trump impeachment watch thread

[TheGreatYacht]

Trump Fundraising Skyrockets Post Impeachment

[ElNono]

#2 is not happening with Mitch at the helm, sorry. He simply has the authority not to bring that to a vote, and he will not. No amount of bickering will change that.

Forget about the Senate trial. Unless they’re planning to hold the articles until after the election, with the hope of switching the Senate (which would be a grave mistake), there’s simply no scenario where this works out the way you want it to work out.

The best that the Dems can do is let the record show it was the Senate that carried out the dereliction of duty. There’s simply much better things for them to campaign on going into 2020, like healthcare, than having an impeachment process they can’t win take front and center and allow Trump to continue to play the victim card.

[ElNono]

BTW, other than trolling Trump, the House has zero leverage.

[Spurs Homer]

#2 is not happening with Mitch at the helm, sorry. He simply has the authority not to bring that to a vote, and he will not. No amount of bickering will change that.

Forget about the Senate trial. Unless they’re planning to hold the articles until after the election, with the hope of switching the Senate (which would be a grave mistake), there’s simply no scenario where this works out the way you want it to work out.

The best that the Dems can do is let the record show it was the Senate that carried out the dereliction of duty. There’s simply much better things for them to campaign on going into 2020, like healthcare, than having an impeachment process they can’t win take front and center and allow Trump to continue to play the victim card.

Not the way I understood it -

I may be wrong - but I am under the impression that ANY senator can make a request - and ask for a vote - and also that (at least Schumer) the dems can also demand a vote - where 51 votes are needed on any motion?

I get that the entire planet is 100% SURE - about the 67 votes to convict - NEVER happening -


but this is why you play the long game -

you rally for votes to be taken on witnesses, do ents and other evidence - and FORCE every senator to go down in history as either being impartial jurors -

or part of a sham.

Record the votes - or better yet - show it on TV and force them to face the public - for better or worse.


I am pretty sure - that what Moscow Mitch is praying for is for what YOU are advocating for -
which is basically - let the Repugs off the hook and just make it easy for them to rig the trial and acquit trump UNDER THE RADAR -


that.

[Spurs Homer]

oh yeah - btw:

as far as LEVERAGE?

Here it is:

The ing fact that Trump did what he is being accused of and there is SOLID EVIDENCE - SOLID PROOF -


THERE'S your ing leverage!

Force the country to pay attention and force the repugs and force trump to either;

Testify under oath, allow the main witnesses to testify under oath, and allow the evidence and do ents/emails/texts -

to be provided -

or

show the country how much of a COVER UP it is.

That would be the LAST thing moscow mitch wants.

[Reck]

BTW, other than trolling Trump, the House has zero leverage.

That in itself is leverage. Triggering Trump and making him look like a total unhinged loser is likely (but not really) to make the in-danger republicans want to at least have some witnesses to make the trial half rigged.

[ElNono]

Not the way I understood it -

I may be wrong - but I am under the impression that ANY senator can make a request - and ask for a vote - and also that (at least Schumer) the dems can also demand a vote - where 51 votes are needed on any motion?

I get that the entire planet is 100% SURE - about the 67 votes to convict - NEVER happening -


but this is why you play the long game -

you rally for votes to be taken on witnesses, do ents and other evidence - and FORCE every senator to go down in history as either being impartial jurors -

or part of a sham.

Record the votes - or better yet - show it on TV and force them to face the public - for better or worse.


I am pretty sure - that what Moscow Mitch is praying for is for what YOU are advocating for -
which is basically - let the Repugs off the hook and just make it easy for them to rig the trial and acquit trump UNDER THE RADAR -


that.

Procedurally, any senator can request what’s known as a “up or down vote”. There’s nothing in the Cons ution that says the Senate must honor that, however, that’s why it’s intrinsically procedural.

However, that doesn’t apply to an impeachment proceeding either. What’s going to happen in the Senate is what happened in the House: there will be a set of rules crafted by the majority to conduct the trial, and voted overwhelmingly on party lines, and that’s how the trial will be conducted.

While Schumer requested that those rules include X or Y, there simply won’t be any such thing, as the Dems simply do not have any leverage or numbers to make any claims, plus Mitch simply does not care that his Senate even pretends to have any sort of fairness in the process and has said as much.

This is really a battle the Dems can’t win as far as removal goes. It doesn’t mean they should just give up and hand Trump a second term, it would be much wiser to focus on the big picture, where they clearly have an advantage.

[ElNono]

That in itself is leverage. Triggering Trump and making him look like a total unhinged loser is likely (but not really) to make the in-danger republicans want to at least have some witnesses to make the trial half rigged.

It might work for the Dem base, but that’s exactly who he’s been for the past 3 years. Everybody knows he’s a unhinges con man. That’s not going to change any Senate rules.

[Spurs Homer]

Procedurally, any senator can request what’s known as a “up or down vote”. There’s nothing in the Cons ution that says the Senate must honor that, however, that’s why it’s intrinsically procedural.

However, that doesn’t apply to an impeachment proceeding either. What’s going to happen in the Senate is what happened in the House: there will be a set of rules crafted by the majority to conduct the trial, and voted overwhelmingly on party lines, and that’s how the trial will be conducted.

While Schumer requested that those rules include X or Y, there simply won’t be any such thing, as the Dems simply do not have any leverage or numbers to make any claims, plus Mitch simply does not care that his Senate even pretends to have any sort of fairness in the process and has said as much.

This is really a battle the Dems can’t win as far as removal goes. It doesn’t mean they should just give up and hand Trump a second term, it would be much wiser to focus on the big picture, where they clearly have an advantage.

Schumer stated that he could force votes -

so I will take him at his word for now -

he specifically stated that he could force a vote and force senators like romney and collins and gardner to have to vote and if they choose to just vote (51 votes) to have zero witnesses and zero trial - then so be it =

their cons uents would then decide their fates.

It would be pretty damning if those senators go along with a complete sham and then lose their senate seats -

the conventional thinking is that those vulnerable senators at least want to "make it appear to be fair"

so this is where Schumer will press hardest on.

[Blake]

Trash outs the Ukraine whistleblower, committing a Federal felony, impeachable.

There'll be less and less whistle blowers in the future

[spurraider21]

oh yeah - btw:

as far as LEVERAGE?

Here it is:

The ing fact that Trump did what he is being accused of and there is SOLID EVIDENCE - SOLID PROOF -


THERE'S your ing leverage!

Force the country to pay attention and force the repugs and force trump to either;

Testify under oath, allow the main witnesses to testify under oath, and allow the evidence and do ents/emails/texts -

to be provided -

or

show the country how much of a COVER UP it is.

That would be the LAST thing moscow mitch wants.

the house has no leverage in that senate ultimately controls the trial proceedings.

house holding the articles does nothing to force the senate's hand. as as mitch is concerned, he has no problem with the articles not being delivered to the senate tbh

[boutons_deux]

There'll be less and less whistle blowers in the future

USA has nearly always persecuted or variously screwed or imprisoned whistlblowers.

In the current Trash atmosphere of hate and violence, I would not be surprised if Trash's whistleblower were murdered.

[Spurs Homer]

the house has no leverage in that senate ultimately controls the trial proceedings.

house holding the articles does nothing to force the senate's hand. as as mitch is concerned, he has no problem with the articles not being delivered to the senate tbh

That is what moscow mitch is saying- but not necessarily true.

There are vulnerable senators that have to be careful and - yes- they might be forced to actually vote

yes - mcconnell has control - but he ultimately wants to stay in majority control of the senate- so he can rig the trial at his own peril

also

trump will whine and cry and pressure mitch to acquit him BEFORE the SOTU

- you think trump wants to give his SOTU address while the trial is still pending- or worse yet - ongoing?

I dont think mitch is just free to do whatever he wants- he also has to be very careful in how he plays this.

[ElNono]

Schumer stated that he could force votes -

so I will take him at his word for now -

he specifically stated that he could force a vote and force senators like romney and collins and gardner to have to vote and if they choose to just vote (51 votes) to have zero witnesses and zero trial - then so be it =

their cons uents would then decide their fates.

It would be pretty damning if those senators go along with a complete sham and then lose their senate seats -

the conventional thinking is that those vulnerable senators at least want to "make it appear to be fair"

so this is where Schumer will press hardest on.

Yeah, no. I mean, let’s suppose Schumer forces a vote and all those senators vote yes, we want witnesses. It’s non-binding, because they’re not voting on the actual trial rules. Mitch will simply not bring up the vote on the rules until he has the yes votes on no witnesses and anything else he wants to pass.

And so, ultimately, it really doesn’t matter what Schumer wants vs what Schumer can get. That’s why he went to the press before even trying to negotiate anything, so he could hope public opinion would force Mitch’s hand. But it won’t, because Mitch don’t really give a about looks.

[ElNono]

That is what moscow mitch is saying- but not necessarily true.

There are vulnerable senators that have to be careful and - yes- they might be forced to actually vote

yes - mcconnell has control - but he ultimately wants to stay in majority control of the senate- so he can rig the trial at his own peril

also

trump will whine and cry and pressure mitch to acquit him BEFORE the SOTU

- you think trump wants to give his SOTU address while the trial is still pending- or worse yet - ongoing?

I dont think mitch is just free to do whatever he wants- he also has to be very careful in how he plays this.

I might be misguided here, but there’s no scenario with the current Senate makeup I can see where:

A) The House has any leverage whatsoever to force the Senate rules to be ‘fair’
B) The Senate minority has any power to do anything whatsoever about it
C) Trump is not only not removed but completely exonerated in a straight party line vote

But we all knew this when the process started, so it shouldn’t be a surprise. It doesn’t invalidate the process itself either.

That’s why I was pointing out that justice will have to come at a later date, and the House would be wise to understand that too.

[Winehole23]

I know it’s not a popular opinion, especially to those fervently looking for revenge (much more than justice). Look, it’s not happening in this impeachment proceedings. Get that out of your head right now. It wasn’t happening when this process started and it won’t be happening now. You knew the Senate wouldn’t remove, because it *is* a political process, not a judicial one.

That doesn’t mean the process shouldn’t have happened. It matters historically, and that’s what people coming after us, hopefully looking back to make sure they don’t make the same mistakes, will look at.

Mitch is a sinister character for our democracy. So is Dear Leader. History should reflect that front and center, because you can’t politically win the short game, but if you want to win the long one, you need to make sure not to get right smack in the middle of the people that did the wrong thing.

Take the Garland example, since Wino brought it up. Mitch universally shat on the Cons ution, I think we can all agree on that. Is the response to on the Cons ution to spite him too? That’s not right. You’re supposed to be better and hold the higher standard.

IMO anyways

I think it's reasonable to take the information as parceled out by the courts. There's zero reason to think Trump will cease grifting

[boutons_deux]

rts. There's zero reason to think Trump will cease grifting

If Nancy allows Moscow Mitch to run his Russian show trial and "exonerate" criminal Trash, Trash will be much worse in every sense in 2020.

I read that Dems are looking into more A of I using Mueller's multiple cases of Trash obstructing investigations.

[ElNono]

I think it's reasonable to take the information as parceled out by the courts. There's zero reason to think Trump will cease grifting

Sure, but this isn’t a court proceeding, it’s a political proceeding. The kind of ‘justice’ some people are looking for, based on facts, will have to wait.

[boutons_deux]

Sure, but this isn’t a court proceeding, it’s a political proceeding. The kind of ‘justice’ some people are looking for, based on facts, will have to wait.

There are FACTS in the A of I, and FACTS in Mueller, no need to wait.

And more FACTS, impeach Kavanaugh for lying in his confirmation hearings.

[Spurs Homer]

I might be misguided here, but there’s no scenario with the current Senate makeup I can see where:

A) The House has any leverage whatsoever to force the Senate rules to be ‘fair’
B) The Senate minority has any power to do anything whatsoever about it
C) Trump is not only not removed but completely exonerated in a straight party line vote

But we all knew this when the process started, so it shouldn’t be a surprise. It doesn’t invalidate the process itself either.

That’s why I was pointing out that justice will have to come at a later date, and the House would be wise to understand that too.

you might be correct

however

pelosi could try something different-
for example- she could hold the articles and wait for the June court rulings which could give the dems all the do ents and possible force witnesses to testify

that would be a ballsy move but history and the american public would have to be pretty favorable if this was all in a quest for the truth and a fair trial

i just see no scenario where it is better for the dems to roll over and stop fighting now

[Chris]

[ChumpDumper]

Why would Biden testify if Donald Trump is on trial, Qhris?

[ElNono]

you might be correct

however

pelosi could try something different-
for example- she could hold the articles and wait for the June court rulings which could give the dems all the do ents and possible force witnesses to testify

that would be a ballsy move but history and the american public would have to be pretty favorable if this was all in a quest for the truth and a fair trial

i just see no scenario where it is better for the dems to roll over and stop fighting now

There’s a risk that people just stop caring about it. See: Benghazi. You can only stretch something for so long before it turns into attention whoring and fake outrage.

[koriwhat]

hmm... interesting... where's the leftist outcry though?

[Spurs Homer]

There’s a risk that people just stop caring about it. See: Benghazi. You can only stretch something for so long before it turns into attention whoring and fake outrage.

Maybe - but there is a huge difference -

Benghazi was just repugs playing politics -and there was ZERO case, ZERO evidence, and no one gave a -
same as the EMAIL thing - no one gave two s about emails - and all you have to do to bring some perspective into this one - is to look at Jared/Ivanka and half the white house staff doing worse email than lery -

to see why that went nowhere.


In this case the evidence is overwhelming and we have a smoking gun, a confession from the criminal traitor, a confession from his chief of staff, 18 trump admin witnesses to corroborate the ery and all this -

WITHOUT one shred of cooperation/do ents/witnesses from the traitor -


so this is just another universe and yes - people will care enough about this to boot a load of repugs out of office IF the dems play this right - and rolling over now is not an option.