Trump battles with Democrats as impeachment pressure grows (1 Viewer)

[GDViking]

Hypocrites. They love Bill for screwing an intern in the Oval Office and hate Trump for saying he could grab a *****! Democrats are stupid people.

So you do understand the difference between consensual and assault, good for you!!!

 

[GreatNews2night]

No you should absolutely seek impeachment.

My problem with it, is that it will accomplish nothing (we'd need two thirds of Congress to convict and remove, and this is NEVER going to happen, given that GOP Senators are now little more than a rubber stamp, always appeasing Trump and never confronting him, terrified of his rabid base and what they'd do to their primary re-election prospects), and it will likely alienate centrist/moderate voters, a segment that will be needed to defeat Trump in 2020.

If impeaching Trump in the House (and failing to remove him in the Senate) results in his victory for a second term, then it will be a huge mistake.

Nancy Pelosi who is no fool, thinks the same way.

 

[tres borrachos]

If that we're the case, ( it's not ) then Mueller would have issued a criminal impeachment referral instead of passing the buck to Barr and Rosenstien

Transcript: Bill Barr answers questions about Mueller report - Axios

Barr: But I will say that when we met*with him, Deputy Attorney*General Rosenstein and I met*with him, along with Ed*o'Callaghan, who is the*principal associate deputy, on*March 5th.

We specifically asked*him about the OLC opinion and*whether or not he was taking a*position that he would have*found a crime but for the*existence of the OLC opinion.*And he made it very clear*several times that that was not*his position. "*


Honestly, if the Mueller report showed 10 separate instances of actual criminal obstruction, the Democrats wouldn't just be talking about impeachment, they would have voted on already and probably picked up a few GOP voters too

The Democrats and the media spent the last 2 years investing everything into the false narrative of collusion and obstruction.
So they can either admit to their voters and supporters they were wrong, or they can just pretend the Mueller report was never released

They don't possess the collective integrity and humility to admit they were wrong, so of-course they're going to continue to manipulate their supporters

Except the Mueller report did specifically reference 10 instances of potential obstruction.

If Mueller could have exonerated him of obstruction, he would have. He couldn't. He left it up to Congress, knowing how the process is supposed to work.

No, the Democrats are not stupid, as you seem to hope they are. They weren't going to vote to impeach immediately considering they have not even seen the unredacted version of his report nor the Grand Jury information.

I'm rather surprised that you don't know any of this.

 

[hanger4]

I had suspected that you were using the word "control" in a novel and idiosyncratic way.

I already knew that you had no idea what control of the Senate entails.

If party R can't get their legislative agenda passed because of party B's filibuster then party R has no control.

 

[Trump]

So you do understand the difference between consensual and assault, good for you!!!

I know when Bill Clinton Rapes Dems are noticeably silent. Ask Juanita Broaddrick

 

[hanger4]

Nuclear option can be applied. Sorry you don’t like facts.

Not on legislation, just on nominations.

 

[Crystal]

My problem with it, is that it will accomplish nothing (we'd need two thirds of Congress to convict and remove, and this is NEVER going to happen, given that GOP Senators are now little more than a rubber stamp, always appeasing Trump and never confronting him, terrified of his rabid base and what they'd do to their primary re-election prospects), and it will likely alienate centrist/moderate voters, a segment that will be needed to defeat Trump in 2020.

If impeaching Trump in the House (and failing to remove him in the Senate) results in his victory for a second term, then it will be a huge mistake.

Nancy Pelosi who is no fool, thinks the same way.

So democrats are cowards and will not stand on their convictions? I see.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

I already knew that you had no idea what control of the Senate entails.
If party R can't get their legislative agenda passed because of party B's filibuster then party R has no control.

The Senate itself uses the 51 or more guideline when they use the word control.

So, your version of the word may be technically or linguistically viable, but it is different than the common usage of the phrase "control of the Senate".


From the Senate's own website U.S. Senate: Party Division

[FONT=&quot] Senator James Jeffords of Vermont announced his switch from Republican to Independent status, effective June 6, 2001. Jeffords announced that he would caucus with the Democrats, giving the Democrats a one-seat advantage, changing control of the Senate from the Republicans back to the Democrats
[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]

:shrug:[/FONT]

 

[Anthony60]

I disagree, this is not about a blowjob, everyone knew Republicans were reaching to attack Clinton for one incident that should have been between himself and his wife and never should have been made public.

With trump this is a case of many, many examples of criminal activity inside the Whitehouse, against the best interests of America, and only in trumps best interest...

BIG difference!!!

Well, there's that lying under oath as a sitting President. Oh, and on video. Even with that, I felt it was mostly payback for Nixon.

Now, it Trumps case (or complete lack of one), there was a multimillion dollar, two year investigation that came up with nothing on Trump. The Democrats have been squawking about impeachment from even before Trump took office. Could it not be more obviously political? They don't even have a crime. I think they are absolutely stunned that they could not come up with ANYTHING after 2 years, on Trump. They were soooo sure the SC would do it. Like they were sure the Hillary would win easily. Their solution is to just say "obstruction" over and over again, until their base believes it. Which is a very short time with the low information types. They believe what they are told.

Any party that controls the House can impeach, but it is rare. And you have to have something, anything, to even think about it. In this case, the RINO Never Trumpers gave the Democrats enough leeway to get a SC appointed. They actually thought they would get Trump out within the first year, the Dems and the leftist media. Remember that?

But, that ship has sailed. RINO's won't stick their necks out for the Dems, and Pelosi knows it. She's not sticking her neck out for anyone.

 

[GreatNews2night]

By the way, Trump thrives in a fight. He probably secretly wants the Dems to try to move forward with impeachment. He will keep whining about a witch hunt, will do the victim, and will motivate his base even more.

People who voted for him in 2016 and are starting to turn against him and are considering voting against him in 2020 will be turned off and will think "the Dems are trying to invalidate my vote" and revengefully will vote for him again in 2020.

Moderates who believed in the idea that Mueller didn't find enough evidence to indict him (Barr efficiently led people to this conclusion although that wasn't exactly what Mueller expressed) will feel alienated by the impeachment effort. Moderates are the swing voters who will be needed in a close election (and believe me, it will be close).

Dems shouldn't run simply by being anti-Trump. They should of course be anti-Trump, but not only that. They should also present a viable platform, with attractive ideas for the American people. They should get a viable candidate who will gather the support not only of the registered Democrats, but also the centrists and independents swing voters. They should attract for example farmers who are upset with the tariffs that are hindering their business and feel disillusioned with Trump. Impeachment would alienate these voters.

Focusing on impeachment which would be a long and bruising battle, will be detrimental to the focus on what I've just mentioned - a viable platform that is appealing to Americans at large.

Let's not underestimate Trump. His economy is seemingly good (because the ill effects of some disastrous measures such as the huge deficit-inducing tax cuts will only manifest with a 2-year delay). He is the incumbent. He has 80% approval rate among conservatives.

To beat him in 2020 Democrats need to be united and focused, and need to bring in moderates and independents. The election is getting closer. Focus needs to be on the campaign, not on the huge and long effort that impeachment would entail - just to be then, cancelled by the Senate's failure to convict and remove.

 

[GreatNews2night]

So democrats are cowards and will not stand on their convictions? I see.

No, what I propose, is the focus on the bigger objective, which is to remove Trump from the White House. Priorities, priorities.

We are one year and a half from the end of Trump's first term. Even if impeachment and removal could succeed (they can't) the entire process would practically coincide with the end of his term.

There is a much more efficient way to kick him out of the White House, and much less traumatic for the nation: defeating him on election day in 2020.

I think that going the impeachment route (which is futile) may actually lead to his electoral victory in 2020.

Look, do you want just to make waves, or do you want him out of the White House? Because I'm sorry to break the news to you, but impeachment doesn't remove a president from the White House. The Senate does, and by a two-thirds majority. Do you actually think that two thirds of the Senate will want to remove Trump? Dream on.

I'm just being realistic, here.

 

[Zoupish]

What are the charges?

At this point, the definite ones are:
Conspiracy to commit money laundering for conspiring with Cohen to set up a shell corporation to conceal payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal.
Felony campaign finance violation for the money paid to conceal his affairs.
Making false statements to a financial institutions by inflating his net worth in seeking a loan from Deutsche Bank to see a loan to by the Buffalo Bills.
Self dealing in the operation of the Trump Foundation
Knowingly signing a materially false tax return for the above.

Mueller seems to have left the issue of obstruction to for congress to deal with, so it's unlikely anything will happen from that after impeachment likely fails in the senate. Though, there are still lots of investigations into Trump world. For example the suspicious activity reports that Deutsche Bank executives failed to pass on to Treasury in 2016 and 2017. Should be interesting.

 

[Trump]

By the way, Trump thrives in a fight. He probably secretly wants the Dems to try to move forward with impeachment. He will keep whining about a witch hunt, will do the victim, and will motivate his base even more.

People who voted for him in 2016 and are starting to turn against him and are considering voting against him in 2020 will be turned off and will think "the Dems are trying to invalidate my vote" and revengefully will vote for him again in 2020.

Moderates who believed in the idea that Mueller didn't find enough evidence to indict him (Barr efficiently led people to this conclusion although that wasn't exactly what Mueller expressed) will feel alienated by the impeachment effort. Moderates are the swing voters who will be needed in a close election (and believe me, it will be close).

Dems shouldn't run simply by being anti-Trump. They should of course be anti-Trump, but not only that. They should also present a viable platform, with attractive ideas for the American people. They should get a viable candidate who will gather the support not only of the registered Democrats, but also the centrists and independents swing voters. They should attract for example farmers who are upset with the tariffs that are hindering their business and feel disillusioned with Trump. Impeachment would alienate these voters.

Focusing on impeachment which would be a long and bruising battle, will be detrimental to the focus on what I've just mentioned - a viable platform that is appealing to Americans at large.

Let's not underestimate Trump. His economy is seemingly good (because the ill effects of some disastrous measures such as the huge deficit-inducing tax cuts will only manifest with a 2-year delay). He is the incumbent. He has 80% approval rate among conservatives.

To beat him in 2020 Democrats need to be united and focused, and need to bring in moderates and independents. The election is getting closer. Focus needs to be on the campaign, not on the huge and long effort that impeachment would entail - just to be then, cancelled by the Senate's failure to convict and remove.

don't leave out "crossfire Hurricane" boomer rang....thats not even on Dems radar....its gonna make Watergate Plumbers look like kids play....

 

[Simon W. Moon]

don't leave out "crossfire Hurricane" boomer rang....thats not even on Dems radar....its gonna make Watergate Plumbers look like kids play....

My breath is bated.

Just any second now, right?

 

[upsideguy]

That dog don’t hunt

It hunts a whole lot better than the dog of post that I had to respond to, which was devoid of fact and understanding.

 

[hanger4]

The Senate itself uses the 51 or more guideline when they use the word control.

So, your version of the word may be technically or linguistically viable, but it is different than the common usage of the phrase "control of the Senate".


From the Senate's own website U.S. Senate: Party Division

[FONT=&quot] Senator James Jeffords of Vermont announced his switch from Republican to Independent status, effective June 6, 2001. Jeffords announced that he would caucus with the Democrats, giving the Democrats a one-seat advantage, changing control of the Senate from the Republicans back to the Democrats
[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]

:shrug:[/FONT]

Proper word to use in that context would have been "majority". Without a 60 vote majority there is no control of the majorities legislative agenda. They can bring to the floor but they can't end debate.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Proper word to use in that context would have been "majority". Without a 60 vote majority there is no control of the majorities legislative agenda. They can bring to the floor but they can't end debate.

I noted that you may be able to make a case that your idiosyncratic use of the word may be viable but it not how the word is commonly used.
Your idiosyncratic use of the word is idiosyncratic.

 

[iguanaman]

I only attempted to point out the similarities in what the dems are saying now and what the GOP said then. They are almost word for word.

Burn me up? No I actually liked much of the Bill Clinton presidency. He governed from the center, did well with the economy and was able to pass major legislation. Wasn't crazy about the whole guidance system thing but overall I have a positive view of his presidency.

So you think this is all about a personal matter that has nothing to do with governing? It is all about Trump's possible conflicts of interests and violations of his oath of office and the Constitution.

 

[iguanaman]

Hypocrites. They love Bill for screwing an intern in the Oval Office and hate Trump for saying he could grab a *****! Democrats are stupid people.

We hate Trump because he is criminal who is using his office to thwart the law. That and he sold out this country to Putin.

 

[ocean515]

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-pelosi-democrats-impeachment/index.html

Trump battles with Democrats as impeachment pressure grows

• The latest: President Trump said he can't work with Democratic leaders while they were pursuing investigations into him and his administration. Trump ended a meeting with them on infrastructure lasted just 5 minutes.
• Meanwhile, on impeachment: Thereare growing tensions asHouse Speaker Nancy Pelosi toes the line between Democrats frustrated by their stonewalled investigations into President Trump and... President Trump.

Lindsey Graham's message for Trump: "Rise above it if you can"Sen. Lindsey Graham, a strong Trump ally in Congress, just tweeted that he's "never seen anybody treated this way."
The tweet comes just hours after Trump held a surprise speech in the Rose Garden, where he slammed Democrats and their pursuit of investigations into him.

I have a lot of sympathy for President Trump. I've never seen anybody treated this way.

All I would say is try to rise above it if you can. The country is looking for leadership. We need leadership.
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) May 22, 2019
​

​

Graham told CNN that he is sympathetic to Trump’s frustration but that the President should rise above and get some things done on spending and infrastructure.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Last night, Trump sent a message to the two leaders of the Democrats, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. In this message, Trump made it clear to them that if they refuse to support a new trade pact with Mexico and Canada that he would not do anything regarding passing an infrastructure bill. This is how a gangster operates. But then, Trump has lived his entire life as a gangster.

Now, Trump has threatened to do absolutely nothing unless all the investigations just go away. For people that weren't involved much in politics back in 1998, there were ongoing impeachment investigations in the House and Senate against Bill Clinton. Nevertheless, Bill Clinton was still open to working with Congress to pass some very significant legislation including a trade agreement with China, a summit with Putin and negotiating the Wye River Memorandum which resulted in an agreement highlighted by a three-stage withdrawal of Israeli troops from the West Bank.

Trump is abandoning the duties he swore to uphold on the day he was inaugurated. This isn't The Apprentice, this isn't a television show that he can manipulate and produce to his liking. This is the US government he's messing with, and our lives and the well being and safety of this country.

Actually, it's how a President acts when confronted with gangsters.

 

[haymarket]

Some folks here did not like it when I stated that there is a political war in this country. Each day proves it more and more and more and this is but a battle.

 

[iguanaman]

I agree you can impeach him on anything the house sees fit. Doesn't mean much without 67 votes so whatever, have at it, it's meaningless.

Many people care about the issues with the FISA applications and the alleged abuse of the IC spying on Americans. Spying on the president or major candidate of the presidency without just cause or for political purposes, is particularly horrifying. If they deceived the courts to do so, it must be addressed. May on both sides of the isle are concerned about the government spying on us without just cause. Liberals used to champion that idea.

There indeed may be something very illegal about " investigating Russian spies or their useful idiots." We have a system of checks and balances to preserve our freedoms and rights. If those are being violated by law enforcement no one should condone it. A cause once again liberals used to stand against.

LOL Trump overturning our checks and balances are another reason Trump should be thrown out of office. If you think anyone sane cares about us monitoring Carter Page you are a fool. He's been a Russian stooge for years.

 

[iguanaman]

Hypocrites. They love Bill for screwing an intern in the Oval Office and hate Trump for saying he could grab a *****! Democrats are stupid people.

You are the hypocrite for supporting a man who brags about assaulting women and dissing one who's "crime" was an affair between consenting adults.

 

[AlphaOmega]

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-pelosi-democrats-impeachment/index.html

Trump battles with Democrats as impeachment pressure grows

• The latest: President Trump said he can't work with Democratic leaders while they were pursuing investigations into him and his administration. Trump ended a meeting with them on infrastructure lasted just 5 minutes.
• Meanwhile, on impeachment: Thereare growing tensions asHouse Speaker Nancy Pelosi toes the line between Democrats frustrated by their stonewalled investigations into President Trump and... President Trump.

Lindsey Graham's message for Trump: "Rise above it if you can"Sen. Lindsey Graham, a strong Trump ally in Congress, just tweeted that he's "never seen anybody treated this way."
The tweet comes just hours after Trump held a surprise speech in the Rose Garden, where he slammed Democrats and their pursuit of investigations into him.

I have a lot of sympathy for President Trump. I've never seen anybody treated this way.

All I would say is try to rise above it if you can. The country is looking for leadership. We need leadership.
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) May 22, 2019
​

​

Graham told CNN that he is sympathetic to Trump’s frustration but that the President should rise above and get some things done on spending and infrastructure.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Last night, Trump sent a message to the two leaders of the Democrats, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. In this message, Trump made it clear to them that if they refuse to support a new trade pact with Mexico and Canada that he would not do anything regarding passing an infrastructure bill. This is how a gangster operates. But then, Trump has lived his entire life as a gangster.

Now, Trump has threatened to do absolutely nothing unless all the investigations just go away. For people that weren't involved much in politics back in 1998, there were ongoing impeachment investigations in the House and Senate against Bill Clinton. Nevertheless, Bill Clinton was still open to working with Congress to pass some very significant legislation including a trade agreement with China, a summit with Putin and negotiating the Wye River Memorandum which resulted in an agreement highlighted by a three-stage withdrawal of Israeli troops from the West Bank.

Trump is abandoning the duties he swore to uphold on the day he was inaugurated. This isn't The Apprentice, this isn't a television show that he can manipulate and produce to his liking. This is the US government he's messing with, and our lives and the well being and safety of this country.

What are we impeaching for again?

 

[Crystal]

You are the hypocrite for supporting a man who brags about assaulting women and dissing one who's "crime" was an affair between consenting adults.

Juanita Broderick comes to mind. He raped her.