Two articles of impeachment announced

vraiblonde

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Abuse of Power
Obstruction of Congress

Supposedly they're going to take the vote before Christmas.

The abuse of power charge centers around Trump supposedly asking Zelinsky to investigate the corrupt Bidens - a charge that everyone involved has denied happened and there are no direct witnesses. All those randos taking the stand to say how much they hate Donald Trump? And how they heard someone say something that someone else told them? Yeah, they're irrelevant.

But the Democrats have a majority and will likely vote to impeach, which will make big headlines but doesn't really amount to anything. All it does is say, yes, we of the opposition party think the President did something. Yawn. Then it goes to the Senate, where I have no doubt these charges will be swiftly dropped.

I don't really understand the point of all this. The Democrats have to know that they're not going to remove Trump from office, or even hurt his reelection prospects. They have to know that these drummed up nonsense charges hurt them worse that they hurt Trump.
 
RareBreed

RareBreed

Throwing the deuces
vraiblonde said:
Abuse of Power
Obstruction of Congress

Supposedly they're going to take the vote before Christmas.

The abuse of power charge centers around Trump supposedly asking Zelinsky to investigate the corrupt Bidens - a charge that everyone involved has denied happened and there are no direct witnesses. All those randos taking the stand to say how much they hate Donald Trump? And how they heard someone say something that someone else told them? Yeah, they're irrelevant.

But the Democrats have a majority and will likely vote to impeach, which will make big headlines but doesn't really amount to anything. All it does is say, yes, we of the opposition party think the President did something. Yawn. Then it goes to the Senate, where I have no doubt these charges will be swiftly dropped.

I don't really understand the point of all this. The Democrats have to know that they're not going to remove Trump from office, or even hurt his reelection prospects. They have to know that these drummed up nonsense charges hurt them worse that they hurt Trump.
Click to expand...
If anything, they are probably helping because everyone is seeing how nuts Democrats are.
 
S

Stjohns3269

Active Member
vraiblonde said:
The good news is that the second they take the vote, Adam Schiff goes back to obscurity and we'll never have to see his corrupt smirking face again. Same with Nadler.
Click to expand...

And Just like that Trump tweets When i said "US" on the phone call i was referring to the "US". I thought it was a perfect phone call?

He continues to move the goal posts on criminality.


Can I ask you two honest questions?

What exactly has Schiff done wrong during this process that makes you say he is " corrupt" beside "he say Orange man bad" "me mad"?

Do you believe that a president should only be impeached if he will be impeached in both houses? Dont you think that the dems trying to hold him to the rule of law is enough? Did you think Clinton shouldn't have been impeached?
 
SamSpade

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
You realize of course, without the first charge - the second charge is bogus. I say it's bogus on its face, because it hinges on the fact that Congress believes the White House answers to them. It's been established since at least the 80's that the President can claim executive privilege to refuse to appear.

So near as I can see, both charges have nothing behind them. I hope - but won't hold my breath - that SOME Democrats will vote against it because they have to answer to voters who will ask - WTF were you thinking? You ran on reaching across the aisle and cooperating - and you VOTED on THAT?
 
SamSpade

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Stjohns3269 said:
And Just like that Trump tweets When i said "US" on the phone call i was referring to the "US". I thought it was a perfect phone call?
Click to expand...

He refers to OUR country in the next clause of the same sentence. And every time elsewhere when he says 'us' (or 'we')- he clearly means either the country, or he and Zelensky.

Seriously, this is a hill you want to die on?
 
vraiblonde

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
SamSpade said:
So near as I can see, both charges have nothing behind them. I hope - but won't hold my breath - that SOME Democrats will vote against it because they have to answer to voters who will ask - WTF were you thinking? You ran on reaching across the aisle and cooperating - and you VOTED on THAT?
Click to expand...

2020 is going to be interesting. I can almost feel sorry for these low level Dem Congresscritters in shaky districts. They can either get re-elected OR they can show solidarity with their Party. The Dem leadership really hosed them over with this.
 
S

Stjohns3269

Active Member
SamSpade said:
You realize of course, without the first charge - the second charge is bogus. I say it's bogus on its face, because it hinges on the fact that Congress believes the White House answers to them. It's been established since at least the 80's that the President can claim executive privilege to refuse to appear.

So near as I can see, both charges have nothing behind them. I hope - but won't hold my breath - that SOME Democrats will vote against it because they have to answer to voters who will ask - WTF were you thinking? You ran on reaching across the aisle and cooperating - and you VOTED on THAT?
Click to expand...


Which House has passed over 400 pieces of legislation that the other house has refused to take a vote on?

Executive privilege does not cover the phone call or instructing his aides to ignore subpoena requests.
 
S

Stjohns3269

Active Member
SamSpade said:
He refers to OUR country in the next clause of the same sentence. And every time elsewhere when he says 'us' (or 'we')- he clearly means either the country, or he and Zelensky.

Seriously, this is a hill you want to die on?
Click to expand...


So then why does Trump feel the need to clarify?
 
SamSpade

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Stjohns3269 said:
Which House has passed over 400 pieces of legislation that the other house has refused to take a vote on?

Executive privilege does not cover the phone call or instructing his aides to ignore subpoena requests.
Click to expand...

Uhh, under Trump - or any session under Obama? I'll wait.
 
vraiblonde

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Gilligan said:
In other words...they came up empty handed. Both of those "charges" are bogus, vague and entirely political.
Click to expand...

AND most people understand that. Sure, there are a handful of durhards on the internet crowing about how great this is, but they are not even close to the majority of voters.

So now what happens with all the Senators running for the 2020 nomination? Do you suppose this is all a big conspiracy to get rid of Booker, Klobuchar, etc? But then they also get rid of Bernie and Lizzie as well. I mean, they can't just go, "Sorry, running for President. Can't make it."

Or can they?

The Senate isn't going to vote to convict anyway, so why would Elizabeth Warren suspend her campaign to waste her time attending this trial?

Or maybe that's the plan - get rid of all of them and Joe Biden is the only one left, takes the nomination by default?

Their timing on this really sucked.
 
S

Stjohns3269

Active Member
vraiblonde said:
AND most people understand that. Sure, there are a handful of durhards on the internet crowing about how great this is, but they are not even close to the majority of voters.

So now what happens with all the Senators running for the 2020 nomination? Do you suppose this is all a big conspiracy to get rid of Booker, Klobuchar, etc? But then they also get rid of Bernie and Lizzie as well. I mean, they can't just go, "Sorry, running for President. Can't make it."

Or can they?

The Senate isn't going to vote to convict anyway, so why would Elizabeth Warren suspend her campaign to waste her time attending this trial?

Or maybe that's the plan - get rid of all of them and Joe Biden is the only one left, takes the nomination by default?

Their timing on this really sucked.
Click to expand...


So you believe the law should on be followed at certain convenient times?

Did you feel the same way during the Clinton impeachment that since only one house would impeach it was a waste of time?
 
SamSpade

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
vraiblonde said:
Their timing on this really sucked.
Click to expand...

That's why they're in a hurry - they want this done fast, so they can get on with it.
It's also why I disagree with Lindsay Graham, who says he thinks the country's been through enough and wants it over.
Oh hell no. Take your time - if the issue is JUSTICE, then it can wait. Scrutinize everything. If the REAL reason is to find out what Trump intended to do or what he said or what he did - it can bear up over time.

They don't want that at all. They have a loser they have to unload - they didn't expect the transcript to be released, so they gambled they HAD him.
And lost. If they don't impeach, they lose. If they do impeach - they lose, actually probably MORE. Getting it done fast is damage control, so it might be forgotten come November.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top