Trump isnt being accused of any crimes but dont let facts get in the way of your screed, carry on.1. Ignore the facts, the law, and the constitution, and acquit trump. This will give them a legacy forever of terrible corruption (on that - they already have it on policy), please the base, make them pariahs to non-Republicans, risk a massive electoral loss in 2020, and give them a lawless, out of control trump who will feel more than even no rules apply to him and all Republicans have to be his servants.
Not to make Hitler comparisons in other ways here, but it reminds me a bit of when German leaders thought they could control Hitler, and he ended up a powerful dictator with all of them at his mercy. It will cement Republicans as the party of trump and nothing more, nothing less. It'll be as if the Republicans had completely let Joe McCarthy own the party to chase votes.
2. Vote to remove trump. In my opinion, they'd be helping themselves long term, but it's not an attractive choice politically either. trump and his 90% of the party would largely be at war with all who did. It'd either be most of them, or split the party's politicians.
It'd be a very popular move with the rest of the country, but unlikely to get them many of those votes. They'd have some 'honor' for following their oaths, the constitution, but not much more. We'd have a president Mike Pence, who the obvious comparison to is Gerald Ford. Someone who was unpopular, and has done little to build support for him as president.
My point is, they have no 'good' choices in terms of a political win. They have to either take their no-trump medicine to get rid of the disease but have continuing side effects, or stay sick with a real threat of being crippled as trump takes over.
Blame? Republicans have been horribly corrupt which led voters to want someone like trump; those voters have caused this mess as a result. Like a drug addict who feels fine if they take the drug but it harms them, Republicans will 'feel fine' in the short term with their base if they acquit, but will make things a lot worse.
They'd like any out - to say the Democrats are wrong and they're right.
The Democrats have been far too effective for them to have that option outside their base. Sadly, there's probably a 95-98% chance they'll take option 1. We've seen a lot of them lying and attacking House Democrats; none who have said the excellent case by the Democrats is making them consider convicting trump.
At this point, it appears even a 'Nixon Tapes' event be would to unlikely change their votes - it's just pure corruption defending the crimes. They are now approving of a president committing crimes and completely using his powers to cover them up and denying Congress's oversight role forever. But they're painted into a corner with only those options. Whether they allow witnesses or not.
1. Ignore the facts, the law, and the constitution, and acquit trump. This will give them a legacy forever of terrible corruption (on that - they already have it on policy), please the base, make them pariahs to non-Republicans, risk a massive electoral loss in 2020, and give them a lawless, out of control trump who will feel more than even no rules apply to him and all Republicans have to be his servants.
Not to make Hitler comparisons in other ways here, but it reminds me a bit of when German leaders thought they could control Hitler, and he ended up a powerful dictator with all of them at his mercy. It will cement Republicans as the party of trump and nothing more, nothing less. It'll be as if the Republicans had completely let Joe McCarthy own the party to chase votes.
2. Vote to remove trump. In my opinion, they'd be helping themselves long term, but it's not an attractive choice politically either. trump and his 90% of the party would largely be at war with all who did. It'd either be most of them, or split the party's politicians.
It'd be a very popular move with the rest of the country, but unlikely to get them many of those votes. They'd have some 'honor' for following their oaths, the constitution, but not much more. We'd have a president Mike Pence, who the obvious comparison to is Gerald Ford. Someone who was unpopular, and has done little to build support for him as president.
My point is, they have no 'good' choices in terms of a political win. They have to either take their no-trump medicine to get rid of the disease but have continuing side effects, or stay sick with a real threat of being crippled as trump takes over.
Blame? Republicans have been horribly corrupt which led voters to want someone like trump; those voters have caused this mess as a result. Like a drug addict who feels fine if they take the drug but it harms them, Republicans will 'feel fine' in the short term with their base if they acquit, but will make things a lot worse.
They'd like any out - to say the Democrats are wrong and they're right.
The Democrats have been far too effective for them to have that option outside their base. Sadly, there's probably a 95-98% chance they'll take option 1. We've seen a lot of them lying and attacking House Democrats; none who have said the excellent case by the Democrats is making them consider convicting trump.
At this point, it appears even a 'Nixon Tapes' event be would to unlikely change their votes - it's just pure corruption defending the crimes. They are now approving of a president committing crimes and completely using his powers to cover them up and denying Congress's oversight role forever. But they're painted into a corner with only those options. Whether they allow witnesses or not.
The Trump hater's case is based on a lie. The Senators should realize this and be honest enough to vote based on the knowledge of this lie.
Trump isnt being accused of any crimes but dont let facts get in the way of your screed, carry on.
Murkowski already trying to give herself an out to voting for witnesses and documents via BS.
She has adopted the "the House rushed the process by not going to Court to support their Subpoenas" talking point. Completely ignoring the fact that the President did not assert an Executive Privilege during the House proceedings. Trump and his WH defense team just said NO to witnesses and documents. Trump literally forced the House to Impeach him as there is no Court Remedy to a President that just says NO. There is Impeachment. That is all we have to deal with such a President.
So Murkowski is already using a false narrative and a strawman to try to give herself a little elbow room to vote no AGAIN on witnesses and documents.
Barrasso misspoke this morning claiming that if the House case is so strong at the end of the presentations, then he won't need witnesses and documents. Really Senator? So you are saying then that if you do not vote for witnesses or documents it will be because you are going to vote for Conviction? Is that really what you wanted to say Senator?
It will all come down to how they vote. All the Senatorial comments up to the vote mean nothing.....just the usual DC two-step.
So this is where our country has landed. The US has had many enemies over the centuries but never had one from within that would destroy us. While Americans were looking at Russia, China and N. Korea, scrutinizing them as our 'enemy', the enemies to our country were right here in plain sight. Millions of young men and women have given their lives for this democracy, it was worth fighting for. Now it is being handed over to a plutocracy.
Right won't be right, wrong won't be wrong. Final score. Democracy-0 Plutocracy-1
Impeachable offenses do not have to be crimes but do not let facts get in the way of your nonsense
The Trump hater's case is based on a lie. The Senators should realize this and be honest enough to vote based on the knowledge of this lie.
According to the US Constitution they do, but since when has the US Constitution ever concerned Democrats?
What lie? Be prepared to support your claims (not the anyone expects that you will).
According to the US Constitution they do, but since when has the US Constitution ever concerned Democrats?
what is the "lie" upon which the case against tRump is based?
What lie? Be prepared to support your claims (not the anyone expects that you will).
No, there is no such stipulation. Your claim is false.
Source: Article II, Section 4, Clause 1 of the US Constitution (emphasis added)The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
The trumpers keep talking about this lie but no one seems to know what the lie is. Anyone out there know what lie the republicans are basing this defense on?
Federal Code Statutory Crimes are not required to Impeach a President. That one is an utterly absurd contention. The Federal Code did not even exist when the Impeachment Clause was written into the Constitution.
wow, watching the trial it never ceases to amaze me how good Dems are at pontificating. It's like a natural skill for them.
The Trump hater's case is based on a lie. The Senators should realize this and be honest enough to vote based on the knowledge of this lie.
Very melodramatic, but not based on reality.
The US Constitution cites very specific crimes, not federal code. You might try reading the US Constitution for a change.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?