President Trump

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

[Obi-Wan Nihilo]

Still no vote to begin impeachment proceedings. Why not? Aside from the fact that there's no grounds for it, as it's not at all illegal for the president to ask other governments to do things, nor is it illegal for him to make deals, it also means that the GOP is denied subpoena power on the matter.

Dems are protecting their own while continuing to be sore losers. 2016 is over, your unlikeable candidate ran a terrible campaign. Get over it, move on, and have some ideas rather than just anger and spite.

Every defense of the attacks on Trump equates to a bigger landslide for him in 2020.

[Gaius Octavius]

But it washerTURN!

Yas queen slay!

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Still no vote to begin impeachment proceedings. Why not?

No one actually wants to impeach Trump, they want only to talk about it and hold hearings about it. As long as there are only hearings, the committees holding the hearings get to set the rules--they can call anyone they want to come testify and Republicans on the committee can be prevented from asking their own questions, meaning the committee can steer the narrative in any direction they wish. An actual impeachment hearing on the floor of the House allows anyone to ask questions...and there are some questions the Democrats do not want Republicans to ask. My advice to anyone in the Trump Administration: ignore/defy any and all Congressional subpeonas until an actual impeachment vote on the floor of the House is underway. "Contempt of Congress" is a Federal offense and is therefore able to be pardoned by the POTUS--as soon as a subpoena is issued, have Trump issue a pardon then the person in question can ignore the subpoena. Make them impeach Trump--time to shit or get off the pot, Democrats.

Besides, all the noise impeachment makes keeps us from paying any attention to the soon-to-be-released-at-some-point report from Barr about the people who conducted the investigation before and during Mueller. Democrats don't want to talk about that stuff, either.

Normally, I would not predict anything resembling a landslide for Trump in 2020 but at this point in time the Democrats still have 12 people running for the nomination--that is a chaotic circus with no chance of winning. They are going to have to get their shit together and pick a candidate by January or lose.

[Avatar]

Barring a miracle, they will probably lose anyway. Pity you can't scrape up some credible opposition for him...

--A

[wayfriend]

Trump administration blocks key witness Gordon Sondland from testifying in impeachment probe [link]

... add that to the long list of refusals to cooperate with lawful requests from Congress. (I should make a list so that the breadth and scope can become clear.)

The reason for the refusal? Trump says it's a "kangaroo court".

Making Trump the only criminal in the world that gets to evade court orders on the basis of I'm-innocent-so-they're-wrong.

The interesting thing here is how far Trump is pushing his illegality because there is no practical recourse against it. (It'll make it to the Supreme Court one day, years after it matters, and Kavanaugh will pay off.) Like refusing to disclose his foreign business interests. Like refusing to stop accepting emoluments. Like making money shipping pilots to his hotels.

It took Trump for us all to see how incomplete are our checks and balances on the President. We've never had a president until now who wasn't restrained by integrity and respect for the law. So maybe at the end of the long dark road this will come to some good.

[SoulBiter]

Still no vote to begin impeachment proceedings. Why not? Aside from the fact that there's no grounds for it, as it's not at all illegal for the president to ask other governments to do things, nor is it illegal for him to make deals, it also means that the GOP is denied subpoena power on the matter.

Dems are protecting their own while continuing to be sore losers. 2016 is over, your unlikeable candidate ran a terrible campaign. Get over it, move on, and have some ideas rather than just anger and spite.

Every defense of the attacks on Trump equates to a bigger landslide for him in 2020.

Agreed! Like has been said over and over, there will be no impeachment. Even if it were to get through the House, its dead in the Senate.

The Democrats know their case is flimsy. So now they have begun their fishing expedition in earnest.

If the Democrats had a good enough case, they would have already called for a vote. But they wont, and I disagree with Hashi, they want an impeachment but they don't have enough yet and they know it. But if they call for a vote, it enables the Republicans in the House to be able to be a part of the investigations and inquiries, rather than bystanders. The Democrats don't want ANY Republicans involved until they think they have that 'silver bullet". But remember, and I will continue to remind people of this. If they had enough, they would call a vote today.

[wayfriend]

But if they call for a vote, it enables the Republicans in the House to be able to be a part of the investigations and inquiries, rather than bystanders.

And to sabotage the process by adding delays, getting everyone side-tracked with conspiracy theories, refusing to cooperate, and generally gumming up the works. (The evidence of this is my previous post!) So how can you blame the Dems for staying in this pre-stage as long as possible? It's just smart.

Again ... we're in new territory. We have no established process for when the members of Congress are bad actors willing to flout the law, just as we have no established process for when the President is a bad actor.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

... add that to the long list of refusals to cooperate with lawful requests from Congress.

The Trump Administration is not yet refusing to comply enough. They should refuse all requests until a full impeachment vote is underway. Either impeach or sit down and shut up, Democrats.

We've never had a president until now who wasn't restrained by integrity and respect for the law. So maybe at the end of the long dark road this will come to some good.

Likewise, we have never had a House of Representatives whose entire reason for existence consists solely of "we are going to take down the POTUS by any means necessary". Maybe the voters cann remind them of their real responsibilities next year.

[wayfriend]

Really?!?!

After McConnell vowed it was his job to make Obama a one term president?

... Oops!

Look, the way you demonstrate accusations are groundless is to provide the facts that show it is. Trump is a criminal in a high-speed chase who's protesting he did nothing wrong so he doesn't have to pull over. No one is impressed by his "innocent" behavior!

[Hashi Lebwohl]

I said House of Representatives. McConnell is not in the House.

oops

The way to prove that accusations are legitimate is to hold actual impeachment hearings, not committee meetings where you are thinking about it.

[SoulBiter]

The Trump Administration is not yet refusing to comply enough. They should refuse all requests until a full impeachment vote is underway. Either impeach or sit down and shut up, Democrats.

Exactly. At this point the Democrats are trying to be noisy enough to try to get into voters heads and maybe affect polling numbers. The problem is that voters want to know what you are doing for them and except for the Trump haters, no one wants them wasting their time on something that is going no where (like this impeachment).

This really goes back to three things.

1. The Democrats are still fuming about Hilary not winning the 2016 election and that Trump ended up winning.

2. Trump and the Republicans got to post two SCOTUS judges.

3. The Democrats don't think they can beat him in the 2020 elections.

The Democrats end game is to not just get Trump out of office. They want to invalidate everything that Trump has accomplished and have this turn into decades of Democratic dominance in elections. But if history has shown us anything, its that the people will get tired of it in short order and it can blow up in your face at election time.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

I am on record stating that the Senate should have held hearings for an Obama appointee; not doing so is abdication of duty. They should have voted not to confirm, to be certain, but they still should have done it.

I concur with the rest, though--this is still "but it was her time" whininess. Well, maybe if she and the DNC had not hijacked and derailed the process things would habe gone differently. This is also still payback for Bill.

edit/add: they actually listened to me!

The White House outlined in a defiant eight-page letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and top Democrats on Tuesday why it will not participate in their "illegitimate and unconstitutional" impeachment inquiry, charging that the proceedings have run roughshod over congressional norms and the president's due-process rights.

Trump administration officials called the letter, which was written by White House counsel Pat Cipollone and obtained by Fox News, perhaps the most historic letter the White House has sent. The document tees up a head-on collision with Democrats in Congress, who have fired off a slew of subpoenas in recent days concerning the president's alleged effort to get Ukraine to investigate political foe Joe Biden during a July phone call with Ukraine's leader.

"President Trump and his administration reject your baseless, unconstitutional efforts to overturn the democratic process," the letter stated. "Your unprecedented actions have left the president with no choice. In order to fulfill his duties to the American people, the Constitution, the Executive Branch, and all future occupants of the Office of the Presidency, President Trump and his administration cannot participate in your partisan and unconstitutional inquiry under these circumstances."

The document concluded: "The president has a country to lead. The American people elected him to do this job, and he remains focused on fulfilling his promises to the American people."

If anyone is still perusing my posts, looking for ideas, I would not at this point turn down a job at the White House--the pay would be great, as would be the experience on my resume.

[Avatar]

Agree with WF that the way to prove accusations baseless is to provide the requisite evidence.

However, also agree that there is no obligation to provide such evidence until and actual legal process begins.

If there is merit in the claim, then prosecute it.

--A

[Skyweir]

Agreed.

So two whistleblowers now plus the IRS whistleblower unthread ... got his hands full atm.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Agreed.

So two whistleblowers now plus the IRS whistleblower unthread ... got his hands full atm.

Is there an actual impeachment hearing underway on the floor of the House at this time? No? Then Trump's hands aren't full by any stretch of the imagination.

[SoulBiter]

Agree with WF that the way to prove accusations baseless is to provide the requisite evidence.

If there is a "cover up" then Trump sucks at it. He has released plenty of information, including the transcripts of the conversation, and then when there is no "silver bullet" the Dems just ask for more. As stated above nothing except impeachment is enough. If they cant find anything direct, they will try to connect dots of circumstantial evidence as 'findings' of wrong doing. No. I would be done with their BS as well.

However, also agree that there is no obligation to provide such evidence until and actual legal process begins.

If there is merit in the claim, then prosecute it.

--A

Agreed. Shit or get off the pot. Fish or cut bait. Whichever works for them. Continuing these constant and ongoing investigations (fishing expeditions) has become tiresome. My crystal ball says the Dems lose big in 2020 but they will never admit it was due to this.

[Zarathustra]

Agreed.

So two whistleblowers now plus the IRS whistleblower unthread ... got his hands full atm.

I believe this has been a coordinated effort from the beginning, a deep state coup. It doesn't surprise me at all that there are more whistleblowers. They're most likely part of the same conspiracy.

It's as obvious as sin that Pelosi won't hold an actual vote because she knows that many in her party are politically vulnerable, in districts that Trump won. She's protecting them by opening an impeachment inquiry in an entirely unprecedented and undemocratic way. And Hashi is right, it denies Republicans a voice. Wayfriend may cheer such a tactic, but this goes against the point of a representative democracy. Those Republicans represent their people. Their people aren't allowed a voice in this process. You can't do something as serious as take down the President on a partisan basis. This has to be bipartisan to be legit. That's why the Founding Fathers wrote into the Constitution that you need 2/3 of the Senate to drive him out of office. The bar is SUPPOSED to be set high, and Pelosi has lowered it.

We're not even talking about a vote for impeachment. We're talking about a vote to open impeachment inquiry. The Dems aren't brave enough to take a stand on that?? Cowards. They don't deserve to rule.

[TheFallen]

As someone with no dog in the fight - and as someone apparently more left-leaning than any of the Dem 2020 nomination candidates (according to the Political Compass thread anyways)...

...I can safely say that from where I am standing, literally everything that the Dems are currently doing or saying - or allowing to be done or said in their name - is playing directly towards guaranteeing Trump a second term.

I have never seen such a succession of counter-productive tactical ineptitudes. Whether it's allowing the Prog Left lunatic fringe to commandeer way too many column inches and way too much air time (and centrist Dems simply do not dare speak out against or gainsay high-profle delusional fanatico-morons like The Squad for fear of being accused of one or more -isms) or whether it's pushing to run yet another unilateral "gee, are there grounds for impeachment here, then?" enquiry (yep, shit or get off the pot FFS, as SB said), the Dems are busily setting up their own certain failure - and that's both blindingly obvious and crushingly stupid.

Way to go Dems, you half-witted and ideologically constipated cretins. Why not try being an effective, credible and thus electable opposition instead? God knows, that's what the US - and indeed any representative democracy - needs.

Added afterthought: just because it's occurred to me, where are all the left-leaning posters who were allegedly being "kept out" of the Tank by one or two vocal individuals, now no longer with us? It strikes me that, now the "job's been done", they couldn't give a rat's ass about contributing here. Damned by their own conspicuous absence, I'd say...

[wayfriend]

The Dems are impeaching Trump to ensure he loses!
Impeaching Trump guarantees he wins!

Maybe pick one, eh?

In all seriousness, and sans all rancor, let me put this out there.

This isn't the Clinton impeachment. This isn't the Nixon impeachment. This time, it's different. It's not about "internal" intrigue like tapes and favoring donors and breaking into the oppositions' offices.

This time it's about betraying our country. It's about putting personal interests above the security interests and international relations of the United States.

To repeat a notion I've mentioned before: Bringing justice to a President who buys election dirt for his own campaign by extorting foreign leaders over aid money that is already theirs - that is not partisan. Not only is that a crime, it is a betrayal of our country. The simple decision to respect one's own country demands taking action on this.

However, protecting this President, under these circimstances, is partisan. It's not only partisan, it is putting party before country.

Now, I can understand why a lot of the President's men are signing up to protect the President. They are protecting themselves.

But everyone else?

Claiming it never happened? "There was no quid-pro-quo." Claiming nothing illegal happened? "I see nothing wrong." Misrepresenting the charges being brought forward? "There's nothing wrong with investigating corruption." Discrediting the ones fighting the crime? "They are all just mad about losing the election"? Obfuscating the issue? "Biden did something similar and it was okay."

Waging this kind of fight, you're just putting party before country. Unless you just like enraging people online - a signficant faction - I would re-examine my motives. Seriously. Because this is well beyond the stage where one can argue the country hasn't been betrayed.