No surprise that Democrat controlled House vited to impeach almost all along party lines.
But short of a radical shock, the Senate will acquit.
In which case .... what was the point?
We might think that even getting this far would damage him beyond repair but the polling I've seen (usual caveats about polling apply) suggest it hasn't harmed him a bit with voters, and some even show a small bump in ratings.
A lesson learned from PeterB about dignity in adversity, so Peter, In Memorium, "Onwards and Upwards".
The problem is, the Democrats have spent the last three years planning this, expecting the people to support them, and allowing them to push through an otherwise unacceptable candidate. Instead we have this ridiculous farce, and Democratic candidates that are only slightly better than Clinton. Meanwhile the economy is roaring, and Trump really hasn't screwed up that much.. There's a really good chance he'll be reelected, and the Democrats have no one to blame but their own rage.
Exactly. The thing is if you try and take out someone who half the country voted for 60+ million (irrespective if you agree/disagree with his politics or him being an ahole) what are you telling those voters that their vote is invalid its a bit like brexit almost.Originally Posted by Saracen999
I'm at a loss here too. I thought this was for when you have hard evidence that meant even the presidents own party would vote him out as would have happened to Nixon if he'd held on.
To me the democrats have shot themselves in the foot, they've given him his election ammo by setting up a trial they know he'll win. It just seems like a waste of everyone's time and an easy victory for Trump.
There was an interesting interview with one analyst who opined that the democrats had a choice between their "impeach by Christmas" promise, or doing the job properly. And they chose "impeach by Christmas", thereby setting up an almost certain Senate acquittal by not presenting sufficient evidence of (alleged) malfeasance that they might get the 20-ish Republicans to vote sgainst Trump that would be needed to convict.
What they should have done, he said, was invest the extra time taking the Whitehouse's refusal to accept "invitations" to testify before the courts and get tge various leading figures subpoena'd and compelled to testify. But it would have taken several extra months. Assuming they won the no-doubt contested fights to get subpoenas, of course.
Instead, they seem to wsnt the Senate to do thrir job for them, and that notion is is already getting a dismissive put-down from Republicans in the Republican-controlled senate.
A lesson learned from PeterB about dignity in adversity, so Peter, In Memorium, "Onwards and Upwards".
I don't think anything will come of this, and as said, they've now given him ammo for his re-election.
It does have a certain 'Brexit' feel to in that the 'stop Brexit' movement felt like a politician driven crusade that was out of touch with a grass-roots reality.
No trees were harmed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were displaced and terribly inconvenienced.
It's a strange one. All those Rep senators who thought it was massively important for people to vote based on evidence when Clinton was impeached, have already vowed they will not listen to the evidence, and that they've already made up their minds.
Truth doesn't matter any more.
sammyc (19-12-2019)
Mitch McConnell has said Republicans will move to dismiss impeachment after opening statements.
The news being quietly buried is the release of The Afghanistan Papers. Evidence that successive US Governments lied to the US people in a similar manner to Blair in the UK. But no one wants to acknowledge that because Trump..
Never even heard of them, got a link?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_Papers
Original WaPo story is paywalled...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote