this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2025
1125 points (97.2% liked)

People Twitter

7516 readers
229 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Archived Post

https://archive.ph/vzrga

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BubbaGumpsBackLumps@lemmy.world 25 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Yeah lets impeach the already twice impeached president, surely third times the charm... right guys ?

/s

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Derpenheim@lemmy.zip 24 points 1 week ago

Only impeachment that will matter is a vigilante with better aim

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

In 2001 when The US authorized use of force on Al-Qaeda that, along with The 1973 war powers resolution gave the president (as in the position of president, not just Bush) unlimited ability to bomb anyone loosely associated with Al-Qaeda in perpetuity.

It's what allowed Bush, then Obama, then Trump, and then Biden, and now Trump again, to use the military as they see fit for performing military operations against basically any state and group in the middle east.

This is sadly likely the least impeachable thing he's done in office.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] iamjackflack@lemm.ee 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ArchmageAzor@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Oop, that's another impeachable offense in the pile.

[–] LadyButterfly@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Yep just add it to the list

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 week ago

I see two outcomes:

  • Congress introduces articles
  • Impeached, but fails ratification in senate

or

  • Congress introduces articles
  • Some terrible tragedy befalls us or Israel
  • Articles fail and congress backs the war full-throated

There is no version of this that ends in removal, and even impeachment wouldn't be anything more than performative outrage.

The majority of sitting representatives have been waiting for an acceptable excuse to bomb Iran for decades. The only objection any of them have is doing so without manufacturing consent from voters first, but we've already seen how this plays out with Afghanistan. They'll drum up dubious evidence of WMD's and launch their entry, and then spend 20 years trying to 'get out' while securing Iran's material resources on the way.

The only difference this time is that Iran has almost 5x the population and 100x the GDP of Afghanistan in 2001, plus an actual organized military base with proper advanced weapons manufacturing. There's a reason we've waited this long to actually do this, and it isn't because we were busy doing other things. It's because this isn't a war we can win without pulling everyone else into it (or at the very least without isolating them from global trading partners).

It's not a morbid joke to call this a WWIII softlaunch.

[–] PunkRockSportsFan@fanaticus.social 18 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The corruption of our nation is absolute.

The president is a Nazi.

Thr people working for him are Nazis.

They are carrying out a Nazi agenda.

They are illegally starting wars illegally kidnapping Americans and illegally using our own armed forces against us.

The time for resistance is passed.

It’s time for survival.

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No. No this is about the time for resistance. We shouldn't just skip that one

[–] witten@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Exactly. I'm so tired of this doomer "we've tried nothing and it hasn't worked" stance on the Trump regime. RESIST, people!

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

To be fair, we've tried a lot of things. Compliance, assistance, book licking, collaborating....

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Pretty sure it's time for FOOTBALL !!!! amirite

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Sorry, you can only be impeached for getting a beej (although that was creepy af from an intern) or wearing a tan suit.

Starting wars just won't do it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Isn't the president allowed 90 days before congress is required?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] kokesh@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (3 children)

He can rape 5 year old on a press conference and won't be impeached.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 week ago

Lol, no it isn't. Ever since Cold War times, the law has been that the president can not only launch missiles, but even deploy troops on the ground, without congressional approval. There's a limit on how long the troops can be deployed, iirc, but once you've started a ground invasion it's a bit late.

Obviously it's unconstitutional, but there's no legal precedent that would say so. If you think this is the first time this has happened, you really need to learn more about history. The US never formally declared war on Vietnam, for example.

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Can we impeach him out of a cannon?

Into the sun?

[–] Death_Equity@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (6 children)

That would take too much energy, it would be simpler to send him into a geostationary orbit.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] GhostedIC@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ah yes, I remember Obama getting impeached for bombing Syria.

And for that matter, Trump getting impeached for killing Soleimani, the leader of Iran, while he was in Iraq.

[–] tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 week ago

Soleimani was the commander of the Quds Force, a division of the Iranian military and high-ranking official but he wasn't the leader of Iran.

[–] cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

i hate the fucking united states

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] burgerpocalyse@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

impeachment shmimshmeashment, i want a conviction and an escort out of the building

[–] PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk 8 points 1 week ago (5 children)

not with the house in the hands of republicans.

Best hope there is enough democracy left in the US to swing it back to the Dems in 2026.

And even then, without a comfortable majority for the Dems in the senate it will just be another impeachment to add to the pile, no conviction.

They don't call him teflon don for no reason

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Jhuskindle@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Can anyone explain what happened to the articles of impeachment that were introduced a few months ago?

[–] drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

So? Nothing will ever come with it.

[–] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

Not happening. Next quotum

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›