House Impeachment Vote. Trump Impeached on both charges. (1 Viewer)

[Henry Ford]

You don't feel they would hold more weight?

With whom? McConnell? No.  And frankly it shouldn't.  Abuse of power for personal gain is a ridiculous thing to think it "isn't enough."

Nixon wasn't charged with conspiracy to commit burglary.  He was charged with abuse of power, contempt of Congress, and obstruction of justice.

 

[Henry Ford]

Need a little grace shown to @Copeman for now. I haven't seen him in the Politcal Forum much and he may not be up-to-date on the latest rule clarifications we have here. From hockey threads, he's someone who likes some   and he's simply carrying that personality into here. From what I know of him, it's probably mostly good-natured ribbing.

His Pens are 9 points back of the Caps and his boy, Crosby, hasn't played in a while. He's hurting right now. FORE!

May I refer to you as "the back of a chair at one of the tables" for the remainder of this discussion?

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

There's a narrative being passed around that obstruction of congress didn't happen because the House didn't file a lawsuit to get him to comply first.

I actually give some credence to that argument though I also do not think his obstruction was limited to only defying subpoenas, so it is not, in my mind, a defense to the entirety of the allegation, just a part of it, maybe, as it is an open question.  I would like the Supremes to opine but I don't think we will get there and I don't find this particular version of the Court to be vested with full moral authority.

 

[Henry Ford]

I actually give some credence to that argument though I also do not think his obstruction was limited to only defying subpoenas, so it is not, in my mind, a defense to the entirety of the allegation, just a part of it, maybe, as it is an open question.  I would like the Supremes to opine but I don't think we will get there and I don't find this particular version of the Court to be vested with full moral authority.

You Can't Hurry [Impeachment]?

 

[Doug B]

I’m not supporting [Trump's actions], just seems the bar is kind of low now. Any form of fairness has been thrown out the window (both sides).

This is a concern of mine. That as naked political tools, investigations and impeachment proceedings will be initiated much more casually going forward anytime the House and the President are of different parties.

I think there is a concept that Donald Trump is so far beyond the pale and so different from what came before that no one in the future will ever use the investigations and proceedings against Trump as "playbook precedent". But in the future ... how can a majority Republican house (say) not whip up something out of whole cloth against a Democratic president? As things stand now, there is no real downside to trumping (no pun intended) up something and running with it. Maybe some political backlash ... but maybe not.

 

[dgreen]

May I refer to you as "the back of a chair at one of the tables" for the remainder of this discussion?

Is this another one of those rural Louisiana sayings? I'm not familiar.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

When I was in my 30s I used to frequent a particular bar that had a very tight-knit group of regulars.  Everyone at the bar knew everyone else at the bar and the bartenders.  We used to bet per play on football games - slap a dollar down and yell "pass" and someone else would say "run" and whoever won got the dollars.  Kept things interesting.

One day a drunk idiot no one had ever seen before walked up and grabbed a stack of ones that was sitting on the bar to be used for this silly betting game, fanned out the money and started making slurring jokes about visiting a gentleman's club, dancing around and stumbling a bit, and drooling ever so slightly.  The person sitting next to the owner of those dollars grabbed the drunk's hands and pried them off of the money like a child who had hold of something he shouldn't have, smoothed the bills a bit, and sat them back down next to his friend.  The guy grabbed for them again and the Good Samaritan slapped his hand once, firmly.  

The drunk shouted that we were too uptight and needed to have a drink while backing away before turning around and slamming his jumbly bits into the back of a chair at one of the tables with an audible groan.

We turned around and kept betting.

For some reason that popped into my head.  I must be getting old.

You are getting tempered, not aging.  Like a fine wine, a good Scotch, or a great violin.  The older the grape the sweeter the wine.

All that is gold does not glitter,

Not all those who wander are lost;

The old that is strong does not wither,

Deep roots are not reached by the frost.

 

[Henry Ford]

When I was in my 30s I used to frequent a particular bar that had a very tight-knit group of regulars.  Everyone at the bar knew everyone else at the bar and the bartenders.  We used to bet per play on football games - slap a dollar down and yell "pass" and someone else would say "run" and whoever won got the dollars.  Kept things interesting.

One day a drunk idiot no one had ever seen before walked up and grabbed a stack of ones that was sitting on the bar to be used for this silly betting game, fanned out the money and started making slurring jokes about visiting a gentleman's club, dancing around and stumbling a bit, and drooling ever so slightly.  The person sitting next to the owner of those dollars grabbed the drunk's hands and pried them off of the money like a child who had hold of something he shouldn't have, smoothed the bills a bit, and sat them back down next to his friend.  The guy grabbed for them again and the Good Samaritan slapped his hand once, firmly.  

The drunk shouted that we were too uptight and needed to have a drink while backing away before turning around and slamming his jumbly bits into the back of a chair at one of the tables with an audible groan.

We turned around and kept betting.

For some reason that popped into my head.  I must be getting old.

May I refer to you as "the back of a chair at one of the tables" for the remainder of this discussion?

Is this another one of those rural Louisiana sayings? I'm not familiar.

Not exactly.

 

[Phil Elliott]

Trump University fraud.  
Trump Foundation fraud.

Corruption related to inauguration fund.

Refusal to divest from Trump Organization, which had already become a funnel for emoluments.

Refusal to release tax returns or any other meaningful financial records, seemingly to hide financial ties to foreign entities, both investments and debts.

Long pattern of sexual harassment and assault, including multiple sexual assaults admitted to on tape.

Having an unregistered foreign agent as his nominated national security advisor.  

There might be other stuff.  That’s just the things off the top of my head from before he took office.  
ETA: like the Stormy Daniels thing.  And not just part where he cheated on his wife with a porn star, how he funneled money to pay her off was a campaign finance violation.

And none of those were included in the articles of impeachment.  

 

[Henry Ford]

And none of those were included in the articles of impeachment.  

Correct.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Not exactly.

It is now.

 

[Phil Elliott]

It wasn't really taken that seriously, these concerns rising to the level of impeaching that is, but IIRC the claims were Trump was violating the emoluments clause and the "if you are listening Russia, hack the emails". Most of those people were from very strong leaning Dem districts so they were playing up their voters.

And an issue with the emails was the delays in turning them over, but yeah, Trump shouldn't have asked Russia to find them.  Some of these earlier impeachment comments are now being used against the Dems as an example of the long term attempt to impeach (effectiveness of the argument probably depends on what side you support). Still, everyone  mentions how serious impeachment is so they probably should be a little careful how they throw the word around, regardless of the level of dislike or the base they are trying to satisfy.  There were several attempts to get Trump and the Dems just can't seem to cross the finish line. Even now, Pelosi just sat down 1 yard from the finish line  and is waiting for the Senate to make "fair" rules, which really isn't under her control. She had control forming the House rules.  

 

[tommyGunZ]

And an issue with the emails was the delays in turning them over, but yeah, Trump shouldn't have asked Russia to find them.  Some of these earlier impeachment comments are now being used against the Dems as an example of the long term attempt to impeach (effectiveness of the argument probably depends on what side you support). Still, everyone  mentions how serious impeachment is so they probably should be a little careful how they throw the word around, regardless of the level of dislike or the base they are trying to satisfy.  There were several attempts to get Trump and the Dems just can't seem to cross the finish line. Even now, Pelosi just sat down 1 yard from the finish line  and is waiting for the Senate to make "fair" rules, which really isn't under her control. She had control forming the House rules.  

Per my understanding, when Pelosi forwards the articles to the Senate is absolutely within her control.

I'm sorry, but after Merrick Garland, you're not going to get much empathy when Senate Republicans whine about hardball. 

 

[BladeRunner]

Per my understanding, when Pelosi forwards the articles to the Senate is absolutely within her control.

I'm sorry, but after Merrick Garland, you're not going to get much empathy when Senate Republicans whine about hardball. 

That's fine, but the Senate isn't going to play her game.  She has no control what the Senate does and they will just wait for her to bring them over before they do anything.

 

[Phil Elliott]

Per my understanding, when Pelosi forwards the articles to the Senate is absolutely within her control.

I'm sorry, but after Merrick Garland, you're not going to get much empathy when Senate Republicans whine about hardball. 

I absolutely agree Pelosi can control when/if she sends them to the Senate. I’m not looking for any empathy or support. I get a kick out these twists and turns on both sides.

 

[Phil Elliott]

Is Trump an innocent victim in all of this?  Has he done nothing that rises to the level of impeachment?

Trump is not a victim at all.  But I have said I think every president could probably be impeached if you investigate them enough. Apparently only abuse of power and obstruction of congress.

 

[Widbil83]

Tulsi hammering Pelosi for playing partisan politics-

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii), a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, criticized Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) after she said that she would delay delivering House-passed impeachment articles against President Trump in an effort to ensure a fair trial in the Senate.

 was surprised to hear that,” Gabbard told Hill.TV on Thursday, breaking with fellow Democrats who have rallied behind Pelosi over the move. 

“You can’t kind of just shift and change and make up the rules as you go along," she said. "If you’re going to pursue this process, you’ve got to let it play out the whole way through.” 

Gabbard said the delaying their delivery perpetuates a sense of hyperpartisanship, adding that both parties are to blame. 

https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/475305-gabbard-rips-pelosi-for-delay-of-impeachment-articles

 

[Biff84]

That's fine, but the Senate isn't going to play her game.  She has no control what the Senate does and they will just wait for her to bring them over before they do anything.

You’re right, she has no control over the Senate, but the big guy in the White House does. Give him enough time for this impeachment to grind on him and he might go back to demanding a big show trial with all the witnesses. She knows that Trump is a ticking time bomb waiting to destroy McConnell’s plan. Mitch knows it too.

 

[BladeRunner]

You’re right, she has no control over the Senate, but the big guy in the White House does. Give him enough time for this impeachment to grind on him and he might go back to demanding a big show trial with all the witnesses. She knows that Trump is a ticking time bomb waiting to destroy McConnell’s plan. Mitch knows it too.

Sure, both sides can play political games all day if they want, but Pelosi ain't getting her way in the Senate.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Trump is not a victim at all.  But I have said I think every president could probably be impeached if you investigate them enough. Apparently only abuse of power and obstruction of congress.

Oh come on.  We had YEARS of investigations during the Obama administration.  Zero Indictments.  No impeachment.  
Not aiming this at you personally, but the “everybody does it” is such a lame excuse for people who support this president when they’re left defending the indefensible.  

 

[tommyGunZ]

Sure, both sides can play political games all day if they want, but Pelosi ain't getting her way in the Senate.

Perhaps.  She doesn’t really have much leverage, in my opinion, though I think she has to play with whatever she has.  And at this point, is anyone still questioning her political strategery?

 

[BladeRunner]

Perhaps.  She doesn’t really have much leverage, in my opinion, though I think she has to play with whatever she has.  And at this point, is anyone still questioning her political strategery?

Nope.  It's a political process thru and thru and this is just par for the course.

 

[David Dodds]

Donald Trump isn't impeached until the articles of impeachment are sent to the Senate. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-19/trump-impeachment-delay-could-be-serious-problem-for-democrats

Impeachment as contemplated by the Constitution does not consist merely of the vote by the House, but of the process of sending the articles to the Senate for trial. Both parts are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution: The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment. And the Senate must actually hold a trial.

 

[Doug B]

Oh come on.  We had YEARS of investigations during the Obama administration.  Zero Indictments.  No impeachment. 

Laying aside the specifics of Obama and Trump for a minute ...

A sufficiently-motivated House of Representatives can impeach an opposite-party president for wearing the wrong color tie. I understand that there is no check on this particular Congressional power except perhaps for the Senate vote. And if the Senate is also opposite-party of the President and is willing to play ball?

(I emphasize: this comment is not about Trump or current goings-on.)

 

[Stealthycat]

Donald Trump isn't impeached until the articles of impeachment are sent to the Senate. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-19/trump-impeachment-delay-could-be-serious-problem-for-democrats

Impeachment as contemplated by the Constitution does not consist merely of the vote by the House, but of the process of sending the articles to the Senate for trial. Both parts are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution: The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment. And the Senate must actually hold a trial.

Democrats are seeing the poll numbers, they're seeing that American people are hating this .............. and Pelosi and the gang are getting cold feet IMO

 

[jonessed]

Not according to the rules of the Senate, but those and a dollar fifty will get you on the streetcar, as they say.

They can change those at will.  The House has full control over impeachment and the Senate has full control over the trial.  The Senate can start the trial and conduct it however they please.  Pelosi has no leverage.  

McConnell seems content letting Pelosi play games.  The longer she does that the more she discredits the process.  If Pelosi doesn’t want to send the articles I imagine he will simply start the trial when it’s most politically expedient.

 

[Henry Ford]

They can change those at will.  The House has full control over impeachment and the Senate has full control over the trial.  The Senate can start the trial and conduct it however they please.  Pelosi has no leverage.  

McConnell seems content letting Pelosi play games.  The longer she does that the more she discredits the process.  If Pelosi doesn’t want to send the articles I imagine he will simply start the trial when it’s most politically expedient.

That's what I meant by "those and a dollar fifty will get you on the streetcar."  But they will have to publicize their change of the rules, and that will cost them politically if the rules aren't perceived as anything close to "fair" (whatever that will mean to the public.)

 

[parrot]

They can change those at will.  The House has full control over impeachment and the Senate has full control over the trial.  The Senate can start the trial and conduct it however they please.  Pelosi has no leverage.  

McConnell seems content letting Pelosi play games.  The longer she does that the more she discredits the process.  If Pelosi doesn’t want to send the articles I imagine he will simply start the trial when it’s most politically expedient.

Not according to the link above;

If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn’t actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn’t truly impeached at all.

That’s because “impeachment” under the Constitution means the House sending its approved articles of to the Senate, with House managers standing up in the Senate and saying the president is impeached.

 

[Copeman]

His Pens are 9 points back of the Caps and his boy, Crosby, hasn't played in a while. He's hurting right now. FORE!

Ahem.....