in my view, he has a rap sheet a mile long, some with good evidence and some with weaker cases. But by the nature of impeachment, it's a trial before the whole country that's fought just as much in the newspapers and social media as it is in the Congress. Public opinion will have an large influence on the outcome, and we know that the public can be confused or get fed up and worn out if your argument is too complicated. So Democrats have tried to keep this as simple as possible, stick to the couple most egregious acts, and keep the focus narrow. Republicans want to do the opposite, broaden the conversation, discuss all the nuances, and generally make the public discourse as convoluted as possible to get people to give up on figuring out the right answer. In the case of the charities fraud, the big question would be is the offense "high." I think plenty of people would decide it's either not sufficiently related to his work as president or else just not egregious enough to warrant an extreme remedy. When I'm fantasizing about an impeachment with 100 articles in it to do a full accounting of all my grievances, sure I can put it in there towards the bottom, but I wouldn't want it as my headliner.
Schumer made a pretty compelling argument for why there should be witnesses allowed in the Senate trial this morning. I didn't hear what McConnell said before him but I can assume it was something that the trial would go like the Clinton impeachment. Schumer pointed out that there were witnesses allowed in the Clinton impeachment. McConnell is going down a partisan line that I felt pretty strongly against when Schiff did it in the house. I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't take the same position. I think witnesses should be allowed and McConnell's hardline position is bs. Hopefully it'll come to a vote so McConnell doesn't get to repeat Schiff's act.
Please add these to the Impeachment articles too. Trump just ordered the assassination of a foreign political leader in direct contradiction to EO 12333 signed by... you guessed it, the sainted Ronald Reagan. It's also in direct violation of Army FM 27-10 as well. Once again he breaks the law. DD
"After a U.S. airstrike killed General Qassem Soleimani, the commander of Iran's elite Quds Force, lawmakers have generally avoided declaring it an 'assassination.' Assassination suggests Soleimani's killing is an unjustified act of aggression, and only a few lawmakers have so far used the word." https://theweek.com/speedreads/8873...-are-calling-soleimanis-killing-assassination
My guess is what McConnell is doing is he knows that if he gets a vote on witnesses, the votes are there to allow witnesses so he can save face from the White House by going this route knowing he doesn’t have the votes. It’s obvious though that the White House is trying to orchestrate a sham trial though which is baffling since their defense in the House was that Schiff wasn’t allowing witnesses like Hunter Biden. Now when they get their chance to vote on witnesses, they now all the sudden are opposed to witnesses. Screams of innocence obviously. McConnell seems to be trying to deal with them more than anyone else including Pelosi and Schumer. My guess is McConnell wants a trial that looks legit, but still acquits Trump in the end. I know he has little respect for the dignity of being majority leader, but is very cognizant of the Senate as a powerful body in government. He knows the power cannot reside in the Executive Branch for impeachment procedures, and I do think he’ll try to protect that in case he wants to impeach a Dem president in a few years.
I totally agree with what you've just said. (imagine that.lol). My real beef has been: 1.) The Mueller investigation stirred my renewed interest in politics, particularly because after he didn't find anything the reaction by the left was mind blowing. On top of that, news trickles out that Nunes presented the FISA abuses to the Intelligence committee and Schiff wrote a rebuttal blowing it off and completely denying it. At the time, I felt there was some shady **** done by Schiff and the leftover folks in the AG & FBI. 2.). I don't think what Trump did constitutes a removal from office. We can agree to disagree and it's no point in continuing the debate. 3.) Given my views above, the way Schiff restricted the Repubs or White House from calling their own witnesses or restricted questions to Schiff's witnesses just adds to where I'm at with this. All that being said, I would be extremely disappointed if that Repubs don't take the high road and conduct and overtly fair Senate trial. This is their chance to demonstrate that they believe on due process. If this is a quick, one sided dismissal I'm back where I started - disgusted by all parties and resigned to mistrust everyone at that level.....which is probably where I should have not deviated from. I'm still a right leaning person. I'm fascinated how different each side perceives the other side. How you guys feel about Nunes is how I feel about Schiff. I have a small level of respect for Pelosi which would get me crushed in my circle of friends and professional world...lol. I still like to say she's 'nasty'...because it cracks me up when I do and I like to crack myself up..lol.
So the report renewed your interest, but not enough to actually read the report? The report found plenty. Try again.
Try again?... I don't care if you believe me or not. I have no reason to lie. Throw me some 'Facts' that the report found. Mueller didn't even read the report before he testified. His staff wrote it. Here is a fact for you: The Mueller Report could not conclude that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. It was not Mueller's job to exonerate either. It was to present the facts. I'm NOT going to waste my time reading it. Pat yourself on the back and wear it like a badge of honor if you've read it and have made the conclusion contradicting the whole purpose of the report. It was a special investigation into Russian meddling into the 2016 election. Sorry if I come off sounding a little pissy but I read your post to mean that you don't believe that the reason I had a renewed interest in politics was the release of the Mueller Report and the **** show that followed. Basically calling me a liar. It's true....and who really cares? You shouldn't. If you meant try again regarding the Mueller Report's conclusion, I apologize for my snarky response. In if that's the case, I stand by the fact that he did not conclude that Trump colluded with Russia. Yeah, I'm aware of the charges brought forth to others as a result of the investigation. That's all peripheral to the purpose of the investigation. Edit: I do sound like a defensive doo doo britches. I'm gonna leave the post up. But I hope you can understand where it came from. And again, if I misunderstood, sorry for the response.
With all due respect: 1. This idea Mueller didn’t find anything is preposterous. Had Obama been investigated in 2009 and we found out he had a letter of intent to do a multi million dollar business deal directly with a hostile foreign government and that foreign government helped him with cyber crimes in 2008 to beat McCain, despite the legal crimes committed by Obama or how active he was in coordination with that foreign govt in the cyber crimes, he would have faced hell, and everyone knows it. 2. Possibly the Mueller report didn’t warrant removal from office. The issue is people on Trumps camp and Republicans now in general refuse to even say “yeah... that’s bad” and instead put people like me on trial for giving a damn. I personally think it’s bad, people like you seem to not care much, but we all should at least live in a world of reality about the truth which Trump supporters (cultivated by propaganda) refuse to believe....that it is bad practice to elect presidents who are entangled financially to hostile foreign governments that are simultaneously attacking the US even if just cyber attacks. Democrat or Republican. 3. Maybe you don’t like how Schiff handled impeachment. That’s fine to discuss, but the issue is the folks on your side of the isle used the tactic of trying to focus on putting Schiff and the Dems on trial instead of even acknowledging the facts. Did Trump do what he’s being Impeached for or not?? Love or hate Adam Schiff, the facts are the facts. He freaking admitted it as a tactic to normalize his behavior. I don’t get why you’ve allowed yourself to be cultivated to look over here at this obvious shiny distraction of putting the prosecutor instead of focusing on the facts. The tactics of distraction are so obvious I can’t believe folks are that easily worked. If you don’t like Schiff or the Dems fine... I don’t expect you to. I do however don’t think it’s too much to ask to acknowledge the reality that even Trump himself admits. Then what to do about it can be soberly discussed. 1. Nothing... and we should praise Trump for cheating on the election. Go Trump! 2. It’s bad, but we should just Censure. Trump is otherwise doing a good job and won’t do it again. 3. He’s guilty, and he’ll do it again if we don’t remove him so in order to protect our election integrity, he’s gotta go, and Pence can continue the MAGA agenda without the election cheating. However we can’t even have the sober discussion about the above options because your tribe conveniently puts the shiny object out there to distract and avoid that discussion completely. I don’t think it’s too much to ask to at least acknowledge the facts, and have a sober discussion about what’s next.
To follow up from my previous post you guys might be shocked to hear me say I actually think #2 might be the best approach for the Country. However the lack of being able to even debate the facts had led to #3 being the only option. #2 only works if the Republicans and his supporters acknowledge the facts, and agree to hold him accountable so he doesn’t do it again. So in reality it’s Trump supporters and Republicans who are forcing Trumps impeachment. Because they refuse to hold him accountable, he’ll just do it again and again, and we won’t be able to trust the integrity of the 2020 elections. Had Trump supporters just been able to live in a world of reality and said “yeah that is bad” #2 could have been an easy way to Censure and move on.
You've sent me down a rabbit hole and I'd like to respond after looking into what you've brought up, particularly regarding the LOI. That's always been suspicious to me but the explanations have been sufficient....to me. We sign LOI's all the time and 90% of them go nowhere. It's a first step to securing investments and stakeholder interest. I have the report pulled up and see the reference. It's a short reference. But further research leads to ambiguity as to when the development's pursuit ceased. In any case, it's a bad look. I'll reply back after the Texans game or maybe during if it goes to hell. I can say up front, there are a lot of bad looks and shadiness associated with Trump. It's indisputable.
The extrajudicial killing of a member of a foreign gov't not currently at war is an both an assassination and an act of war, justified or not.
So, I posted this in the War with Iran thread. Trump, within the last 48 hours has tweeted about potentially committing war crimes (with no regard for international law) and has tweeted a declaration saying that his tweets will serve as a declaration of war (or something to that effect) if and when he feels like we should bomb Iran. This goes completely against the US Constitution, which states that Congress holds that power. These two things, on their own, are more than enough to Impeach the President and remove him from office. This guy is off his rocker. These two things, coupled with the bullying of the Ukraine and withholding Congressional funds (see: a pattern) are by far and away, more than enough to remove from office. I hope people don't look beyond this. I think a new article needs added, however that may be. The Clown in the White House is playing his reality TV version of a President. What he's really doing is destroying the Constitution and acting as a Dictator.
I can agree with a lot of this but I would be very careful about adding an article of impeachment against the US of war powers as it will greater muddy the impeachment. That doesn't mean Trump and his supporters shouldn't be called out for a reckless decision, that seems overtly political and one that just continues us in endless war that Trump himself campaigned on getting us out of.
If you were interested in the Mueller report, I suggest you read it. Based on your statements, its very clear you did not.
