Is it a "deal"?

[This_person]

So, Pelosi comes out and says that impeaching Trump is off the table. Her words were something like, "he's just not worth it", which is what every guy says to his buddy when he knows his buddy will get his ass kicked if he fights the guy at the bar.

So, her reasoning is kind of stupid. It's always worth it if there was a law broken, only not worth it if there wasn't.

This brings up a couple of questions: Does she KNOW there was no law broken, no impeachable offense, no "there" there from the Special Counsel's report?

Or, is this a deal: tit for tat, you leave HRC alone and all of the crimes done by the Democrats, and we'll stop investigating you and all the crimes you've done, Republicans?

What say you?

 

[TCROW]

She’s technically correct since objectively there’s not a single impeachable offense on the table at this moment.

I think it’s code for: “Let’s wait for the Mueller Report.”

 

[vraiblonde]

Does she KNOW there was no law broken, no impeachable offense, no "there" there from the Special Counsel's report?

Yes.

Al Green said the other day that he thinks they have grounds for impeachment simply because he believes Trump is a bigot. Maxine Waters runs around on the talk shows saying Trump is a Russian spy. Party Queen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says she's the boss and can impeach anyone who displeases her.

Nancy knows that none of this is true, and she knows that impeachment was just a red meat talking point for the bots to snap at. She knows how to be a politician and separate fantasy from reality. She knows how to say one thing, then do the exact opposite without getting busted.

That's the problem with leading a group of psychos and idiots: you have to lead psychos and idiots. I'd have some sympathy for her, but she helped create these people. She sh*t her own pants and now she has to sit in it.

 

[limblips]

So, Pelosi comes out and says that impeaching Trump is off the table. Her words were something like, "he's just not worth it", which is what every guy says to his buddy when he knows his buddy will get his ass kicked if he fights the guy at the bar.

So, her reasoning is kind of stupid. It's always worth it if there was a law broken, only not worth it if there wasn't.

This brings up a couple of questions: Does she KNOW there was no law broken, no impeachable offense, no "there" there from the Special Counsel's report?

Or, is this a deal: tit for tat, you leave HRC alone and all of the crimes done by the Democrats, and we'll stop investigating you and all the crimes you've done, Republicans?

What say you?

There is fear on both sides of the swamp. It is like the old Cold War doctrine of Mutual Mass Destruction. If one side pushes the button the other side will retaliate in kind, a bad scenario for both and most importantly the country. It could cripple our government if the crooks were to go to jail. So is it a deal? I think so but not a handshake deal, more of a cover our collective a$$e$ deal.

 

[This_person]

She’s technically correct since objectively there’s not a single impeachable offense on the table at this moment.

I think it’s code for: “Let’s wait for the Mueller Report.”

See, I don't think the Mueller Report has anything to do with it beyond her knowledge it would not support impeachment.

 

[This_person]

Yes.

Al Green said the other day that he thinks they have grounds for impeachment simply because he believes Trump is a bigot. Maxine Waters runs around on the talk shows saying Trump is a Russian spy. Party Queen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says she's the boss and can impeach anyone who displeases her.

Nancy knows that none of this is true, and she knows that impeachment was just a red meat talking point for the bots to snap at. She knows how to be a politician and separate fantasy from reality. She knows how to say one thing, then do the exact opposite without getting busted.

That's the problem with leading a group of psychos and idiots: you have to lead psychos and idiots. I'd have some sympathy for her, but she helped create these people. She sh*t her own pants and now she has to sit in it.

I agree with the vast majority of what you say here. Pelosi has been throwing cold water on impeachment talk all along, knowing there never would be anything "there" there, and also trying to be the elder statesman in terms of "let's have a reason before we talk impeachment." She hasn't thrown buckets of cold water, just small glasses, though, because she wants to let the minions run with their calls for impeachment to keep the heat up - her water was symbolic, and ass covering.

I'm happy to see her squirm over it.

 

[This_person]

There is fear on both sides of the swamp. It is like the old Cold War doctrine of Mutual Mass Destruction. If one side pushes the button the other side will retaliate in kind, a bad scenario for both and most importantly the country. It could cripple our government if the crooks were to go to jail. So is it a deal? I think so but not a handshake deal, more of a cover our collective a$$e$ deal.

I don't think it would harm our country in any way to have the crooks go to jail. I'm not even convinced it would harm our government. it would hurt, like setting a broken bone, and it would take time to heal. But, to me, the country is harmed far more by having them there.

Recall "If that fukking bastard wins, we all hang from nooses!" If they know this, if they are saying, "take me down and I'll take down half of Washington", we are all better off if "half of Washington" goes down. I'd rather suffer through the pains of recovery than continue with the disease.

 

[limblips]

I don't think it would harm our country in any way to have the crooks go to jail. I'm not even convinced it would harm our government. it would hurt, like setting a broken bone, and it would take time to heal. But, to me, the country is harmed far more by having them there.

Recall "If that fukking bastard wins, we all hang from nooses!" If they know this, if they are saying, "take me down and I'll take down half of Washington", we are all better off if "half of Washington" goes down. I'd rather suffer through the pains of recovery than continue with the disease.

I agree but if the numbers are great enough the restoration process will take a long time, special elections, court challenges, etc... During this time our government would be basically stagnant. No budgets, no social programs, anarchy, disheveled military and so on. Not a palatable scenario.

 

[This_person]

I agree but if the numbers are great enough the restoration process will take a long time, special elections, court challenges, etc... During this time our government would be basically stagnant. No budgets, no social programs, anarchy, disheveled military and so on. Not a palatable scenario.

I'm not sure if you've noticed, but we didn't have an actual budget approved on time (or, in most years, at all) for the last decade or so.

There are processes to replace the bad folks in Congress. They'd work.

 

[SamSpade]

I'm startled by the "not worth it" language.

Look, if he got into office by using our arch enemy on the planet to steal an election, you're damned skippy it is worth it;
it would be the most heinous crime in our history regarding elections.

But they know deep down - he's not. They mumbled it, suggested it, hinted at it in an underhanded attempt to tarnish
his administration, but somewhere along the line, some of them decided to run with it. And if the investigations clearly
show nothing - that it was all pointless - they're in deep crap. They NEED the investigations to continue so they can beat
him next year. After that, it doesn't matter if it's true - it's like Reid and his accusation that Romney didn't pay his taxes for
ten years - once he was defeated, it didn't matter, did it?

So the top brass KNOW there's nothing there. They can only gain if the dark cloud hangs over him until election day.
They can't win if the truth comes out too soon that there's nothing.

 

[transporter]

So, Pelosi comes out and says that impeaching Trump is off the table. Her words were something like, "he's just not worth it", which is what every guy says to his buddy when he knows his buddy will get his ass kicked if he fights the guy at the bar.

So, her reasoning is kind of stupid. It's always worth it if there was a law broken, only not worth it if there wasn't.

This brings up a couple of questions: Does she KNOW there was no law broken, no impeachable offense, no "there" there from the Special Counsel's report?

Or, is this a deal: tit for tat, you leave HRC alone and all of the crimes done by the Democrats, and we'll stop investigating you and all the crimes you've done, Republicans?

What say you?

What say I? I say you are a moron...but that should not come as news.

Pelosi's comments were very carefully worded...you'd understand that if you paid attention to more than just "he's not worth it".

She CLEARLY stated that there are no grounds for impeachment now (which is what some of the nuttier members on the fringe of her party are clamoring for).

She also CLEARLY stated that impeachment is an option and CLEARLY laid out what those options were--obvious crime....obvious bipartisan support.

 

[mudpuddle]

I just have a question....what happened to Clinton after he was impeached? He wasn't removed from office....just sayin'

 

[This_person]

What say I? I say you are a moron...but that should not come as news.

No, you calling names is never news.

Pelosi's comments were very carefully worded...you'd understand that if you paid attention to more than just "he's not worth it".

She CLEARLY stated that there are no grounds for impeachment now (which is what some of the nuttier members on the fringe of her party are clamoring for).

She also CLEARLY stated that impeachment is an option and CLEARLY laid out what those options were--obvious crime....obvious bipartisan support.

She also CLEARLY stated that impeachment is a divisive process, and that Trump is not worth that process. The CLEAR implication is that she does not see impeachment as a way to get him out of office, nor a way to damage his ability to be reelected.

It's CLEAR you missed the entire point of my question, because a governmental elected official of the tenure of Mrs. Pelosi and level of Speaker would CLEARLY say something more along the lines of "impeach him for what?" or some other CLEAR indication that there's no need or desire or grounds for impeachment if it were her goal to act in a professional and competent way. Instead, she left open weasel words, but otherwise slammed the door pretty hard on impeachment of Mr. Trump even if there were grounds, since he's just not worth it.

You missing the CLEAR point of what she was saying is no more news than you calling people names without provocation or good reason.

 

[This_person]

I just have a question....what happened to Clinton after he was impeached? He wasn't removed from office....just sayin'

That is because he was never convicted.

 

[mudpuddle]

if he wasn't convicted, then how could he have been impeached?

 

[Clem72]

I also thought the wording was funny. They spent so much time and effort getting the rabid left absolutely frothing at the mouth and now she says "not worth it", which sounds like she COULD do it if she wished but wont. That's not going to go over well.

 

[Clem72]

if he wasn't convicted, then how could he have been impeached?

Impeached, as in he went through the process of impeachment. If you go to trial, you were trialed. None of these words refers to the result of the process.

 

[This_person]

if he wasn't convicted, then how could he have been impeached?

Impeachment is akin to being indicted. The House impeaches a president (indicts him over for trial), the Senate then conducts the trial under the cognizance of the chief justice of the supreme court. If found guilty, then the president is removed from office.

Only two presidents have been impeached - President Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. Both were acquitted by the Senate. Given all of the talk of Russia-Russia-Russia, it's interesting to note that Mrs. Clinton hired Russians (through Steele {also a foreigner} through the lawyers), Mr. Clinton was impeached for (among other things) obstruction of justice. It's almost as if you can figure out what the Democrats are doing wrong by what they accuse others of doing.