Nancy Pelosi Announces Impeachment Inquiry

caseyedwards

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,866

Vagabond

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,292
I don't think anything could have gotten through Trump's brain.
True, but a memorandum from oneself to the President warning him that the Supreme Court won't protect him would be would be a nice thing to have in the Trump Presidential Library one day. 🤷‍♂️
 

Peaches LaTour

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,927
It seems to be getting serious that Trump is going to throw Pence under the bus.

Commentators tonight said Trump's logic in encouraging impeachment for Pence is that the GOP won't impeach him (Trump) if they can impeach Pence because they don't want Pelosi as POTUS.

I think it is time for Pence to start praying, hard. :D

And by the way, I stocked up on my popcorn today.:watch:
 

caseyedwards

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,866
It seems to be getting serious that Trump is going to throw Pence under the bus.

Commentators tonight said Trump's logic in encouraging impeachment for Pence is that the GOP won't impeach him (Trump) if they can impeach Pence because they don't want Pelosi as POTUS.

I think it is time for Pence to start praying, hard. :D

And by the way, I stocked up on my popcorn today.:watch:
If pence is impeached and removed over the Ukraine call then trump isn’t getting another Vice President and pelosi will be President soon. If trump is impeached and removed over the Ukraine call Pence isn’t getting a Vice President and pelosi will be president soon. Nothing prevents a president pelosi soon
 

Reuven

Official FSU Alte Kacher
Messages
15,448
The House doesn’t need to take a vote. And as for Minority Leader McCarthy’s whingeing, the Dems are operating under the rules the Republicans put in place. So there’s that.
 

Susan1

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,401
Random things I wrote down last night -
There wouldn't even be the word "impeachment" if a president is "above the law".

Nobody ever mentions this part of one of the texts that I keep seeing - "Heard from the White House — assuming President Z convinces trump he will investigate/’get to the bottom of what happened’ in 2016, we will nail down date for visit to Washington,” Volker said "
"Convinces" trump they are going to investigate, not assures him or promises or swears or shows proof, or even has any real plan to. Convince is make someone think you are going to do something whether you are or not. He didn't write "assuming President Z investigates". It's like they were trying to, uh, convince trump that they were going to investigate so they could get what they wanted, but they really weren't.
And I still don't understand how they could have even thought for a minute that trump would do anything for Ukraine. Have they not watched the international news for the past three years? "trump is always sucking up to Putin, but I'm sure he will be on our side now"?
 
Last edited:

caseyedwards

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,866
The House doesn’t need to take a vote. And as for Minority Leader McCarthy’s whingeing, the Dems are operating under the rules the Republicans put in place. So there’s that.
But why did they in 1974 and 1998? Why didn’t Carl Albert and newt Gingrich just announce impeachment?
 

Fan123

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,153
That interview link you posted - Stephanopoulos' job is to press for answers to questions. I saw a politician skirting around the answer.
I saw a journalist asking a question of a statement that didn’t happen.
Most media commentators, including the more objective ones, have said that by what Trump said, he was asking China to investigate Biden.
That’s the problem here, most media commentators, including Stephanopoulos is not objective.
The fact is that Biden has not done anything illegal and Trump is just going after him because he is the front runner for the 2020 election.
To be fair, one can argue the Democrats would care less if Andrew Yang is accused of the same thing.
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,510
Well apparently in the letter that the WH sent to Democrats they didn't demand a floor vote and on a call with reporters they wouldn't say what Dem would have to do to make the impeachment inquiry legitimate.
I read that a staffer told a reporter that they want the impeachment inquiry to stop. So, in order to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry the WH wants the impeachment inquiry to be suspended. Makes total sense. :confused:


I wonder if anyone on Trump's team has tried explaining to him what happened in United States v. Nixon. I suppose it would be a fool's errand, but still....
The DOJ just argued in front of a judge that the decision was wrong. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/08/justice-department-objects-to-house-getting-mueller-grand-jury-info.html


But why did they in 1974 and 1998? Why didn’t Carl Albert and newt Gingrich just announce impeachment?
How about you ask them instead of us? I'm sure they had a reason. Or not. But there is apparently no rule in the Constitution that requires a full floor vote.
 

Fan123

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,153
Does it hurt to bend and twist like this, so you don't have to admit what Trump is doing or does it come naturally? Either way, you should send an application to certain Republicans. I'm sure they could use you
So you think asking someone to do something is the same as saying someone should do something? What do you make of the YouTube clip at the 2:55 mark when Trump basically said he didn’t ask China to investigate the Bidens?
 
Last edited:

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
53,454
The Constitution doesn't say anything about the process, only that it is the sole power of the House of Representatives. Its not a bad argument to make that the House should follow previous processes, but there's no legal or constitutional mandate for that. We all know that if the House took a full vote and voted for an impeachment inquiry that the White House would find other reasons not to comply.

Its kind of dumb, or well, it would be dumb if Trump weren't 100% guilty of abuse of power. If he weren't Trump's people could use the impeachment inquiry process to get the information out there that things aren't what they look like right now. But since everyone knows Trump abused his power its all just a power game.

Trump can keep blocking everything. The Democrats can incorporate that obstruction into articles of impeachment. Its important that Democrats try to get as much information in front of the public (and in front of any non-brainwashed Republicans that may exist in the Senate) in the meantime because there's no doubt what will happen: the House will vote to impeach, the Senate (barring any more serious revelations) will vote not to convict and we will move to an election with the hopes that Trump can't render it null and void by his continued abuses of power.
 

rfisher

Let the skating begin
Messages
59,403
So you think asking someone to do something is the same as saying someone should do something is the same thing? What do you make of the YouTube clip at the 2:55 mark when Trump basically said he didn’t ask China to investigate the Bidens?
I think we all heard what he said which is why his supporters scrambled to "explain" yet again. They seem to have to do that a lot. Your buddy should learn to keep his big mouth shut.
 

Fan123

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,153
I think we all heard what he said which is why his supporters scrambled to "explain" yet again. They seem to have to do that a lot. Your buddy should learn to keep his big mouth shut.
Ha, no explanation needed, it’s all in the video. ;) It’s just that many of you and the bias media tend to twist some situations to reflect a certain narrative. All Stephanopoulos needed to do was to play the press conference a little longer. Very irresponsible of him not to have done so, and to have repeatedly antagonized his interviewee was so over the top, but admittedly very funny.
 

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
53,454
One can make the argument that Republicans must have reasons to be quite certain that there will never be another Democratic president, given that they are supporting unchecked executive power. Its kind of chilling to realize.

Trump’s refusal to comply with House subpoenas depends on an absolutist view of executive power (Washington Post)

Trump has demonstrated a consistent disdain for the rule of law since taking office, from declaring a national emergency to divert money from the military construction budget for his border wall to musing that guns should be taken away from people without due process. But Tuesday’s frontal challenge to the fundamental system of checks and balances takes the cake.

...The absolutist position articulated in Cipollone’s letter follows Trump’s increasingly provocative assertions of his own power. “Article II allows me to do whatever I want,” Trump said this summer.

“He is shaking the foundations of the republic,” said Kerry Kircher, the House counsel for the Republican majority between 2011 and 2016. “He is poking his fingers into all of the places where we have norms and traditions and things that both parties have respected for years, and he has blown all of those out the window,” Kircher explained earlier this week, before the Cipollone letter, to Seung Min Kim and Rachael Bade.
I go back to the column I posted yesterday from Paul Krugman. The Republican Party, Krugman argues, is "is a radical force increasingly opposed to democracy." I think he is correct to liken it to authoritarian nationalist parties like Hungary’s Fidesz or Poland’s Law and Justice.

I think that a lot of Republicans haven't realized how far the party has gone. I like to think they could still reject this hijacking by extremists and bring the party back to its roots as a center-right party participating in our constitutional system.
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,510
So you think asking someone to do something is the same as saying someone should do something? What do you make of the YouTube clip at the 2:55 mark when Trump basically said he didn’t ask China to investigate the Bidens?
A couple of things. That he lies every time he opens his mouth and there's a chance that he was lying there because he brought up Biden in a previous phone call with China already and that he then said that he thinks he should ask them to do that.

Trump's in trade negotiations with China. If you believe for a second that China won't use that against him you really need to stop following the Fictional World of Propaganda Politics on Fox News and get involved in politics in the real world.
 

caseyedwards

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,866
I read that a staffer told a reporter that they want the impeachment inquiry to stop. So, in order to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry the WH wants the impeachment inquiry to be suspended. Makes total sense. :confused:




The DOJ just argued in front of a judge that the decision was wrong. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/08/justice-department-objects-to-house-getting-mueller-grand-jury-info.html




How about you ask them instead of us? I'm sure they had a reason. Or not. But there is apparently no rule in the Constitution that requires a full floor vote.
I did and they said it was to try formalize the rules of conduct and be fair to the minority party and look legalistic and legitimate against the president.
 

PRlady

Nerdy flack
Messages
32,886
One can make the argument that Republicans must have reasons to be quite certain that there will never be another Democratic president, given that they are supporting unchecked executive power. Its kind of chilling to realize.

Trump’s refusal to comply with House subpoenas depends on an absolutist view of executive power (Washington Post)



I go back to the column I posted yesterday from Paul Krugman. The Republican Party, Krugman argues, is "is a radical force increasingly opposed to democracy." I think he is correct to liken it to authoritarian nationalist parties like Hungary’s Fidesz or Poland’s Law and Justice.

I think that a lot of Republicans haven't realized how far the party has gone. I like to think they could still reject this hijacking by extremists and bring the party back to its roots as a center-right party participating in our constitutional system.
In Israel, the Prime Minister has described the pathetic efforts of a few brave people in his party to replace his indicted self with someone with the exact same (awful) values but no looming indictments as a "coup." His only goal in retaining his office is to pass a bill guaranteeing immunity to sitting PMs and then another bill forbidding the High Court from overturning the first bill. My husband and I spend our time wondering who's going down the tubes first, the US, the UK or Israel, and the answer is probably "all of them."
 

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
53,454
In Israel, the Prime Minister has described the pathetic efforts of a few brave people in his party to replace his indicted self with someone with the exact same (awful) values but no looming indictments as a "coup." His only goal in retaining his office is to pass a bill guaranteeing immunity to sitting PMs and then another bill forbidding the High Court from overturning the first bill. My husband and I spend our time wondering who's going down the tubes first, the US, the UK or Israel, and the answer is probably "all of them."
I find it shocking that the US and UK have Donald Trump and Boris Johnson as leaders at the same time. What in hell happened?

Israel at least faces existential threats but the US and UK don't face anything like that. We ended up with the most extreme and unfit president because... of some people's resentment of liberals? :confused:
 

PRlady

Nerdy flack
Messages
32,886
I find it shocking that the US and UK have Donald Trump and Boris Johnson as leaders at the same time. What in hell happened?

Israel at least faces existential threats but the US and UK don't face anything like that. We ended up with the most extreme and unfit president because... of some people's resentment of liberals? :confused:
Come visit me in my sociological lair. I have lotsa explanations, backed up by quant research. :EVILLE:
 

caseyedwards

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,866
I find it shocking that the US and UK have Donald Trump and Boris Johnson as leaders at the same time. What in hell happened?

Israel at least faces existential threats but the US and UK don't face anything like that. We ended up with the most extreme and unfit president because... of some people's resentment of liberals? :confused:
In the United States people do believe there is a threat. Like in “fiscal year” 2019 1 million migrants entered America without visas. That’s just 2019! But when someone was “elected” by saying build a wall you know people saw demographic changes. Now in the 1920’s when America started the visa system that’s because both parties agreed the open borders system was letting in “too many foreigners” now only one part of one party believes in “too many foreigners”
In Britain it’s very similar. What germany did by opening its doors to all the Syrian refugees and more as well as eu expansion into Eastern Europe meant more and more people were eligible to just move to the UK!
 

MacMadame

Cat Lady-in-Training
Messages
29,693
Come visit me in my sociological lair. I have lotsa explanations, backed up by quant research. :EVILLE:
You should post some of it. We'd all be interested.

now only one part of one party believes in “too many foreigners”
Well, that's what they say. But we all know that many in the GOP don't really care about immigration, legal or otherwise, because they need the cheap labor to keep their businesses going.
 

PRlady

Nerdy flack
Messages
32,886
Briefly, 20% of Americans of voting age are strongly nativist, and that's the biggest predictor of a vote for Trump. Correlates more closely than education, income etc. When 24% of those surveyed basically say that there's nothing he could do that would make them support impeachment, that overlays heavily with the nativist quint.

If I had to recommend one book among all the material I've come across, it would be this one: https://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-politics-of-losing/9780231190060
 

rfisher

Let the skating begin
Messages
59,403
:lol: Graham sent Pelosi a letter telling her the GOP in the Senate would not vote for impeachment so she'd better just call the whole thing off. He's trying to round up enough signatures to scare her off. They are really running scared, because if they weren't they'd just let the House get on with it and not worry. Just keep up the pressure Nancy. Let his little head explode.

The Democratic debate next week will be interesting.
 

rfisher

Let the skating begin
Messages
59,403
Briefly, 20% of Americans of voting age are strongly nativist, and that's the biggest predictor of a vote for Trump. Correlates more closely than education, income etc. When 24% of those surveyed basically say that there's nothing he could do that would make them support impeachment, that overlays heavily with the nativist quint.

If I had to recommend one book among all the material I've come across, it would be this one: https://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-politics-of-losing/9780231190060
If 20% are, then 80% are not. What the Democrats and Independents and even moderate Republicans have to do is vote. It all comes down to getting out and voting. If the GOP base, who have the lowest income and least education can get up off their butts and vote, then so too can all the rest of the country. They just have to feel the need to do so.
 

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
53,454
Briefly, 20% of Americans of voting age are strongly nativist, and that's the biggest predictor of a vote for Trump. Correlates more closely than education, income etc. When 24% of those surveyed basically say that there's nothing he could do that would make them support impeachment, that overlays heavily with the nativist quint.

If I had to recommend one book among all the material I've come across, it would be this one: https://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-politics-of-losing/9780231190060
ah! I was thinking the one thing that Republicans would have trouble with if they tried to veer away from Trump back to the mainstream is immigration. 20% is obviously not enough to sustain a political party, but losing that 20% would make it pretty hard as well.

I think they have no choice but to try to dump the 20% and try to compete with Democrats for more traditionally centrist and Republican-type voters.
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,510
:lol: Graham sent Pelosi a letter telling her the GOP in the Senate would not vote for impeachment so she'd better just call the whole thing off. He's trying to round up enough signatures to scare her off. They are really running scared, because if they weren't they'd just let the House get on with it and not worry. Just keep up the pressure Nancy. Let his little head explode.

The Democratic debate next week will be interesting.
The Senate is not voting on any bills either, so should she stop passing them, too? That way every member of Congress could just home or on an extended vacation and would only have to return for the occasional bipartisan non-binding resolution and the ones who are retiring because they want to spend more time with their family don't have to retire anymore. :rolleyes:
 

MacMadame

Cat Lady-in-Training
Messages
29,693
We have had periods in our history where parties moved around, even exploded and a new one replaced them. The "winner take all" system of the Electoral College says that only two parties can be viable (from a mathematical / game theory / data modeling perspective) but that doesn't mean they have to be the Dems and the GOP.

I wonder if we are seeing the death of the GOP and a new party will take their place. Because they do seem intent on shooting themselves in the foot or otherwise destroying themselves from within. Or maybe the "new" party will still be the GOP but reconstituted.

If that doesn't happen and the GOP stays the same and manages to keep power, I do fear for the country. The road we are going down right now is not a pretty one.
 

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
53,454
I wonder if we are seeing the death of the GOP and a new party will take their place. Because they do seem intent on shooting themselves in the foot or otherwise destroying themselves from within. Or maybe the "new" party will still be the GOP but reconstituted.
I don't think the GOP in its current form can survive if we remain a liberal democracy. If they don't change, they will be replaced by another party that competes on the center-right.

If that doesn't happen and the GOP stays the same and manages to keep power, I do fear for the country. The road we are going down right now is not a pretty one.
Or the other alternative, which is that they manage to take authoritarian control and render elections just for show and retain power as the nativist/nationalist/racist Trump party. I don't think that could really work though because they would be a 20-25% of the population and a lot of the corporate forces would not support them.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 8, Guests: 1)

Top