WATCH LIVE: Trump's Getting Impeached Today

I guess you are.

 

Not as much as Schiff and Pelosi. But he is almost as worthless as those two.

 

And as your own article admits, there is no direct link between Trumps comments and the hacks that you pointed towards. In fact the report that is referenced doesn't even mention Trumps comment.

 

That has already been answered, why are you not accepting the facts?

 

You do not speak for hoosier.

 

The only claim I made is that Russia state actors reacted to Trump's "joke" by hacking a Hillary Clinton server, for the first time, within 5 hours.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/18/trump-impeachment-trial-steny-hoyer-087319

Political gamesmanship, part 2. Since it's not "the real meaning of acquittal", they'll just hold the articles indefinitely ROFL. Doesn't this remind anyone of a similar situation? Merrick Garland. This is exactly the same position the GOP took on Merrick Garland. The Dems will withhold it until they can get a Democratic Senate, on which to impeach Donald Trump on.

 

Going.... Going... SOLD!.... To the gullible poster in the 9th row....

 

The democrat sham investigation reminds me of the McCarthy hearings. They started out with Trump is guilty then started looking for something to hang him with and are giddy to trash anyone associated with him.

 

The ONLY "input" that I have seen from the Pro-Trump RW is "But...Clinton...But...Biden..." .

Am I missing anything, or is it all just Whataboutism?

 

Did Hoosier complain or are you fake outraged for him too?

 

Time check!

63 minutes and 57 minutes, respectively.

 

Happy waste of three years day and helping Trump get re-elected day?

Happy or marry works, thanks for the gift.

 

Hoosier claimed that Trump never invited foreign interference in the election and when presented with three explicit examples and asked to defend them, he said they were examples of free speech. From that point he has run away from trying to explain how free speech means that Trump was not inviting foreign interference in the US election.

 

Just read this article. It's an interesting theory - hold the articles and use them as leverage to push McConnell into agreeing to call witnesses.

No idea how that would play or what leverage it creates outside of gunking up McConnell's plan to make the impeachment trial as quick and painless as possible.

 

Well better gullible than bitter, angry and full of hatred for the American people.

Nancy Pelosi said Trump was too dangerous to allow the American people the chance to reelect him.

Fuk you mrs Pelosi!

 

No impeachment has ever helped a President or their party, even Clinton and he was a **** ton more popular and presidential than Trump.

 

I personally think that they'll do the Garland strategy. The Democrats will argue that it still counts as "impeachment"(they just haven't delivered it yet), while also on the same side of their tongue saying there's no votes, so conservatives who voted Democrat in 2018 shouldn't be upset.

I can read the political strategy like the back of my head.

 

It would be the type of gamesmanship that might help the Senate gain seats.

 

Let Hoosier worry about himself.

 

Nah, it would just be called opposition research which the left has been defending about the unverified dossier.

 

There is a first time for everything.

Seems you didn't learn a lesson from 2016.

All I'm going to say is prepare for a second term of Donald Trump.

 

Essentially, the House will have to keep 'bringing it up' in some form, but at that point it will turn into abuse of the public, as we will have been hearing about impeachment ad nauseum, and even though we're not in favor(at least virtually split on it), we will continue to be burdened with the threat of the withheld articles.

Worse yet for Democrats, the 'squad' supporters will be increasingly restless every day there isn't an impeachment. So even though this strategy would have some merits if it were something like a judge confirmation, because it's something as symbolically important as impeachment, any delay would actually(as you pointed out) backfire tremendously on Democrats.

They're in a no-win situation. Impeach, and they face 45% of the electorate, and a good change of losing a lot of House seats even if they get a Democratic President. Don't impeach, and they lose the squad votes but keep conservative democratic votes at bay.

I'd argue there's more conservative democrats than squad voters, but that's just me.

 

Well sure, it would count as impeachment as soon as a majority of the House votes on the articles of impeachment. And the Constitution does dictate that the House will deliver those articles to the Senate to be voted upon, but it does not specify a timeline.

I don't think they could withhold indefinitely, like in Garland. But it's a novel concept.

 

Yes, you did so against my claim that it was a joke. It was an attempt to show that it wasn't a joke but a serious request for election interference. You even put the word joke in parentheses as an indicator that it wasn't a joke.

It should also be noted that the DNC and DCC servers are not Hillary Clinton's server. Another reason that your claim has failed.

You're real good at spin attempts. Which is why I often reply to your posts. To point out the errors that the spin causes.