|
Edmund Lava posted:As laughable as a conviction by the Senate is, I find the idea of Trump resigning so impossible I can’t imagine what would even cause it. I could see him doing it if we somehow (this would be the hard part) got to the point where Mitch could waltz in to the oval office and confidently tell him "look, you resign tonight or the senate removes you tomorrow, and there's nothing I can/will do to protect you." He's a coward at heart who would absolutely walk away from the board before admitting defeat. Hard part is obviously getting to the point where his removal is that certain.
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 10:02 |
|
|
Rigel posted:In the extremely unlikely 0.001% case that Trump goes down and Pence looks like he's in trouble, the Senate GOP would drag Pence's impeachment out long enough to name a new VP under him. The only scenario where Pelosi becomes president is if Trump and Pence die almost simultaneously. I think you'll find that if both the President and Vice presidnt are impeached the presidency will then be passed on to Airbud, due to the little known Airbud amendment passed in the mid to late 90's. Oh what a comparatively less wacky, shenanigan filled WhiteHouse would an Airbud presidency see.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:05
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:the issue with republicans who need to care about the general isn't so much if they'll successfully be flipped - doesn't matter, there's not enough of them - but that they're placed in a no-win situation so it doesn't really matter what vote they take, it hurts them badly in their next election Gee whiz EW, that sounds like what McConnell did to red state Democratic Senators in 2018 by forcing Kavanaugh to the forefront!
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:05
|
|
|
BlueBlazer posted:Then whats with the border emergency declaration? That's like the one important thing to Trumps base he can point to, why would McConnell allow that to come to vote? by law mitch has to bring it to a vote. trump can just veto it which is what he did last time, so there's no real reason to try to break the law.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:05
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:a trump who has been kicked out of office has way more time to go around campaigning against every senator who impeached him in favor of any other primary candidate at all Given his legal situation, I would imagine he would be too busy to do much of that once "executive privilege" is removed
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:05
|
|
|
BigBallChunkyTime posted:That's pretty much a certainty at this point. On the one hand, this will hurt a ton of innocent public servants and gently caress Trump for even trying. On the other hand, his approval rating went down pretty hard over this the last time he forced a shutdown, and there’s a non-zero chance that GOP senators will get caught up in his poo poo and may consider impeachment as a way to salvage their careers before their constituents start baying for blood.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:06
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:Pence caused an HIV outbreak in his own state. He's an embarassment, don't you worry. This is from the last page, but what? Do you have a source?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:06
|
|
|
Dick Trauma posted:He is going to be exactly the same as he was before. He'll go back to his tower and his TV shows and his idiotic tweets like nothing ever happened. trump loving loves rallies. it's his favorite part of being president. he will absolutely do as many of them as he can.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:06
|
|
|
Velocity Raptor posted:This is from the last page, but what? Do you have a source? It was equine AIDS
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:06
|
|
|
Um no please god dont be this stupid
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
CuddleCryptid posted:Given his legal situation, I would imagine he would be too busy to do much of that once "executive privilege" is removed that assumes he listens to his lawyers, which i can assure you he doesn't
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
Velocity Raptor posted:This is from the last page, but what? Do you have a source? https://www.thenation.com/article/mike-pence-is-still-to-blame-for-an-hiv-outbreak-in-indiana-but-for-new-reasons/ Basically, he gutted a bunch of healthcare in targeting gays and drugs that he created an outbreak. He shut down needle exchanges.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure this has been asked before, but I am the dumb: Lets suppose the House does their side of the Impeachment. Is there anything stopping Mcconnell from just not scheduling/doing the Senate half?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
I don’t know if this is a good idea or not in regards to our stupid rear end public’s attention span. He’s guilty of so much else but Ukraine is the easiest to wrap a layman’s head around and the most blatant by far. Can’t inundate them with too much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:08
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:this is stupid. Yeah, I'm not sure what the upside of this would be other than if they actually thought they could get him removed. (which I doubt they believe)
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:08
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:by law mitch has to bring it to a vote. trump can just veto it which is what he did last time, so there's no real reason to try to break the law. *researched Point taken. I'll but my tinfoil hat away.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:08
|
|
|
cr0y posted:Um no please god dont be this stupid hmmm the president has done far more blatantly corrupt things but let's laser focus on this one thing and not use the additional powers we get through impeachment inquiries to uncover more of his wrongdoing and stretch it out to destroy his chances in the election.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:08
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:a trump who has been kicked out of office has way more time to go around campaigning against every senator who impeached him in favor of any other primary candidate at all Isn't a trump kicked out of office going to be spending a lot of time in a court room for like... *waves hands generally at last decade*
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:08
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I'm glad she did this now, but as I said earlier, I don't buy that she couldn't have launched impeachment-related investigations. We could have gotten to this point a lot sooner, and our political system would be a lot healthier for it. Waiting for a major story like this, that is impossible to spin, was crucial. A lot of the media was not going along with impeachment over Trump’s record so far. Even though it was deserved, it was not going to play well among the general population. Now that there is a new and very clear charge against Trump, and something so far out of left field that it instinctively feels wrong, there will be a lot more support among the media and thereby the average voter for impeachment proceedings. They can still pile on all the other impeachable offenses Trump committed, but they needed a smoking gun to make this a winning issue, and now they have one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:09
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:this is stupid. That's not what the article says at all. Literally nothing about focusing only on the call, nothing about "end of the year" In fact the article in question posted:Democratic leaders emerged from the closed-door meeting declaring that their impeachment inquiry was urgent. But multiple lawmakers, including House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland, confirmed that there was still no specific timeline, and that the House would not cut short its scheduled two-week recess. and quote:Democrats held a full caucus meeting Wednesday morning as their leaders continued to hash out an impeachment strategy. Rank-and-file lawmakers were vexed at the lack of details about how to carry out Pelosi’s call to action. I even searched the article for "end of the year" (or even just "year"). It's not loving there. The tweet is misleading, and once again I wonder why anybody in this thread takes a tweet summary at face value on anything because this poo poo happens over and over and over again.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:09
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:trump loving loves rallies. it's his favorite part of being president. he will absolutely do as many of them as he can. We haven't seen true grifting yet either. When he can throw post Presidential rallies, and just bag on whatever is going on with a frothed up crowd; he'll be able to sell whatever he can to hundreds or thousands of idiots across the nation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:10
|
|
|
goethe.cx posted:She’s in so deep that she won’t vote to remove even despite not being in Congress anymore I meant Susan Collins. All these faux moderate harpies blend together.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:10
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:That's not what the article says at all. Literally nothing about focusing only on the call, nothing about "end of the year" Oh so Politico is just doing Poltico things again for clickbait. Should have expected as much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:10
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:Waiting for a major story like this, that is impossible to spin, was crucial. Right, but given that House committees have a stronger hand when their investigations fall under the umbrella of impeachment, I'm not convinced that we couldn't have gotten a major story like this much earlier.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:10
|
|
|
Tnega posted:I'm pretty sure this has been asked before, but I am the dumb: Lets suppose the House does their side of the Impeachment. Is there anything stopping Mcconnell from just not scheduling/doing the Senate half? senate rules have a lot of "must" and "shall" about actually immediately holding the trial. also, Justice Roberts theoretically presides, though I don't know what precise powers he will have. that said, if mitch says "so what, gently caress that" i don't see an enforcement mechanism as long as 51 senators back him up
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mcculloughirvin/status/1176920253303001088?s=20 edit ahahahahahahahaha epoch times https://twitter.com/AdrianNormanDC/status/1176888703743979522?s=20
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:I really think Trump is going to shut the government down again to try and hold it hostage to stop the investigations. This will loving bankrupt me and I am terrified....
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
The Bloop posted:After impeachment and removal, Pence would come in with at least a 60% national approval rate for not being Trump. That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:I meant Susan Collins. All these faux moderate harpies blend together. Heh, show me an example of Olympia Snowe being a feminist hero and voting for  like Collins did.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:12
|
|
|
Edit - Nevermind.
dr_rat fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Sep 25, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:12
|
|
|
Tnega posted:I'm pretty sure this has been asked before, but I am the dumb: Lets suppose the House does their side of the Impeachment. Is there anything stopping Mcconnell from just not scheduling/doing the Senate half? IANAL but given how little Mitch cares for norms I suppose he could just never hold a trial but that's probably a best-case or at least very good-case scenario for Dems as they can all run on how Mitch won't even allow the Constitutionally mandated trial to occur. It's all upside at this point imo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:12
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Right, but given that House committees have a stronger hand when their investigations fall under the umbrella of impeachment, I'm not convinced that we couldn't have gotten a major story like this much earlier. the mueller report had 10 instances of obstruction and mueller all but said he would've indicted trump if he wasn't president (the whole if i could've exonerated him if i could've thing the gop got hung up on).
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:13
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Right, but given that House committees have a stronger hand when their investigations fall under the umbrella of impeachment, I'm not convinced that we couldn't have gotten a major story like this much earlier. I mean...maybe? Maybe there's nothing else that's this simple and direct. At best you can argue that Pelosi got lucky. But she DID get lucky, and I don't think we waited until it was too late (I was worried we might), and at that point you're basically mad that she stressed you out, personally, for a few months.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:13
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:that said, if mitch says "so what, gently caress that" i don't see an enforcement mechanism as long as 51 senators back him up Seems like the GOP would have to be in a pretty dire spot for them to calculate that being visibly too scared to even have a show trial would be better than actually moving forward and acquitting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:13
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:The tweet is misleading, and once again I wonder why anybody in this thread takes a tweet summary at face value on anything because this poo poo happens over and over and over again. the tweet is from the author of the article, so i presume that he is reporting additional information he has developed to supplement the article
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:13
|
|
|
When does the government run out of money? I know I posted a link earlier that said "November 21st" but can someone confirm? Also I could easily see Trump shutting the government down to end the impeachment probe. He loving shut down the government over his stupid Wall for a loving month - and he only caved because the ATC/TSA people were walking off the job, shutting down our airports and thus, grinding the economy to a literal halt. It would be right around the holidays too 
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:14
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:the tweet is from the author of the article, so i presume that he is reporting additional information he has developed to supplement the article weird how it's not in the article, something that could easily be updated, then. Almost like it's misleading. EDIT: They updated it without even mentioning that they did, I only figured it out because of the 2:09 PM timestamp for the article vs. a 2PM Tweet time. quote:Though there's no explicit timeframe to act, some Democrats said they were hopeful articles could be considered by the end of the year or even sooner. So again, not even a consensus. Not even a majority. Just "some Democrats" with Lieu named specifically. Tweet's misleading. Angry_Ed fucked around with this message at 19:17 on Sep 25, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:14
|
|
|
axeil posted:IANAL but given how little Mitch cares for norms I suppose he could just never hold a trial but that's probably a best-case or at least very good-case scenario for Dems as they can all run on how Mitch won't even allow the Constitutionally mandated trial to occur. my personal view is not holding a trial at all would be more damaging than holding an immediate acquittal vote
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:14
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:I mean...maybe? Maybe there's nothing else that's this simple and direct. I'm actually mad that there may have been opportunities where the House could have at least seriously stymied Trump's agenda, but didn't take them. I'll grant you that at this point it's academic; Pelosi didn't take those opportunities, but thankfully took this one. I hope we see some follow-through from her, as opposed to what we've seen over the last several months.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 10:02 |
|
|
Tnega posted:I'm pretty sure this has been asked before, but I am the dumb: Lets suppose the House does their side of the Impeachment. Is there anything stopping Mcconnell from just not scheduling/doing the Senate half? Senate rules says he has to. And honestly as long as he thinks he has the votes, he’ll likely push it through and force a vote ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:15
|
|
