9
   

What will probably happen

 
 
snood
 
Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 12:16 pm
I'm of course heartened by the midterm results in the House. At the very least there will be committee chairs who can make life a little less comfortable for the swamp beasts who've been running amok. You know - subpoena people to have to answer questions before congress that might expose some of their dirt. That's probably going to happen.

But, what else? I really don't see any way open to really hurt the perverted, traitorous clown in the Oval Office. Impeachment is an empty exercise because the Senate will never vote to remove him. If he's subpoenaed or even charged with crimes, he'll just deny and delay like he's done; if any decisions are given to the SCOTUS to make, well now that's stacked in a way that's likely to absolve the wretch anyway.

So, while I was glad to see that the voting public is not totally brain dead and morally bereft, I don't see a scenario that might make the halfwitted pustule reaping any portion of the whirlwind he so deeply deserves.

Do you?
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 01:22 pm
He may reap the whirlwind, once he's out of office. At his age, he may just check out fairly soon after.
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 02:10 pm
@snood,
I want in on this, I definitely have a few ideas. But, family visiting so I’ll be back later.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 02:32 pm
For Dog's sake, the damned fools better not impeach him. That would be the height of stupidity.
Sturgis
 
  4  
Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 02:36 pm
@snood,
What will happen? Still a bit too early to say. It is however a beginning of what I hope is a long-term shift back to the way the government was and is intended to operate.

Our greatest hope and possibility would be for a truly viable Democrat to emerge and get it going for the 2020 election and then hopefully knock the slime currently infesting the White House clear out into orbit.


Nice having you back here snood, you're voice has been missed
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  2  
Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 04:51 pm
@snood,
Welcome back.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 05:51 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

For Dog's sake, the damned fools better not impeach him. That would be the height of stupidity.

Because? Pence? Or the possibility that the effort would just galvanize the occupying party?
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 06:01 pm
The Republican controlled Senate would not allow it to happen, for one.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 06:17 pm
@snood,
Pence could be endured, although he knows more about practical politics than the Narcissist-in-Chief. Mostly what you say about galvanizing the opposition--but those weenies will be fired up anyway, at the thought of no more President Plump. So, a little of the last, but mostly because it would be futile effort, and it would be an advantage to sitting Republican Senators. Impeach just means to indict, and you can do that in the House with a simple majority. But . . .

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

(Article One, Section Three, sixth paragraph)

You ain'ta gonna get a conviction out of this Senate. Trying him would provide that clown just another stage for his antics, and Republican Senators could take credit for the acquittal in the aftermath. It would also make the Democrats look like fools, and those who would like to support the party already despair of them. If Meuller comes up with offenses which cannot be ignored, bad enough to embarrass (Ha!) a Republican Senate, or to outrage them, time enough then. What they really ought to be doing is going after people like Zinke, de Vos, and the rest of his band of corrupt, authoritarian creeps. You know, de Vos' husband's cousin was getting $700 a day for housing children taken from their parents at the border? That's the kind of specific thing the House should investigate, and for which impeachment would be a remedy. So, for example, if the House could amass credible evidence that Betsy de Vos used her influence to get that contract for her husband's cousin, and she were impeached for it, the Republican Senate could be made to look bad as winking at corruption if they acquitted her.

The Democrats need to be smart, work hard, and win the confidence of the unaligned center of the American electorate. If they make themselves look like a pack of typical, self-interested and grandstanding politicians, form with no substance, noise with no effective action, they'll just hurt themselves.
snood
 
  2  
Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 06:54 pm
@Setanta,
I agree with all of that. But (for exactly the same reason you interjected Ha! after mentioning embarrassing the Repub senators), there's no reason to believe that they would feel any obligation to follow through on impeachments of De Vos or Zinke or any of the many other slimeball associates and cabinet members.
Isn't it possible that their lemming-like electorate might see any successful impeachments as just more fake news, and just more fuel for their blind loyalty?
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Sun 18 Nov, 2018 07:39 pm
Another consideration is Pelosi. Looks as though she is ready to be House Speaker once more. She said weeks if not months ago that impeachment is not on the table.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Nov, 2018 12:18 am
@snood,
Yes, that's certainly possible, and very likely highly probable. However, as I mentioned, the battle is for the unaligned middle, those members of the electorate who don't see themselves (necessarily) as party loyalists. Those Americans who might actually (*gasp*) think before going into the voting booth. I would also add that the House can get a lot of good work done investigating charges of voting fraud on the part of the Republicans.
0 Replies
 
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Nov, 2018 12:23 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

For Dog's sake, the damned fools better not impeach him. That would be the height of stupidity.

The only way to keep Trump from getting a second term as president? Impeach him. The way things are? I have a difficult time seeing him lose in 2020 given the current state of establishment fetishizing going on the Democratic National Committee and their obsession over keeping the party status quo and how that helped Trump and the Republican Party establish their cancer in the federal government and in the US Senate in the first place.
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Mon 19 Nov, 2018 01:53 pm
@tsarstepan,
I could not agree less. Impeaching Plump won't help and it will sour people's attitudes towards the Democrats. Forget Plump, focus on gaining the confidence of the roughly one third of voters who make up their minds in the last weeks before an election.
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Mon 19 Nov, 2018 02:00 pm
He's the rottenest apple in the barrel, but he's only one in a barrel of rotten apples. Democrats should work to clean house at the polls. You can't do that by clinging to the things that got you voted out in the first place. Thinking has to move beyond Trump and corrupt toadies. There is a short two years in which to gain voters trust by standing for something beyond the status quo. Actually work for the people rather than blather empty rhetoric.
0 Replies
 
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Nov, 2018 02:14 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

I could not agree less. Impeaching Plump won't help and it will sour people's attitudes towards the Democrats.

Given that the Republicans have a greater hold on the Senate, how many Supreme Court Justices do you figure that Trump will place on the Supreme Court in the next two years until the 2020 presidential elections? No impeachment? He continues to destroy the Supreme Court.

Also, what would be the point of keeping Mueller around if no impeachment trial? Do you really think what he dregs up will convince so-called moderate Republicans from voting for a second Trump term?
snood
 
  3  
Reply Mon 19 Nov, 2018 03:34 pm
@tsarstepan,
But how will impeaching remedy any of that? I say again, it would be an empty exercise unless the Senate votes to remove him and there is zero chance of the Repub-held Senate doing that.
Impeachment could very well have the opposite of the desired effect. After the Repubs impeached Clinton he enjoyed some of his highest favorability numbers.
roger
 
  2  
Reply Mon 19 Nov, 2018 05:40 pm
@snood,
I doubt a failed impeachment would have any effect on Trump's numbers at all. All in all, it's not usually a good idea to shoot and miss.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Mon 19 Nov, 2018 05:52 pm
@tsarstepan,
tsarstepan wrote:
No impeachment?


impeachment's not going to happen

most Dems know that and shut that talk down - it's really being talked about by Republicans now - like they're daring the Dems to try it and get shut down by the Senate - get sympathy for #45

there's no upside to pushing it

his base won't care

it won't change what Dems think about him

independent/undecided voters need something else to get their vote - a failed impeachment isn't going to do that
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Nov, 2018 05:55 pm
Definitely curious to see how the new house is going to work out. It's a fairly different group of people. Not so many men, not so many white people, people with some pretty strong, non-DC standard opinions.
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » What will probably happen
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/13/2020 at 10:52:19