It's Draft Time: Impeachment Edition

[*bfine32*]

(02-24-2017, 01:40 AM)Dill Wrote: You roll with "hillary didn't lie" and you are rolling with them.

Welp, I'm not rolling with Hillary didn't lie. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-24-2017, 01:44 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Welp, I'm not rolling with Hillary didn't lie. 

She sure is a liar. 

Meanwhile, Trump can't even tell the truth about a round of golf. I understand all politicians lie. But, c'mon, man. 

[GMDino]

We sure should impeach Hillary.  

Speaking of which: What is the over/under on the number of new email and Benghazi hearings we would have had already if she had won?

[*michaelsean*]

(02-24-2017, 08:16 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: She sure is a liar. 

Meanwhile, Trump can't even tell the truth about a round of golf. I understand all politicians lie. But, c'mon, man. 

And nobody tries to argue he didn't.

[*michaelsean*]

(02-24-2017, 01:27 AM)Dill Wrote: Whoa! Obama didn't plan a "specific day." That is not possible in the case of a raid on people who may be traveling frequently in the region.  At least 48 hours of fresh intel prior to any go day would be required.

In fact, this was not even a specific, date-ready raid. It was a general project discussed and then passed on to the Trump administration to be given the usual due consideration following intel protocols and NSC deliberation. No go means Obama thought the risks--especially to our relation to the Yemeni government--could not be assessed properly in a few weeks. (Obama's in-house rule for spec ops was Measure twice and cut once.) So it was up to the Trump NSC team to decide whether raids of this type should occur at all--after due deliberation.

Did Trump gave the ok over dinner and tweet during the raid, as former NSC member Colin Kahl claims?--apparently he was not in the situation room following events in real time.  Trump dined, people died?

Again, there was nothing wrong with the mission itself.  You keep assuming there was some intel that they ignored.  The mission was leaked, and that was discovered by an intercept as the were enroute.  They chose to go forward.  

Obviously I'm no Obama fan, but you didn't see me flip out when a drone strike killed a 16yr old American citizen. Did he measure twice there? How many times did he measure when we wiped out a wedding party?

[GMDino]

(02-24-2017, 10:10 AM)michaelsean Wrote: And nobody tries to argue he didn't.

No they are arguing that we must "give him a chance" ™ while he and/or his administration has lied at least once every day of his term in office so far.

Oh, and also that Hillary Clinton is a bigger liar.

[*michaelsean*]

(02-24-2017, 10:40 AM)GMDino Wrote: No they are arguing that we must "give him a chance" ™ while he and/or his administration has lied at least once every day of his term in office so far.

Oh, and also that Hillary Clinton is a bigger liar.

Not me so I'm clean.  He lied.  She lied.

[*michaelsean*]

Never really followed the "give him a chance" thing as your giving him a chance or not giving him a chance is really irrelevant to what happens.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-24-2017, 10:10 AM)michaelsean Wrote: And nobody tries to argue he didn't.

Except him and his staff. 

[Dill]

(02-24-2017, 10:26 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Again, there was nothing wrong with the mission itself.  You keep assuming there was some intel that they ignored.  The mission was leaked, and that was discovered by an intercept as the were enroute.  They chose to go forward.  

Obviously I'm no Obama fan, but you didn't see me flip out when a drone strike killed a 16yr old American citizen.  Did he measure twice there?  How many times did he measure when we wiped out a wedding party?

I keep assuming there was no specific "mission." There was a general plan, at the discussion stage, to use spec ops to gather intel. This would be the first time US "boots on the ground" were used in Yemen. Obama and his NSC did not have time to evaluate properly the risks of such special op missions in Yemen. He did not "ok" a specific mission and then pass it on to Trump. His NSC expected Trump's team would use due diligence to assess the feasibility of such missions and the use of US personnel.

Trump has promised to speed up the process for oking commando missions. Keeping his promise, he and his team did not take the time to deliberate. He said "go" while having dinner with Bannon. While Americans were fighting on the ground, he was tweeting about a television appearance.

Not surprisingly, There was plenty wrong with the mission itself. You can't "ignore" intel if you don't collect it.

U.S. military officials told Reuters that Trump approved his first covert counterterrorism operation without sufficient intelligence, ground support or adequate backup preparations.As a result, three officials said, the attacking SEAL team found itself dropping onto a reinforced al Qaeda base defended by landmines, snipers, and a larger than expected contingent of heavily armed Islamist extremists. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-commando-idUSKBN15G5RX

Do you understand the difference between special ops and drone strikes?  The president does not ok every drone strike in Yemen or Afghanistan or Syria or Iraq. The drones patrol set areas and the people controlling them have a protocol for engagement. So Obama was not "measuring" at all in the strikes you reference. Drone strikes do not cost American lives unless they Americans traveling with AQ. And they do not risk millions in equipment.

And I do see you flip out when an American Ambassador outstrips his security on a dangerous night, on orders from no one but himself, and gets killed. Then you are all upset about "lies"--until Trump is in the White House telling you his raid was already planned by Obama and a success.

[xxlt]

http://www.thewrap.com/donald-trump-press-conference-vegas-odds-impeach/

Latest odds above. Not looking good for Donny Boy. But hey, what to Vegas odds makers know? They know they don't think he survives his first term!

[Belsnickel]

(03-04-2017, 07:59 PM)xxlt Wrote: http://www.thewrap.com/donald-trump-press-conference-vegas-odds-impeach/

Latest odds above. Not looking good for Donny Boy. But hey, what to Vegas odds makers know? They know they don't think he survives his first term!

Not saying whether or not the odds makers are right on this, but they are often just as right, if not more so, than pre-election polling.

[samhain]

Honestly, the biggest key to whether or not there is a possibility for Trump's impeachment is the 2018 midterms. If the Dems can gain power in the Senate or House, then maybe. I doubt this happens. I've seen the seats up for grabs, and it does not favor the Dems at all. He's still to useful to the GOP for them to cut bait. Well until they get what they want out of him anyway....

[xxlt]

(03-05-2017, 02:52 AM)samhain Wrote: Honestly, the biggest key to whether or not there is a possibility for Trump's impeachment is the 2018 midterms.  If the Dems can gain power in the Senate or House, then maybe.  I doubt this happens.  I've seen the seats up for grabs, and it does not favor the Dems at all.  He's still to useful to the GOP for them to cut bait.  Well until they get what they want out of him anyway....

But there's the rub. There are at least 3 factors belying that "usefulness." 1. He made many enemies in the party establishment and many did not endorse him during campaign, 2. As his negatives continue to go up some will become fearful of the midterms you mentioned and a "shellacking" even worse than Obama's midterms, and 3. (yeah sadly it is third in importance) the myriad illegal and/or unethical activities he is partaking in on a daily basis.

There is also the specter of Pence as a more "useful" and "safe" replacement assuming he doesn't get brought down in the Trump debacle.

[Benton]

(03-05-2017, 02:52 AM)samhain Wrote: Honestly, the biggest key to whether or not there is a possibility for Trump's impeachment is the 2018 midterms.  If the Dems can gain power in the Senate or House, then maybe.  I doubt this happens.  I've seen the seats up for grabs, and it does not favor the Dems at all.  He's still to useful to the GOP for them to cut bait.  Well until they get what they want out of him anyway....

job security is first and foremost. If Republicans think he's going to cost them a few seats, they'll offer him up to the masses, regardless of whether or not he's appointed a few of the party favorites.

[xxlt]

(03-05-2017, 10:25 AM)Benton Wrote: job security is first and foremost. If Republicans think he's going to cost them a few seats, they'll offer him up to the masses, regardless of whether or not he's appointed a few of the party favorites.

This brings up another point. Part of the Bannon wet dream is the destruction of the government. Trump is crying about not having his cabinet confirmed while not nominating for many cabinet posts. Scores of other jobs are being left unfilled too. Sure some lunatics in the GOP will sign on for this, but others see it for the insanity it is. Not only does el Tigre not have a mandate from the American people, he doesn't have a mandate from elected GOP officials. So far they are voting the party line but a huge fracture in that may be much closer than many think.

[hollodero]

(03-05-2017, 11:53 AM)xxlt Wrote: Sure some lunatics in the GOP will sign on for this, but others see it for the insanity it is.

For all I've seen, these two do not exclude each other.

I cannot believe that anyone of those guys does not see the insanity and disaster that is the Trump presidency. But they don't mind. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-04-2017, 07:59 PM)xxlt Wrote: http://www.thewrap.com/donald-trump-press-conference-vegas-odds-impeach/

Latest odds above. Not looking good for Donny Boy. But hey, what to Vegas odds makers know? They know they don't think he survives his first term!

I'll say this right now, and I've got a pretty good track record, unless something earth shattering is revealed I put Trump's chance of being impeached at 0%.  This isn't really due to Trump not doing anything stupid, it's because the Dems have already burned this bridge.  They've cried "impeach"  since before Trump was even sworn in.  They've said it so many times it's lost all meaning and is pretty much background noise now.  I think Maxine Waters mutters it in her sleep.

[Benton]

(03-05-2017, 01:19 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'll say this right now, and I've got a pretty good track record, unless something earth shattering is revealed I put Trump's chance of being impeached at 0%.  This isn't really due to Trump not doing anything stupid, it's because the Dems have already burned this bridge.  They've cried "impeach"  since before Trump was even sworn in.  They've said it so many times it's lost all meaning and is pretty much background noise now.  I think Maxine Waters mutters it in her sleep.

valid point. On the other hand, I dont think it will be the dems who take that step.

Republicans are likely to maintain power through the midterm. The problem is, team trump is running out of currency with his base. If he wants to win reelection as the guy who puts billionaires and life-time politicians in power, blows through tax payer money and doesn't fix "things," he's going to have to have something to hang his "I'm an outsider" hat on. Term limits, taxing corps, something. The options of what wont ruffle Republicans' feathers is short.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-05-2017, 01:27 PM)Benton Wrote: valid point. On the other hand, I dont think it will be the dems who take that step.

Republicans are likely to maintain power through the midterm. The problem is, team trump is running out of currency with his base. If he wants to win reelection as the guy who puts billionaires and life-time politicians in power, blows through tax payer money and doesn't fix "things," he's going to have to have something to hang his "I'm an outsider" hat on. Term limits, taxing corps, something. The options of what wont ruffle Republicans' feathers is short.

Well argued, but I'm not sure I agree.  I don't see Trump's base deserting him at all, he's actually followed through on a lot of campaign promises.  Whether that's a good thing or not depends on whether you voted for him in the first place.  This most recent Obama "deep state" issue is only going to cement his status with many, true or not, and I don't think it is, it's going to be a panacea for Trump for many potential issues.  Bottom line, Trump is POTUS and he's got an R next to his name, unless disaster looms the GOP is going to back him, knowing the alternative is a major swing to the dems.