My predictions for the trump impeachment

[Wyatt earp]

Senate aint going to convict if trump were to be impeached in the house. That would be the republican death knell and good riddance to those weak spineless rubes if they did.

Republicans will not impeach regardless of the facts

However, if the information is damaging to the country and the presidency, both Trump and Republican Senators will have to answer to the voters

In order for the Senate to conduct the trial the Dem-majority House must first impeach and a simple majority would suffice. Nearly 3 full years since "impeach" was first screamed, 8 full months since the Dems took the House, and 6 full months since the Mueller witch-hunt concluded and they still can't get a resolution to pass. It is obviously reticent Dems who are holding up the process.

Wanna guess why?

With a solid majority of Americans against impeachment could it be fear of voter backlash perhaps?

I doubt if voters will show much sympathy for Trump because he is being picked on

 

[Wyatt earp]

Senate aint going to convict if trump were to be impeached in the house. That would be the republican death knell and good riddance to those weak spineless rubes if they did.

Republicans will not impeach regardless of the facts

However, if the information is damaging to the country and the presidency, both Trump and Republican Senators will have to answer to the voters

In order for the Senate to conduct the trial the Dem-majority House must first impeach and a simple majority would suffice. Nearly 3 full years since "impeach" was first screamed, 8 full months since the Dems took the House, and 6 full months since the Mueller witch-hunt concluded and they still can't get a resolution to pass. It is obviously reticent Dems who are holding up the process.

Wanna guess why?

With a solid majority of Americans against impeachment could it be fear of voter backlash perhaps?

I doubt if voters will show much sympathy for Trump because he is being picked on

View attachment 280961

 

[SAYIT]

Senate aint going to convict if trump were to be impeached in the house. That would be the republican death knell and good riddance to those weak spineless rubes if they did.

Republicans will not impeach regardless of the facts

However, if the information is damaging to the country and the presidency, both Trump and Republican Senators will have to answer to the voters

In order for the Senate to conduct the trial the Dem-majority House must first impeach and a simple majority would suffice. Nearly 3 full years since "impeach" was first screamed, 8 full months since the Dems took the House, and 6 full months since the Mueller witch-hunt concluded and they still can't get a resolution to pass. It is obviously reticent Dems who are holding up the process.

Wanna guess why?

With a solid majority of Americans against impeachment could it be fear of voter backlash perhaps?

You are correct. They know what the public is going to do with them for their continued rage based on nothing else but emotion and hate.

I suspect it's desperation driving them but Dems are just digging their hole deeper and deeper. There are a few rational voices among them who can see the 2020 Trump Train coming but not enough of 'em to pull their unhinged comrades off the tracks. Very sad.

Gun confiscation, abortion, socialism, and impeachment do not amount to a winning strategy but … well … there it is.

 

[iceberg]

now THIS is breaking news.

 

[miketx]

This is just a thrown dart prediction, it doesnt mean anything but I do think it has some merit.

First, trumps presidency will not survive this. I've said for a long time that people are way too confident when it comes to trump winning in 2020. I think his odds are not as good as many would think.

Most people in the u.s. are not as politically "in tune" as those you see here. By that, I mean, most dont really follow politics. They are generally armchair pundits that follow it as much as the hour of news they watch each night. I would say they would be easily influenced by other opinions as, while they call themselves republicans, that is a term they use to associate themselves with a certain set of ideals attributed to a politician in their party. Very few have the wherewithal to actually argue politics.

The left wing media machine has done an excellent job of pushing a narrative. The left, if nothing else, are persistent, and unwavering. This persistence does have an effect on those republicans I described above. Mabey not all, but many.

The left has done a very good at associating things like misogyny, racism, greed, anti immigration, and womanizing with trump. This has spillover consequence. The left is pushing the narrative that if you support trump, and/or vote for him, you support all of those attributes and that means you are all of then as well, even though none of it is true, you may just be voting for the candidate on the platform, against democrats.

But what if that isnt the only consequence? What if it is found out that you voted for trump at your place if employment? It could cause problems. Sure, they cant fire you for voting for a president, but if they are successful in labeling you a racist/womanizer/mysoginist because of your support for him, that could cause issues, especially if people look back in your years at the job and if someone starts thinking: "hmm, 2 years ago I heard him make a comment about soandso, and knowing he is a trump supporter, it makes sense now".

Especially if you are at odds with someone at work, they could leverage this against you.

People are afraid of labels, and if they think they will be labeled, it could cause some people to abstain from voting altogether.

This is also why many Republican members of congress who are in an election year may start to jump ship if it looks like things are going bad for trump, because they are afraid of being labeled, and they will be afraid of losing their seat if they see the public majority are increasing animosity against trump (remember, there are generally more democrats than republicans).

There is no way the democrats are not going to bring articles of impeachment. This will go to trial in the senate. There will be a lot of pressure on republicans on the senate to impeach him.

This will probably go down in one of two ways:

1) trump loses in 2020 because of a successful media campaign against him that sways voters due to unwanted labeling or because they become convinced the left is right.

2) a brutal impeachment inquiry and subsequent trial may mean things start looking bad for trump. If trump feels he may end up being a candidate for removal, cuts a deal to end the investigation in return for his resignation. I'm sorry to say it, but I don't believe trump will let himself be the first president to be removed from office.

It doesnt even matter if he is guilty or not. Is it not possible that simply being an impeached president with the aura of corruption (whether true or not) hanging around you could spell problems for his business dealings? Is he willing to risk that for a presidency?

Again, this is just an opinion, but I feel there may be some merit to it. I feel it may be imperative to have another Republican candidate on deck. I am willing to admit I'm totally wrong here, as this is just some preliminary notions.

If trump gets impeached, the 2020 election will come down to how justified America perceives the impeachment is. If Democrats impeach him lacking compelling evidence, he'll run, wearing impeachment as a badge, and win easily. But on the other hand, if Democrats can find undeniable evidence that he pressured Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden and used that military aid to obtain it; and Republicans refuse to convict him in the Senate, he would lose <hyperbole>if I ran against him</hyperbole>.

Trump has already admitted "that he pressured Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden and used that military aid to obtain it" - PUBLICLY.

Good, we need some allies over there.

 

[skookerasbil]

Senate aint going to convict if trump were to be impeached in the house. That would be the republican death knell and good riddance to those weak spineless rubes if they did.

Republicans will not impeach regardless of the facts

However, if the information is damaging to the country and the presidency, both Trump and Republican Senators will have to answer to the voters

In order for the Senate to conduct the trial the Dem-majority House must first impeach and a simple majority would suffice. Nearly 3 full years since "impeach" was first screamed, 8 full months since the Dems took the House, and 6 full months since the Mueller witch-hunt concluded and they still can't get a resolution to pass. It is obviously reticent Dems who are holding up the process.

Wanna guess why?

With a solid majority of Americans against impeachment could it be fear of voter backlash perhaps?

I doubt if voters will show much sympathy for Trump because he is being picked on

View attachment 280961

lol......some knucklehead in a post above said "let say for arguments sake.........". OY.....these people just have some keen inability to connect the dots on what sticks and whats a bunch of hooey.

 

[miketx]

This is just a thrown dart prediction, it doesnt mean anything but I do think it has some merit.

First, trumps presidency will not survive this. I've said for a long time that people are way too confident when it comes to trump winning in 2020. I think his odds are not as good as many would think.

Most people in the u.s. are not as politically "in tune" as those you see here. By that, I mean, most dont really follow politics. They are generally armchair pundits that follow it as much as the hour of news they watch each night. I would say they would be easily influenced by other opinions as, while they call themselves republicans, that is a term they use to associate themselves with a certain set of ideals attributed to a politician in their party. Very few have the wherewithal to actually argue politics.

The left wing media machine has done an excellent job of pushing a narrative. The left, if nothing else, are persistent, and unwavering. This persistence does have an effect on those republicans I described above. Mabey not all, but many.

The left has done a very good at associating things like misogyny, racism, greed, anti immigration, and womanizing with trump. This has spillover consequence. The left is pushing the narrative that if you support trump, and/or vote for him, you support all of those attributes and that means you are all of then as well, even though none of it is true, you may just be voting for the candidate on the platform, against democrats.

But what if that isnt the only consequence? What if it is found out that you voted for trump at your place if employment? It could cause problems. Sure, they cant fire you for voting for a president, but if they are successful in labeling you a racist/womanizer/mysoginist because of your support for him, that could cause issues, especially if people look back in your years at the job and if someone starts thinking: "hmm, 2 years ago I heard him make a comment about soandso, and knowing he is a trump supporter, it makes sense now".

Especially if you are at odds with someone at work, they could leverage this against you.

People are afraid of labels, and if they think they will be labeled, it could cause some people to abstain from voting altogether.

This is also why many Republican members of congress who are in an election year may start to jump ship if it looks like things are going bad for trump, because they are afraid of being labeled, and they will be afraid of losing their seat if they see the public majority are increasing animosity against trump (remember, there are generally more democrats than republicans).

There is no way the democrats are not going to bring articles of impeachment. This will go to trial in the senate. There will be a lot of pressure on republicans on the senate to impeach him.

This will probably go down in one of two ways:

1) trump loses in 2020 because of a successful media campaign against him that sways voters due to unwanted labeling or because they become convinced the left is right.

2) a brutal impeachment inquiry and subsequent trial may mean things start looking bad for trump. If trump feels he may end up being a candidate for removal, cuts a deal to end the investigation in return for his resignation. I'm sorry to say it, but I don't believe trump will let himself be the first president to be removed from office.

It doesnt even matter if he is guilty or not. Is it not possible that simply being an impeached president with the aura of corruption (whether true or not) hanging around you could spell problems for his business dealings? Is he willing to risk that for a presidency?

Again, this is just an opinion, but I feel there may be some merit to it. I feel it may be imperative to have another Republican candidate on deck. I am willing to admit I'm totally wrong here, as this is just some preliminary notions.

If trump gets impeached, the 2020 election will come down to how justified America perceives the impeachment is. If Democrats impeach him lacking compelling evidence, he'll run, wearing impeachment as a badge, and win easily. But on the other hand, if Democrats can find undeniable evidence that he pressured Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden and used that military aid to obtain it; and Republicans refuse to convict him in the Senate, he would lose <hyperbole>if I ran against him</hyperbole>.

Trump has already admitted "that he pressured Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden and used that military aid to obtain it" - PUBLICLY.

Care to link to your quote?

Funny. Don't you have access to TV, Internet, newspapers...? Google it...

Why? They are all liars like you.

 

[iceberg]

Senate aint going to convict if trump were to be impeached in the house. That would be the republican death knell and good riddance to those weak spineless rubes if they did.

Republicans will not impeach regardless of the facts

However, if the information is damaging to the country and the presidency, both Trump and Republican Senators will have to answer to the voters

In order for the Senate to conduct the trial the Dem-majority House must first impeach and a simple majority would suffice. Nearly 3 full years since "impeach" was first screamed, 8 full months since the Dems took the House, and 6 full months since the Mueller witch-hunt concluded and they still can't get a resolution to pass. It is obviously reticent Dems who are holding up the process.

Wanna guess why?

With a solid majority of Americans against impeachment could it be fear of voter backlash perhaps?

I doubt if voters will show much sympathy for Trump because he is being picked on

View attachment 280961

lol......some knucklehead in a post above said "let say for arguments sake.........". OY.....these people just have some keen inability to connect the dots on what sticks and whats a bunch of hooey.

for arguments sake, why don't they cut this shit out?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Republicans will not impeach regardless of the facts

However, if the information is damaging to the country and the presidency, both Trump and Republican Senators will have to answer to the voters

In order for the Senate to conduct the trial the Dem-majority House must first impeach and a simple majority would suffice. Nearly 3 full years since "impeach" was first screamed, 8 full months since the Dems took the House, and 6 full months since the Mueller witch-hunt concluded and they still can't get a resolution to pass. It is obviously reticent Dems who are holding up the process.

Wanna guess why?

With a solid majority of Americans against impeachment could it be fear of voter backlash perhaps?

I doubt if voters will show much sympathy for Trump because he is being picked on

View attachment 280961

lol......some knucklehead in a post above said "let say for arguments sake.........". OY.....these people just have some keen inability to connect the dots on what sticks and whats a bunch of hooey.

for arguments sake, why don't they cut this shit out?

Why? The dementia is deep and all they have is wild emotional speculation.

 

[Oddball]

My prediction....

 

[Wyatt earp]

now THIS is breaking news.

LMFAO..

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So let's say, for arguments sake, Democrats prove conclusively that he used that military aid to coerce Zelensky to dig for dirt on Biden -- you still think Republicans won't convict him?

I dont think they will convict him. I think Trump will come up with some spun up narrative and they will stand behind that. Look how spineless they are on issues now. I hear them talking about gun legislation and nobody will do anything until Trump gives them their marching orders. It’s pathetic.

The Senate won't have to do anything because Articles of impeachment will not make through the House. Keep in mind neither Pelosi's claim of "formal impeachment inquiry" nor Nadler's August claim of "official impeachment proceedings" have any authority unless the House votes to approve them (which they haven't). You've been duped again.

Funny. Speaker Pelosi would not have launched an Official Impeachment Inquiry if she thought she didn't have the votes to impeach. She is famous for accurately counting her votes. I have no doubt that Trump will be impeached in the House. The Senate is a different matter.

It's not about having the votes to impeach you STUPID, STUPID child but rather about her having a House Resolution to institute the "formal impeachment inquiry" - which she doesn't - she announced with great fanfare today. You also have been duped again because you are STUPID.

She made no such announcement.

Nancy Pelosi launches formal impeachment inquiry, Trump responds to announcement

Live updates: House launches Trump impeachment inquiry - CNNPolitics

Trump Impeachment Inquiry Opens as Call Transcript Is Released: Live Updates

 

[whitehall]

You almost gotta laugh the allegations are so thin against Trump that some pundits think he arranged the scandal himself. Meanwhile the top democrat candidate is up to his ass in corruption allegations. Years ago when Cronkite and Rather were the only sources of information the democrats would be able to push the narrative but they continue to underestimate the intelligence of the public.

 

[rightwinger]

the Pyschocrats can impeach President Trump 7 times a week, but he will remain in office because they don't have the senate

Regardless of the charges?

 

[airplanemechanic]

If trump gets impeached, the 2020 election will come down to how justified America perceives the impeachment is. If Democrats impeach him lacking compelling evidence, he'll run, wearing impeachment as a badge, and win easily. But on the other hand, if Democrats can find undeniable evidence that he pressured Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden and used that military aid to obtain it; and Republicans refuse to convict him in the Senate, he would lose <hyperbole>if I ran against him</hyperbole>.

Trump has already admitted "that he pressured Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden and used that military aid to obtain it" - PUBLICLY.

Care to link to your quote?

Funny. Don't you have access to TV, Internet, newspapers...? Google it...

Yea I did and I can't find anything about that. All I see is that Trump said he withheld money from them (which he can do) and said it had nothing to do with the Biden thing.

So you misquoted or you are just dishonest. Which is it?

For your viewing pleasure...

Trump’s response to the scandal
On Sunday, the president admitted to discussing matters related to the Biden family in a call with the Ukrainian president, citing concerns about “corruption.”

“The conversation I had was largely congratulatory, was largely corruption, all of the corruption taking place,” Trump told reporters on the White House lawn. “It was largely the fact that we don’t want our people like Vice-President Biden and his son creating to the corruption already in the Ukraine.” He added that the exchange was “perfect” and involved no improper behavior.

A day later, Trump suggested it’s totally proper to withhold aide from a country because it won’t investigate your political rivals. “It’s very important to talk about corruption,” Trump said. “If you don’t talk about corruption, why would you give money to a country that you think is corrupt?”

But the timing of Trump’s decision to withhold almost $400 million in aidjust days before speaking to the Ukrainian president suggests the possibility of a quid-pro-quo.

Trump continued making less-than-subtle remarks at the United Nations General Assembly:

Politico reported on Tuesday night that the White House was preparing to release the transcript of the call, the whistle-blower’s complaint, and the DNI inspector’s report by the end of the week. Prior to Pelosi’s announcement, Trump wanted to release only the transcript.

Everything We Know About Trump’s Ukraine Whistle-blower Scandal

Oh, and here are a few more for your viewing pleasure...

• Trump Admits Asking Ukraine to Investigate Biden's Son
  https://www.thedailybeast.com / trump-admits-asking-ukra... - 323k - similar pages
  1 day ago ... Trump Admits Asking Ukraine to Investigate Biden's Son ... to efforts to dig up dirton the role Joe Biden and his son Hunter are alleged to have ...
• Trump admits withholding aid to Ukraine while asking country's ...
  https://www.independent.co.uk / news / world / americas / us-politics / trump-ukraine-aid-impeac... - 583k - 13 hours ago - similar pages
  13 hours ago ... Donald Trump hasadmitted he withheld aid for Ukraine on Tuesday after ... while asking country's leader to investigate 2020 rival Joe Biden ...
• Trump Admits Pressuring Ukraine Over Biden - The Atlantic
  https://www.theatlantic.com / ideas / archive / 2019 / 09 / trump-admits-pressuring- / 598609 / - 264k - similar pages
  1 day ago ... Trump once again implicitly admitted pressuringUkraine during remarks ... to ask what the president knew and when he knew it; Trump has told ...
• Trump Admits He Spoke to Ukraine President About Corruption | Time
  President Trump Admits He Spoke to Ukraine President About Corruption and Possibly Biden - 311k - similar pages
  2 days ago ... President Donald Trump says he spoke to Ukraine's new president about his ... In his remarks to reporters, he then raised Biden as an example, although ... He did not answer directly when asked whether he would release a ...
• Trump admits he discussed Biden with Ukraine - Vox
  https://www.vox.com / policy-and-politics / 2019 / 9 / 22 / 20878702 / donald-trump-ukraine-whi... - 176k - similar pages
  2 days ago ... Republicans are now calling for an investigation into Biden as Democrats call for impeachment.
• Trump Admits Mentioning Biden in 'Perfect' Call With Ukraine ...
  https://www.rollingstone.com / politics / politics-news / trump-admits-biden-phone / - 510k -similar pages
  2 days ago ... Trump, looking very red, basically admits he asked Ukrainian... not to send the aid unless Ukraine dug up dirt related to Hunter Biden's ...

I have more...

Ok so I guess CNN is lying:

Donald Trump admits he delayed Ukraine aid but claims it was unrelated to Biden - CNNPolitics

"President Donald Trump admitted Monday that he delayed aid to Ukraine ahead of a call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, when he pushed the leader to look into potential rival Joe Biden and his son's work, giving the excuse that he was waiting for European nations to contribute their fair share of aid and claiming there was "never any quid pro quo."

Game. Set. Match.

Thanks for playing.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Donald Trump admits he delayed Ukraine aid but claims it was unrelated to Biden - CNNPolitics
"President Donald Trump admitted Monday that he delayed aid to Ukraine ahead of a call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky,

Ok...
Why?

 

[Grumblenuts]

This is just a thrown dart prediction, it doesnt mean anything but I do think it has some merit.

First, trumps presidency will not survive this. I've said for a long time that people are way too confident when it comes to trump winning in 2020. I think his odds are not as good as many would think.

Most people in the u.s. are not as politically "in tune" as those you see here. By that, I mean, most dont really follow politics. They are generally armchair pundits that follow it as much as the hour of news they watch each night. I would say they would be easily influenced by other opinions as, while they call themselves republicans, that is a term they use to associate themselves with a certain set of ideals attributed to a politician in their party. Very few have the wherewithal to actually argue politics.

The left wing media machine has done an excellent job of pushing a narrative. The left, if nothing else, are persistent, and unwavering. This persistence does have an effect on those republicans I described above. Mabey not all, but many.

The left has done a very good at associating things like misogyny, racism, greed, anti immigration, and womanizing with trump. This has spillover consequence. The left is pushing the narrative that if you support trump, and/or vote for him, you support all of those attributes and that means you are all of then as well, even though none of it is true, you may just be voting for the candidate on the platform, against democrats.

But what if that isnt the only consequence? What if it is found out that you voted for trump at your place if employment? It could cause problems. Sure, they cant fire you for voting for a president, but if they are successful in labeling you a racist/womanizer/mysoginist because of your support for him, that could cause issues, especially if people look back in your years at the job and if someone starts thinking: "hmm, 2 years ago I heard him make a comment about soandso, and knowing he is a trump supporter, it makes sense now".

Especially if you are at odds with someone at work, they could leverage this against you.

People are afraid of labels, and if they think they will be labeled, it could cause some people to abstain from voting altogether.

This is also why many Republican members of congress who are in an election year may start to jump ship if it looks like things are going bad for trump, because they are afraid of being labeled, and they will be afraid of losing their seat if they see the public majority are increasing animosity against trump (remember, there are generally more democrats than republicans).

There is no way the democrats are not going to bring articles of impeachment. This will go to trial in the senate. There will be a lot of pressure on republicans on the senate to impeach him.

This will probably go down in one of two ways:

1) trump loses in 2020 because of a successful media campaign against him that sways voters due to unwanted labeling or because they become convinced the left is right.

2) a brutal impeachment inquiry and subsequent trial may mean things start looking bad for trump. If trump feels he may end up being a candidate for removal, cuts a deal to end the investigation in return for his resignation. I'm sorry to say it, but I don't believe trump will let himself be the first president to be removed from office.

It doesnt even matter if he is guilty or not. Is it not possible that simply being an impeached president with the aura of corruption (whether true or not) hanging around you could spell problems for his business dealings? Is he willing to risk that for a presidency?

Again, this is just an opinion, but I feel there may be some merit to it. I feel it may be imperative to have another Republican candidate on deck. I am willing to admit I'm totally wrong here, as this is just some preliminary notions.

This has no merit – the nonsense about the ‘left wing media machine’ in particular.

Impeaching Trump guarantees his re-election and relegates Democrats to the political wilderness – including losing the House in 2020.

Democrats lose if they do the right thing.

If they do the pragmatic thing and don’t impeach they stand a better chance of winning the WH and Senate in 2020 – they’ll be doing what’s politically expedient, but not the right thing.

Don't be ridiculous. The House impeachment inquiry began months ago. If they just let it all fizzle out now with no significant votes or findings to report they'll be rightly judged gutless and lose.

The Dems are screwed if they do and schlonged if they don't and they have done it to themselves. Pelosi's announcement yesterday of a "formal impeachment inquiry" has the same legal significance as Fat J-Nad's just 6 weeks ago … NONE.

Without a House resolution it's just political grandstanding. The Dems are gonna have to man-up and put it to a vote … again.

The Consequence of No Consequences
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has made the calculation that everything that has already happened to America is not necessarily worthy of response, evidently on the theory that it endangers the chances of a continued Democratic House majority in 2020.

While agreed - too calculated, wimpish, late regardless - I continue to view Bernie separately. Given the major media and Dems finally begin embracing Sanders instead of either just ignoring or shitting on Trump's genuine competition - again, the Dems will win big. Otherwise, yeah, the super rich win and the world loses again.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Donald Trump admits he delayed Ukraine aid but claims it was unrelated to Biden - CNNPolitics
"President Donald Trump admitted Monday that he delayed aid to Ukraine ahead of a call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky,

Ok...
Why?

It says in post 115. Read it.

he was waiting for European nations to contribute their fair share of aid

He has bitched about European nations not paying their fair share for years.

Trump says he will release the full unredacted transcript of the conversation. He wouldn't do this unless it proved he did nothing wrong.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Full transcript:

Trump did nothing wrong.

Read the Trump-Ukraine phone call readout

 

[Grumblenuts]

Trump says he will release the full unredacted transcript of the conversation. He wouldn't do this unless it proved he did nothing wrong.

Many other possibilities leap to mind... One in particular..