Donald Trump is such a threat to the nation.

[HappyJoy]

By calling attention to McConnell not wanting to call witnesses or take the trail seriously. So, holding out for a better deal as moderate Republicans are getting calls from their own constituents wanting a full trail.

As for the impeachment articles they have already passed.

I'm pretty sure the most narcissistic president this country has ever known cares a great deal about how his impeachment trail will make him look.

huh? what is her leverage son? come on beat us down with this genius of yours. Mitch gives two shits if she uses that paper for wiping her ass. how is it she has leverage/ this isn't his thing it's hers. dude, you are very confused. hly fk.

Mitch didn't ask her to perform the impeachment. that was her. so she kidnapped her own kid and wants some bad guy to give her money for her kid. too fking funny.

Mitch doesn't care that Trump was impeached? I doubt that.

Anyway, I've already answered this.

he wasn't. that's what you don't understand. hly fk.

she's holding her own kid hostage, and you think mitch is concerned. no friend, that just makes you a fking idiot of the century.

He was impeached when the articles were voted on.

nope. keep trying.

I don't have to try, it happened.

 

[jc456]

She wants to know what the rules are going to be in the senate so that McConnell doesn't attempt to kill any impeachment trial thus rendering what she feels is important for our country to fall by the way side. You don't have to agree with her to recognize the obvious.

Too bad. She knew when she started it wasn't gonna go anywhere. Reminds me of the 2000 election. The rules didn't work in their favor so they tried to change them retroactively. Doesn't work that way.

Impeachment and removal from office are two separate things. She is only oversees one and only has influence in the other so she's simply looking to get the fairest trail she can for the findings that were realized in the House. Again, you can disagree with the impeachment results but the OP is making up reasons for her actions now and the wingnut stupidity is painful to watch.

she has absolutely no influence in the senate. still waiting on how you figure this means leverage

 

[HappyJoy]

She wants to know what the rules are going to be in the senate so that McConnell doesn't attempt to kill any impeachment trial thus rendering what she feels is important for our country to fall by the way side. You don't have to agree with her to recognize the obvious.

What difference does it make? Impeachment is DOA anyway.

Well no, he was impeached. That already happened. The House performed it's role and that vote was counted.

Of course Trump will not be convicted in the senate. But if 2 or 3 Republicans vote to throw him out then politically there is something to that. Anyway, I don't even think that would be Pelosi's end game. She just wants a full trial with witnesses.

no it didn't. It happens when she hands the articles to the senate, then he was impeached. until such time, she's

Link?

 

[S.J.]

She just wants a full trial with witnesses.

Yeah, Republicans wanted witnesses in the House too. Did they get them?

 

[jc456]

She wants to know what the rules are going to be in the senate so that McConnell doesn't attempt to kill any impeachment trial thus rendering what she feels is important for our country to fall by the way side. You don't have to agree with her to recognize the obvious.

What difference does it make? Impeachment is DOA anyway.

Well no, he was impeached. That already happened. The House performed it's role and that vote was counted.

Of course Trump will not be convicted in the senate. But if 2 or 3 Republicans vote to throw him out then politically there is something to that. Anyway, I don't even think that would be Pelosi's end game. She just wants a full trial with witnesses.

no it didn't. It happens when she hands the articles to the senate, then he was impeached. until such time, she's

Link?

A Law Professor’s Provocative Argument: Trump Has Not Yet Been Impeached

 

[jc456]

She just wants a full trial with witnesses.

Yeah, Republicans wanted witnesses in the House too. Did they get them?

I was hoping Peloser would resign and every other demofk go fk themselves.

 

[jc456]

She wants to know what the rules are going to be in the senate so that McConnell doesn't attempt to kill any impeachment trial thus rendering what she feels is important for our country to fall by the way side. You don't have to agree with her to recognize the obvious.

What difference does it make? Impeachment is DOA anyway.

Well no, he was impeached. That already happened. The House performed it's role and that vote was counted.

Of course Trump will not be convicted in the senate. But if 2 or 3 Republicans vote to throw him out then politically there is something to that. Anyway, I don't even think that would be Pelosi's end game. She just wants a full trial with witnesses.

Pelosi's game is up and she knows it. She was desperate and miscalculated. If anything, it will help Trump win in November.

dude, it was all calculated. she has done what she intended to do. Period. She was never going to impeach trump.

 

[HappyJoy]

She wants to know what the rules are going to be in the senate so that McConnell doesn't attempt to kill any impeachment trial thus rendering what she feels is important for our country to fall by the way side. You don't have to agree with her to recognize the obvious.

Too bad. She knew when she started it wasn't gonna go anywhere. Reminds me of the 2000 election. The rules didn't work in their favor so they tried to change them retroactively. Doesn't work that way.

Impeachment and removal from office are two separate things. She is only oversees one and only has influence in the other so she's simply looking to get the fairest trail she can for the findings that were realized in the House. Again, you can disagree with the impeachment results but the OP is making up reasons for her actions now and the wingnut stupidity is painful to watch.

she has absolutely no influence in the senate. still waiting on how you figure this means leverage

She can hold off sending the impeachment articles to the senate way before or just before an election, that's influence. She could hold off articles of impeachment while a coupe of moderate senators are being bombarded with phone calls from constituents telling them they want a full trial. That's influence. I have no idea if any of this would work but she does have some influence. I'm not sure why this is difficult for you to understand.

 

[jc456]

She wants to know what the rules are going to be in the senate so that McConnell doesn't attempt to kill any impeachment trial thus rendering what she feels is important for our country to fall by the way side. You don't have to agree with her to recognize the obvious.

Too bad. She knew when she started it wasn't gonna go anywhere. Reminds me of the 2000 election. The rules didn't work in their favor so they tried to change them retroactively. Doesn't work that way.

Impeachment and removal from office are two separate things. She is only oversees one and only has influence in the other so she's simply looking to get the fairest trail she can for the findings that were realized in the House. Again, you can disagree with the impeachment results but the OP is making up reasons for her actions now and the wingnut stupidity is painful to watch.

she has absolutely no influence in the senate. still waiting on how you figure this means leverage

She can hold off sending the impeachment articles to the senate way before or just before an election, that's influence. She could hold off articles of impeachment while a coupe of moderate senators are being bombarded with phone calls from constituents telling them they want a full trial. That's influence. I have no idea if any of this would work but she does have some influence. I'm not sure why this is difficult for you to understand.

no she can't, once a new congress takes over they're dead. Dude, fking learn fking something.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

The disregard for process and law is the elephant in the room here.

Is the House using the Hastert Rule to impeach the *pResident the thing that has you Cultists so butt hurt?

 

[HappyJoy]

She wants to know what the rules are going to be in the senate so that McConnell doesn't attempt to kill any impeachment trial thus rendering what she feels is important for our country to fall by the way side. You don't have to agree with her to recognize the obvious.

What difference does it make? Impeachment is DOA anyway.

Well no, he was impeached. That already happened. The House performed it's role and that vote was counted.

Of course Trump will not be convicted in the senate. But if 2 or 3 Republicans vote to throw him out then politically there is something to that. Anyway, I don't even think that would be Pelosi's end game. She just wants a full trial with witnesses.

no it didn't. It happens when she hands the articles to the senate, then he was impeached. until such time, she's

Link?

A Law Professor’s Provocative Argument: Trump Has Not Yet Been Impeached

So an article with one contrarian point of view (from a professor whose opinion you don't care about anyway) that goes out of it's way to state that most think he is impeached is somehow proof to you? It's not.

 

[HappyJoy]

She wants to know what the rules are going to be in the senate so that McConnell doesn't attempt to kill any impeachment trial thus rendering what she feels is important for our country to fall by the way side. You don't have to agree with her to recognize the obvious.

Too bad. She knew when she started it wasn't gonna go anywhere. Reminds me of the 2000 election. The rules didn't work in their favor so they tried to change them retroactively. Doesn't work that way.

Impeachment and removal from office are two separate things. She is only oversees one and only has influence in the other so she's simply looking to get the fairest trail she can for the findings that were realized in the House. Again, you can disagree with the impeachment results but the OP is making up reasons for her actions now and the wingnut stupidity is painful to watch.

she has absolutely no influence in the senate. still waiting on how you figure this means leverage

She can hold off sending the impeachment articles to the senate way before or just before an election, that's influence. She could hold off articles of impeachment while a coupe of moderate senators are being bombarded with phone calls from constituents telling them they want a full trial. That's influence. I have no idea if any of this would work but she does have some influence. I'm not sure why this is difficult for you to understand.

no she can't, once a new congress takes over they're dead. Dude, fking learn fking something.

Link?

 

[jc456]

What difference does it make? Impeachment is DOA anyway.

Well no, he was impeached. That already happened. The House performed it's role and that vote was counted.

Of course Trump will not be convicted in the senate. But if 2 or 3 Republicans vote to throw him out then politically there is something to that. Anyway, I don't even think that would be Pelosi's end game. She just wants a full trial with witnesses.

no it didn't. It happens when she hands the articles to the senate, then he was impeached. until such time, she's

Link?

A Law Professor’s Provocative Argument: Trump Has Not Yet Been Impeached

So an article with one contrarian point of view (from a professor whose opinion you don't care about anyway) that goes out of it's way to state that most think he is impeached is somehow proof to you? It's not.

he's your guy. And, there have been others now. son, you're in a no win here. why not take the embarrassment you've already gotten and walk away.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

She wants to know what the rules are going to be in the senate so that McConnell doesn't attempt to kill any impeachment trial thus rendering what she feels is important for our country to fall by the way side. You don't have to agree with her to recognize the obvious.

Too bad. She knew when she started it wasn't gonna go anywhere. Reminds me of the 2000 election. The rules didn't work in their favor so they tried to change them retroactively. Doesn't work that way.

Impeachment and removal from office are two separate things. She is only oversees one and only has influence in the other so she's simply looking to get the fairest trail she can for the findings that were realized in the House. Again, you can disagree with the impeachment results but the OP is making up reasons for her actions now and the wingnut stupidity is painful to watch.

she has absolutely no influence in the senate. still waiting on how you figure this means leverage

She can hold off sending the impeachment articles to the senate way before or just before an election, that's influence. She could hold off articles of impeachment while a coupe of moderate senators are being bombarded with phone calls from constituents telling them they want a full trial. That's influence. I have no idea if any of this would work but she does have some influence. I'm not sure why this is difficult for you to understand.

It's a bit of brilliant ploy, and I'm not even a huge Pelosi fan.

 

[HappyJoy]

Well no, he was impeached. That already happened. The House performed it's role and that vote was counted.

Of course Trump will not be convicted in the senate. But if 2 or 3 Republicans vote to throw him out then politically there is something to that. Anyway, I don't even think that would be Pelosi's end game. She just wants a full trial with witnesses.

no it didn't. It happens when she hands the articles to the senate, then he was impeached. until such time, she's

Link?

A Law Professor’s Provocative Argument: Trump Has Not Yet Been Impeached

So an article with one contrarian point of view (from a professor whose opinion you don't care about anyway) that goes out of it's way to state that most think he is impeached is somehow proof to you? It's not.

he's your guy. And, there have been others now. son, you're in a no win here. why not take the embarrassment you've already gotten and walk away.

No, he's a guy whose opinion I respect but would not put above everyone else.

Where as you guys don't respect his opinion at all during the impeachment hearing yet now will apparently ignore everyone else in favor of him. I guess you now also believe that Trump committed impeachable offenses.

 

[HappyJoy]

She wants to know what the rules are going to be in the senate so that McConnell doesn't attempt to kill any impeachment trial thus rendering what she feels is important for our country to fall by the way side. You don't have to agree with her to recognize the obvious.

Too bad. She knew when she started it wasn't gonna go anywhere. Reminds me of the 2000 election. The rules didn't work in their favor so they tried to change them retroactively. Doesn't work that way.

Impeachment and removal from office are two separate things. She is only oversees one and only has influence in the other so she's simply looking to get the fairest trail she can for the findings that were realized in the House. Again, you can disagree with the impeachment results but the OP is making up reasons for her actions now and the wingnut stupidity is painful to watch.

she has absolutely no influence in the senate. still waiting on how you figure this means leverage

She can hold off sending the impeachment articles to the senate way before or just before an election, that's influence. She could hold off articles of impeachment while a coupe of moderate senators are being bombarded with phone calls from constituents telling them they want a full trial. That's influence. I have no idea if any of this would work but she does have some influence. I'm not sure why this is difficult for you to understand.

It's a bit of brilliant ploy, and I'm not even a huge Pelosi fan.

She is smart.

 

[The Original Tree]

She wants to know what the rules are going to be in the senate so that McConnell doesn't attempt to kill any impeachment trial thus rendering what she feels is important for our country to fall by the way side. You don't have to agree with her to recognize the obvious.

Too bad. She knew when she started it wasn't gonna go anywhere. Reminds me of the 2000 election. The rules didn't work in their favor so they tried to change them retroactively. Doesn't work that way.

Impeachment and removal from office are two separate things. She is only oversees one and only has influence in the other so she's simply looking to get the fairest trail she can for the findings that were realized in the House. Again, you can disagree with the impeachment results but the OP is making up reasons for her actions now and the wingnut stupidity is painful to watch.

she has absolutely no influence in the senate. still waiting on how you figure this means leverage

She can hold off sending the impeachment articles to the senate way before or just before an election, that's influence. She could hold off articles of impeachment while a coupe of moderate senators are being bombarded with phone calls from constituents telling them they want a full trial. That's influence. I have no idea if any of this would work but she does have some influence. I'm not sure why this is difficult for you to understand.

It's a bit of brilliant ploy, and I'm not even a huge Pelosi fan.

Not very brilliant when the Faux Impeachment was really about The 2020 Election and she is turning people against her and rallying them to The President's side.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Too bad. She knew when she started it wasn't gonna go anywhere. Reminds me of the 2000 election. The rules didn't work in their favor so they tried to change them retroactively. Doesn't work that way.

Impeachment and removal from office are two separate things. She is only oversees one and only has influence in the other so she's simply looking to get the fairest trail she can for the findings that were realized in the House. Again, you can disagree with the impeachment results but the OP is making up reasons for her actions now and the wingnut stupidity is painful to watch.

she has absolutely no influence in the senate. still waiting on how you figure this means leverage

She can hold off sending the impeachment articles to the senate way before or just before an election, that's influence. She could hold off articles of impeachment while a coupe of moderate senators are being bombarded with phone calls from constituents telling them they want a full trial. That's influence. I have no idea if any of this would work but she does have some influence. I'm not sure why this is difficult for you to understand.

It's a bit of brilliant ploy, and I'm not even a huge Pelosi fan.

She is smart.

Yep. Anything that makes political cultists lose their minds to this level is a good thing.

 

[The Original Tree]

Too bad. She knew when she started it wasn't gonna go anywhere. Reminds me of the 2000 election. The rules didn't work in their favor so they tried to change them retroactively. Doesn't work that way.

Impeachment and removal from office are two separate things. She is only oversees one and only has influence in the other so she's simply looking to get the fairest trail she can for the findings that were realized in the House. Again, you can disagree with the impeachment results but the OP is making up reasons for her actions now and the wingnut stupidity is painful to watch.

she has absolutely no influence in the senate. still waiting on how you figure this means leverage

She can hold off sending the impeachment articles to the senate way before or just before an election, that's influence. She could hold off articles of impeachment while a coupe of moderate senators are being bombarded with phone calls from constituents telling them they want a full trial. That's influence. I have no idea if any of this would work but she does have some influence. I'm not sure why this is difficult for you to understand.

It's a bit of brilliant ploy, and I'm not even a huge Pelosi fan.

She is smart.

Impeachment needle not moving as majority of voters oppose removing Trump: polls

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Too bad. She knew when she started it wasn't gonna go anywhere. Reminds me of the 2000 election. The rules didn't work in their favor so they tried to change them retroactively. Doesn't work that way.

Impeachment and removal from office are two separate things. She is only oversees one and only has influence in the other so she's simply looking to get the fairest trail she can for the findings that were realized in the House. Again, you can disagree with the impeachment results but the OP is making up reasons for her actions now and the wingnut stupidity is painful to watch.

she has absolutely no influence in the senate. still waiting on how you figure this means leverage

She can hold off sending the impeachment articles to the senate way before or just before an election, that's influence. She could hold off articles of impeachment while a coupe of moderate senators are being bombarded with phone calls from constituents telling them they want a full trial. That's influence. I have no idea if any of this would work but she does have some influence. I'm not sure why this is difficult for you to understand.

It's a bit of brilliant ploy, and I'm not even a huge Pelosi fan.

Not very brilliant when the Faux Impeachment was really about The 2020 Election and she is turning people against her and rallying them to The President's side.

Dare to dream, I suppose. You do understand that your *pResident was impeached, right? Right?