Pelosi: Impeachment? "He's just not worth it"

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Sandy Shanks, Mar 11, 2019.

  1. Blaster3

    Blaster3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2018
    Messages:
    6,008
    Likes Received:
    5,302
    Trophy Points:
    113
    yepperz... i register dem, so i can vote in their primaries (pickin the best choice that'll make them the weakest), then at the general i vote straight conservative repub... skewes the data while providing immense enjoyment... cheers ;)
     
  2. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trust me on this one. When the leadership of an American Presidential campaign seeks to collaborate with a hostile foreign government, that is breaking the law.

    No evidence??? There is Junior's testimony. He admits it. The e-mail exchange between him and Goldstone in which he agrees to meet with the Russians is on the internet. Goldstone tells Junior they represent the Russian government. They met at Trump's home. That is on the record.

    Trump's fans like you wish to avoid the evidence. They just want it to go away.

    Well, it won't. And Trump Tower is just a tiny bit of the evidence against Trump.

    But, I seriously doubt the House will impeach. The Democrats gain advantage by not impeaching. See post #22.
     
  3. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Did you read the caption? That is exactly my point. See post #22.

    Thank you.
     
  4. AZBob

    AZBob Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2019
    Messages:
    2,183
    Likes Received:
    1,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Then you need to be wearing a tinfoil hat yourself. You’re welcome.
     
  5. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You are probably right, but that will change soon. The Dems have had control of the House for just over two months. Give it time, and the Mueller report will be out any week now. The House investigations have just gotten started.
     
  6. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You misunderstand. He knew before the meeting and gave his okay.

    Could the reverse be true? The top leadership of his campaign is about to meet with four Russian operatives at his home to get dirt on Clinton, and he didn't know? He didn't give his approval beforehand?

    For this hands-on manager who claims to know about everything, that reasoning is ludicrous.

    He know more about ISIS than the generals. He knows more about Syria than his four-star general type SecDef. He even knows more about flying than anyone else.

    But he didn't know about this meet in his own home? That's hilarious.
     
  7. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Did you read post #22? I couldn't tell.
     
  8. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They listen to him just fine and you only have 3 republicans in the senate who may side with him which also will not override a veto.

    And for the last two years we have heard nothing from the left other than how Trump was guilty of collusion and he was going down and now you folks are changing your tune saying it doesn't matter.

    That looks so pathetic.
     
  9. Reasonablerob

    Reasonablerob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2018
    Messages:
    9,856
    Likes Received:
    3,832
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Really? I understood she was a private citizen, what's the exact text? As it happens even THAT wouldn't count as collusion. The difference between this and the 1990s is Clinton's perjury was very cut and dried, all Trump's 'Crimes' are very ambiguous.
     
  10. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We will see. The vote is tomorrow.

    You are not understanding all of this. This is all about impeachment, not collaboration with the Russians. It has always been true that the Republican-led Senate is unlikely to convict Trump. Why impeach him?

    That is what this is about.
     
  11. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, first it was going to be collusion with the Russians and now that that's fallen through it's something else.

    You guys want to impeach first and are looking for a reason second. You are going to waste congress's time with stupid investigations just in the hopes you find something now that Mueller is a bust.

    Talk about a witch hunt.
     
  12. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is easy to say. We have not looked at the evidence on this thread. There is a great deal, but that is all I am going to say at this point.

    There are several reasons why the Democratic leadership is toning down the clamor for impeachment by freshman Congressmen and women and a couple others like Rep. Al Green, TX, who has been calling for Trump's impeachment for a year now.

    They recall 1998.

    Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich led the charge for the impeachment of Bill Clinton in 1998. In November of that year, the Democrats picked up five seats in the House although the Republicans still maintained majority control. The results were a particular embarrassment for Gingrich, who, before the election, had been reassured by private polling that Clinton's scandal would result in Republican gains of up to thirty House seats. The poor showing by Republicans caused a reprimand from the House for Gingrich's ethics violation and pressure from Republican colleagues resulted in Gingrich's resignation from the speakership on November 6, 1998. Gingrich resigned altogether from the House two months later on January 3, 1999.

    Polls conducted during 1998 and early 1999 showed that only about one-third of Americans supported Clinton's impeachment or conviction. However, one year later, in a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll 57% approved of the Senate's decision to keep him in office and two thirds of those polled said the impeachment was harmful to the country.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newt_Gingrich

    Despite the efforts of young Congresswomen and Green, the Democratic leadership wants no part of that kind of a fiasco.

    Trump wants to be impeached. Everything he does, every stupid thing he says, is geared toward that goal. He will be the star of a monumental T.V. drama played out daily, and he will benefit from the martyrdom.

    The Democratic leadership is banking on the Mueller report. Not to provide evidence of impeachment, but to characterize Trump as damaged goods. The Democrats will have months to advertise all the faults of the Republican President as reported by Mueller and the House investigations. This practically insures a Democratic victory in 2020.

    2020 is the prize. In the Democratic view, everything they do is directed toward that goal.

    Compare this to a failed attempt to remove him from office -- a verdict nearly guaranteed by the Trump Republican Senate -- which could make Trump a martyr and cause sympathy for him.

    Much like what happened in 1998.
     
  13. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wanting to do something, and doing it are two different things. At some point one has to look at the practicality of what one wants to do.

    Read the post just below yours.
     
  14. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You give the democratic party way too much credit for strategizing.

    That's some serious over reach there.
     
  15. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Democrats are going full steam for impeachment even though they know it won't pass the senate so they are not playing any sort of game here.

    They will fail and as you said, they will look bad and probably lose in 2020.
     
  16. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Pelosi and some others know what you are talking about but they can't reign in everyone.

    If you left it to them then sure, it might just work but there is a movement of hate afoot that they cannot tamper no matter how hard they try.

    The liberals have bloodlust going on right now.
     
  17. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump was dealt a major blow today by -- wait for it -- Republicans, his own party. The House voted today to allow the "witch hunt," the "Mueller hoax," to be seen by every American.

    The House of Representatives on Thursday passed a resolution calling for special counsel Robert Mueller's report to be released to the public once it is completed. The vote was 420 to zero! Every Republican in the House voted to have the report by Trump's nemesis to be made public.

    The House, as compared to the Senate, is regarded as the closest to the people because the entire House is up for election every two years. The people have spoken. They want to see the Mueller report. No doubt this will have an immediate and powerful impact on William Barr, the new A.G.

    Trump suffered another powerful setback today. The Republican controlled Senate rejected President Trump's declaration of a national emergency at the southwest border on Thursday, setting up a veto fight and dealing him a conspicuous rebuke as he tested how boldly he could ignore Congress in pursuit of his highest-profile goal.

    The vote was 59 to 41 as twelve Republicans joined Democrats in defying Trump in a showdown many GOP Senators had hoped to avoid.

    In a measure of how remarkable the confrontation was, Thursday was the first time Congress has voted to block a Presidential emergency since the National Emergency Act became law in 1976.

    There have been a lot of firsts in the Trump Presidency. Nearly all, like these two, are notably unremarkable.
     
  18. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Twelve Republicans sided with the Democrats. For Trump, that's embarrassing.
     
  19. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That was a new development after I made that post.

    But it's really not embarrassing because those others changed their minds at the last minute because they are facing tough re-election battles and did not want this being an issue.

    Had nothing to do with Trump whatsoever, it's about their winning another term.

    There still aren't enough to overturn Trumps veto however.
     
  20. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Really?

    You're suggesting it would be LESS "embarrassing" if they were free to ignore their constituents?
     
  21. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,883
    Likes Received:
    3,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    The only reason she said that is because she has reason's to believe there isn't enough evidence to get it through the Senate. The House would vote for it if he threw a candy wrapper on the ground. I don't agree with you Sandy that the Senate goes along with most of what Trump does. They are nothing like the Democrats that are afraid to break ranks against the Party.
     
  22. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Has nothing to do with constituents it has to do with their challengers bringing it up.

    It takes that issue off the table during the campaign.

    Polling wise this isn't a hot button issue with voters so no reason for them to stick their necks out for it.
     
  23. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The good news is, this is extremely embarrassing for Trump. His party controls the Senate, and the Senate rejected his declaration.

    The bad news is, Trump is going to use his first veto to block the bill, and there are not enough Republican votes to override the veto. Trump will be free to continue his assault on our Constitution, specifically the power of the purse as is vested in Congress as laid down in the Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 (the Appropriations Clause) and Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 (the Taxing and Spending Clause).

    In other words, Trump Republicans in Congress are so toady as to agree with Trump to weaken the powers of Congress. .

    In a note of pure irony, Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C first said he would vote for the resolution rejecting Trump's declaration. Then he changed his mind and voted against it. The reason: He cited talks with the White House that suggested Trump could be open to restricting Presidential emergency powers in the future. Put another way, our esteemed President is open to reducing the powers of his own office.

    Is this Fantasyland? Maybe we are living through Alice's adventures in Wonderland?

    It sure seems like it sometimes. Republicans in Congress wish to weaken the powers of Congress. A President who is open to weakening the powers of the Presidency. This is surreal.

    https://q13fox.com/2019/03/14/senat...erturn-trumps-national-emergency-declaration/
     
  24. Jestsayin

    Jestsayin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2016
    Messages:
    16,798
    Likes Received:
    17,571
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Do ya think you're gonna make it Sandy? What if Trump plays the veto card? Will that spawn another ten or so hate threads?
     
  25. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Now you got it. Pelosi is concerned there is not enough evidence for the Trump Republicans to convict Trump. Without a conviction what is the point? An impeachment could backfire on Democrats.

    Just as it did with Republicans in 1998 when the Gingrich-led House impeached Clinton.

    Trump is going to use his first veto to block the bill, and there are not enough Republican votes to override the veto. Trump will be free to continue his assault on our Constitution, specifically the power of the purse as is vested in Congress as laid down in the Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 (the Appropriations Clause) and Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 (the Taxing and Spending Clause).

    In other words, Trump Republicans in Congress are so toady as to agree with Trump to weaken the powers of Congress. .

    Are you saying they will override Trump's veto and keep the power of the purse? That's not going to happen.
     

Share This Page