Serious questions for Trump supporters regarding this impeachment thing

[Sun Devil 92]

I've been reading for a long time that Trump supporters want the impeachment proceedings to happen, and I'm seeing a lot of celebrating here, but I'm not quite sure why.

My guess is that you're thinking the Dems will make themselves look bad in the process, just in time for the next elections, would that be fair? (I can't disagree that politicians can make themselves look foolish, by the way, especially when they think they smell blood)

Any other reasons? And isn't it possible that some negative or damaging news on Trump will come to light as well, which might hurt him in 2020?

Serious questions.
.

Because there is no rule as to how long an impeachment trial is to last. Moscow Mitch presides, and he can give just half an hour to each side and have a sham trial.

You need 2/3rds, thus 66 or 67 Senators to find Trump guilty. At the present, if you have all the Democrats vote "guilty" and the one or two Republicans which have expressed doubts about Trump not being guilty, you'd have just a bit above 50.

So a long investigation uncovering more criminal activity is more important for building public opinion.

If you're wrong, and if the Chief Justice makes sure the Senate "trial" is above board, and if the evidence is beyond a reasonable doubt, and if the Republican Senators vote to acquit Trump, then one of two thing will happen:

1. Trump, McConnell and the Republican Party will have destroyed our Founders Vision; or,
2. The People will be outraged, and the Republican Party will go the way of the Whigs.

Awwwwwww.......

A sore loser even before he loses.

Pragmatic; I am pragmatic.

A sore lose ain't so bad, a sore winner is an asshole.

Hard for the the GOP to further destroy what Obama has pretty much trashed.

Pragmatic that.

 

[Wry Catcher]

And if the Dems impeach, 62 million will accept that their vote were overturned? That will destroyour Founders Vision or The People will be outraged. The dems don't lose a lawfully elected president-the Trump supporters would.

I heard today that Piglosi made the statement that impeachment is so important, it would be worth losing the leadership of Congress for it.

So what do they know about Trump that it's so important to get rid of him? Hmmmmm........

"Piglosi"? Did you ever complete the Third Grade?

/----/ From the side that calls President Trump every name in the book.

The only thing I've called DJT is that he is an asshole. And, there is no room to debate he isn't. As for others, I don't have any control over them.

Schiff is an asshole-that squares the account.

Schiff is a patriot, partisan of course, but he is supporting and defending COTUS, something President Trump has never read, nor has he ever supported during his tenure at President.

 

[dblack]

I've been reading for a long time that Trump supporters want the impeachment proceedings to happen, and I'm seeing a lot of celebrating here, but I'm not quite sure why.

My guess is that you're thinking the Dems will make themselves look bad in the process, just in time for the next elections, would that be fair? (I can't disagree that politicians can make themselves look foolish, by the way, especially when they think they smell blood)

Any other reasons? And isn't it possible that some negative or damaging news on Trump will come to light as well, which might hurt him in 2020?

Serious questions.
.

Because there is no rule as to how long an impeachment trial is to last. Moscow Mitch presides, and he can give just half an hour to each side and have a sham trial.

You need 2/3rds, thus 66 or 67 Senators to find Trump guilty. At the present, if you have all the Democrats vote "guilty" and the one or two Republicans which have expressed doubts about Trump not being guilty, you'd have just a bit above 50.

So a long investigation uncovering more criminal activity is more important for building public opinion.

If you're wrong, and if the Chief Justice makes sure the Senate "trial" is above board, and if the evidence is beyond a reasonable doubt, and if the Republican Senators vote to acquit Trump, then one of two thing will happen:

1. Trump, McConnell and the Republican Party will have destroyed our Founders Vision; or,
2. The People will be outraged, and the Republican Party will go the way of the Whigs.

Awwwwwww.......

A sore loser even before he loses.

Pragmatic; I am pragmatic.

A sore lose ain't so bad, a sore winner is an asshole.

Hard for the the GOP to further destroy what Obama has pretty much trashed.

Pragmatic that.

Hard, but not impossible. Republicans will find a way!

 

[Third Party]

No, YOU don't know what I'm talking about or you would not protest.

Of course I do. You said something very stupid, in comparing a completely and intentionally biased sample to a random sample.

Furthermore, you obviously know less than nothing about statistics or statistical analysis. You dont know what sample size is appropriate, nor could you understand their methods, if your life depended on it.

These are facts, my man. It's not personal.

You say I know less than nothing and then say its not personal? FUCK YOU- don't worry-its not personal.
I took statistics so I won't bore you with contaminated sample lot science but I will say the outside influences on sample integrity have gotten worse over the years. So even tho my life depends on it, I will take my posts to others here and discuss these things without name calling. Good bye.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I've been reading for a long time that Trump supporters want the impeachment proceedings to happen, and I'm seeing a lot of celebrating here, but I'm not quite sure why.

My guess is that you're thinking the Dems will make themselves look bad in the process, just in time for the next elections, would that be fair? (I can't disagree that politicians can make themselves look foolish, by the way, especially when they think they smell blood)

Any other reasons? And isn't it possible that some negative or damaging news on Trump will come to light as well, which might hurt him in 2020?

Serious questions.
.

Because there is no rule as to how long an impeachment trial is to last. Moscow Mitch presides, and he can give just half an hour to each side and have a sham trial.

You need 2/3rds, thus 66 or 67 Senators to find Trump guilty. At the present, if you have all the Democrats vote "guilty" and the one or two Republicans which have expressed doubts about Trump not being guilty, you'd have just a bit above 50.

So a long investigation uncovering more criminal activity is more important for building public opinion.

If you're wrong, and if the Chief Justice makes sure the Senate "trial" is above board, and if the evidence is beyond a reasonable doubt, and if the Republican Senators vote to acquit Trump, then one of two thing will happen:

1. Trump, McConnell and the Republican Party will have destroyed our Founders Vision; or,
2. The People will be outraged, and the Republican Party will go the way of the Whigs.

Awwwwwww.......

A sore loser even before he loses.

Pragmatic; I am pragmatic.

A sore lose ain't so bad, a sore winner is an asshole.

Hard for the the GOP to further destroy what Obama has pretty much trashed.

Pragmatic that.

What did President Obama Trash?

 

[Manonthestreet]

"Resistance by Whistleblower" Was Part Of The Anti-Trump Plan From The Start
A conspiracy admitted inside intel and State Dept to get Trump no matter what......I see several orgs that need deep cleaning and downsizing.....budget cut ready

Now that is some peak trump cultism, right there.

Just the facts

And a heaping helping of trump cultism.

Says lib cultist

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You say I know less than nothing and then say its not personal?

Correct. We are all ignorant of a great many things. You happen to be utterly ignorant of this particular topic. Saying so is not an insult.

 

[Third Party]

I heard today that Piglosi made the statement that impeachment is so important, it would be worth losing the leadership of Congress for it.

So what do they know about Trump that it's so important to get rid of him? Hmmmmm........

"Piglosi"? Did you ever complete the Third Grade?

/----/ From the side that calls President Trump every name in the book.

The only thing I've called DJT is that he is an asshole. And, there is no room to debate he isn't. As for others, I don't have any control over them.

Schiff is an asshole-that squares the account.

Schiff is a patriot, partisan of course, but he is supporting and defending COTUS, something President Trump has never read, nor has he ever supported during his tenure at President.

You can't call Trump an asshole and not expect a Dem to get it back. And Schiff IS the biggest asshole I can think of.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"Piglosi"? Did you ever complete the Third Grade?

/----/ From the side that calls President Trump every name in the book.

The only thing I've called DJT is that he is an asshole. And, there is no room to debate he isn't. As for others, I don't have any control over them.

Schiff is an asshole-that squares the account.

Schiff is a patriot, partisan of course, but he is supporting and defending COTUS, something President Trump has never read, nor has he ever supported during his tenure at President.

You can't call Trump an asshole and not expect a Dem to get it back. And Schiff IS the biggest asshole I can think of.

Don't lie. There is no evidence in any one of your posts that you think.

 

[Third Party]

Because there is no rule as to how long an impeachment trial is to last. Moscow Mitch presides, and he can give just half an hour to each side and have a sham trial.

You need 2/3rds, thus 66 or 67 Senators to find Trump guilty. At the present, if you have all the Democrats vote "guilty" and the one or two Republicans which have expressed doubts about Trump not being guilty, you'd have just a bit above 50.

So a long investigation uncovering more criminal activity is more important for building public opinion.

If you're wrong, and if the Chief Justice makes sure the Senate "trial" is above board, and if the evidence is beyond a reasonable doubt, and if the Republican Senators vote to acquit Trump, then one of two thing will happen:

1. Trump, McConnell and the Republican Party will have destroyed our Founders Vision; or,
2. The People will be outraged, and the Republican Party will go the way of the Whigs.

Awwwwwww.......

A sore loser even before he loses.

Pragmatic; I am pragmatic.

A sore lose ain't so bad, a sore winner is an asshole.

Hard for the the GOP to further destroy what Obama has pretty much trashed.

Pragmatic that.

What did President Obama Trash?

Workers when he said "you didn't build that". That POS never did a day's work in his life and he criticizes me and my fellow workers without knowing a damn thing? Screw him, the lazy bastard!

 

[Manonthestreet]

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If you're wrong, and if the Chief Justice makes sure the Senate "trial" is above board, and if the evidence is beyond a reasonable doubt, and if the Republican Senators vote to acquit Trump, then one of two thing will happen:

1. Trump, McConnell and the Republican Party will have destroyed our Founders Vision; or,
2. The People will be outraged, and the Republican Party will go the way of the Whigs.

Awwwwwww.......

A sore loser even before he loses.

Pragmatic; I am pragmatic.

A sore lose ain't so bad, a sore winner is an asshole.

Hard for the the GOP to further destroy what Obama has pretty much trashed.

Pragmatic that.

What did President Obama Trash?

Workers when he said "you didn't build that". That POS never did a day's work in his life and he criticizes me and my fellow workers without knowing a damn thing? Screw him, the lazy bastard!

Then you clearly had no idea what he meant. I remember the outrage. I remember being somewhat stunned that so many people were being so stupid and couldn't puzzle out his meaning. Boy have times changed...now I expect no less...

 

[Wry Catcher]

If you're wrong, and if the Chief Justice makes sure the Senate "trial" is above board, and if the evidence is beyond a reasonable doubt, and if the Republican Senators vote to acquit Trump, then one of two thing will happen:

1. Trump, McConnell and the Republican Party will have destroyed our Founders Vision; or,
2. The People will be outraged, and the Republican Party will go the way of the Whigs.

Awwwwwww.......

A sore loser even before he loses.

Pragmatic; I am pragmatic.

A sore lose ain't so bad, a sore winner is an asshole.

Hard for the the GOP to further destroy what Obama has pretty much trashed.

Pragmatic that.

What did President Obama Trash?

Workers when he said "you didn't build that". That POS never did a day's work in his life and he criticizes me and my fellow workers without knowing a damn thing? Screw him, the lazy bastard!

Did the owner build the infrastructure necessary for the business to operate?

That you buy into that bullshit suggests you are not very bright.

 

[Third Party]

Awwwwwww.......

A sore loser even before he loses.

Pragmatic; I am pragmatic.

A sore lose ain't so bad, a sore winner is an asshole.

Hard for the the GOP to further destroy what Obama has pretty much trashed.

Pragmatic that.

What did President Obama Trash?

Workers when he said "you didn't build that". That POS never did a day's work in his life and he criticizes me and my fellow workers without knowing a damn thing? Screw him, the lazy bastard!

Did the owner build the infrastructure necessary for the business to operate?

That you buy into that bullshit suggests you are not very bright.

What the Hell are you talking about?

 

[G.T.]

Pragmatic; I am pragmatic.

A sore lose ain't so bad, a sore winner is an asshole.

Hard for the the GOP to further destroy what Obama has pretty much trashed.

Pragmatic that.

What did President Obama Trash?

Workers when he said "you didn't build that". That POS never did a day's work in his life and he criticizes me and my fellow workers without knowing a damn thing? Screw him, the lazy bastard!

Did the owner build the infrastructure necessary for the business to operate?

That you buy into that bullshit suggests you are not very bright.

What the Hell are you talking about?

He's suggesting you take a more introspective and intelligent look at what Obama might have meant when he said "you didnt build that," as opposed to the derpy rahrah kneejerk the partisan blobs decided to take.

His point was that society functions as parts of a whole...not that "workers dont build," and further...that should have not needed explaining.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Trump to Russian spies in White House: I don't really mind that you interfered.

Trump to the public: clearly it was Ukraine, not Russia, who interfered.

 

[Coyote]

What do you mean he is “different”? He is NOT above the law.

That's the issue-legality

Agree. And that is why there needs to be an investigation.

except now the mantra is no crime is needed, just think he's below the standards for the office.

it really does come across as "any port in a storm" and not an honest effort to address "wrongdoing".

I don't agree. An impeachment inquiry isn't necessarily going to benefit the Dems - Pelosi was doing a good job keeping the reins on that and I agreed with it - whether it was Clinton, Bush, Obama, or Trump the calls for impeachment were used more for partisan political purposes than serious crimes (Congress can always choose to censure). I think this one was a bridge to far and NOT starting an inquiry even though it might hurt the Dems would have been a derelection of duty.

Trump was refusing to pass on the whistle blower report which should not have gone to him in the first place and he had no legal right to hold and the contents are seriously concerning imo. The inquiry will allow them to get documents and subpeona witnesses expeditiously and this will hopefully become transparent and settled one way or the other quickly.

and schiff knew of this report a month before it was released. the entire act of WHAT A SURPRISE reeks to me.

if i were under attack 24x7 it would make me do strange things also, i'm sure. but the instant jump to IMPEACH as soon as they went public with it to me came across as pre-meditated and just for show as they knew what they were going to do for a month and had time to plan.

Other presidents have been under attack 24/7: Clinton, GW Bush, and Obama. Clinton went through impeachment for a relatively minor offense and years of non stop ever expanding investigations...so...I just don’t buy that as an excuse.

I have never seen a president excused so much and so regularly.

I DO think impeachment has become a partisan tool in recent years, starting with Clinton, continuing with clamors to impeach Bush, and then Obama. If the Dems had pursued impeachment based on the Mueller report, I would have disagreed and called it a partisan stunt.

I think current case though is potentially far more serious and warrants at least an inquiry and an examination. I think Pelosi realized this as well and that she had no choice but to go down that path. It is potentially that serious.

I say potentially because we don’t know the details, but from what we do know, sweeping it under the rug with a “everyone is attacking Trump unfairly” mentality is a dereliction of duty.

 

[Coyote]

Honestly man, I don’t think you’d know reality if it smacked you directly on the forehead. The whistler blower was the catalyst, followed by the DOJ keeping it from Congress, and the spark that lit the fuse was genius Giuliani on Cuomos show when he went off like a lunatic

The whistle blower, was a non-event. We've gone through it. The whistle blower knew even less about the phone call, than we know right now. The report was effectively a massive nothing-burger. Much like the Mueller report was a nothing-burger.

The report contained references to news articles, and hear-say. That's it. In short it was "I heard.... " and "There was a call...." and "Some people said....".

That whistle blower report was remarkable in only one way.... how little it had in the way of facts.

So why was it withheld? I'm convinced because either Trump, or someone in the Trump administration knew that delaying the release of this report, would be a brilliant political move. They knew that he left-wing, which has been both rabid and delusional in their attempts to destroy Trump, would toss themselves like a suicide cult, on this sword of their own making.

And they did. I have a hard time believing that Trump himself was this smart... but someone led the entire left-lemming-wing straight to a cliff, and encouraged them as they jumped to their deaths.

So let me clarify....

If there is something more here... and new evidence comes out showing illegal activity, then Trump is doomed, and I'm all for it.

But as things stand right now at this moment.... this will destroy the Democrats, and their lemming followers.

Trump is in melt down mode. His diehards probably love it but for normal people when our POTUS sends close to 50 tweets in 24 hours and brings up things like civil war, treason, confronting the whistleblower, White House spy’s etc etc etc it get real old. If we are talking about political strategy then I’m not seeing the brilliance from trump here I’m seeing a tail spin.

Oh good grief. You act like Trump wasn't a drama queen until now. This is what the man does. Chill out, and move on.

No shit, which is why he has faced such stark opposition since he entered politics. He is crossing lines left and right and even his own friends and supporters in congress are starting to speak out against his meltdowns. The wall is cracking. It isn’t pretty

exposing the swamp creatures the campaign he ran on to expose. genius!!!

 

[Coyote]

So why was it withheld? I'm convinced because either Trump, or someone in the Trump administration knew that delaying the release of this report, would be a brilliant political move. They knew that he left-wing, which has been both rabid and delusional in their attempts to destroy Trump, would toss themselves like a suicide cult, on this sword of their own making.

It was likely withheld due to them changing the requirements for whistleblowing. They changed it from having direct knowledge to hearing information second hand. It's not clear the exact date as to when it was changed, but it's now suspected about two weeks before the story hit the media.

And that is yet another well fertilized conspiracy theory.

Fact check: Trump and other Republicans falsely claim whistleblower rules changed just before Ukraine complaint - CNNPolitics

The article claims that "between May 2018 and August 2019, the intelligence community secretly eliminated a requirement that whistleblowers provide direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoings."
Facts First: This is false. The Federalist reading of the form is inaccurate and although the submission form that whistleblowers from the intelligence community fill out was revised in August 2019, the revision did not change the rules on who can submit a whistleblower complaint.
Even so, pro-Trump pundits and lawmakers spread the theory on Twitter and TV over the weekend as evidence of some nefarious plot against Trump. Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio told Jake Tapper on "State of the Union" that whistleblowers no longer need firsthand knowledge because "they changed the form."

Tapper pushed back, fact-checking Jordan. "Experts say it has never been true that you need to have firsthand knowledge to be a whistleblower," Tapper said.

In a statement issued late Monday afternoon, the inspector general of the intelligence community (ICIG) said that the form submitted by the whistleblower on August 12, 2019, was the same one the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018. The statement reiterated the fact that having firsthand knowledge of the event has never been required in order to submit a whistleblower complaint. "Although the form requests information about whether the Complainant possesses first-hand knowledge about the matter about which he or she is lodging the complaint, there is no such requirement set forth in the statute."

 

[IM2]

That's the issue-legality

Agree. And that is why there needs to be an investigation.

except now the mantra is no crime is needed, just think he's below the standards for the office.

it really does come across as "any port in a storm" and not an honest effort to address "wrongdoing".

I don't agree. An impeachment inquiry isn't necessarily going to benefit the Dems - Pelosi was doing a good job keeping the reins on that and I agreed with it - whether it was Clinton, Bush, Obama, or Trump the calls for impeachment were used more for partisan political purposes than serious crimes (Congress can always choose to censure). I think this one was a bridge to far and NOT starting an inquiry even though it might hurt the Dems would have been a derelection of duty.

Trump was refusing to pass on the whistle blower report which should not have gone to him in the first place and he had no legal right to hold and the contents are seriously concerning imo. The inquiry will allow them to get documents and subpeona witnesses expeditiously and this will hopefully become transparent and settled one way or the other quickly.

and schiff knew of this report a month before it was released. the entire act of WHAT A SURPRISE reeks to me.

if i were under attack 24x7 it would make me do strange things also, i'm sure. but the instant jump to IMPEACH as soon as they went public with it to me came across as pre-meditated and just for show as they knew what they were going to do for a month and had time to plan.

Other presidents have been under attack 24/7: Clinton, GW Bush, and Obama. Clinton went through impeachment for a relatively minor offense and years of non stop ever expanding investigations...so...I just don’t buy that as an excuse.

I have never seen a president excused so much and so regularly.

I DO think impeachment has become a partisan tool in recent years, starting with Clinton, continuing with clamors to impeach Bush, and then Obama. If the Dems had pursued impeachment based on the Mueller report, I would have disagreed and called it a partisan stunt.

I think current case though is potentially far more serious and warrants at least an inquiry and an examination. I think Pelosi realized this as well and that she had no choice but to go down that path. It is potentially that serious.

I say potentially because we don’t know the details, but from what we do know, sweeping it under the rug with a “everyone is attacking Trump unfairly” mentality is a dereliction of duty.

I don't think the Mueller report was a partisan stunt. In this case it looks like he was conspiring with the Ukraine to do the same thing. And his phone call was made the day after Mueller testified. I think he thought he could get away with it again. But I agree with you that sweeping this under the rug and making excuses just can't be done here.