Forget all the media bull shit….
Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell CANNOT go anywhere with the trial of an impeached President Donald J. Trump without laying out how the process will work with Democratic leadership in Congress…
Forget all the bullshit from Trump’s knuckleheads about the impeachment NOT being exactly what it IS…
President Trump has been charged with two things ….
Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress…
This indictment is the third one of any American President….
It IS in the history books….
Done….
We are now waiting fro Trump trial….
A conviction who vote Himont of office by the US Senate under the laws of the United States..
At this time it is highly unlikely Trump will be convicted and lose his job…
But?
For things to get done?
The lawmakers of BOTH parties WILL have sit down and iron out the rules of engagement ..
….with no direct negotiations between the Senate leaders scheduled, nor any indication of when Ms. Pelosi might send the articles, lawmakers and aides privately warned that the stalemate could stretch into mid-January, with Mr. Trump’s presidency hanging in the balance.
Mr. McConnell, conceding that his chamber could not proceed to a trial without the House acting first, said the Senate would simply turn back to their regular legislative work while they waited, “content to continue the ordinary business of the Senate while House Democrats continue to flounder.”
Stepping onto the Senate floor moments after Mr. McConnell, Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, accused the president’s party of trying to steamroll to his acquittal.
“We are not asking for critics of the president to serve as witnesses in the trial,” Mr. Schumer said. “We are asking only that the president’s men, his top advisers, tell their side of the story. And Leader McConnell has been unable to make one argument — one single argument — as to why these witnesses and these documents should not be part of a trial.”
In her own written statement, Ms. Pelosi went a step further, accusing Mr. McConnell of violating the oath that all senators must take in an impeachment trial to “do impartial justice,” and of ignoring wrongdoing by the president.
“Today, Leader McConnell made clear that he will feebly comply with President Trump’s cover-up of his abuses of power and be an accomplice to that cover-up,” she wrote.
The outcome of the dispute over witnesses and documents could determine not only when the trial begins and how long it lasts, but also whether it produces meaningful new information that could affect the outcome, either exonerating or further implicating Mr. Trump….
image…House and Senate Leaders, including Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy. Photo: by Ron Sachs-Pool/Getty Images
Well, yeah, but this could drag out for awhile and according to how this Iranian thing plays out?
The whole impeachment drama could take a backseat.
I hope the whole thing moves rapidly to it’s certain conclusion…acquittal and then we can move on to the Election.
Not me Jack…..
The whole impeachment thing is eating Trump up from the inside…
Good…
The guy thinks he got over….
Remember a trial freezes the US Senate…
McConnell Does have to come back to table …
After Super Tuesday Pelosi has less pressure…
I’m interested in getting rid of Trump.
That will only happen through defeating him in an election which you even admit.
Your fascination with causing Trump personal unhappiness is noted.
However, there is No evidence this impeachment saga is hurting Trumps electoral prospects.Indeed his approvals have gone Up since this started.
What is your explanation for that?
Attention IS ATTENTION….
Good or BAD…..
If “getting rid of Trump” was your sole interest, you would be acting to make sure your party did not nominate a weak candidate. That doesn’t seem to remotely be a concern to you. You seem to be content to stand on the sidelines and wash your hands of it all. It’s almost seems like you want Trump to be reelected so you can continue attacking others.
By the way, you should check out the daily MSN daily tracking poll which continues to show wide margins in favor of the Senate removing Trump.
Perhaps because it is not obvious who the weakest candidates are. You would say it is Sanders, but he does fairly well against Trump in the polls compared to other Democrats. I know at least one Republican who would vote for Sanders over Trump, but would not vote for Biden.
Well, if you think that anecdotal evidence makes it correct, that is your right.
Weak candidates?
Joe Biden BEATS Trump consistently…
No other Democrat does….
So, at least you have taken a stance.
Tell us though james, if Biden is denied the nomination, will you vote for the eventual nominee of the party?
If so, it’s a very quick “Yes” as a response and it will be duly noted.
No quick response….
Sorry…
I have pointed out that I was for Hillary before Obama got the nomination and after 3 days I strongly supported the 2 term Democratic President…
Daniel G couldn’t take it and turned to Republicans….
So let the record reflect that james is unwilling to say he will vote for the Democrat against Trump, if it is not Biden.
Maybe James’ possible ineffective non-vote against Trump might balance your (CG’s) ineffective non-vote against Trump.
And I only write this because the stakes are so high.
As a long–time Socialist (who’s worked within, rather than outside, the Democratic Party) I hardly oppose third parties or third lines on principle. Nor do I think that the two-party system is Divinely ordained..
But I regret the one time that I (although not a citizen or voter) did not support the Democratic nominee, Hubert Humphrey over Nixon & Wallace in 1968. (Instead, I worked literally across Market Street on the losing Democratic state Senate campaign of William Newsom.) Not that California at the time, any more than Illinois or New York state today, was ever in doubt — the Golden State voted for the Republican presidential candidate, including favorite sons Nixon & Reagan,
for all ten elections, save 1964, from 1952 to 1988.
By the way, Rhode Island’s own Lincoln Chafee (GOP U.S. Sen. 2000-2007, ind Gov. 2011-14 &. cand. for Dem, pres. nomination 2012) said he didn’t vote for Geo. W. Bush in 2004, but instead wrote in the name of Bush’s father. Not that this had the slightest discernible effect on RI’s Electoral Vote. (Now that the Chafees have moved lock, stock & barrel to Wyoming, his personal vote for President will again be equally irrelevant.)
Hilarious .
Heres a guy who admits he has no idea who he is voting for accusing me of “sitting on the sidelines.”
Well let me assure you that I will be voting for the Democratic nominee for President.
I haven’t made up,my mind who I will vote for in the S.C. Democratic primary yet.Shen I do I will make it known here.
If I vote in a Republican primary and he is on the ballot, I will vote for Joe Walsh.
I am also considering voting in a Democrat primary though because I want to vote for the main opponent of the Cook County States’ Attorney and that would be the only way to make a change in that office.
You have ample candidates and ample choices, so far less excuse.
Of course you have the right to shop as long as want but all this squeezing of the melons and kicking of the tires is not going to stop the potential of a weak nominee emerging. If stopping Trump is all that matters, preventing that would be paramount.
Uh
Remember I vote in South Carolina.
South Carolina is going to vote for Trump.
Using your logic .like you in Illinois ?
My vote doesn’t matter.
Of course the fact is?You couldn’t care less who I vote for .
If your vote doesn’t matter, perhaps then use it as a way to somehow express opposition to Trumpism.
Right in Joe Riley for those offices of whomever it is you feel is a good representative of the party.
Joe Riley, the former Mayor of Charleston, is a great guy whom I have worked with closely in a previous position I once held..
No, I’m going to vote for the Democratic candidate.
I was referring specifically to your 2018 votes for the Trumpists running for the state offices. You could have done something different in theory, since those races were already determined.
Ah?
Jack IS correct on HIS state’s views….
The state IS a Red state…
Most of us reside in Blue states…
It DOES make a difference…..
General election is besides the point (although SC might be closer than IL in the end), but jack’s primary vote in SC has outsized importance as to other states and the potential of stopping the party from nominating a candidate who will lose to Trump.
Agreed…
The winner of SC for Democrats tends to be the nominee…
Joe Biden is ahead of the field by almost 20%….
There is NO Barack Obama running this time….
I was going to challenge James’ assertion that “The winner of SC for Democrats tends to be the nominee… ” until I (hopelessly corrupted by the standards of journalism, scholarship and Wikipedia) looked it up.
And James is right.
The only GOP S.C. winner since 1980 to fail of national nomination was Newt Gingrich (rather than Mitt Romney) in 2012
And the only two Democrats since 1988 to win S.C. but lose the national nomination were Jesse Jackson (rather than Michael Dukakis) in the 1988 caucuses and favorite son John Edwards (rather than John Kerry of Mass.) in the 2004 primary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Carolina_primary
Which leads me to ask Jack, is there some particular bipartisan animus in the Palmetto State (harking back no doubt to Fort Sumter and Calhoun vs. Webster) to candidates from Massachusetts, who provided all three national nominees who’d lost S.C.: Dukakis, Kerry & Romney).
The primary is still two months away.
I will likely not finally decide on who I will vote for until a week or so before.
My prime focus, as I’ve said , is defeating Trump.
Accordingly, My vote will be cast with that in mind and how the field looks at that time.
Wow!
Uh, why not just say…
“I have no F****** idea.”
Because, of course,
You don’t!
My view stands Jack…
It IS the basis of Trump’s numbers fanned by the media…
Or you could give me the black and white lecture?
I got it from CG earlier this week.
It was interesting that you apparently sought his “services” in counteracting my alleged uh “stubbornness “ in holding on to my views.
That idiocy was the stupidest (of the many) stupid things done here.
And yet you missed the discussion when you went away (and everyone else basically stopped posting) and personally appealed to us by name to return.
So, we reap what we sow old buddy!
Nice diversion.
Irrelevant of course.
I explained Shan I returned that I was confronting a personal crisis in my life.Fortunately ,it passed.
But since you have raised it..
Why did everyone ,including you apparently, quit posting when I left?
I mean what was I?Just another poster I assumed.
What?You “missed” me and when I left there was simply no reason to post anymore?
We were all (and are) glad that things improved for you. Yes, everything basically stopped. The “fights” and insults here are the same as they were. You first said you were taking a more serene approach to politics or something of that nature. but you went right back to the way you had been to. So, that’s where things are.
Yes we all know that you never insult anyone,attack anyone, or do anything that should arouse anyone’s ire.
You are simply a”victim” of malicious attacks from wild eyed Democrats out to “get” you.
Yet you return for more.
Good God when are you going to end the silliness?
A few weeks ago you signed off ,sort of, a few days later you were back.
You love this stuff!Who do you think you’re kidding?
You give as good as you take.
So cram your absurd notion about how “different” you are etc etc.
You’re no better and no worse that anyone else here.
Claiming I am “no worse” than anyone else here is a major, major acknowledgement. I will take it!
The others are likely to disagree though.
No you’re no worse.
We all give and take.
I don’t agree with you in most things.As I’ve told you in the past I have lots of friends who I disagree with politically .We will argue then have a drink ,laugh about how wrong the other is ,and then start bitching about something else.
I really hold no animosity toward you despite what you might believe.
I too go back and forth with Jack here….
But it’s fun and enlightening and no problem for me….
That’s very nice. I am sure we would probably get along in many regards. I’d probably have a laugh or two with james as well. I have always had a very civil online relationship with DSD.
However, Zreebs (especially) and Scott are not going to be that generous when it comes to me being “no worse” and Keith…… he still thinks I am a Nazi sympathizer because I supported Mitt Romney.
On the topic of this post?
McConnell is gonna HAVE TO make Trump a little mad to get the process going…
And the impeachment IS here to stay…
Trump lost THAT one to the Dem’s….
I don’t recall if there was a major reason why I quit posting. A large part of it had to do with being busy at work. Unlike you, I don’t see a lot of value nor do I get any pleasure in responding to James’s posts.
So apparently my “appeal” brought everyone back?
I am amazed at my power!
Let’s see how far this goes!
I “appeal “to you to vote Democratic!
Force your party to become mainstream and I would, when appropriate.
As we already know, I was openly rooting for some Democrats to win high profile races in 2019, that some of you thought were unwinnable.
Yet you have never voted for a Democrat right?
Oh and you would call today’s Republican Party “mainstream.”
That’s funny too.
I have voted for Democrats in non-partisan races but yet in a partisan race. We will see what the future holds.
I consider my own views within the Republican Party to be mainstream (and you have conceded as much about me in the past). I do not consider Trumpism mainstream which is why I will not be voting for it, and likely would have avoided voting for it in a non-competitive State Agriculture Secretary race, etc.
I consider my views “mainstream.”
“Mainstream” is largely in the eyes of the beholder.
Your views may be mainstream even if we have many disagreements.
However, if you vote for Bernie Sanders in a general election, which you would have every right to do, I do not think you will have voted for someone mainstream.
Do you consider Trump “mainstream?”
I answered that for you at 1:39 EST yesterday
My term is your NOT seeing ‘greys’ on issues Jack…