(10-10-2019, 09:11 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: First off, I need to point out that criminality of actions is not, never has been, and never should be the line for impeachment.

As for this idea overall, it won't happen the way things stand right now. His popularity among Republicans is still high so GOP officials will be hesitant to do anything against him. Invoking the 25th would be seen as a GOP coup against him and would likely mean a party schism. People are playing this in partisan terms (it's all inherently political, which isn't bad, but staunch partisanship is) rather than what is good for the country.

(10-09-2019, 09:18 PM)hollodero Wrote: I disagree with that on principle. If one feels his duty as Congressman leaves him no other choice, then impeachment seems the right thing to do - even if it stands no chance to go through.
Now I'm not saying this was necessarily the case here with Trump, but chance of success should not be the sole criteria for bringing up impeachment.

Quote:It wasn't just about firing Comey though. It was about firing Comey because of "that Russia thing". Which would have been akin to Obama firing him because of "that Email thing".
Which ironically was the first reason the admin gave - Comey mishandling Clinton. Until Trump blew that up and then it turned out he had demanded loyalty and suggested to let Flynn go.
The fuzz over the Comey firing is about a little bit more than just Comey.

Quote:Well... you realistically got two options and get to choose the better one. Tickling one's fancy usually is not part of that decision, is it?

(10-10-2019, 09:15 AM)Au165 Wrote: I get that, but that can be their spin as the story narrative being pushed is he is a criminal. He himself is pushing the due process narrative as if this is a criminal investigation and that will continue that belief in the general public.

Currently yes, but if this thing goes south for him and they lose the public support he isn't going to walk away like Nixon he is going to go down in a ball of fire. That damage to the Republican party would be disastrous so they could use his spin out as proof his mental capacity is shot. This all requires Pence to be on board but I wonder if the party could convince him to do it if hey were in a tail spin.  

(10-10-2019, 10:34 AM)Dill Wrote: If we are talking about GOP Senators, they are still beholden to their voters, a majority of whom still think Trump has done a great job as president and, like the "Russia thing," see this whole impeachment thing as just a legislative coup to take down the one president who finally kept his promises. Trump the liar is just a persona he adopts to explode liberal heads.

I know it is hard to grasp, but there really are masses of people out there who 1) think Trump is doing  good job and/or 2) he has done nothing impeachable to this point--it's all just Dem butthurt and yammer. Sure, "different style." But you don't impeach because of style.  If people don't see anything really wrong with Trump's behavior, then they assume objections to him as president are just "partisan." Still more worried about "socialism" (as they were in 2008 and 2012) than the unfolding disaster of our foreign policy and daily degradation of the highest office in the land.

I do think that most GOP politicians DO recognize the danger to the party that you point out. They did before the election. But so far they are still trapped by their own voters. That won't change likely until we start seeing more cracks in the Fox programming.

(10-10-2019, 10:49 AM)Au165 Wrote: You mean cracks like this?



It's still early in this process so you'd assume those numbers are only going to get worse. Add in the whole bucking the party on Syria thing and I could 100% see the party turning on him by January. His crazy fringe will always be out there, but that crazy fringe has always existed and once he is removed they have two choices Republican or Democrat and they sure as heck aren't going Democrat. 

(10-10-2019, 11:00 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: As of right now he is still at an 87% approval rating among Republicans (based on the Sept 16-30 polling). There is a lot of movement needed to make enough of an impact on the partisans in office.

(10-10-2019, 11:00 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: As of right now he is still at an 87% approval rating among Republicans (based on the Sept 16-30 polling). There is a lot of movement needed to make enough of an impact on the partisans in office.

Quote:Two Giuliani Associates Who Helped Him on Ukraine Arrested on Campaign-Finance Charges

Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman are expected to appear in federal court in Virginia later on Thursday

(10-10-2019, 10:49 AM)Au165 Wrote: You mean cracks like this?



It's still early in this process so you'd assume those numbers are only going to get worse. Add in the whole bucking the party on Syria thing and I could 100% see the party turning on him by January. His crazy fringe will always be out there, but that crazy fringe has always existed and once he is removed they have two choices Republican or Democrat and they sure as heck aren't going Democrat. 

(10-10-2019, 09:16 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You're point is true but I don't think that's the point Leonard was making.  His point was that the move was purely political and to be quite honest the vast majority of the impeachment talk prior to this latest round was purely political.  The Dems have been like the boy who cried wolf.  There may very well be a wolf present this time, but you'd have to forgive people for thinking there might not be.

(10-10-2019, 09:16 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's the rub with that though.  People can't say Trump talks out of his ass all of the time and then use the words coming out of that orifice as solid proof of anything.  Has everything Trump said been entirely true?

(10-10-2019, 09:16 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No, we have more than two options.

(10-10-2019, 09:16 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Voting for someone you dislike does not have to be one of them.  Honestly the only Dems I could realistically vote for would be Buttiegieg, who has no shot, and to a lesser extent Biden, who IMO also has no shot.  There is zero chance I could vote for Sanders or Warren so I'd be going third party again.  Not that it matters as many residents of CA vote for anything with a D next to their name.

(10-10-2019, 12:11 PM)hollodero Wrote: Far be it from me to "not forgive" anyone, but I challenge that opinion. First, I wonder who you call "the Dems". Second, I wonder how one could blame them for being "political", the whole impeachment process is political in any case, always. Getting more important, why is there such a different measure stick for Dems? Because you do know who actually cries wolf over nothing all the time... it's Trump and the GOP, not the Dems. They (not just Trump) cry wolf over FISA abuse, over Strzok and secret societys, over fake news and media bias, emails and DNC servers, over every little piece of nothing...
...while trying to impeach Trump over his squad comments (I guess Al Green tried that) might be over the top, but there are at least real facts to back up that opinion. Which to me is not "crying wolf", just maybe confusing a big scary dog with one.

But finally, putting the petty comparison aside and making the real point. What is it one should tell the grandchildren in a few years when they ask why Trump, now on his own record abusing his power to extort another nation against the defined national interest and get a political rival smeared, did not get impeached? - "You know child, there was a woman called Maxine Waters, and she cried impeachment too early. Also, there was a man named Al Green who did not have a solid case and cried for impeachment too early as well. You see, that's why we could never ever impeach Trump ever again no matter what. Because of Maxine Waters. You understand that, right?"

Will he (or she... of course!) though? What will history say.

Quote:That is fair, close to nothing he says is true. And in many many cases ignorance and mere idiocy are indeed his best defenses. Which is incredibly sad, but,as I said, fair.
That (well, that and the fact that your policies forbid indicting a president and your AG blocks any real investigation into this matter) is why Congress needs to talk to witnesses, see documents and all that stuff. I honestly wonder how completely blocking them from any of that (I guess you call that "stonewalling"?) is not an impeachable offense taken for itself. It seems to go straight against the constitution.

Quote:I disagree with that. Not factually, but effectively.

Quote:I understand that for sure, I didn't want to sound too strict on that one. I get it how someone not quite liberal would not stomach Sanders or Warren policies, that even I think go too far at times and are too big of a shift for the country. But if it were Biden or Klobuchar or Pete...? Well, then I'd make the case that even for non-liberals, national interest (meaning not having Trump being president any longer) is the biggest factor in the voting decision. Has to be. There might be other factors that in its sum superseed it (like fear of gun confiscation, which I sincerely get as a valid point), but this imho has to be the biggest one :)

Quote:But since you're in California, it sadly really does not matter a bit what you do. This election's up for a handful of other voters in other places to decide, those in Ohio for example. Which I consider to be quite undemocratic, but that's a whole other can of worms to open.

(10-10-2019, 12:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You're not fully grasping the point I'm making.  The constant cries for impeachment have created a chorus that prevent an actual legitimate claim from actually being heard and discerned from the others.  Not only that, but it paints the current effort with the exact same brush used on all the other efforts, some for laughable reasons.  If I call the police every day and say there's an intruder in my house and every day they show up and there isn't one do you think they're going to treat the next call I make as seriously as the first, even if this time there actually is an intruder?  I get that the evidence is stronger in this case, but that doesn't matter to most people because they've been beat over the head with impeachment talk the past three years.  To them this is merely the latest call of an intruder in my house.

(10-10-2019, 12:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I've said this from the beginning.  Based on past actions, whether they be by a minority of the Democratic party of not, you're going to need a real smoking gun to make impeachment stick on Trump now.  Whether this issue is it or not remains to be seen. 

(10-10-2019, 12:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: True, which I why I voted for Ross Perot in the first national election in which I could vote, I wanted a viable third party.  I still do.

(10-10-2019, 12:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I have more faith in our institutions than that.  The US can easily survive a eight year Trump presidency.  W. Bush caused infinitely more damage than Trump has to date and now many view him as a lovable goof.

(10-10-2019, 12:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:   I look around this country and I do not like the trend towards shifting away from hard won basic principles of our country such as freedom of speech.  I view this trend, and it currently emanates from the left, as far more dangerous long term to the United States than a second Trump term.  Honestly, if Trump got one more SCOTUS nominee then I'd be satisfied because I think we're going to need a conservative leaning SCOTUS to stave off the worst excesses of the far left that are coming down the pipe.

(10-10-2019, 12:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: True, but that's the system as it's been for a very long time.  I still support the EC as I very much prefer the individual states having their say in who is elected POTUS.  One need only look at the disdain people like AOC have for "flyover country" to see why this is a good thing.

(10-10-2019, 12:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You're not fully grasping the point I'm making.  The constant cries for impeachment have created a chorus that prevent an actual legitimate claim from actually being heard and discerned from the others.  Not only that, but it paints the current effort with the exact same brush used on all the other efforts, some for laughable reasons.  If I call the police every day and say there's an intruder in my house and every day they show up and there isn't one do you think they're going to treat the next call I make as seriously as the first, even if this time there actually is an intruder?  I get that the evidence is stronger in this case, but that doesn't matter to most people because they've been beat over the head with impeachment talk the past three years.  To them this is merely the latest call of an intruder in my house.

(10-10-2019, 12:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You're not fully grasping the point I'm making.  The constant cries for impeachment have created a chorus that prevent an actual legitimate claim from actually being heard and discerned from the others.  Not only that, but it paints the current effort with the exact same brush used on all the other efforts, some for laughable reasons.  If I call the police every day and say there's an intruder in my house and every day they show up and there isn't one do you think they're going to treat the next call I make as seriously as the first, even if this time there actually is an intruder?  I get that the evidence is stronger in this case, but that doesn't matter to most people because they've been beat over the head with impeachment talk the past three years.  To them this is merely the latest call of an intruder in my house.

(10-10-2019, 09:05 PM)GMDino Wrote:

BREAKING: The FBI and federal prosecutors in NYC are scrutinizing Rudy Giuliani’s financial dealings with the two men charged today. The men, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, are charged with pumping Russian money into US political campaigns. (reporting from @evanperez @ShimonPro)

— Marshall Cohen (@MarshallCohen) October 10, 2019