Impeachment Thread: * locks eyes with Nunes* "...Chalupa."

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Impeachment Thread: * locks eyes with Nunes* "...Chalupa."

«‹›322 »

Not a Children: Oct 9, 2012; Don't need a holster if you never stop shooting.

nerox posted:

Maybe he means Garland would be the only VP that the house would confirm, as a piece of obstructionist performance art by the Democratic House.

Bingo

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:11

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 31, 2024 12:23

eke out: Feb 24, 2013

https://twitter.com/CBSThisMorning/status/1222267004457029633

collins seems about as firm on this as it gets

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:19

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

https://twitter.com/Amy_Siskind/status/1222254226635620354

yeah. i think we will see witnesses.

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:21

Failed Imagineer: Sep 22, 2018

do not believe her lies

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:21

eke out: Feb 24, 2013

Dapper_Swindler posted:

https://twitter.com/Amy_Siskind/status/1222254226635620354

yeah. i think we will see witnesses.

the funny thing here is that the number is so high in part because the framing includes republicans who want Hunter to be subpoenaed

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:22

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

eke out posted:

the funny thing here is that the number is so high in part because the framing includes republicans who want Hunter to be subpoenaed

sure but gently caress if i care.

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:23

PIZZA.BAT: Nov 12, 2016

haveblue posted:

As per the 25th Amendment (the boring part that isn't about the President dying or going nuts) a replacement VP has to be confirmed by both houses, so that would be a fun fight.

ah gotcha. well it wouldn�t be their nightmare scenario of president pelosi but imagine getting both houses to agree on the replacement knowing full-well that they�d ultimately become prez.

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:36

VideoGameVet: May 14, 2005; It is by caffeine alone I set my bike in motion. It is by the juice of Java that pedaling acquires speed, the teeth acquire stains, stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my bike in motion.

eke out posted:

https://twitter.com/CBSThisMorning/status/1222267004457029633

collins seems about as firm on this as it gets

Susan "Van Pelt" Collins holds the football once again.

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:37

Shrecknet: Jan 2, 2005

Knowing the House Dems they'd do something completely pants like replace Pelosi with Hillary Clinton the day before Pence is removed to get "their" President in office, motivating a billion superchuds to elect Tom Cotton in 2024.

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:38

Bubbacub: Apr 17, 2001

When did Dershowitz turn into a chud? Did he get infected with Guiliani's brainworms?

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:39

abigserve: Sep 13, 2009; this is a better avatar than what I had before

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-impeachment-trial-01-28-20/index.html posted:

What they are saying now: Republicans are now arguing that the latest reports � that former national security adviser John Bolton�s book manuscript reveals that Trump told him in August that he was withholding $391 million in aid until Ukraine announced a probe into the Bidens � are likely true but simply confirm what is already known.

This is astonishing to me, literally since the story first broke as I've been following it:

- Trump was not soliciting political favors on that phone call. It was a perfect call.
- Ok, sure, maybe he was soliciting personal favors on that phone call, but there is no evidence he was pressuring Ukraine.
- Ok, yes, we can accept that he was pressuring ukraine, but there is no evidence that he was actively withholding aid to that end.
- Look, sure, we have already accepted that he was actively withholding aid to increase pressure on Ukraine to solicit personal political favors. Wait, that's what this is all about?

edit;

- he didn't do it
- ok he did it but it wasn't that bad
- ok yeah he did it and it was exactly as bad as it sounded but this is ok

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:41

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

abigserve posted:

This is astonishing to me, literally since the story first broke as I've been following it:

- Trump was not soliciting political favors on that phone call. It was a perfect call.
- Ok, sure, maybe he was soliciting personal favors on that phone call, but there is no evidence he was pressuring Ukraine.
- Ok, yes, we can accept that he was pressuring ukraine, but there is no evidence that he was actively withholding aid to that end.
- Look, sure, we have already accepted that he was actively withholding aid to increase pressure on Ukraine to solicit personal political favors. Wait, that's what this is all about?

edit;

- he didn't do it
- ok he did it but it wasn't that bad
- ok yeah he did it and it was exactly as bad as it sounded but this is ok

OK sure, the president committed documented crimes, but the PHONE CALL is what is on trial here

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:44

Bloody Pom: Jun 5, 2011

Kurieg posted:

"I name Donald Trump wearing a fake mustache as my new VP"

Appropriate considering this is basically what Russia has been doing for the last 20+ years, only without the fake mustache. :v:

e: gently caress, I should learn to refresh before posting.

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:44

haveblue: Aug 15, 2005; Toilet Rascal

abigserve posted:

This is astonishing to me, literally since the story first broke as I've been following it:

- Trump was not soliciting political favors on that phone call. It was a perfect call.
- Ok, sure, maybe he was soliciting personal favors on that phone call, but there is no evidence he was pressuring Ukraine.
- Ok, yes, we can accept that he was pressuring ukraine, but there is no evidence that he was actively withholding aid to that end.
- Look, sure, we have already accepted that he was actively withholding aid to increase pressure on Ukraine to solicit personal political favors. Wait, that's what this is all about?

edit;

- he didn't do it
- ok he did it but it wasn't that bad
- ok yeah he did it and it was exactly as bad as it sounded but this is ok

Yeah, the defense has always been "This is bad but doesn't rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors" which has only become more and more insane as more details are revealed.

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:46

twice burned ice: Dec 29, 2008; My stove defies the laws of physics!

Bubbacub posted:

When did Dershowitz turn into a chud? Did he get infected with Guiliani's brainworms?

When he realized only Republicans were willing to go to bat for a pedophile, I think

# ? Jan 28, 2020 22:47

Framboise: Sep 21, 2014; To make yourself feel better, you make it so you'll never give in to your forevers and live for always.; Lipstick Apathy

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/28/trump-praises-pompeo-npr-confrontation-107754

Trump praises Pompeo for totally getting owned in that NPR interview with Mary Louise Kelly and throwing a tantrum and spreading lies about her to cover up just how badly she owned him

:sigh:

# ? Jan 28, 2020 23:17

Cheesus: Oct 17, 2002; Let us retract the foreskin of ignorance and apply the wirebrush of enlightenment.; Yam Slacker

abigserve posted:

- he didn't do it
- ok he did it but it wasn't that bad
- ok yeah he did it and it was exactly as bad as it sounded but this is ok

I can't place where I've heard that before.

Oh wait, I have:

quote:

A Narcissist's Prayer

That didn't happen.

And if it did, it wasn't that bad.

And if it was, that's not a big deal.

And if it is, that's not my fault.

And if it was, I didn't mean it.

And if I did...

You deserved it.

# ? Jan 28, 2020 23:27

Obama 2012: Mar 28, 2002; "I never knew what hope was until it ran out in a red gush over my lips, my hands!"

-Anne Rice, Interview with the President

abigserve posted:

- he didn't do it
- ok he did it but it wasn't that bad
- ok yeah he did it and it was exactly as bad as it sounded but this is ok

Every Trump scandal has five phases:

1) It didn�t happen
2) Okay, it DID happen, but Trump didn�t do it.
3) Okay, it happened, and Trump DID do it, but it wasn�t bad.
4) Okay, it happened, Trump did it, and it WAS VERY BAD, but other people also do bad things, so...
5) Hillary Clinton

It�s infuriating to me that the press doesn�t ever seem to catch on to this.

# ? Jan 28, 2020 23:31

Framboise: Sep 21, 2014; To make yourself feel better, you make it so you'll never give in to your forevers and live for always.; Lipstick Apathy

Cheesus posted:

I can't place where I've heard that before.

Oh wait, I have:

Why is that so loving painfully accurate and why do I know so many people who think like that :smith:

# ? Jan 28, 2020 23:40

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Framboise posted:

Why is that so loving painfully accurate and why do I know so many people who think like that

Because the world is loving full of narcissistic assholes.

# ? Jan 28, 2020 23:43

Kale: May 14, 2010

Obama 2012 posted:

Every Trump scandal has five phases:

1) It didn�t happen
2) Okay, it DID happen, but Trump didn�t do it.
3) Okay, it happened, and Trump DID do it, but it wasn�t bad.
4) Okay, it happened, Trump did it, and it WAS VERY BAD, but other people also do bad things, so...
5) Hillary Clinton

It�s infuriating to me that the press doesn�t ever seem to catch on to this.

There needs to be a "The Democrats are going CRAAAAAAAAAAAZY and being so unfair to me? Presidential Harassment! Worst in history! You hate to see it!" in there somewhere. Probably after step 5. Trump cannot settle for like that almost defeat way of looking at things in a whataboutism sense like Putin can so it has to be twisted around by the end of the narrative such that really he's the victim for enduring such unfair criticism.

Also it's not necessarily Hillary Clinton anymore, it's whoever he perceives as his greatest political foe of the moment. In 2016 it was definitely Hillary Clinton. In 2017 it was John McCain. In 2018 it was Robert Mueller, in 2019 it was Nancy Pelosi and right now it's Adam Schiff. In a few more months it'll be whoever the Democratic Presidential nominee is.

# ? Jan 28, 2020 23:46

eke out: Feb 24, 2013

https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1222290702857592833

(this just broke and they haven't added any more details than the headline, so if you don't have WSJ access you aren't missing much right now)

# ? Jan 28, 2020 23:51

The Glumslinger: Sep 24, 2008; Coach Nagy, you want me to throw to WHAT side of the field?; Hair Elf

And before someone posts that LA Times article in here, Feinstein already put out a statement saying they misunderstood what she said and that she is voting to convict

https://twitter.com/SenFeinstein/st...r%3D143%23pti25

# ? Jan 28, 2020 23:53

eke out: Feb 24, 2013

https://twitter.com/lindsaywise/status/1222288954663325698

the democratic strategy of "no quid pro quo for witnesses"... appears to be paying off completely so far, considering they've given away nothing yet and already won the threshold issue

# ? Jan 28, 2020 23:57

Djarum: Apr 1, 2004; by vyelkin

No Safe Word posted:

was not approved by both houses? what's your argument here?

the point is that they can't just rush in a VP pick without getting the house to say okay so either you're agreeing in a weird way or you missed the point

I am trying to think of who the Republicans can nominate that would be able to get through. They don't have much in the moderate camp anymore, especially that could survive the House. If McCain were alive I could see him. I assume they would need to nominate someone who wouldn't want to run beyond that as well since I would think they would want to get someone more to the right to run. Granted they don't have much there either.

It would be one thing that I could see them not wanting to pull any bullshit with since the House could just block them and they would ultimately be forced with President Pelosi which would be enough to get them to play ball.

# ? Jan 28, 2020 23:59

oxsnard: Oct 8, 2003

wow, should be a fun week after all. Does that mean that the GOPs in the Senate have to actually plan for the possibility that they need to boot Trump?

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:00

oxsnard: Oct 8, 2003

stop fantasizing about Pence getting the boot too. They'll pin it all on trump if they go down that road. There will be no replacement VP either IMO

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:01

eke out: Feb 24, 2013

oxsnard posted:

wow, should be a fun week after all. Does that mean that the GOPs in the Senate have to actually plan for the possibility that they need to boot Trump?

woah there hold your horses

even if things go maximally bad the worst case scenario for trump is like "52-55 people vote to convict, 10+ short of what's required to remove"

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:02

Djarum: Apr 1, 2004; by vyelkin

eke out posted:

https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1222290702857592833

Here is the article.

quote:

*McConnell Says GOP Leaders Don�t Currently Have Enough Votes to Block Impeachment Witnesses

*McConnell Made Remarks in Private Senate GOP Meeting

WASHINGTON�President Trump�s lawyers tried to cast doubts on the importance and credibility of allegations by former national security adviser John Bolton about the president�s motives for freezing aid to Ukraine, as they concluded their efforts to counter Democrats� charges that Mr. Trump abused power and obstructed Congress.

The arguments on the third and final day of presentations by the Trump legal team in the Senate impeachment trial came as the White House grew more concerned that the Republican-controlled chamber may vote later this week to hear from more witnesses. Republicans had hoped to wrap up the trial with an acquittal of the president by this week, but Mr. Bolton�s account has thrown that time frame into doubt.

Using less than half of the 24 hours they were allotted, the president�s lawyers argued that House managers hadn�t established their case and that their accusations fell short of the threshold needed to remove a president from office, particularly in an election year.

�The bar for impeachment cannot be set this low,� said Jay Sekulow, one of the president�s personal attorneys, of the Democrats� impeachment case. Deputy White House counsel Pat Philbin said the abuse-of-power article was �infinitely malleable� and allowed for too much subjectivity. �How are we supposed to get the proof of what�s in the president�s head?� he asked.

White House counsel Pat Cipollone, in closing, reminded senators that the presidential election was nine months away and said the choice should be left to voters. �Why tear up their ballots?� he asked.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.), following the conclusion of the session, dismissed the Trump legal team�s arguments. �Their whole argument is diversion,� he said.

�If you don�t believe the newspaper report, call the witnesses,� he said of the Bolton account, which was first reported Sunday evening in the New York Times. He reminded senators that the witnesses Democrats have wanted to call but that have been blocked by the White House�which include Mr. Bolton and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney �are Republicans appointed by the president.

Democrats, who control 47 seats, need four Republicans to join them to approve motions for new testimony or documents, which need a simple majority to pass. Starting Wednesday, the Senate will have two days to ask each side questions, followed by a vote later this week on new evidence.

In Tuesday�s closing, the defense team was seeking to persuade senators not to support hearing testimony from further witnesses, among them Mr. Bolton. Mr. Bolton wrote in a draft of his forthcoming book that the president told him he wanted to keep aid to Ukraine frozen until Kyiv had aided investigations into Democrats, including former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Mr. Bolton�s lawyer confirmed.

The president has denied Mr. Bolton�s description of the conversation. He has repeatedly said there was no link between freezing the aid to Ukraine and his push for investigations.

In a marked shift from Monday, when the defense team made scant mention of Mr. Bolton�s allegations, the president�s lawyers on Tuesday argued that too little is known about the claims for them to factor into the Senate trial.

Mr. Sekulow called the allegations �inadmissible� and pointed to the president�s denials, while accusing the former adviser of seeking to boost his book sales. Impeachment, he added, �is not a game of leaks and unsourced manuscripts. That is politics, unfortunately.�

Democrats have said they want Messrs. Bolton and Mulvaney to testify because they could offer firsthand accounts of the president�s pressure campaign on Ukraine and motivations for his decision to hold up the aid.

The House last fall had sought Mr. Bolton�s testimony but moved forward with articles of impeachment when he declined to appear without a subpoena. The House declined to subpoena him in an effort to move quickly and not get bogged down in court fights.

The reports of Mr. Bolton�s account unsettled Republican senators and bolstered the odds of a successful vote to hear further witness testimony. Several on-the-fence Republican senators said Mr. Bolton�s claims strengthened the case for further witness testimony, while the number of senators the White House believes may vote for more testimony ticked up.

Lawmakers expressed interest in learning more about Mr. Bolton�s claims. One proposal by Sen. James Lankford (R., Okla.) to make the Bolton manuscript available to the Senate in a classified setting for review drew the support of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), a top ally of the president�s.

Mr. Schumer rejected the idea of reading the manuscript behind closed doors. �What an absurd proposal,� he said. �It is a book. There is no need for it to be read in the SCIF unless you want to hide something,� referring to a secure facility. The book is set to be published in March.

While no administration officials during the fall�s House hearings testified that they were told directly by Mr. Trump that he was holding up the aid to pressure Kyiv, four current and former officials said they understood that to be the case.

Republicans have said this week that if the Senate votes for more testimony, they want to call witnesses including Mr. Biden and his son, Hunter.

Sens. Mitt Romney (R., Utah) and Susan Collins (R., Maine) indicated on Monday that they were likely to favor witnesses. Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R., Alaska) and Lamar Alexander (R., Tenn.) remained open to the idea.

�I think that John Bolton probably has something to offer us,� Ms. Murkowski said Tuesday.

The White House has grown concerned in recent days that two other senators might vote in favor of more testimony: Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Rob Portman of Ohio, people familiar with the discussions said. The defense team has been preparing for the possibility that the Senate will vote in favor of calling more witnesses and discussing how it would go to court to fight a subpoena for Mr. Bolton�s testimony. Mr. Bolton has said he would testify during a Senate trial if subpoenaed.

Mr. Toomey suggested at a closed-door Senate lunch on Monday an arrangement in which the Senate subpoena Mr. Bolton as well as a witness sought by the White House, an approach Mr. Romney said he found fair.

�I think if you hear from one side, you probably ought to have a chance to hear from witnesses from the other side,� said Mr. Romney.

Republicans senators said that during the coming days of questioning they planned to ask about the elder Mr. Biden as vice president withholding loan guarantees from the Ukrainian government when the nation was slow to fire a prosecutor general whom Western diplomats criticized for not cracking down on corruption.

They also planned to ask about Hunter Biden�s role on the board of a Ukrainian gas company while his father was vice president. Mr. Trump and his allies have argued it was corrupt for Mr. Biden to call for the ouster of the Ukrainian prosecutor because he had once investigated the gas company, Burisma Holdings, that had ties to his son. The Bidens deny wrongdoing. Hunter Biden has said that serving on the company�s board showed poor judgment given his father�s anticorruption efforts.

Republicans also plan to use their questions to attack the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Calif.), over his office�s dealings with the whistleblower whose account of the Ukraine pressure campaign spurred the impeachment inquiry.

Democratic senators said they would like to ask questions that could allow the Democratic House managers to rebut comments from the Trump defense team.

Following the period of questioning, the Senate will hold as much as four hours of debate on whether to subpoena witnesses or documents. If that hurdle is cleared, the Senate would then proceed to vote on whether to hear from Mr. Bolton, subpoena the notes he took during his tenure as national security adviser and gather other information or hear from other witnesses.

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:03

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

eke out posted:

woah there hold your horses

even if things go maximally bad the worst case scenario for trump is like "52-55 people vote to convict, 10+ short of what's required to remove"

I don't think there's anything that will get them to convict unless it was a secret ballot. He could literally shoot John Bolton on 5th avenue and it wouldn't matter.

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:06

Tibalt: May 14, 2017; What, drawn, and talk of peace! I hate the word, As I hate hell, all Montagues, and thee

eke out posted:

woah there hold your horses

even if things go maximally bad the worst case scenario for trump is like "52-55 people vote to convict, 10+ short of what's required to remove"

Yeah, I wouldn't count on Trump getting removed until you see Graham, McConnell and Paul talking about removal. Those are the sort of votes you need to get to 67.

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:07

ShutteredIn: Mar 24, 2005; El Campeon Mundial del Acordeon

I think WSJ jumped the gun on this.
https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/1222294591447105541
YET doing a lot of work here.

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:10

eke out: Feb 24, 2013

Tibalt posted:

Yeah, I wouldn't count on Trump getting removed until you see Graham, McConnell and Paul talking about removal. Those are the sort of votes you need to get to 67.

yeah it's just not happening. i think we can safely rule that possibility out, while acknowledging the low-but-theoretically-possible chance that he loses a few votes overall

ShutteredIn posted:

I think WSJ jumped the gun on this.
https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/1222294591447105541
YET doing a lot of work here.

imo the issue is: things aren't going to get better over the next 48 hours. they are going to get hosed in questioning, and Schiff is going to look a hell of a lot better than Trump's clowns when they're side-by-side

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:11

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

Tibalt posted:

Yeah, I wouldn't count on Trump getting removed until you see Graham, McConnell and Paul talking about removal. Those are the sort of votes you need to get to 67.

yeah. i highly doubt he will be removed. my hope is that we have witnesses and poo poo gets worse for the GOP loving them in novemember. my secret hope is they try to get pisslord to step down and he screams publicly about it.

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:14

oxsnard: Oct 8, 2003

To be clear, I think there's no way in hell he gets removed. But the Bolton testimony means there's a risk something incredibly damning comes out

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:24

red19fire: May 26, 2010

Dapper_Swindler posted:

yeah. i highly doubt he will be removed. my hope is that we have witnesses and poo poo gets worse for the GOP loving them in novemember. my secret hope is they try to get pisslord to step down and he screams publicly about it.

Yeah my secret hope is diaper boy gets removed from office then is immediately arrested by the SDNY, who then release his tax returns and we can all collectively heal by laughing at what a broke dipshit he is, and what rubes his moron acolytes are.

E: I also wonder if the GOPers are realizing that every single day it will always get worse, there will be a new bombshell every day until the end of time. This impeachment is their chance to mash the Betray button and save themselves. I would bet on them choosing self-preservation over going down with the trump Hindenburg, and the odds get better every day.

red19fire fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Jan 29, 2020

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:24

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

oxsnard posted:

To be clear, I think there's no way in hell he gets removed. But the Bolton testimony means there's a risk something incredibly damning comes out

i think that and it would open the flood gates, bad poo poo would flow out and these rats would eat each other to save themselves. i think one of the better outcomes is them trying to push trump to resign and it turns into an GOP civil war shitshow.

Edit: the smart ones are. if Bolton is damning enough and names names. alot of the former/current white house chuds will either leap to stab him or cling on to his mushroom cock tighter.

Dapper_Swindler fucked around with this message at 00:31 on Jan 29, 2020

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:27

twice burned ice: Dec 29, 2008; My stove defies the laws of physics!

red19fire posted:

Yeah my secret hope is diaper boy gets removed from office then is immediately arrested by the SDNY, who then release his tax returns and we can all collectively heal by laughing at what a broke dipshit he is, and what rubes his moron acolytes are.

E: I also wonder if the GOPers are realizing that every single day it will always get worse, there will be a new bombshell every day until the end of time. This impeachment is their chance to mash the Betray button and save themselves. I would bet on them choosing self-preservation over going down with the trump Hindenburg, and the odds get better every day.

Good news, we can do this part already

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:27

ShutteredIn: Mar 24, 2005; El Campeon Mundial del Acordeon

https://twitter.com/burgessev/status/1222296901451755520
So yeah, not a done deal yet.

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:30

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 31, 2024 12:23

Djarum: Apr 1, 2004; by vyelkin

Dapper_Swindler posted:

yeah. i highly doubt he will be removed. my hope is that we have witnesses and poo poo gets worse for the GOP loving them in novemember. my secret hope is they try to get pisslord to step down and he screams publicly about it.

Eh. If Bolton goes the way it is looking like it will implicate senior leadership in the White House. It will go from what it currently is to something much wider and harder to control and/or hand wave away. I am sure the number one worry would be Pence as if he is named, which he likely will be, it takes the security blanket away.

This is now going to drug out from days to likely weeks at best as well. Public perception will shift somewhat and Trump will turn on GOP Senators.

McConnell just lost control of his caucus. That means you will likely see more GOP Senators stop towing the line, especially ones in tougher states which will give a lot more cover.

Big things to watch for. 1: If Trump starts openly attacking the GOP Senators. 2: If the GOP Senators break from the White House talking points. 3: If the media coverage, especially on the Right (IE Fox News) shifts.

If any of the above happen it means that there is a rift forming between the two. It ultimately my not be enough votes for removal. By my count there is at least 12 Senators that can not or will not budge.

If any case this all got real, real interesting.

# ? Jan 29, 2020 00:31

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Impeachment Thread: * locks eyes with Nunes* "...Chalupa."

«‹›322 »