Pelosi: Trump isn’t worth impeachment

[Bitek]

It is already to late for the census. The questions will be finalized in the next months, and the census will start on April 1 2020 and will be delivered before the next President or Senate is seated.

Don't mean the questions itself and those shenanigans, just mean it's a redistricting cycle due to the updated census and Ds need to be in a strong electoral position to not get screwed again.

 

[Maxima1]

Mueller seems (since who can really tell with how protective he is) rather pragmatic. I'm guessing that he doesn't need DJT under oath as there are ample sources of evidence and documentation proving his culpability. I think you mention testifying so that you see how the other person plays their cards. DJT basically sputtered his cards out of his hand with his saying he would, then changing the terms several times, and basically all but publicly saying he needs to plead the 5th.

I agree with Schiff. It's a mistake. The bumbling buffoon wouldn't even last a minute.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...take-mueller-not-put-trump-under-oath-n981546

Schiff: 'Mistake' for Mueller not to get Trump to testify under oath
"I also think that the special counsel feels some time pressure to conclude his work," Schiff told NBC's "Meet the Press."

 

[Bitek]

I'm really torn on this because it is very likely politically unwise to pursue impeachment against him. It won't get him out of office and he will spin it up into some giant quasi civil war. That being said, from a good governance standpoint he absolutely must be impeached as if you don't impeach someone who is openly committing crimes while in office who exactly do you impeach? In that case there really is no way to remove a criminal executive and I'm very sure that future presidents will take note.

In the end I guess I fall on the side of 'getting him out of office is the most important thing' so I would side against impeachment but I flop back and forth because the eventual consequences of that are probably very bad.

I think impeachment really only becomes available on a second term unless an investigation moves very quickly and decidedly within a first term.

 

[jackstar7]

I agree with Schiff. It's a mistake. The bumbling buffoon wouldn't even last a minute.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...take-mueller-not-put-trump-under-oath-n981546

Schiff: 'Mistake' for Mueller not to get Trump to testify under oath
"I also think that the special counsel feels some time pressure to conclude his work," Schiff told NBC's "Meet the Press."

That's fine. I'm certain Schiff knows more than I do, but from my ignorant view, I don't see the error. Trump's lawyers would never allow him to be put under oath and until he's formally indicted himself, he has no incentive to cooperate with the investigation into himself. The GOP enabling him doesn't make it a worthwhile pursuit either.

Which is again... because there are no principles to be found in DJT or the GOP.

 

[interchange]

There is nothing to impeach over, Democan'ts don't understand that impeachment isn't a tool meant to use because you didn't get your way, but because the POTUS is corrupt, breaking the law, etc. That doesn't apply to Trump, all that happened were standard other countries meddling, the left is going to have to eventually come to grips with the reality that they lost the election and Trump won, America rejected Hillary for Trump. It is that simple. They'll have another chance in 2020, but there isn't any grounds for impeachment of Trump.

He's an unindicted co-worker conspirator to felony campaign finance violation, and we just received physical evidence and a list of corroborating witnesses to the conspiracy from Michael Cohen. Are you suggesting this doesn't meet criteria for him to be charged with a crime in order to hear the evidence to consider his guilt? What more would you need to start examining the evidence by the only body (Congress) capable of holding a President accountable?

 

[Moonbeam]

Perhaps the Democrats, by not impeaching, are trying to spare us from outright announcing that democracy is dead. No telling what kind of violence might erupt were word of that to get around, or is it the fear of utter realization and utter indifference that might be the issue?

 

[UglyCasanova]

Well this is certainly amusing. All the talk on this board on impeachment too and how it’s inevitable and that Trump will be behind bars. And I think it was UC saying all along that once you reach a certain point like Hilldawg and Trump the laws don’t apply to you anymore. Nancy gets it.

 

[blackangst1]

The main thing is she said just as she wasnt for impeaching Bush jr for war crimes, she's not for impeachment now. "unless theres overwhelming evidence". Which there isnt. I love the "oh. And Trump isnt worth it". Like an afterthought lol.

 

[Jhhnn]

..

Well this is certainly amusing. All the talk on this board on impeachment too and how it’s inevitable and that Trump will be behind bars. And I think it was UC saying all along that once you reach a certain point like Hilldawg and Trump the laws don’t apply to you anymore. Nancy gets it.

Trolling out the "Crooked Hillary!" duh-version, huh?

 

[Jhhnn]

The main thing is she said just as she wasnt for impeaching Bush jr for war crimes, she's not for impeachment now. "unless theres overwhelming evidence". Which there isnt. I love the "oh. And Trump isnt worth it". Like an afterthought lol.

I'm confident Trump will face indictment for felony campaign violations once he's out of office. OTOH, such things aren't seen as crimes in Republican land.

 

[blackangst1]

I'm confident Trump will face indictment for felony campaign violations once he's out of office. OTOH, such things aren't seen as crimes in Republican land.

I agree. I've said it before, NY will likely get him.

 

[Jhhnn]

I agree. I've said it before, NY will likely get him.

Them too, I suspect. None of it fazes his base. They knew he was crooked when they voted for him. He even told them-

Those being conned always believe they're on the winning side of the con, of course. It's fundamental to the whole thing.

 

[blackangst1]

Them too, I suspect. None of it fazes his base. They knew he was crooked when they voted for him. He even told them-

Those being conned always believe they're on the winning side of the con, of course. It's fundamental to the whole thing.

I agree. AOC'S base hasn't realized she's a con. But she is

 

[Jhhnn]

I agree. AOC'S base hasn't realized she's a con. But she is

Needs more duh-version. If Trump weren't the most astounding con artist ever he wouldn't be President. Lots of people have lots of trouble seeing that clearly. He has the rubes in this country right in the palm of his hand. They adore him & will defend him no matter what in the same way Michael Cohen did for 10 years.

 

[blackangst1]

Needs more duh-version. If Trump weren't the most astounding con artist ever he wouldn't be President. Lots of people have lots of trouble seeing that clearly. He has the rubes in this country right in the palm of his hand. They adore him & will defend him no matter what in the same way Michael Cohen did for 10 years.

Cool story bro

 

[SlowSpyder]

you are one gaslighted moron

Impeachment was always a pipe dream, anyone with at least half a brain could tell this was always about sour grapes and a coping mechanism for smug types to help deal with the reality of America rejecting their candidate. Now even the Democrats in power are softening up their base to prepare for an impeachment let-down, it isn't happening. The gas-lit types were the ones that honestly believed Trump was going to get impeached over the silly charge of Russian collusion. Hillary was ̶g̶r̶o̶s̶s̶l̶y̶ ̶n̶e̶g̶l̶i̶g̶e̶n̶t̶ extremely careless with her email, it wasn't the Russians that made that happen, it was Democrat hero Hillary that did.

 

[fskimospy]

Impeachment was always a pipe dream, anyone with at least half a brain could tell this was always about sour grapes and a coping mechanism for smug types to help deal with the reality of America rejecting their candidate. Now even the Democrats in power are softening up their base to prepare for an impeachment let-down, it isn't happening. The gas-lit types were the ones that honestly believed Trump was going to get impeached over the silly charge of Russian collusion. Hillary was ̶g̶r̶o̶s̶s̶l̶y̶ ̶n̶e̶g̶l̶i̶g̶e̶n̶t̶ extremely careless with her email, it wasn't the Russians that made that happen, it was Democrat hero Hillary that did.

How do you feel about the felonies Trump is implicated in by federal prosecutors? Should he be impeached for them or do those not count because reasons?

 

[SlowSpyder]

How do you feel about the felonies Trump is implicated in by federal prosecutors? Should he be impeached for them or do those not count because reasons?

Which "felonies" are you referring to?

 

[fskimospy]

Which "felonies" are you referring to?

As per court filings from federal prosecutors in the southern district of New York:

On approximately June 16, 2015, Individual-1, for whom Cohen worked at the time, began an ultimately successful campaign for President of the United States. Cohen had no formal title with the campaign, but had a campaign email address, and, at various times advised the campaign, including on matters of interest to the press. Cohen also made media appearances as a surrogate and supporter of Individual-1. (PSR ¶ 39).

During the campaign, Cohen played a central role in two similar schemes to purchase the rights to stories – each from women who claimed to have had an affair with Individual-1 – so as to suppress the stories and thereby prevent them from influencing the election. With respect to both payments, Cohen acted with the intent to influence the 2016 presidential election. Cohen coordinated his actions with one or more members of the campaign, including through meetings and phone calls, about the fact, nature, and timing of the payments. (PSR ¶ 51). In particular, and as Cohen himself has now admitted, with respect to both payments, he acted in coordination with and at the direction of Individual-1. (PSR ¶¶ 41, 45). As a result of Cohen’s actions, neither woman spoke to the press prior to the election. (PSR ¶ 51).

So as per the federal government Trump directed and coordinated with Cohen to commit a felony. That is in and of itself a felony (probably more than one).

How do you feel about those felonies? Again, let me guess they magically don’t count, haha.

 

[kage69]

Pelosi wants the Senate, and calculated tactics like this makes me think she and the Dems will probably pull it off. Let Trump continue to think the impeachment was what he had to worry about, and let him get back to the business of shoring up Democratic support.

Republicans are going to get creamed.

 

[Jhhnn]

Cool story bro

Truth is stranger than fiction, particularly when it comes to Trump. Remember that time the super patriot billionaire Trump bragged that not paying federal income taxes meant he was smart?

Y'all voted for him anyway.

 

[SlowSpyder]

As per court filings from federal prosecutors in the southern district of New York:



So as per the federal government Trump directed and coordinated with Cohen to commit a felony. That is in and of itself a felony (probably more than one).

How do you feel about those felonies? Again, let me guess they magically don’t count, haha.

Sounds like a bunch of hearsay by a known liar, Cohen.

 

[Jhhnn]

Sounds like a bunch of hearsay by a known liar, Cohen.

Yeh, Cohen lied & bullied for Trump for 10 years. It's not his accusation, anyway, but rather that of federal prosecutors in the SDNY. Cohen has excellent attorneys, as well. He wouldn't have copped to a prison term if prosecutors didn't have an overwhelming case against him & Trump.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Sounds like a bunch of hearsay by a known liar, Cohen.

Wait, in this narrative isn't Cohen being accused of lying about Trump not having committed crimes? So, if Cohen was lying then does that mean Trump did commit crimes?
It seems to me that calling Cohen a liar does not really help your narrative here.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Wait, in this narrative isn't Cohen being accused of lying about Trump not having committed crimes? So, if Cohen was lying then does that mean Trump did commit crimes?
It seems to me that calling Cohen a liar does not really help your narrative here.

Cohen is a known liar, I wouldn't make any conclusion off of what he's said.

Certainly we can all agree that if there is strong enough evidence against Trump, we'll see charges brought, right? So far we're years into an investigation and there is no evidence of collusion and no charges.