With the Vindman testimony really making the whistleblower unimportant now?
And Democrats doing a vote tomorrow on the inquiry?
Their first attack campaigns have been countered…
There are now media pieces coming out about the McConnell’s Senate majority being in trouble?
Trump isn’t in any trouble with a Senate conviction vote…
But the House IS gonna be handing the Republicans in the Senate a ‘hot potato’….
No doubt….
But if the evidence keeps piling up on Trump’s underhanded actions?
What happens to them?
Remember…
Donald Trump cares less about ANYBODY except?
Donald Trump….
Senate Republicans, with 22 seats up for reelection and their majority up for grabs in 2020, are in a bind over how to defend President Trump from the House impeachment push.
They realize their political fortunes and policy goals are tied to the president, but they also know their best shot at keeping control of the Senate hinges on senators preserving their independent brands.
That means they have to be careful in defending conduct they see as improper; several Senate Republicans say it would be wrong to hold up military aid to Ukraine to gain political leverage, the issue at the heart of the impeachment inquiry.
Senate Republicans on Tuesday took a decidedly cautious approach as a White House witness offered new testimony in the House critical of Trump.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) claimed victory in Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) decision to hold a House vote Thursday on impeachment procedures but stopped short of outlining his next moves.
“Obviously they’ve responded to the pressure that we put on them to try to handle this in a more transparent way that meets basic standards of due process that every American would be entitled to,” he said.
“We’ll have to take a look at what the House produces later today and see if it passes the smell test of providing the kind of due process protections that the president and his team are certainly entitled to, just like President Nixon was and President Clinton was,” he said.
Trump and Republican leaders in the House have telegraphed a new strategy intended to move away from attacks against Democrats on process, and toward a more robust defense of the president on the merits of impeachment.
“I’d rather go into the details of the case rather than the process,” Trump said Monday before a trip to Chicago.
“Process is wonderful,” he added. “But I think you ought to look at the case.”
But McConnell, a master of procedural fights, didn’t endorse the shift in his comments….
image..thenation
What happens you ask?
They vote to acquit Trump of course.
No ifs ,ands. , or uh, “buts.”
None of silly “greys” here James ,there will will be a simple convict or acquit vote.
Probably…
But…..
I don’t think it would all of them….
And who knows what is gonna come out in the next few months?
Some of the GOPer’s will either have to abstain or actually vote FOR….
3 didn’t vote Against the inquiry…
So what if a few vote to remove him?
What practical effect does that have on anything?
CG keeps mentioning that it would be “historic.”Well. I suppose it would merit an asterisk in a treatise on Presidential Impeachment’s.Thats nice,but once again, what real effect will it have?The answer of course is obvious…
None
Trump will still be President.The couple that might vote to remove will be vilified by the Right Wing press and Trump himself while meriting some interviews on CNN and MSNBC.
All in all,no big deal.
Of course you could run a post about it and once again inform us that this is the beginning of the Republican Party “turning on” Trump.(for like the hundredth time)
It might have a very large effect on the electorate if a “bipartisan majority” of the Senate vote to remove him from office.
Needless to say, this would be unprecedented.
Again, I am almost certain you understand that the 2020 election still occurs if he is “acquitted” but yet your posts on the topic make it seem like you assume that he is automatically in office for years if the vote “fails.”
I’d hope for that to be the case.
But I don’t see his GOP base abandoning him because a cpuole of Republicans who will be immediately labeled RINOs vote to convict.
However among independents and those not politically tuned in who decided “what the hell” in 2016?
Yeah they might see Trump stating in office despite a majority vote in both Houses to remove him as “swampy” (even though it is Constitutional).
Basically his playing the victim spiel will wear thin if he is benefiting from the very system they were told he was going to fight.
So yeah, in that scenario I could see how a majority of Senators voting to convict could lose him some votes.
He can’t win the election with just the “GOP base.”
Needless to say, the election comes down to one factor-
Can Democrats make a case to swing voters that they can be entrusted with the Presidency?
Swing voters? Yes. You? No.
To clarify my post–swing voters are far more likely to have a favorable or at least neutral view of the Democratic Party you hate.
Even if they voted for Trump. Who you also detest.
Agreed
Though I don’t “hate” your party. I just find it deplorable at times.
I’ve never been a swing voter.
In truth, that ought to make you appreciate my principle even more, but I guess I can live without it.
Your “perspective” is also that a conservative Republican like John Kasich should be given the Democratic nomination and that all voters–Republicans, Democrats, and swing vorers–would all cheer and elect him President.
Excuse me if I see your “perspective” as uh, not always on the mark.
No, that’s not really accurate. I just stated it would be a near foolproof way to beat Trump. I also gave other names that are less “conservative” than Kasich.
Every time I brought it up I said I didn’t blame you guys for thinking you can beat Trump on your own and that I would not have wanted to take such a “deal” either. From your perspective, you just better be right, or there will be massive regret.
I would imagine that those in the Labor Party in Israel are glad they decided to be strategic similar to what I had suggested would be the most fool-proof way to beat Trump.
But I get it. There are voting rights for felons and free prison sex changes and taxing the hell out of black churches and all of the things Bill Maher mentioned that many in the party want to do.
Of course the Republican Party has “conservative values” and Donald J Trump as an exemplar thereof.
You have a different view of “conservative values” than I do.
I am sure if I was somehow around in 1969, we would have still had the same disagreements.
You make lots of assumptions.
I have repeatedly said that I think he is likely to lose the election for ahost of reasons.
Do I think theimpeachment trial will be the decisive factor in his defeat.No.
Besides ,of course ,this has Nothing to do with the discussion which was concerning Republican support for conviction.
And while you are making assumptions about my views of Trumps reelection.
You daily post remarks that one could take as being suggestive of his reelection.
Of course ,you just don’t like it when anyone posts that Republicans are not going to desert Trump as you forlornly hope they will.,
If they “take” them that way, they are being tribalist and paranoid. (And they certainly say the opposite over at the other site.)
I don’t think we know for sure how the election will turn out and as political junkies, I don’t think there is anything wrong with examining all angles and possibilities.
How can an impeachment not be a big factor though?
Unless someone thinks he is so far behind right now, that nothing matters. That certainly does not seem to be the case according to conventional wisdom.
Democrats have been dealt a good hand with this and should be able to use it to their political benefit.
There will be lots of factors.
I said it wouldn’t be the “decisive” factor.
Trump will loudly proclaim his almost sure acquittal as vindication of his actions .
I believe that Trump will probably lose because he hasn’t expanded his “base,”
And that people are tiring of his conduct in office and by a year from now will have essentially”had it” with his antics.