Trump Impeached!

[Twilight Hue]

Source? As far as I can tell there's no evidence to this claim.
]

There's plenty.

Let's get real: Democrats were first to enlist Ukraine in US elections

Obama Admin Asked Ukraine to Investigate Paul Manafort

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...tigation-might-do-more-hurt-biden-than-trump/

 

[Ponder This]

You have heard faster and slower from both sides. So what?

The point is about what the Democrat base want and what the Democrat leadership has failed to deliver. Can you imagine what would happen if the Democrat leadership backed off of impeachment? They have to impeach him or their base will be angry with their leadership regardless of if there was a strong enough case to impeach.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I'll need popcorn.

And I'm not talking about for the House impeachment. I mean the Senate trial.

It's cute you think that will happen.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Whoa! Let's give the guy a chance to get re-elected and screw up again, eh?

He's already claiming he's entitled to two more years, election or not, and his enablers are laying the groundwork to make those claims a reality. Even if Trump loses next year (and it's far from a sure thing) don't expect that to be an end to it.

 

[metis]

He's already claiming he's entitled to two more years, election or not, and his enablers are laying the groundwork to make those claims a reality. Even if Trump loses next year (and it's far from a sure thing) don't expect that to be an end to it.

Exactly, and this also may be due to the fact that the minute he is out of office he can be indicted. Michael Cohen, Trump's "fixer", concluded much the same as you have in Congressional testimony. And a recent poll of people who consider themselves to be Republicans has it that 43% of them believe that Trump is more important than our Constitution.

 

[shmogie]

I agree with you that what is happening here, on both sides of the aisle is constitutional. If the House impeaches and the Senate declines to convict, then that must be the way it goes. The constitutional requirements are met, and there's nothing more to say.

I'm also beginning to wonder if it might not actually be better for the House to vote against impeachment (that would require a few dozen Democrats to not toe the party line). I mean, there have definitely been shenanigans on the part of Trump and some of his supporters (Giuliani, for instance), I'm beginning to suspect that this might actually be a pretty weak case. And if that's so, it might be better to shelve the entire thing. The Democrats could easily say, "we saw a duty to investigate, we did so, and we found some things that were dubious, but the majority decided in the end that it wasn't enough to warrant a very disunifying impeachment."

And then everybody could get on with the business of telling Americans why they should be elected in 2020 (rather than harping on why the other guy shouldn't).

I agree with you. However, the democrats promised the radical part of their base an impeachment, and once they began, they had to calculate where the least harm to their political goals would be.

They calculated that angering their vocal very left leaning members would do more harm than following through on impeachment. They can say to these people, we ted to nail him to the wall, but the mean old Republicans let him off.

They never figured that their tactics and the weakness of their case on national TV would harm them with Independents, those who really elect the president. They were bewildered by the fact that after each of their hearings of the show trial, they lost more support in this demographic.They though they had choreographed everything well enough to damage Trump.

Further, the 31 democrat house members elected in Trump districts are terrified they will face retribution for impeachment.

So, they satisfied their radicals, but alienated others.

They could have gotten bipartisan support for censure, and for a short while that seemed the way out. A poll of their radicals showed them that this wads unacceptable. So they had to be all in.

I think time will prove this to have been a giant error on the part of the democrats. The Republicans paid a big price at the polls for impeaching Clinton, and he actually committed a crime, perjury, and had his law license taken away from him.

We will see.

 

[shmogie]

I agree with you that what is happening here, on both sides of the aisle is constitutional. If the House impeaches and the Senate declines to convict, then that must be the way it goes. The constitutional requirements are met, and there's nothing more to say.

I'm also beginning to wonder if it might not actually be better for the House to vote against impeachment (that would require a few dozen Democrats to not toe the party line). I mean, there have definitely been shenanigans on the part of Trump and some of his supporters (Giuliani, for instance), I'm beginning to suspect that this might actually be a pretty weak case. And if that's so, it might be better to shelve the entire thing. The Democrats could easily say, "we saw a duty to investigate, we did so, and we found some things that were dubious, but the majority decided in the end that it wasn't enough to warrant a very disunifying impeachment."

And then everybody could get on with the business of telling Americans why they should be elected in 2020 (rather than harping on why the other guy shouldn't).

I agree with you that what is happening here, on both sides of the aisle is constitutional. If the House impeaches and the Senate declines to convict, then that must be the way it goes. The constitutional requirements are met, and there's nothing more to say.

I'm also beginning to wonder if it might not actually be better for the House to vote against impeachment (that would require a few dozen Democrats to not toe the party line). I mean, there have definitely been shenanigans on the part of Trump and some of his supporters (Giuliani, for instance), I'm beginning to suspect that this might actually be a pretty weak case. And if that's so, it might be better to shelve the entire thing. The Democrats could easily say, "we saw a duty to investigate, we did so, and we found some things that were dubious, but the majority decided in the end that it wasn't enough to warrant a very disunifying impeachment."

And then everybody could get on with the business of telling Americans why they should be elected in 2020 (rather than harping on why the other guy shouldn't).

I agree with you, completely.

Censure instead of impeachment was a reasonable, probably bipartisan option, for a while.

The vocal left wing of the democrat party shot that down. They have been agitating for impeachment since election day and want to nuke Trump period. Overturning the vote of the people was the goal all along.

The democrat party leadership had to weigh pissing off this part of their base, or taking the results of impeachment. They felt that if they controlled the process with an iron fist they could really dirty up Trump for the next election.

In spite of hours on TV taking their best shots, while silencing the Republicans, each hearing lost support with Independents, who elect the president. They simply did not like what they saw.

I think they wasted millions of dollars, and thousands of hours on this, and the result harmed them.

Impeachment is pretty much dead, and was so in the past when it was attempted. 2/3 of the senate voting for removal is an extremely high bar, as the Founders wanted it. It has never been reached, and probably never will.

 

[shmogie]

I agree with you, completely.

Censure instead of impeachment was a reasonable, probably bipartisan option, for a while.

The vocal left wing of the democrat party shot that down. They have been agitating for impeachment since election day and want to nuke Trump period. Overturning the vote of the people was the goal all along.

The democrat party leadership had to weigh pissing off this part of their base, or taking the results of impeachment. They felt that if they controlled the process with an iron fist they could really dirty up Trump for the next election.

In spite of hours on TV taking their best shots, while silencing the Republicans, each hearing lost support with Independents, who elect the president. They simply did not like what they saw.

I think they wasted millions of dollars, and thousands of hours on this, and the result harmed them.

Impeachment is pretty much dead, and was so in the past when it was attempted. 2/3 of the senate voting for removal is an extremely high bar, as the Founders wanted it. It has never been reached, and probably never will.

Sorry, sorry, sorry ! I thought I lost my first response, wrote another and posted it, then found the first !

 

[Skwim]

.

And the confirmation is in

"The always prolific tweeter-in-chief appears to have hit a new record.

The president’s @realDonaldTrump account had tweeted and retweeted 115 times by late Thursday night,[Dec. 12] marking what could be his most active day on the platform yet.

The avalanche came as the House judiciary committee pressed toward a historic vote on Friday to approve articles of impeachment against him.

Trump has noticeably ramped up his tweeting during the impeachment inquiry. He tweeted 77 times on Wednesday and 105 times on Sunday, repeatedly declaring his innocence and retweeting comments and video of supporters defending his conduct.

PETER BAKER----
"Trump's record-high 123 tweets yesterday were more in a single day than he posted in any full week in 2017. All told, it brought his total since Sunday to 367, the most since taking office of any week — with two days still to go. ⁦@maggieNYT⁩ For Trump, Impeachment May Be a Political Plus but Also a Personal Humiliation …"​

source

.​

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Surprised trump and his trumpettes haven't claimed the obvious win here... trump has finally managed to do something Obama never could, i.e. get impeached.

 

[Ouroboros]

And a recent poll of people who consider themselves to be Republicans has it that 43% of them believe that Trump is more important than our Constitution.

Scary. That's how we'll lose the constitution, when the voters don't want it anymore.

 

[Shaul]

By impeaching someone without cause the House Democrats are actually impeaching themselves.

 

[SkepticThinker]

On the contrary. I'm reflecting what he said himself about the trial:

Mitch McConnell says he's 'taking his cues' from Trump's lawyers as the GOP mulls a strategy for an impeachment trial

So the jury is cooperating with the defendant?
Wow.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Worried that you won't get your way in a free, fair, and open trial? I for one would hate to see an America where all it takes is some accusations to convict someone with no real opportunity to cross examine the evidence.

How does Mitch McConnell's idea of a trial (where he as as a juror, is coordinating directly with White House counsel - aka the defendant) constitute anything close to a "free, fair and open trial?"
Do jurors usually coordinate with the defendant?

 

[SkepticThinker]

You are sounding like a creationist when you say "no real evidence" . The evidence is quite clear. Some of it is undeniable, even to Republicans.

Hence the reason they can't refute it and instead are focusing on the process or pretty much anything else they can come up with.

 

[SkepticThinker]

What obstruction? From what?

Making a phone call?

I'd say the real obstruction was the Socialist Democrats interfering with the duties of a sitting president in hopes of a bloodless coup attempt.




He also doesn't want to admit the Socialist Democrats have done the exact same thing in the past, like the time when the Obama Administration asked the Ukraine to investigate Paul Manafort , who was Trump's campaign manager.

Oh Gawd. How minds slip these days.


It makes it clear the intention of the Socialists is not defending and upholding the Constitution themselves. They apparently exempted themselves from all that.

Never trust Socialist Hypocrites.

The obstruction part is refusing to provide the necessary documentation requested by Congress and all the witnesses who spoke at the hearings. Also, demanding that top officials ignore subpoenas, all the while complaining that no direct witnesses have testified at the hearings. You can't make this stuff up.


A phone call that everyone who listened to it, from Trump's own administration, thought was an alarming and inappropriate call.
Then there's that pesky fact about bypassing traditional channels of communication and instead sending his shady personal lawyer who is not employed by the US government and is completely lacking in security clearance. A man who is still, today, at this moment, trying to dig up dirt on Biden in the Ukraine. But there's nothing to see here, right? Everything is on the up and up.
I shudder to think of the reaction you would have had if Obama had even carried out a tiny fraction of what Trump has done. Remember that time he wore that tan suit and you guys all lost your minds? Imagine how you would have reacted if Obama had solicited a foreign power to investigate his political rivals, never mind the quid pro quo and all the rest of it. And don't forget that his former personal lawyer, who did all his illegal bidding for him, is currently sitting in prison.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I agree with you. However, the democrats promised the radical part of their base an impeachment, and once they began, they had to calculate where the least harm to their political goals would be.

They calculated that angering their vocal very left leaning members would do more harm than following through on impeachment. They can say to these people, we ted to nail him to the wall, but the mean old Republicans let him off.

They never figured that their tactics and the weakness of their case on national TV would harm them with Independents, those who really elect the president. They were bewildered by the fact that after each of their hearings of the show trial, they lost more support in this demographic.They though they had choreographed everything well enough to damage Trump.

Further, the 31 democrat house members elected in Trump districts are terrified they will face retribution for impeachment.

So, they satisfied their radicals, but alienated others.

They could have gotten bipartisan support for censure, and for a short while that seemed the way out. A poll of their radicals showed them that this wads unacceptable. So they had to be all in.

I think time will prove this to have been a giant error on the part of the democrats. The Republicans paid a big price at the polls for impeaching Clinton, and he actually committed a crime, perjury, and had his law license taken away from him.

We will see.

Fox News host "stunned" by Fox News poll showing majority support Trump's impeachment

 

[shmogie]

Fox News host "stunned" by Fox News poll showing majority support Trump's impeachment

What does this have to do with serious errors by the FBI ? Stay on topic Please. Polls are polls. You were delighted that they predicted Trump would lose in a landslide in 2016. Hillary is not President.

Now you may very well be believing in unicorns, again. No matter, he won't be removed from office and in a month the news cycle and the American people will have moved on to something else.

 

[SkepticThinker]

What does this have to do with serious errors by the FBI ? Stay on topic Please. Polls are polls. You were delighted that they predicted Trump would lose in a landslide in 2016. Hillary is not President.

Now you may very well be believing in unicorns, again. No matter, he won't be removed from office and in a month the news cycle and the American people will have moved on to something else.

It speaks to your declarations about polls and independents moving away from impeachment.
According to Fox News, of all places, 50% of the country think Trump should be impeached and removed. Fifty three percent say he abused his power. Forty-five percent of people think he committed bribery.

 

[shmogie]

It speaks to your declarations about polls and independents moving away from impeachment.
According to Fox News, of all places, 50% of the country think Trump should be impeached and removed. Fifty three percent say he abused his power.

Do you not realize that polls change from week to week ?

Stay on topic, if you want to talk about polls, go to a thread where they are the subject of the thread.