Only if there was actual evidence of such a condition. Because Hillary lost does not qualify.
The FBI can not bring impeachment proceedings against a President. Which member of the U.S. House do you believe requested that the FBI begin investing impeachment probabilities?
The swamp was fighting back.
(post shortened)
“Since then”? Are you suggesting that the FBI started an investigation based on the hope that they may find something in the future? Isn’t it just a likely that someone in the FBI started this investigation in retaliation of Comey being fired?
The FBI has some questions that the FBI needs to answer.
Odd that the FBI (the very conservative, Republican-lead organization) didn’t start the inquires after Clinton lost, but rather only after credible evidence Trump broke several laws endangering the office and the nation.
So you’re saying the FBI did the correct, legal and constitutional thing by approaching the cabinet with their information and when the cabinet apparently refused then the FBI listened to them? That’s really your argument that the FBI is in the wrong? Really?
I guess the upside is you are very much convincing those of us who feel Trump should be removed from office that we’re doing the right thing and the arguments against us are not sound.
As long as it’s the FBI that needs to answer questions, and not Trump. Nothing he needs to answer for, amirite?
So… you see that as the ONLY thing behind the [del]disgust[/del] discontent some of us have with thump? All-right-y then! I see. Moving on.
(post shortened)
Go ahead, make your case to someone who could actually start impeachment proceedings. It’s been over two years, and you have failed to provided sound arguments so far. Keep up the good work.
That’s not what I said, but you would have no way of knowing that.
No, I’m suggesting they knew last May what the rest of us have learned since. (and probably more)
“Overthrow”, to me, has connotations of illegality to it.
There is nothing wrong with someone approaching the president’s cabinet and telling them that they think the Cabinet should oust the president (whoever it is) under the 25th amendment. That is the legal way to do it.
I see no problem in asking. Presumably the Cabinet members will ask why and what proof exists to move ahead with the removal. If there is no proof or good reason one would suppose the Cabinet members would tell whoever was asking to go pound sand because they will not remove the president.
If there was no good reason and the Cabinet was willing to do this anyway then I can only assume the president is so deep in a hole, that he/she is hated that much by his/her own Cabinet, that president is probably doomed one way or another anyway.
So there is really nothing wrong with asking (beyond the possible damage it might do to their career for trying).
Thank you, but the FBI, CIA, Justice Dept. seem to be doing just fine on their own what with the numerous guilty pleas and convictions during the still on-going investigation. Especially fine considering the obstacles placed before them, including interference by targets of the investigation and ludicrous conspiracy theories being promoted by unscrupulous media for their credulous audience. So getting back to your statements about the FBI, since you cut off and ignored this part of my post let’s try again:
Does this mean you’re giving up the claim the FBI did something wrong or illegal and were strictly motivated by revenge for Clinton? You’re not addressing it and leaving it to others to prove your assertions. I won’t post the question again and will take the hint and drop it if you have nothing else other than goal post moving.