[tommytwotone]

That's my understanding - and it was always going to go that way.

Think the end goal was never to oust him, just try and get the stink of impeachment on him prior to the 2020 campaign.

[Oldmanmatt]

I reckon, if you could harness a permanent magnet rotor, to the long dead feet of the founding fathers; the spinning would power most of the northern hemisphere.

[SA Chris]

Do I understand correctly that, assuming this passes in the House today, then it just goes to the Republican controlled Senate who will vote against, and therefore there’s no impact on Trump?

I think there is a prolonged hearing before Senate vote though, probably drag out forever?

[andy popp]

Do I understand correctly that, assuming this passes in the House today, then it just goes to the Republican controlled Senate who will vote against, and therefore there’s no impact on Trump?

The trial takes place in the Senate, where the Republicans do indeed hold a majority. We're watching the House debate now - quite simply Republicans are intellectually and morally bankrupt and they will prove that in the Senate. Senators McConnell and Graham have already, openly said they have no intention of acting as the impartial jurors that the constitution explicitly binds them to be. There can be no hope that they will as a party vote in anything but the most partisan way. He will be impeached and then acquitted.

Will it have any effect on Trump? The impeachment hearings have had only a marginal impact on public opinion, which has shifted little, and I think that will remain the case as proceedings move to an acquittal in the Senate. The proceedings might convince some supporters and neutrals who are wavering to abandon Trump. But they will also strengthen the resolve of the base. Unbelievably, I doubt it will have that much impact at all on the 2020 election. But I think things had reached such a point that the Democrats had little choice to impeach, even if the attempt is doomed and it might even provide a boost to Trump. If this had been let pass without impeachment then you might as well tear up the whole of the constitution. In many ways, it's actually a matter of principles, not politics, at this point.

[andy popp]

Do I understand correctly that, assuming this passes in the House today, then it just goes to the Republican controlled Senate who will vote against, and therefore there’s no impact on Trump?

I think there is a prolonged hearing before Senate vote though, probably drag out forever?

Trump says he wants a long, combative Senate trial but McConnell, who controls proceedings in the Senate, wants to keep it as short as possible. More exposure equals more risk, not of Trump losing but of the public hearing more details.

[Oldmanmatt]

Do I understand correctly that, assuming this passes in the House today, then it just goes to the Republican controlled Senate who will vote against, and therefore there’s no impact on Trump?

I think there is a prolonged hearing before Senate vote though, probably drag out forever?

Trump says he wants a long, combative Senate trial but McConnell, who controls proceedings in the Senate, wants to keep it as short as possible. More exposure equals more risk, not of Trump losing but of the public hearing more details.

The details will break anyway. Loudly.

Unless Bolton has as “Epstein accident”...

[andy popp]

Do I understand correctly that, assuming this passes in the House today, then it just goes to the Republican controlled Senate who will vote against, and therefore there’s no impact on Trump?

I think there is a prolonged hearing before Senate vote though, probably drag out forever?

Trump says he wants a long, combative Senate trial but McConnell, who controls proceedings in the Senate, wants to keep it as short as possible. More exposure equals more risk, not of Trump losing but of the public hearing more details.

The details will break anyway. Loudly.

Unless Bolton has as “Epstein accident”...

The details have already broken, loudly, to little effect.

Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer has asked that Bolton be called as a witness, something McConnell has already said will never happen. Bolton refused all requests to appear before House committees. We're not going to hear from him. On the other hand, he's already signed a very nice book deal ...

[Oldmanmatt]

Oh, he’ll do it his way, I think. He’s no Democrat, but he’s also not a man to cross, has a heavy, skeleton adorned, axe to grind and the balls to swing it, once it’s good and sharp.

I’d put money on there being more than already out there, in there (his book).

This is interesting:

if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, it might still be dog

[andy popp]

Sorry, I meant we won't hear from his during the impeachment.

[Oldmanmatt]

I suppose I just hope for Trump to “Be Gone” (tail between legs a bonus) and don’t really care how he goes.
The impeachment is a step. If it unseats him, Yeha!
But mainly it’s another dent in the Teflon.
Emperor’s new clothes and all that. All of the people some of the time etc. etc.

Anyway. Moscow Mitch turns 78 on 20th of Feb. Unfortunately, that’s young for a tortoise, but we can dream.

[moose]

I sadly suspect that the impeachment will fail, as insufficent Reps will turn, and Trump will turn it into a victory - like the Muellar report he'll conflate not having been proven guilty with proof of innocence.

[Oldmanmatt]

I sadly suspect that the impeachment will fail, as insufficent Reps will turn, and Trump will turn it into a victory - like the Muellar report he'll conflate not having been proven guilty with proof of innocence.

I think that’s in large part bluster.
He will probably do those things, but the articles will have cut him deeply and regardless of the outcome now, he knows his legacy is shot.
Clinton had the gumption to recognise that resignation and graceful retreat allowed him to be rehabilitated over time. Trump and the GOP will see their intransigence dig their hole deeper and their long term damage will be greater for it.
They seem willing to risk it for short term gains.
Mitch seems eternally bent out ofshape that the people dared elect a black president and seems only to care about preventing that ever happening again. Still, he’s unlikely to make it through to 2024 and seriously long odds on 2028, so ...

[andy popp]

I sadly suspect that the impeachment will fail.

This is a certainty. I'll be amazed if a single Republican Senator finds him guilty.

[andy popp]

Clinton had the gumption to recognise that resignation and graceful retreat allowed him to be rehabilitated over time.

Clinton was acquitted and served out the remainder of his second term.

[Oldmanmatt]

Clinton had the gumption to recognise that resignation and graceful retreat allowed him to be rehabilitated over time.

Clinton was acquitted and served out the remainder of his second term.

Yup, my brain fart.

Not that Nixon was as graceful in his retreat as my sentence implied (nor was his rehabilitation that great). I was thinking more about the GOP not being tarnished to same degree as they will/are this time.

So:

At least Nixon had the gumption to realise resignation and graceful retreat might allow him to be rehabilitated over time .

[andy popp]

That makes more sense. I think Nixon quit purely to avoid the humiliation of a Senate trial and spent the rest of his life in deep resentment. There was no rehabilitation. But I think you're right about the GOP. Nixon quit because he knew he'd lost the support of the GOP. Whether the GOP turned away through principle or an instinct for self-preservation, it did allow them to survive the tarnish of association with Nixon. That won't happen this time. But it still won't make any difference.

[galpinos]

I guess the senate hearing will screw Biden's chances of getting picked.

[andy popp]

I'm not saying you're wrong, but what's the reasoning?

On the other hand, Tulsi Gabbard, who voted Present on both articles yesterday (effectively an abstention) probably just completely screwed her Presidential bid (possibly on purpose).

[galpinos]

I'm not saying you're wrong, but what's the reasoning?

I think he will have a lot of s**t thrown at him, I can't imagine Trump not briefing his defenders to bring it up at every opportunity, and unlike the Donald, it will stick to Biden*.

*Democrats are less inclined to look past these issues than Republicans, they need to be the good guys and (as) sqeaky clean (as possible in American Politics) in the same way the Rights wins on a few simple messages and the Left turn itself inside trying to cover every base and trying to be all things to all people (and get painted as championing the rights of disabled trans immigrants and arguing about who gets to use which toilet whilst not looking after the white "native" working class).

[TobyD]

Never mind the impeachment trial, how are these the words of a man fit to be president? ‘I never understood wind’: Trump goes on bizarre tirade against wind turbines
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/23/trump-bizarre-tirade-windmills?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

Christ on a bike, I wouldn't trust this man to drive, let alone in charge of the entire US military.

[UnkArl]

What in the blue fuck is he on about!?!

[Fiend]

A truly nauseating level of extreme idiocy and incoherence, even by his exceptionally low standards.

[andy popp]

What in the blue fuck is he on about!?!

Just another part of the appeal to the angry (white) people who elected him.

[andy popp]

This batshit crazy interview with Rudy Giuliani is well worth reading: http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/12/a-conversation-with-rudy-giuliani-over-bloody-marys.html

[Oldmanmatt]

What in the blue fuck is he on about!?!

Just another part of the appeal to the angry (white) people who elected him.

Actually, since I’m tired of being lumped in with these “white” people (both here and in the US), could we just call them “Thickos”?
It’s more accurate and less racially charged.
#notallwhitepeople


(This is written in jest, Merry Xmas, ya animals!)