A couple of days ago, I went out on a limb and said that impeachment would either never come to a vote, or would be voted down, because the last thing the Dems want is a Senate trial, with the Repubs calling witnesses and asking questions. Now, an interesting "straw in the wind":
The House Majority Whip is Jim Clayton. His job is persuasion and arm twisting to get the votes that the Speaker of the House needs. Rep Clayton has publicly said that he is NOT trying to round up impeachment votes, and that members should vote their conscience.
In other words, either 1) Nancy has all the votes she needs to impeach (unlikely), or 2) Nancy knows that it is all just for show, and she can't get the votes she needs to impeach.
We have an interesting few weeks ahead.
I believe his name is James Clyburn.
He is one of the few Demonrats who understands that impeachment is a loser.
The House will vote for impeachment.........book it.
However, I hope I'm wrong.
My gut felling is that Pelosi has the votes she needs to send this to the Senate. Justin Amash said he will for for 3 articles.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/videos/poli...es-three-articles-impeachment-ip-vpx.cnn
Of course he is going to vote yes. Trump put a hurting on his business with Chinese tariffs.
A couple of days ago, I went out on a limb and said that impeachment would either never come to a vote, or would be voted down, because the last thing the Dems want is a Senate trial, with the Repubs calling witnesses and asking questions. Now, an interesting "straw in the wind":
The House Majority Whip is Jim Clayton. His job is persuasion and arm twisting to get the votes that the Speaker of the House needs. Rep Clayton has publicly said that he is NOT trying to round up impeachment votes, and that members should vote their conscience.
In other words, either 1) Nancy has all the votes she needs to impeach (unlikely), or 2) Nancy knows that it is all just for show, and she can't get the votes she needs to impeach.
We have an interesting few weeks ahead.
That's quite a limb you climbed out on there..
Seems like you have all you bases covered.
Either she has the votes or she doesn't. Pretty safe bet I would say.
Obviously, this is just speculation on my part: I think that maybe the reason the Dems are seemingly desperate to push this blatantly false impeachment case is to deflect or cover up serious evidence of DemonRat corruption facts about to be revealed. That is the only thing I can come up with as to why they are doing this. The "evidence" the "witnesses" have produced so far is beyond stupid to anyone with any sense of honest reason. I don't care if they like Trump or not, but the sky is blue and water is wet. It is what it is and just because they don't like him does not change the facts.
There's another interperetation of his remarks, and that is, some democrats will be in close races for re-election and their leadership knows that a vote to impeach could turn the tide against them.
The last thing they want is to lose control of the house.
Just my opinion but the Democrats probably believe they had the votes to impeach before they started. Simply put the impeachment vote is just DNC strategy at work. They despise DJT and will do whatever they can to discredit him.
Say the congress votes to impeach. Then the Republican lead senate votes no. The Democrats are creating their entire subject matter for the next election nationwide during which they will try to win the house the senate and the executive branch for the first time since 70's when this all started.
The Republicans need to make it about corruption but they probably wont because they are just as corrupt as the Democrats.
DJT has brought something to light that will not go away anytime soon in the fact that Joe Biden used his political influence to get his son fat jobs on committee or boards. The question is how many sons or daughter or political hacks of senators and congresspersons or presidents have done the same thing.
We could go on and on about this BS for ever the Democrats believe they have the demographics in their favor more of us old codgers pass away they're just in a wait and see game.
Good luck and shoot straight y,all
I believe the dems thought they had the votes going into this sham, but the sham just keeps getting more shammy. Now the moderate democrats are saying Sham-Wow, this is going to lose us the house! They don’t know weather to chit or wind their watch.
You are right. Brain malfunction here.
I think Trump will be impeached on an extremely close vote, which will still protect House Demokraps in close districts. They'll wrench the vote to impeach by 1 or 2 votes to save face and prove to the base that they're "pure".
I'm sure the Senate won't convict.
If the dems were smart, they'd vote to censure the President. Basically says you were naughty Mr. President and don't do it again. Big deal.
If the dems do vote for impeachment it'll go down in flames in the Senate and President Trump will take yet another victory lap and cruise to an easy 2020 victory.
Dems need to stop listening to extremists, but they don't seem to be able to so far. A real House speaker might help.
If the dems were smart, they'd vote to censure the President. Basically says you were naughty Mr. President and don't do it again. Big deal.
If the dems do vote for impeachment it'll go down in flames in the Senate and President Trump will take yet another victory lap and cruise to an easy 2020 victory.
Dems need to stop listening to extremists, but they don't seem to be able to so far. A real House speaker might help.
I agree with all that, except the Demokraps ARE extremists. They used to have some common sense and honor, but they're just communist activists anymore. They're lead around by the nose by Ashkenazi Bolsheviks, and they don't have a clue they are.
I think Trump will be impeached on an extremely close vote, which will still protect House Demokraps in close districts. They'll wrench the vote to impeach by 1 or 2 votes to save face and prove to the base that they're "pure".
I'm sure the Senate won't convict.
If that is the case, then the Republicans can say that the opposition to impeachment is more bipartisan than those those voting to support impeachment. If it gets to the Senate, drag it out for a couple of months. That will put the hurt on Booker, Warren and Sanders.
The House will vote for impeachment.........book it.
However, I hope I'm wrong.
I hope you are right, and the Senate allows all the evidence the Dems supressed to be examined.
The House will vote for impeachment.........book it.
However, I hope I'm wrong.
I hope you are right, and the Senate allows all the evidence the Dems supressed to be examined.
That’s why I’m leaning towards censure. I just don’t see the Democrats opening themselves up to a historic clown show.
The House will vote for impeachment.........book it.
However, I hope I'm wrong.
I hope you are right, and the Senate allows all the evidence the Dems supressed to be examined.
That’s why I’m leaning towards censure. I just don’t see the Democrats opening themselves up to a historic clown show.
The GOP might sideswipe them and vote to impeach enough to bring it to the Senate. They need to shout out that they did so to bring out all the HIDDEN evidence the Dems suppressed and fear. Exposure is going to sink the jackasses.
Obviously, this is just speculation on my part: I think that maybe the reason the Dems are seemingly desperate to push this blatantly false impeachment case is to deflect or cover up serious evidence of DemonRat corruption facts about to be revealed. That is the only thing I can come up with as to why they are doing this. The "evidence" the "witnesses" have produced so far is beyond stupid to anyone with any sense of honest reason. I don't care if they like Trump or not, but the sky is blue and water is wet. It is what it is and just because they don't like him does not change the facts.
I believe the dems thought they had the votes going into this sham, but the sham just keeps getting more shammy. Now the moderate democrats are saying Sham-Wow, this is going to lose us the house! They don’t know weather to chit or wind their watch.
I think both these things are correct. Foreign aid is the mechanism politicians use to leave politics wealthy. Biden and Clinton have perfected this process and Trump has the evidence to prove it. Democrats and Republicans have a lot to loose if Trump decides to use this evidence in a real investigation intended to reveal the facts and prosecute the quilty parties. Almost all politicians are quilty. I hope he is re-elected and destroys all those who are corrupt. Doubt it will happen.
A couple of days ago, I went out on a limb and said that impeachment would either never come to a vote, or would be voted down, because the last thing the Dems want is a Senate trial, with the Repubs calling witnesses and asking questions. Now, an interesting "straw in the wind":
The House Majority Whip is Jim Clayton. His job is persuasion and arm twisting to get the votes that the Speaker of the House needs. Rep Clayton has publicly said that he is NOT trying to round up impeachment votes, and that members should vote their conscience.
In other words, either 1) Nancy has all the votes she needs to impeach (unlikely), or 2) Nancy knows that it is all just for show, and she can't get the votes she needs to impeach.
We have an interesting few weeks ahead.
That's quite a limb you climbed out on there..
Seems like you have all you bases covered.
Either she has the votes or she doesn't. Pretty safe bet I would say.
You missed the very first sentence.
What kind of pressure can Pelosi bring to bear on members of her caucus that may be leaning against? Primaries, money, committee membership. What else?
I see it getting voted up. It will go to the senate. The senate will apply the rules of evidence and the rule of law. A few R Senators may jump ship. Think Romney here. They won't have enough votes for impeachment. The Dems will scream that "politics not justice." The media will echo that sentiment. The Dems will mount their next assault. Come November, swing voters from swing states will decide if we want to become a socialist state with a state controlled media or if we want to keep our representative constitutional republic.
In addition to Romney, I think Collins and Murkowski are untrustworthy.
In addition to Romney, I think Collins and Murkowski are untrustworthy.
All it will take are four Senators jumping ship and the Senate trial become very a different ball game, a lot of the trial proceedings, witnesses, etc., will be decided on by a 51 vote majority.
In addition to Romney, I think Collins and Murkowski are untrustworthy.
They might, but I don't think they'll be stupid enough to allow draconian rules changes for the trial, and as twisted as Roberts is, he'll conduct the trial according to the norms of rules of evidence.
In addition to Romney, I think Collins and Murkowski are untrustworthy.
All it will take are four Senators jumping ship and the Senate trial become very a different ball game, a lot of the trial proceedings, witnesses, etc., will be decided on by a 51 vote majority.
No, it takes a 2/3 vote in the Senate to remove the President.
They need 66 votes to do that. I don't think they can come up with that.
In addition to Romney, I think Collins and Murkowski are untrustworthy.
They might, but I don't think they'll be stupid enough to allow draconian rules changes for the trial, and as twisted as Roberts is, he'll conduct the trial according to the norms of rules of evidence.
My understanding is that a simple 51 vote majority can overrule Roberts.
In addition to Romney, I think Collins and Murkowski are untrustworthy.
Murkowski has done a lot dumb chit.. but her supporting impeachment would end her career in politics..
In addition to Romney, I think Collins and Murkowski are untrustworthy.
All it will take are four Senators jumping ship and the Senate trial become very a different ball game, a lot of the trial proceedings, witnesses, etc., will be decided on by a 51 vote majority.
No, it takes a 2/3 vote in the Senate to remove the President.
They need 66 votes to do that. I don't think they can come up with that.
2/3 vote for removal, a 51 vote majority for deciding procedures during the trial.
In addition to Romney, I think Collins and Murkowski are untrustworthy.
Murkowski has done a lot dumb chit.. but her supporting impeachment would end her career in politics..
I don’t believe that. Her bulk constituency is anti trumpers. Maybe she’ll vote present like on kavanaugh.
The whole impeachment effort is aimed at one thing: Denying DJT the opportunity to replace RBG should she assume room temperature. Democrats will scream "This nomination is not valid because the President is under suspicion, etc, etc, etc." THERE is were Utah's gift to the Senate will turn tail and run with the Democrats.
Senator Graham has been on the tube today preparing us for the Senate Republicans to flush this as fast as possible. They don't want to call Adam Schitt as a fact witness nor anyone else for that matter. He could burn Schitt down, but he won't do it. I don't have much faith in any of them at this point.
Demons have the votes.
But since they know it's going nowhere & may harm them, they may never call the vote of the floor.
MM
In addition to Romney, I think Collins and Murkowski are untrustworthy.
All it will take are four Senators jumping ship and the Senate trial become very a different ball game, a lot of the trial proceedings, witnesses, etc., will be decided on by a 51 vote majority.
No, it takes a 2/3 vote in the Senate to remove the President.
They need 66 votes to do that. I don't think they can come up with that.
2/3 vote for removal, a 51 vote majority for deciding procedures during the trial.
Gotcha, wouldn't McConnell have a lot of say in that?
I see him as more friend than foe to Trump and wouldn't think he would allow anything that would deny Trump a fair trial.
A motion for dismissal will require 51 votes, does McConnell have the votes?
The rules package governing an impeachement trial are still up in the air. It could get interesting if nothing is agreed upon. McConnell doesn't know if he even has the votes to pass a partisan rules package.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...isan-rules-package-for-impeachment-trialMcConnell said he’ll try to negotiate a deal with Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) but that if it fails he’ll try to muster 51 votes in the Senate Republican Conference to set the rules of the trial.
“It would depend on what we could agree to,” McConnell told reporters when asked if he would prefer to reach a bipartisan deal to set the parameters of the trial.
“That failing, I would probably come back to my own members and say, ‘OK, can 51 of us agree [on] how we’re going to handle this?’” McConnell said.
But McConnell acknowledged that he may not even have 51 votes in his own conference on the measure that determines how much time the impeachment managers and the defense will have to present their cases and what witnesses, if any, will be called to the Senate floor.
McConnell said that if he and Schumer fail to reach a deal and there aren’t 51 Republican votes for a rules package then there would be a freewheeling series of votes on various motions, ranging from the management of floor time to summoning witnesses.
“My assumption is once you heard the arguments on both sides, motions would be made. My suspicion is the chief justice would not want to rule on those. He would submit them to the Senate, and 51 of us would decide on a case-by-case basis how to go forward,” McConnell said.
The scenarios laid out by the GOP leader signal skepticism within the Senate that there would be the same bipartisan agreement on how to proceed as there was before the 1999 impeachment trial of then-President Clinton.
I don't think it political strategy on the whole.
Think so many Dems are out of their friggin minds, hate Trump, and are so crooked.............they believe it's all or nothing.
And those of that type, tend to listen to only others of same.
Let em sink, the bastards.
Senator Rob Portman of Ohio said yesterday that he will vote not to convict if it comes to that.
I don’t trust Graham very far already said he would not call the [bleep] show. What the talk of a secret senate vote? There’s a lot of swamp creatures out there. I think the IG report is going to be a flop and coverup the swamp will protect both sides. Trump needs to watch his back through this and the silent majority need to get out in vote in large numbers of we are going to be peasants once again.
What really bugs the hell out of me is the way the hard core (Schiff and Nadler) are rewriting definitions - Breitbart just had an article about Nadler rewriting the definition of Treason to encompass what they want to charge Trump with. The fat little basta*d will stop at nothing to get his way.
What really bugs the hell out of me is the way the hard core (Schiff and Nadler) are rewriting definitions - Breitbart just had an article about Nadler rewriting the definition of Treason to encompass what they want to charge Trump with. The fat little basta*d will stop at nothing to get his way.
Never trust a man who pulls his pchucking pants up to his armpits.