
Plus since the proceedings were guaranteed to fail (even setting aside the party votes, while Trump has committed many constitutional violations, this one is shared by several of his predecessors and was an especially stupid thing to hinge an impeachment vote on - doubly so because it's not technically a violation until 60 days have passed), all they'd accomplish is burning a substantial amount of political will (something the Democratic party is severely lacking in) to... accomplish nothing but making Donald even worse? He already attacks Democratic states that have shown relatively minor opposition; if their representatives supported impeachment then life could suddenly become a lot harder for their constituents. Unless you're an accelerationist it was a bad idea all around.
(I should note I don't support this rationale - cowardly appeasement has never worked - but I can understand it, at least in theory. I'm mostly pissed that they pulled this stunt on such a flimsy pretext when there were plenty of rock-solid justifications to base an impeachment on)
He needs to be impeached for his flagrant violations of the Posse Commitatus act, but that was more than a week ago, so nobody remembers.
They should have done it on day one and continued every day to explain to the public why it is necessary and how he is corrupt and dangerously incompetent if he remains.
Looks like there are 212 Democrat reps in the house, which puts it at a large majority which would rather “not cause a fuss” or whatever the fuck excuse they’re trying to bullshit this time.
Useless people. Worthless people.
It's not about not wanting to cause a fuss. It's just a losing impeachment that people don't want to attach their names to, probably the weakest attempt so far because so many Democrat presidents have acted in the same way. Precedent isn't nothing.
What the actual fuck
I mean, an Impeachment trial without any possibility of removal seems pretty pointless, yeah. It takes 67 Senators to remove. The DNC with caucus have 47. They probably don't even have enough votes to pass a simple majority purely symbolic impeachment, much less removal from office.
Cowards the lot of them. I'm sure as well having AOC at the forefront the majority of the useless Elissa Slotkin-style useless libs squashed this out of spite