Posted on 09/28/2019 5:38:42 AM PDT by palmer
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
There is no case for impeachment.
Impeachment nothing. This is the continuation of a three year coup d’état that must be crushed.
Dems don’t need a case. They have 228 votes. That’s all they need.
Don't waste your time trying to explain this to Democrats though, because when you are dealing with Democrats, you are dealing with insane individuals.
yes weak is giving it to much credibility. It deserves none
“I know the impeachment case is weak because Ginsburg is still alive (picture from Thursday).”
This is what we used to call in the military “battlespace preparation” or “preparing the battleground.”
The Democrats are worried that Ginsburg will shuffle off this mortal coil during Trump’s first term (and they’re also frantic to prevent him from getting a second term, because the Notorious RBG is becoming frailer by the month), for one. So they gin up these “controversies” in hopes of one sticking enough to boot PDT from office before RBG packs it in. Or, barring his removal from office, have him so politically weak and hamstrung that those wussy GOPers in the Senate will cave and won’t consider a nominee until after the November 2020 election (which Democrats somehow think they have a chance of winning). Won’t work, of course, but since when did Dems ever suffer from an overabundance of intelligence?
Also, they know the Horowitz IG report is due up — and it promises to be “exciting,” to say the least. Plus, you’ve got two different U.S. Attorneys (Huber and Durham) conducting their own investigations in addition to the FISA abuse look-see Horowitz was running.
All this screaming and caterwauling and gnashing of teeth by Dems in this case is their attempt at misdirection and distraction, and they’re hoping the impeachment hysteria they’re stoking over in the fever swamps of the left and among their media bootlickers will prevent the public, including independents, from paying much attention to the coming reports from all three gentlemen. That, too, won’t work.
The bottom line is if the Dems impeach Trump over the call to the Ukraine president based on the transcript we’ve all had a chance to read, Trump will win re-election in a landslide of epic proportion.
Part of me says let’s get this show on the road. The other thing is the Dems will protest any supreme court nomination during the Senate trial. They can’t let Trump pick RBG’s replacement. Her health must be quickly deteriorating.
There is no case for impeachment period. This is just part of the ongoing coup to remove President Trump.
Perhaps that’s their game. It’ll be “we can’t let a President, in an election year AND during an impeachment inquiry, pick a new SC justice”.
It’s impossible to predict the future and it certainly is not positive for the MAGA agenda for this gaslighting nonsense to dominate the news. Much better to nip this in the bud than leave it needlessly festering for months. But that would require action from the GOP Senate and they clearly have no interest in supporting POTUS.
Also, they know the Horowitz IG report is due up — and it promises to be “exciting,” to say the least. Plus, you’ve got two different U.S. Attorneys (Huber and Durham) conducting their own investigations in addition to the FISA abuse look-see Horowitz was running.
Don’t hold your breath there. It’s been 15 months since McCabe was referred for prosecution. None of what you mentioned is even at that level yet. We now have 1 year and one month left of Trump’s first term.
Could be McConnell really doesn’t want a SCOTUS fight in an election year with blue state GOP Senators on the ballot and will use impeachment as a cover as an excuse to punt.
Huber has certainly not investigated anything for months, if he ever started.
The Democrats should have ginned up their phony impeachment charade before the Mueller debacle destroyed any shred of credibility they might have had to pursue this manufactured crisis. Now it’s just parody run amok.
> Dems don’t need a case. They have 228 votes. That’s all they need. <
Right you are. The public might want a case. The Senate might want a case. But the House can legally impeach a president for any old reason. Evidence, probable cause, etc. None of that matters.
If they had the votes, Botoxic would call the vote today. I don’t think they have the votes yet. I think they are about 30 short.
Very troubling is how just mere weeks ago, the deep state infiltrated the intelligence department to change the whistle blower requirements.
The deal with Buzzi is this: once the DemoKKKrats start the impeachment clock ticking by passing formal articles of impeachment, they pretty much have to get the Senate a case.
Andrew Johnson’s impeachment took about 3 months; Bill Clinton’s about 4.
Although there are a few formalities once the House passes articles, the case goes to the Senate post haste.
Once in the Senate, Yertle must take it up . . . for five minutes. He has the option-—IF HE HAS THE VOTES-—to simply dismiss it as frivolous. I believe he will do that if the articles are as stupidly supported as they seem to be. The dismissal vote number is 51 because Pence breaks the tie. This allows us room for three defectors-—Minion for sure, possibly Burrito since he isn’t running.
KEEP IN MIND SHEETS BYRD IN 1999 CAME WITHIN SEVEN VOTES OF GETTING SLICK’S IMPEACHMENT CASE DISMISSED! And he was guilty as hell.
If Yertle can’t get 51 to dismiss, then a trial takes place. There are two theories on this-—one is that the GOP pulls out every single witness on the other side and grills them and exposes the whole thing under oath. The other is, “get it over with quickly.” Each has an advantage and disadvantage.
However, back to the clock and Buzzi. Once impeachment starts, if Buzzi croaks, Ds will say “A president under impeachment cannot name a USSC justice.” So . . . if the House waits too long, say, late next summer, they risk having Buzzi out live them. But if they go too soon, say, in 3 weeks, they risk having it over and Trump acquitted-—and HE WILL BE ACQUITTED-—by early spring, in which case, if Buzzi croaks, they lost their little claim about an impeached president.
Finally, don’t believe news reports. If Botoxic had 218 votes for impeachment, she’d vote tomorrow.
Agreed. Pelosi lacks the votes. She lacked them 8 weeks ago too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.