IMPEACHMENT WATCH 2019-2020 - flow of data

There are *10* of them, clearly laid out in the Mueller Report. Had you read the report, you would have known this, since other adults DO know this. The ONLY reason why Mueller did not bring charges was because of a DOJ policy binding his hands, not allowing someone to indict a sitting president. However, when asked by both committees whether or not Trump could be charged with this stuff after leaving office, the answer was an immediate YES. It also means that obstruction of Justice is a logical and reasonable grounds for impeachment, just as it was in 1974.

So, you can either decide to play dumb about this or you can actually read what has happened. Not that I expect Conservatives to read or comprehend much these days, since Trump never reads. He's very busy with pussygrabbing, golfing and grifting, you know.

 

Ain't going to happen, guys. The hearings and testimony in the House and the write up sessions of the articles would alone would take at least three months, and more likely 5-6 months - considering court action to enforce House subpoenas to get the testimony on record, that provides a justification sufficient to move polling numbers among the GOP. In an election season, the real appetite will be for campaign time back home.

The closer to the election, the more willing everyone will be to let the voters take the heat for the result, instead of the House. For every Congress person who wants to take that vote with him back home , there are two who don't want that vote scheduled on the calendar. You can finesse what you say on the campaign trail, depending on polling and audience, but you can't finesse a vote sitting on your record.

I am telling you, they don't want to impeach.

 

Good points!

Yes, easier to just declare that you favor impeachment is you know that will garner votes in your district and say nothing if it will lose votes. Without anything on the record the GOP can't accuse the DNC as a whole of trying to impeach the BLOTUS.

Furthermore impeaching the BLOTUS and having the Senate fail to remove him does a lot of harm to the Dems while making a martyr out of the BLOTUS. That is a Lose-Lose for the Dems and a Win-Win for the GOP.

Far better to allow We the People to do the job of throwing him out of the Oval office.

If we don't then it is on us and we will have to live with the consequences.

 

Paul Ryan for president, anyone? Oh, pardon me, it would be Mike Pence. Good luck.

 

Getting snarky and insulting refutes nothing. The FACT remains Mueller made no criminal referral to the Attorney General. The Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General and DOJ Office of Legal Counsel agreed. Mueller stated there are no awaiting charges and his office shutdown.

 

Since no cause for impeachment other than he won has been brought why would they?

 

The 148th D-rep and 149th Rep overall just came out for impeachment: Vincente Gonzalez (TX-15), who has flipped. In June, he was against impeachment and viewed as one of the eight most difficult Ds to get on board for such, but because of the Trump/Ukraine scandal, he has changed his position. After the hearings on Thursday, expect a great many Ds to come out formally for impeachment.

 

False.

It's in print for people who know how to read. There are MULTIPLE causes for impeachment. So many, in fact, that it is sometimes hard to keep track of them.

I will remind that the Republicans held impeachment hearings against Andrew Johnson mainly because he wanted to fire his War Secretary and the Republicans did not want him to. Of course, since he was a hateful racist and the Republicans of 1868 are more like the Democrats of 2019, I can kind of understand where they were coming from.

 

I hold that the investigation into Russian Collusion and OOJ brought forth no charges against Trump and was reviewed by the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General and the Office of Legal Counsel and they concurred. The House has NO criminal referral with regards to these charges. However we do know there has been a criminal referral submitted towards Comey who was RIGHTFULLY fired by Trump.

 

The 149th D-Rep and 150th overall just came in unequivocally for impeachment proceedings: Dean Phillips (MN-03). He flipped MN-03 from red to blue in 2018, by +11.42%, but he is a very moderate Democrat and was on the list of the (probably) 8 most difficult Democrats to get on board with impeachment. Make no doubt about it, - this is big news.

 

You can hold whatever the hell you want, that doesn't make it real or the truth.

Again, for those who are sloooooow on the uptake, Mueller EXPLICITLY outlined, described and defined 10 very specific acts of obstruction of justice that would have, in a heartbeat, resulted in indictments against any other person who is not the POTUS. The ONLY thing that kept him from indicting is standing DOJ policy that a sitting POTUS cannot be indicted, which is stupid, as policy is not even law. So, enough of this obfuscation.

 

If your opinion, which of those ten acts of obstruction is the one that's most egregious and clearly illegal, therefore impeachable?

 

Well yeah it does and Mueller referred NO obstruction of justice to the AG and the AG and DAG and OLC reviewed and did not find OOJ either. He could have been charged just as Starr charged Clinton and laid out the specific criminal charges for Congress to decide whether to impeach and remove or not. Prima facie evidence of his crimes. Perjury, subornation of perjury and obstruction of justice. The Democrats said none of those warranted impeachment and removal from office so what leg do they have to say they warrant it for Trump even when they have no referral from the SC or DOJ.

 

Since you have such a quick mind, could you list the ten "acts of obstruction" listed in the Mueller Report. Then we can examine them one-at-a-time so as not appear that you are being hysterical about PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP.

 

I have a friend who is a federal judge in Maryland (not Trump country). He was reading the Mueller Report. The report was written by attorneys and he reads legal briefs all the time. He had an interesting take on the report.

Reading thru the lines, he said that what he saw were not people busy with collusion, but who were busy promoting their own self interests in the Trump campaign and who exaggerated their importance to it--to their regret.

He specifically talked about Paul Manafort.

Paul Manafort ran the campaign for about 90 days before he was replaced by Kellyanne Conway.

It is well-known that Manafort did a lot of business in the Ukraine. He messed up a deal which caused a $200 million loss to some partners there and they were suing him.

My friend interprets the report as saying that Manafort joined the campaign to pressure his associates to lay off until after the campaign was over and Trump won. With a high position in the administration he could steer big returns to those suing him.

He said it looked to him like the democrats interpreted his actions as collusion in order to excuse their loss.

He didn't talk about Papadopulous and Page, but they were also one-man bands doing minor work for the campaign and wound up on the Democrats' radar screen.

 

Good God, man. You are my new data hero. I thought I was a data geek; I am but a humble fanboy.

 

On the topic of the thread, a week ago I would have said impeachment was not going to happen any time soon. Now I think it could get rolling within a month. The Ukraine thing seems to be a bit of a game changer.

 

Hearings will be ongoing but the election season is ramping up so there is a trade off to be managed.

 

These are non-bnding numbers and they fall far short of a majority. They can also blow away with the political winds. Just ask democrats who won in Trump districts last year..

You have to have a legitimate reason for impeachment. Beating Hillary is not one of them. Smears and water cooler gossip from the last two years are just a substitute.

Acting like poor losers, promoting stupid programs and wasting time on this sole issue will guarantee the democrat lose even worse in 2020.

 

Thank you for explaining one lost cause by bringing up another.

 

There are more than sufficient legal violations on which to charge the BLOTUS that would pass the House.

However the Senate under the malign tyranny of Moscow Mitch won't do their Constitutional DUTY and remove him from office.

That is why it has become another political football that will be punted until it can be safely dropped into the election zone.

 

Sufficient legal violations?

You are long on broad statements and short on actual details. Let's go over them one-by-one. What legal violations are you talking about? I will write slow so you can understand me..

 

Puerile ad hom and attempt to derail the thread duly noted and ignored for derogatory reasons.

 

translation: You are right. We don't know what we are talking about.

 

While I slept, 9 more Ds came out for impeachment, bringing the total to 158 D-reps plus 1 I rep = current total of 159 Reps for impeachment:

Gil Cisneros (CA-39)*
Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Elissa Slotkin (MI-08 )*
Debbie Dingell (MI-12)
Angie Craig (MN-02)
Mikie Sherill (NJ-11)*
Chrissy Houlahan (PA-06)*
Elaine Luria (VA-02)*
Abigail Spanberger (VA-07)*

6 of them (asterisked) were part of a writer team of 7 (including Jason Crow, who had already announced for impeachment on July 30th) where they are military vets and vets of the nation's intelligence and defense agencies. They wrote their announcement together in a piece published in the Washington Post.

7 of the names on the list flipped their respective seat from red to blue in 2018 (D-pick-up). I have colored those names in blue.

So, with Gonzalez's (TX-15) and Phillips' (MN-03) announcements earlier in the day, this means that 11 Democrats announced for impeachment on one day - and the hearings on Thursday have not even happened yet. A name like Rose DeLauro does not surprise me: she is the founder of the House Democratic Progressive caucus. And Debbie Dingell is not a surprise either. But now, in just one day, 9 names that were at the very bottom of my list, people I thought would not declare or declare at the last moment, have already declared FOR impeachment proceedings and an ensuing vote.

This is a major development.