McConnell won.

[Crazyhole]

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...-impeachment-articles-to-the-senate-next-week

Makes me wonder what he plan is next. 50-50 on this decision being made due to pressure to get it out of the news or plans for additional inquiries that support their position that makes senate Republicans look bad.

 

[firm_bizzle]

I don't understand why she would send them over. It will be a sham of a trial, McConnell already told her.

 

[Crazyhole]

I don't understand why she would send them over. It will be a sham of a trial, McConnell already told her.

They aren't worth anything if they dont go to the senate. It's like indicting someone but not bringing it to trial.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Impeachment was a partisan debacle. National embarrassment

 

[firm_bizzle]

They aren't worth anything if they dont go to the senate. It's like indicting someone but not bringing it to trial.

They aren't worth anything if they go to the Senate.

 

[sk8knight]

They aren't worth anything if they go to the Senate.

They aren’t worth anything whether they go to the Senate or not because it’s all a huge crock of shit and yet another monumental waste of taxpayer money. Unless the point was to polarize the country even more and cause us to lose even more faith in our institutions, this has achieved nothing. Nothing came of Trump’s request, Ukraine got their money without the investigation, Biden’s campaign hasn’t been damaged and he and his son have avoided investigation both domestically and abroad, and neither Biden nor Trump saw a bump or drop in the polls from any of this.

 

[DaShuckster]

They aren’t worth anything whether they go to the Senate or not because it’s all a huge crock of shit …

Yeah, it's not like Trump tried to pressure a vulnerable foreign country to announce a criminal investigation of his political rival or anything. That's like SO nothing!

...and yet another monumental waste of taxpayer money.

Where was your sanctimonious hand-wringing over money when the Republicans spend OVER 20 MILL investigating Benghazi? I forgot, what happened with those hearings?

Unless the point was to polarize the country even more and cause us to lose even more faith in our institutions, this has achieved nothing.

Well, I'll be damned! So its those Dems who are polarizing our country!!!

Thank God for our Unifier-in-Chief or this country would really be in bad shape, right?

 

[Crazyhole]

I still find it odd that trump would ask Ukraine to damage Bidens campaign 14 months before the general election. If his plot was so nefarious, he would have used it as an October surprise.

 

[DaShuckster]

I still find it odd that trump would ask Ukraine to damage Bidens campaign 14 months before the general election. If his plot was so nefarious, he would have used it as an October surprise.

Congress had already approved Ukraine's funding so Trump has to make his play while he still had some leverage.

 

[Crazyhole]

Congress had already approved Ukraine's funding so Trump has to make his play while he still had some leverage.

Um, they will do the same thing next year.

 

[anon_ki59ERik4csguoSd]

Trump's presidency was a partisan debacle. National embarrassment

FIFY

 

[Crazyhole]

They aren't worth anything if they go to the Senate.

Then what was the point? It had to go to the senate no matter who was in charge and they understood the partisan nature of it.

I think it would have been awesome if they had conducted the investigation, impeached him, and the senate would have evidence to remove him from office if for nothing else just taking their power back. Instead they used their most valuable weapon and now it's worth nothing. Precedent has been made and all presidents from now on won't fear impeachment because they proved that congress is incapable of holding any level of checks and balances. Trump killed soleimani and during the FISC briefing his officials basically said they can do whatever they want, essentially a "what are you going to do about it" position.

Take Lee and Paul for example. Both think the impeachment deal is a joke but both are livid about trumps position on the War-powers act. There are still some members of congress and the senate who will remain loyal to their oath and not take party lines. If trump bombs the heck out of Tehran, impeach him for that and I guarantee you there will be enough republican senators that break rank that he will be at risk of being removed. Stop with the willy-nilly he said she said bs that has to be rushed just to make a political statement.

 

[UCFKnight85]

FIFY

Imagine thinking this was a witty response

 

[sk8knight]

Yeah, it's not like Trump tried to pressure a vulnerable foreign country to announce a criminal investigation of his political rival or anything. That's like SO nothing!
Where was your sanctimonious hand-wringing over money when the Republicans spend OVER 20 MILL investigating Benghazi? I forgot, what happened with those hearings?
Well, I'll be damned! So its those Dems who are polarizing our country!!!

Thank God for our Unifier-in-Chief or this country would really be in bad shape, right?

Red Bold Italics. I feel special.

 

[Cubs79]

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...-impeachment-articles-to-the-senate-next-week

Makes me wonder what he plan is next. 50-50 on this decision being made due to pressure to get it out of the news or plans for additional inquiries that support their position that makes senate Republicans look bad.

I dont think you can say anybody won as of yet. I think witholding it and making news certainly got it on peoples minds that the Republicans might run a farce trial. If that happens, it might not resonate well with voters, in which case, I dont think you can say McConnell won. Also, it seems like a lot of Senate Republicans are now wanting witnesses, and if that happens, I dont think you can say McConnell won either. The reaction to the process is going to indicate who won, and we wont know that for a while.

 

[Crazyhole]

I dont think you can say anybody won as of yet. I think witholding it and making news certainly got it on peoples minds that the Republicans might run a farce trial. If that happens, it might not resonate well with voters, in which case, I dont think you can say McConnell won. Also, it seems like a lot of Senate Republicans are now wanting witnesses, and if that happens, I dont think you can say McConnell won either. The reaction to the process is going to indicate who won, and we wont know that for a while.

I'm just talking about political power. In this round, McConnell won because his goal was to get the impeachment articles sent over even if he didnt agree to Pelosis demands. From here on out, who knows what will happen.

 

[anon_ki59ERik4csguoSd]

Imagine thinking this was a witty response

salty

 

[goodknightfl]

I don't understand why she would send them over. It will be a sham of a trial, McConnell already told her.

Yeah, Trial is going to match impeachment. Just a waste of time and money.

 

[DaShuckster]

Red Bold Italics. I feel special.

Husker Red to boot!!!

 

[firm_bizzle]

They aren’t worth anything whether they go to the Senate or not because it’s all a huge crock of shit and yet another monumental waste of taxpayer money. Unless the point was to polarize the country even more and cause us to lose even more faith in our institutions, this has achieved nothing. Nothing came of Trump’s request, Ukraine got their money without the investigation, Biden’s campaign hasn’t been damaged and he and his son have avoided investigation both domestically and abroad, and neither Biden nor Trump saw a bump or drop in the polls from any of this.

So it's cool when the POTUS breaks the law? We should just look the other way?

 

[sk8knight]

So it's cool when the POTUS breaks the law? We should just look the other way?

Prove he broke the law and I have no problem with him paying the penalty for that. Unfortunately for you, the case hasn’t been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[DaShuckster]

Prove he broke the law and I have no problem with him paying the penalty for that. Unfortunately for you, the case hasn’t been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

The majority of the key witnesses were told by Trump not to testify in the impeachment hearings. Personally, if I were Nancy I would have pushed the issue through the Supreme Court. But that would have taken serious time (albeit through Nov. 2020) to get resolved so essentially the House was caught between a rock and a hard place.

So continue spewing your "the case wasn't proven" crappola, but we both know that's BS.

The reality is that Trump will be President through 2020 until a newly elected President takes office next January. IMHO, we dodged a bullet regarding the recent Iran situation. I just hope Trump's batsh*t crazy antics don't intensify as we get closer to November's election.

 

[firm_bizzle]

Prove he broke the law and I have no problem with him paying the penalty for that. Unfortunately for you, the case hasn’t been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

He extorted another country using taxpayer money in order to get help on his reelection campaign and he's obstructing key witnesses from testifying.

 

[firm_bizzle]

The majority of the key witnesses were told by Trump not to testify in the impeachment hearings. Personally, if I were Nancy I would have pushed the issue through the Supreme Court. But that would have taken serious time (albeit through Nov. 2020) to get resolved so essentially the House was caught between a rock and a hard place.

So continue spewing your "the case wasn't proven" crappola, but we both know that's BS.

The reality is that Trump will be President through 2020 until a newly elected President takes office next January. IMHO, we dodged a bullet regarding the recent Iran situation. I just hope Trump's batsh*t crazy antics don't intensify as we get closer to November's election.

That's why I would have held the articles of impeachment, more stuff comes out every day. As soon as the Senate acquits him the issue is over.

 

[Crazyhole]

That's why I would have held the articles of impeachment, more stuff comes out every day. As soon as the Senate acquits him the issue is over.

How so? The ultimate goal is to remove a president from office apparantly. Keep bringing new stuff up and get him voted out of office. The only argument against it is to say "the people are too stupid to make that decision", which is pretty much the entire premise of statism.

 

[sk8knight]

He extorted another country using taxpayer money in order to get help on his reelection campaign and he's obstructing key witnesses from testifying.

So you say. The transcript says that the American people are interested in it and he asked if they could do us a favor. You also cannot prove there was leverage applied of any kind and, in fact, the testimony says that they weren’t aware of any leverage or that there was no leverage. In a couple of cases, it wasn’t until Schiff presented his pretty fiction that the witnesses speculated that there could have been. None of that is proof of a crime.

 

[sk8knight]

And furthermore, the going around in circles until the next flimsy excuse to impeach Trump is getting old too. First it was non-collusion, then non-obstruction, then non-extortion, then some kind of obstruction again. It’s all just Trumped up outrage over bullshit that every politician has done and especially Presidents. It’s all because the Democrats just wont accept that their anointed one lost and that the Republican Party didn’t cease to function in 2012.

 

[anon_ki59ERik4csguoSd]

No. It's because he's that bad.

 

[sk8knight]

No. It's because he's that bad.

Yeah. And he was that bad before he was even sworn in when the Representative from CA created the ImpeachTrump PAC, right?

 

[DaShuckster]

Yeah. And he was that bad before he was even sworn in when the Representative from CA created the ImpeachTrump PAC, right?

Poor Baaaaaaby. The poor guy had to deal with some dingbat politician creating an ImpeachTrump PAC ...sob!...RIGHT OFF THE BAT!!!

You sure as hell didn't see any prominent dingbat questioning whether President Obama deserved to be in the highest Office in the Land right off the bat....oh wait...Who was it that championed the birther movement??!?!

 

[UCFWayne]

FIFY

i almost feel bad for you. jan 20 2025 is a really long time away. almost.

 

[anon_ki59ERik4csguoSd]

i almost feel bad for you. jan 20 2025 is a really long time away. almost.

Do you think igaf at this point? Hell, I might vote for Trump just because I think this country deserves to fail. The sooner we hit rock bottom, the sooner we can rebuild. Rome is busted.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Imagine if these loser Democrats had a way to remove the President from office in some other manner than ramming a partisan sham impeachment debacle through?

Oh well since no other means exist for replacing a President in this country, this national embarrassment must continue

 

[anon_ki59ERik4csguoSd]

Imagine if these loser Republicans had a way to win that didn't involve gerrymandering and getting the second most votes.

Oh well. Since half the country is okay with this, the U.S. will continue to be an embarrassment.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Imagine if these loser Republicans had a way to win that didn't involve gerrymandering and getting the second most votes.

Oh well. Since half the country is okay with this, the U.S. will continue to be an embarrassment.

Imagine being so briandead stupid that you believe that electoral college = gerrymandering

 

[anon_ki59ERik4csguoSd]

Imagine being so briandead stupid that you believe that electoral college = gerrymandering

Hey look, a conservative projecting again with his "briandead" stupidity. Sure hope Brian is okay, though. For real.

It must be nice to be in the party that consistently loses the vote, yet somehow stays in power. Keep on going Repugnicans! You're number 2! You're number 2!

 

[UCFKnight85]

Hey look, a conservative projecting again with his "briandead" stupidity. Sure hope Brian is okay, though. For real.

It must be nice to be in the party that consistently loses the vote, yet somehow stays in power. Keep on going Repugnicans! You're number 2! You're number 2!

Typical. Gets owned on substance so resorts to a misspell from autocorrect. How insanely and predictably petty

 

[anon_ki59ERik4csguoSd]

Typical. Gets owned on substance so resorts to a misspell from autocorrect. How insanely and predictably petty

Your reading comprehension must be horrible. I'm starting to doubt you ever went to UCF.

I said gerrymandering AND getting the second most votes. Not gerrymandering = electoral college.

You're so eager to own someone, you completely embarrass yourself by failing at basic reading comprehension.

 

[fried-chicken]

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...-impeachment-articles-to-the-senate-next-week

Makes me wonder what he plan is next. 50-50 on this decision being made due to pressure to get it out of the news or plans for additional inquiries that support their position that makes senate Republicans look bad.

Looks like it's being reported that enough republicans are against blocking witnesses that McConnell can't prevent testimony. So, maybe he didn't win. Maybe Pelosi has the votes she needs to get what she wants. Maybe that's why she sent it when she did.

https://lawandcrime.com/impeachment...peachment-charges-or-block-witnesses-reports/

 

[Boosted87]

Looks like it's being reported that enough republicans are against blocking witnesses that McConnell can't prevent testimony. So, maybe he didn't win. Maybe Pelosi has the votes she needs to get what she wants. Maybe that's why she sent it when she did.

https://lawandcrime.com/impeachment...peachment-charges-or-block-witnesses-reports/

I think the dynamics of witnesses and Trump trying to exert executive privilege will be fascinating. Senate calls a witness and Trump claims total immunity. The mere act of Roberts signing off on a subpoena would effectively render the total immunity argument moot. So the witness shows up for questions, but then asserts actual privilege that has some precedent in court rulings (like direct comms with POTUS).

House Managers will challenge that, arguing and citing the few cases on the subject, where privilege is always balanced against the public's right to transparent government. If there's any proceeding in which privilege goes to zero, it would be an impeachment trial. Roberts would then have full authority to make that determination.

However, any ruling he makes could be overturned with a simple 51 vote majority. Because of that detail, I suspect Roberts is generally going to give deference to the Senate's authority over POTUS. Constitutionally this makes sense, sense the "sole power" to try impeachments is vested in the Senate.

If there's any tiny chance of Trump being removed, it would probably be for efforts to obstruct the trial itself. That could turn personal real quick.