Uncle Milty wrote:It's a history lesson.

it has happened three times before. what is the trend in that small sample?

jamiethekiller wrote:I don't necessarily disagree with Brannt. IMO all this does is solidify is base more and pushed centrists away from even voting.

I don't either but this is not news, even if it is pretended to be. Several members here, including myself, specifically expressed our trepidation in an impeachment inquiry over multiple politics threads due to our concerns over the negative impact it would have on the 2020 election (from the Ds POV). Those here who have long supported an impeachment inquiry also acknowledged the potential negative impact but felt that the need to hold a criminal accountable outweighed the risk of him being re-elected.

The last two impeachment proceedings happened to second term Presidents. We do not know what this will do from Trump and any comparisons to the past must be taken with a grain of salt.

/statingtheobvious

slugsrbad wrote:The last two impeachment proceedings happened to second term Presidents. We do not know what this will do from Trump and any comparisons to the past must be taken with a grain of salt.

/statingtheobvious

also, when the next election came around for all three, the next person elected was of a different party. i do not see that as losing.

CalvinBall wrote:

Uncle Milty wrote:It's a history lesson.

it has happened three times before. what is the trend in that small sample?

Check Clinton's approval rating. On a personal level, think of your support for Obama when rumblings of impeachment presented.

I was referring more to efforts to investigate and remove Trump. The only thing it's accomplished is to increase the divide and cement positions.

btw, who's the third who was impeached?

Andrew Johnson, Clinton and Nixon are the three. Or are you /Buckying since Nixon wasn’t impeached but resigned

Although a near certainty without his resignation, Nixon was never actually impeached.

Brantt wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:

Brantt wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:you do realize that 40 percent of people being for it is remarkably high, right? do your people across the country tell you that?

Can't you have a simple, civil conversation without condescending comments? What is wrong with you today?

Yes, let's debate Crowdstrike and how the hack was an inside job. I mean, that is the kind of stuff you believe. What is the point? This isn't I believed in the principles of the Democratic party but they abandoned me. It is more a story of you and your circle getting duped by a moronic, con man that does not give a #$!&@ about you in any sense.

I don't even know what Crowdstrike is.

Yes, half the country is all stupid and has been duped. We can all only strive to be as intelligent as you. Amazing also how the half that have been duped in general are more successful in life.

This just broke the unintentional comedy meter.

Trump just suggested they ask for Pence's Ukraine calls too.

Uncle Milty wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:

Uncle Milty wrote:It's a history lesson.

it has happened three times before. what is the trend in that small sample?

Check Clinton's approval rating. On a personal level, think of your support for Obama when rumblings of impeachment presented.

I was referring more to efforts to investigate and remove Trump. The only thing it's accomplished is to increase the divide and cement positions.

That just isn't based on anything other than your opinion.

The Clinton Impeachment compared to this one is significantly different. For starters, Clinton had a high approval rating to begin with. Trump does not. At all. You think suburban, educated whites are suddenly going to have sympathy on him and his approval rating will skyrocket?

Also, Bush won.

momadance wrote:Trump just suggested they ask for Pence's Ukraine calls too.

haha that's hilarious. if i can't be president you can't either. honestly, other than the democrats doing something stupid, which they are good at, a quick impeachment and pence throwing trump under the bus would probably mean a R victory if there are no new wars and the economy chugs along.

azrider wrote:

momadance wrote:Trump just suggested they ask for Pence's Ukraine calls too.

haha that's hilarious. if i can't be president you can't either. honestly, other than the democrats doing something stupid, which they are good at, a quick impeachment and pence throwing trump under the bus would probably mean a R victory if there are no new wars and the economy chugs along.

I don't follow your rationale. You are saying if the Dems don't do something dumb it will probably mean an R victory. What happens if the Dems do something dumb?

06hawkalum wrote:

azrider wrote:

momadance wrote:Trump just suggested they ask for Pence's Ukraine calls too.

haha that's hilarious. if i can't be president you can't either. honestly, other than the democrats doing something stupid, which they are good at, a quick impeachment and pence throwing trump under the bus would probably mean a R victory if there are no new wars and the economy chugs along.

I don't follow your rationale. You are saying if the Dems don't do something dumb it will probably mean an R victory. What happens if the Dems do something dumb?

trump will lose, if you just let him. people are sick of the shit show. and pelosi has done a pretty good job keeping the party in check and focused on not being part of that shit show.

i told people about the little boy who cried wolf earlier, now this stuff is the wolf and not some hysterical partisan shit. hope this does not fizzle out, nor appear to be russia 2.0, if it is, drop it right away and stay the course. don't give this guy distractions or enemies, let him stand and defend his job next fall. if he has to do that... i could run against him and beat him.

Swalwell confirms it includes multiple individuals. Also confirms there a numerous witnesses to interview.

Much of the Russian defense was "no collusion". It didn't seem to matter to most people that Russia interfered with our election--that is a fact that no one credibly has denied. (Keep in mind the KGB has long been engaged in American politics, though back in the old days of the cold war they were more apt to support left wing and peace organizations while today they support various nationalists ones.) The denial was that the Russians were just out there on their own working to help get Trump elected. But now, we have actual evidence of collusion. It doesn't really matter if there was any quid pro quo or not--the fact that Trump asked for help is enough for their to be collusion. It's not the Russians, but still, a President's campaign has colluded or attempt to collude with a foreign government. This is what we know so far.

Now, I have no problem believing that Trump himself didn't believe that he was doing anything illegal. He's an ignorant moron. What I'm hoping for though is that while there's no doubt there will be an attempt at cover up, the administration is so inept that they continue to screw that up too. Trump doesn't have a Haldeman or Rove or even a Liddy to try to extricate him from this.

TenuredVulture wrote:Much of the Russian defense was "no collusion". It didn't seem to matter to most people that Russia interfered with our election--that is a fact that no one credibly has denied. (Keep in mind the KGB has long been engaged in American politics, though back in the old days of the cold war they were more apt to support left wing and peace organizations while today they support various nationalists ones.) The denial was that the Russians were just out there on their own working to help get Trump elected. But now, we have actual evidence of collusion. It doesn't really matter if there was any quid pro quo or not--the fact that Trump asked for help is enough for their to be collusion. It's not the Russians, but still, a President's campaign has colluded or attempt to collude with a foreign government. This is what we know so far.

Now, I have no problem believing that Trump himself didn't believe that he was doing anything illegal. He's an ignorant moron. What I'm hoping for though is that while there's no doubt there will be an attempt at cover up, the administration is so inept that they continue to screw that up too. Trump doesn't have a Haldeman or Rove or even a Liddy to try to extricate him from this.

Stephen Miller and Sean Hannity are on the case!

TenuredVulture wrote:Much of the Russian defense was "no collusion". It didn't seem to matter to most people that Russia interfered with our election--that is a fact that no one credibly has denied. (Keep in mind the KGB has long been engaged in American politics, though back in the old days of the cold war they were more apt to support left wing and peace organizations while today they support various nationalists ones.) The denial was that the Russians were just out there on their own working to help get Trump elected. But now, we have actual evidence of collusion. It doesn't really matter if there was any quid pro quo or not--the fact that Trump asked for help is enough for their to be collusion. It's not the Russians, but still, a President's campaign has colluded or attempt to collude with a foreign government. This is what we know so far.

Now, I have no problem believing that Trump himself didn't believe that he was doing anything illegal. He's an ignorant moron. What I'm hoping for though is that while there's no doubt there will be an attempt at cover up, the administration is so inept that they continue to screw that up too. Trump doesn't have a Haldeman or Rove or even a Liddy to try to extricate him from this.

The phone call happened 2 days after Mueller's testimony and he bragged about getting off per the memo. He believes he's invincible. The dude claims he could shoot someone on 5th Ave and get away with it. He knows what he's doing.

momadance wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:Much of the Russian defense was "no collusion". It didn't seem to matter to most people that Russia interfered with our election--that is a fact that no one credibly has denied. (Keep in mind the KGB has long been engaged in American politics, though back in the old days of the cold war they were more apt to support left wing and peace organizations while today they support various nationalists ones.) The denial was that the Russians were just out there on their own working to help get Trump elected. But now, we have actual evidence of collusion. It doesn't really matter if there was any quid pro quo or not--the fact that Trump asked for help is enough for their to be collusion. It's not the Russians, but still, a President's campaign has colluded or attempt to collude with a foreign government. This is what we know so far.

Now, I have no problem believing that Trump himself didn't believe that he was doing anything illegal. He's an ignorant moron. What I'm hoping for though is that while there's no doubt there will be an attempt at cover up, the administration is so inept that they continue to screw that up too. Trump doesn't have a Haldeman or Rove or even a Liddy to try to extricate him from this.

The phone call happened 2 days after Mueller's testimony and he bragged about getting off per the memo. He believes he's invincible. The dude claims he could shoot someone on 5th Ave and get away with it. He knows what he's doing.

I quite disagree that he knows what he's doing. He's getting away with it because he's being enabled by the Republican party, and his base and the media (I go back and forth on which group is less intelligent) have convinced himself that somehow, as a rich white guy, he must be smart despite any lack of evidence for even rudimentary intelligence. There are lots of people willing to do very stupid things because generally there are no real consequences. Voting for Trump the political equivalent of investing in the Uber IPO or casting Russell Crowe in a musical.

I think Sharice Davids makes it 218?