House Impeachment Inquiry

Status
Not open for further replies.
varwoche said:
As I understand, this step gives the GOP power to subpoena which enables all sorts of antics, such as calling Hunter Biden to testify. It will happen eventually, but I can see why they're holding off.
Click to expand...
Oh, that's interesting. I did not know that.
 
Segnosaur said:
It would have to be such a massive shift in support of impeachment among republicans that the chance of it happening is unlikely.

The way I see it, republicans have a choice:
- Stick behind Trump. Probably lose the next election, but at least put in a decent fight
- Impeach Trump and get slaughtered in 2020. (Yes, many republicans will probably stuck with the party, but in elections, a few percentage points of support can make a big difference, and there are probably enough hard-core Trump fans that the republicans would be in real trouble if they turned on him.)
Click to expand...
Or don't and get slaughtered if the testimony turns more of the public against Trump. His base is still a minority and that means it depends on the breakdown state by state when it comes to Senate seats.
 
acbytesla said:
There is a tipping point. We just don't know what it is.
Click to expand...
I like to think that GOP senators already are in possession of information that voters don't have - yet - that will begin coming out if they smell blood in the water. It's a conspiracy theory on my part: That a parade of ex-Administration officials have been keeping them briefed on scandals we've never heard of. It's not good for my mental health because it feeds my hope that any second now bits of extremely damaging information are going to start coming out, so that I latch onto any sign support is waning.

This isn't based on anything, really. Just a general belief that whatever we've heard of, Trump has done 10 times worse and that there are "smocking" guns *everywhere*.
 
Minoosh said:
I like to think that GOP senators already are in possession of information that voters don't have - yet - that will begin coming out if they smell blood in the water. It's a conspiracy theory on my part: That a parade of ex-Administration officials have been keeping them briefed on scandals we've never heard of. It's not good for my mental health because it feeds my hope that any second now bits of extremely damaging information are going to start coming out, so that I latch onto any sign support is waning.

This isn't based on anything, really. Just a general belief that whatever we've heard of, Trump has done 10 times worse and that there are "smocking" guns *everywhere*.
Click to expand...

What information that has come forward so far should be plenty. I think the GOP is now throwing all the mud on the wall they can to confuse the issue. I see that Republicans are now going after Taylor. But that man is emblematic of the word credible.

But as long as the Democrats keep it simple and don't go off track it can only get worse for Trump.
 
PhantomWolf said:
People on the inside are suggesting that even now, of there was the ability to have a secret ballot, the result could easily be 90-10 for removal.
Click to expand...
Makes me wonder what tidbits are making their way all the way to New Zealand?

acbytesla said:
You're right. She is facing a serious challenger. Astronaut John Kelly who is quite charismatic.
Click to expand...
It's not only that. She ran for the Senate last year (McCain's seat) and lost to a Democrat. She's only in the Senate because she was then appointed to replace Kyl who had replaced Flake. It might be smart for her to pivot against Trump based solely on what Arizona voters want.

How long would it take Trump's minions to scare up primary challengers for the 2020 Senate elections? When does that window pass? It might affect senators' calculations.
 
acbytesla said:
But as long as the Democrats keep it simple and don't go off track it can only get worse for Trump.
Click to expand...
My previous post to you didn't come out right. I meant, even without a strong Democrat to run against, McSally might STILL tip against Trump. The 2 previous senators were pretty pointedly anti-Trump. Though they voted for his agenda, mostly.
 
Minoosh said:
My previous post to you didn't come out right. I meant, even without a strong Democrat to run against, McSally might STILL tip against Trump. The 2 previous senators were pretty pointedly anti-Trump. Though they voted for his agenda, mostly.
Click to expand...

I understood that. She's in a damned if she does, damned if she doesn't predicament.
 
acbytesla said:
What information that has come forward so far should be plenty. I think the GOP is now throwing all the mud on the wall they can to confuse the issue. I see that Republicans are now going after Taylor. But that man is emblematic of the word credible.

But as long as the Democrats keep it simple and don't go off track it can only get worse for Trump.
Click to expand...

And even some of those going after Taylor seem to not really have their heart in it. Just going through the motions to satisfy the base.
IMHO they would be smarter just to admit what Trump did, but then argue that it might justify censure but not removal from office. I strongly disagree, but I think just trying to ignore the evidence is a stupid tactic.
 
Last edited:
Marcus said:
Trump is different than Nixon. Even if GOP senators tell him they are ready to convict him (I don't really see this happening) he won't give in, he will fight it out. Possibly all this will result in him losing the general, but the question is who will beat him? Bernie is shown to be too old and frail after his heart attack, Biden appears damaged and tired, front runner Warren, perhaps, but she isn't looking very strong.
Click to expand...

Agree about Bernie's health pretty much ruling him out (no matter what the Bernie Bros thing) , but Biden and Warren both appeal pretty strong vs Trump in the polls.
 
acbytesla said:
I understood that. She's in a damned if she does, damned if she doesn't predicament.
Click to expand...
If someone were trying to recruit primary challengers against a Republican senator, what’s the timeline? When does it become too late to effectively “primary” somebody?
 
One person at work had an interesting idea;If it really looks bad Trump will do an LBJ...not resign but announce he has decided not to run for relection. That way he could claim he left of his own volition, and can play kingmaker in the Republcian contest.
 
Finally I just overheard someone on the news countering the narrative of so-called secret hearings depriving Trump of due process. Jackie Speier of California pointed out that these aren’t hearings, that the GOP has equal time to ask questions, etc. The news channel (don’t know which one) could not get any of the Republican gate-crashers to appear on camera. Bozos. They used a clip of Lindsey Graham whining to represent the “other” side.
 
dudalb said:
One person at work had an interesting idea;If it really looks bad Trump will do an LBJ...not resign but announce he has decided not to run for relection. That way he could claim he left of his own volition, and can play kingmaker in the Republcian contest.
Click to expand...
Unless they beg him not to endorse them.
 
acbytesla said:
I understood that. She's in a damned if she does, damned if she doesn't predicament.
Click to expand...

She's running against Mark Kelly, not John (/nit).

The latest report about VA Whistleblower committee may work against her. The Trump administration set up a VA committee that actually exposes to prosecution and publicity whistleblowers. McSally is a veteran and claims to be for the veterans, yet if she continues to support Trump in the middle of this she is going to lose more votes.
 
dudalb said:
One person at work had an interesting idea;If it really looks bad Trump will do an LBJ...not resign but announce he has decided not to run for relection. That way he could claim he left of his own volition, and can play kingmaker in the Republcian contest.
Click to expand...
That would be interesting. Have any other Republicans even expressed an interest in running?
 
Marcus said:
That would be interesting. Have any other Republicans even expressed an interest in running?
Click to expand...

- Mark Sanford, current Representative and former Governor of South Carolina
- Joe Walsh, current Representative from Illinois and talk radio show host
- Bill Weld, current Governor of Massachusetts, Libertarian Party VP nominee in 2016.

Are all running active campaigns and have filed with and met the criteria under the Federal Election Commission to run for President.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
It would have to be such a massive shift in support of impeachment among republicans that the chance of it happening is unlikely.

The way I see it, republicans have a choice:
- Stick behind Trump. Probably lose the next election, but at least put in a decent fight
- Impeach Trump and get slaughtered in 2020. (Yes, many republicans will probably stuck with the party, but in elections, a few percentage points of support can make a big difference, and there are probably enough hard-core Trump fans that the republicans would be in real trouble if they turned on him.)
Click to expand...
Or don't and get slaughtered if the testimony turns more of the public against Trump. His base is still a minority and that means it depends on the breakdown state by state when it comes to Senate seats.
Click to expand...
Trump's base (i.e. the ones who have gone "full retard", and are more for Trump than the GOP in general) may only be a minority, but when you have elections that are decided by a few thousand votes, a small minority who decides "I liked Trump and won't vote for Pence in 2020 or my local senator because they voted Trump out" could have a big effect.

Many senators have an approval rating only a few percentage higher than their disapproval.
 
I believe Bolton has been mentioned before, but it looks like there are stronger indications he might testify in the hearings...

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/25/joh...in-contact-with-trump-impeachment-panels.html
Lawyers for former national security advisor John Bolton have been in touch with officials working on House committees about possibly testifying in the impeachment probe of President...The news comes more than a week after the White House’s former top Europe expert, Fiona Hill, reportedly testified to Congress that Bolton was so disturbed by efforts to get Ukraine to investigate Trump’s political opponents that he called it a “drug deal.” Hill said that Bolton told her he did not want to be part of that push, which involved White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, according to reports of her testimony.

Not a fan of Bolton, but seeing one republican turn on other republicans is rather fun to watch, isn't it?
 
theprestige said:
It's been around for at least a year, I think. Is it new to you? Congrats on being one of today's lucky 10,000!
Click to expand...

Goodness. The whole point of that cartoon is that it is better not to mock someone for learning something new today. Did you read it to the end? Lots of words, I know.

Besides, the point is that Never-Trumper has a certain resurgence this week, not that it was coined this week. Duh. (hence "new Term of the Week", not "New Term of the Week".)
 
Segnosaur said:
Most likely a distraction, pure and simple.

Although the hearings have been closed to the public, what we have heard has been very damaging to Trump. Now, instead of pointing out "Person X provides evidence against Trump", we are now talking about the GOP stunt. (And if they can somehow paint themselves as "fighting the power", all the better for them. Just like those 60s-era protests.)
Click to expand...

It’s not “a distraction.”

It is an attack on the United States Congress.

It is treason.
 
phiwum said:
Goodness. The whole point of that cartoon is that it is better not to mock someone for learning something new today. Did you read it to the end? Lots of words, I know.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't use xkcd mean-spiritedly. Randall Munroe deserves better, even if no one else does. No, references to the ten thousand are one of my few ways of saying something nice, and trying to be a better human being. I sincerely think it's great if alfaniner is just now discovering it. I think it's a good term, worth knowing about. It's also cool if he already knew it. And I'm glad it's making a resurgence, if for no other reason than it reminds people that the GOP establishment isn't actually all pro-Trump.

Anyway, yeah. xkcd is good stuff, and sometimes it's fun to be nice.
 
theprestige said:
I wouldn't use xkcd mean-spiritedly. Randall Munroe deserves better, even if no one else does. No, references to the ten thousand are one of my few ways of saying something nice, and trying to be a better human being. I sincerely think it's great if alfaniner is just now discovering it. I think it's a good term, worth knowing about. It's also cool if he already knew it. And I'm glad it's making a resurgence, if for no other reason than it reminds people that the GOP establishment isn't actually all pro-Trump.

Anyway, yeah. xkcd is good stuff, and sometimes it's fun to be nice.
Click to expand...
Nothing alfaniner said suggests he just learned the term.

Tru reading youI the end of my post.
 
dudalb said:
One person at work had an interesting idea;If it really looks bad Trump will do an LBJ...not resign but announce he has decided not to run for relection. That way he could claim he left of his own volition, and can play kingmaker in the Republcian contest.
Click to expand...
I can't see him doing that, but if so, it would a great thing if it went as well for them as it did for the Dems in '68.
 
phiwum said:
Nothing alfaniner said suggests he just learned the term.
Click to expand...
Nothing suggests otherwise. And nothing he said changes the spirit in which I replied. I'm sincerely sorry if I caused any unpleasantness. My intent was celebratory.

Tru reading youI the end of my post.
Click to expand...
The part where you were making personal attacks? I was hoping we could just forget about that. Would you like me to report it, instead?
 
theprestige said:
Nothing suggests otherwise. And nothing he said changes the spirit in which I replied. I'm sincerely sorry if I caused any unpleasantness. My intent was celebratory.


The part where you were making personal attacks? I was hoping we could just forget about that. Would you like me to report it, instead?
Click to expand...

Feel free. Telling you that you ignored the last paragraph of my post is not a personal attack in my opinion, but if you feel otherwise, I reckon the system is there for a reason. Seek justice if you wish.

(Sincere apologies for once again having typos out the wazoo in that post, by the way. I don't know why I ever both posting via the phone. I hate that keyboard.)
 
Marcus said:
That would be interesting. Have any other Republicans even expressed an interest in running?
Click to expand...

Not while the king is still on the throne.
But if Trump were to resign or not run again, there would be no shortage of candidates.
 
I think the GOP stunt on Wendesday was stupid, phony theatrics of the worst kind, but Some people are really overeacting to it.
 
Segnosaur said:
I believe Bolton has been mentioned before, but it looks like there are stronger indications he might testify in the hearings...

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/25/joh...in-contact-with-trump-impeachment-panels.html
Lawyers for former national security advisor John Bolton have been in touch with officials working on House committees about possibly testifying in the impeachment probe of President...The news comes more than a week after the White House’s former top Europe expert, Fiona Hill, reportedly testified to Congress that Bolton was so disturbed by efforts to get Ukraine to investigate Trump’s political opponents that he called it a “drug deal.” Hill said that Bolton told her he did not want to be part of that push, which involved White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, according to reports of her testimony.

Not a fan of Bolton, but seeing one republican turn on other republicans is rather fun to watch, isn't it?
Click to expand...

I don't like Bolton at all, but I think he does have some genuine principals, as much as I might disagree with them. Trump has no principal except Trump and his ego.
 
dudalb said:
I don't like Bolton at all, but I think he does have some genuine principals principles, as much as I might disagree with them. Trump has no principal principle except Trump and his ego.
Click to expand...

This is picky I know.

And I agree.
 
Last edited:
phiwum said:
Feel free. Telling you that you ignored the last paragraph of my post is not a personal attack in my opinion, but if you feel otherwise, I reckon the system is there for a reason. Seek justice if you wish.
Click to expand...
My bad. The personal attack was at the end of your first paragraph. I actually addressed your second paragraph, so I don't know where you got that I was ignoring it. Maybe because I didn't quote it? I'm sorry for the confusion.
 
Some good news for the Democrats on the legal front front:

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/...grand-jury-material-to-house-democrats-000299
A federal judge on Friday ruled that the Justice Department must turn over former special counsel Robert Mueller's grand jury evidence to the House Judiciary Committee...
...
In a double victory for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Judge Beryl Howell — the chief federal judge in Washington — ruled that the impeachment inquiry Democrats have launched is valid even though the House hasn't taken a formal vote on it. The decision rejects arguments by DOJ and congressional Republicans that a formal vote is necessary to launch impeachment proceedings.


Expect more whining from the Republicans.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom