quote:

they can marginalize the impeach 45, soon to be 46,

That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

I am interested to see what the "Reckoning" will look like a year from now. Hopefully the legislature will get back to America's business when this circus is over.

President Trump tweets:

Congratulations to Boris Johnson on his great WIN! Britain and the United States will now be free to strike a massive new Trade Deal after BREXIT. This deal has the potential to be far bigger and more lucrative than any deal that could be made with the E.U. Celebrate Boris!

The Republicans House members were fantastic yesterday. It always helps to have a much better case, in fact the Dems have no case at all, but the unity & sheer brilliance of these Republican warriors, all of them, was a beautiful sight to see. Dems had no answers and wanted out!

My Approval Rating in the Republican Party is 95%, a Record. Thank you!

Poll numbers have gone through the roof in favor of No Impeachment, especially with Swing States and Independents in Swing States. People have figured out that the Democrats have no case, it is a total Hoax. Even Pelosi admitted yesterday that she began this scam 2 1/2 years ago!

The Do Nothing Democrats have become the Party of lies and deception! The Republicans are the Party of the American Dream!

The Republican Party is more united now than at any time in its history - by far!

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Alexandria Cortez: "This is about preventing a potentially disastrous event from occurring next year"

Nadler: "We cannot allow an election to solve our problems"

quote:

In other news, what is the President doing today? Impeachment can't go away fast enough. Nobody talks about what the President is doing to strengthen our country. Even this thread is 99% impeachment. Get over it already. The Dems want to keep impeachment going because it controls the news cycle. Take away impeachment and what are they left with? Record low unemployment, rising stock market, more fair trade deals, etc. Take away impeachment and the Trump Presidency is looking great.

So you think impeachment goes away and the news media suddenly starts reporting about the great economy and how Trump created it?
Anyone who cares already knows. The media is never going to report on any of this. EVER. Trump wants to confront his accusers in a Senate hearing and I support him in that. The Democrats need this impeachment farce publicly beaten over their heads until it's a albatross that is hung around their necks for the next 50 years.

Let them walk now and you will be in another knife fight with them in a week.

quote:

Trump wants to confront his accusers in a Senate hearing and I support him in that.

I do too.

The Republicans in the House may have won the "argument" over impeachment. Kudos to Jim Jordan, Elise Stefanik, and David Nunes who did a great job. But... at the end of the day, if Trump is still impeached, if the Dems have the votes in the House, Trump will still have the stain of impeachment. He wants a trial not just to expose the House Democrats for their unfair tactics, but he wants the opportunity to present a substantive case. He wants acquittal, not just a dismissal.

It's not a coup. It's a civil war.


Lately, it's been convenient — and self-serving to some — to call what is going on with the Trump administration a coup. It's a "soft coup" or a "silent coup" or a wish-it-were-a-coup.

Let's take a look at what that means. According to all definitions I can find, a coup is a sudden, often violent overthrow of a government. Every time I look up the definition of a coup, I get something like this from Merriam-Webster: "a sudden decisive exercise of force in politics." But there is nothing sudden about this.

Have you ever thought, "What would a modern civil war look like?" Tanks rolling down the streets of Washington, D.C.? Missiles targeting the Congress? Armed forces storming the White House or Capitol Building? None of these would accomplish anything. So what would a modern-day civil war look like?

At least since the 1960s, a faction of people have been looking for a chance to make our government conform to what they think it should be. This faction has identified itself in many ways, and its members always embrace Marxist ideals with a top-down government run by a few. A "law-based" government, on the other hand, would have a constitution to protect the rights of the minority from the "tyranny" of the majority. That is what the United States of America is: a law-based government founded on the belief that those working in government are employees of the people, and not that the people are subservient to them. And all decisions are to be based on our agreement to form such a government — that is, as spelled out in our Constitution.

When a group, no matter how large or small, decides it wants to step beyond the constitutional means for changing the government and change it to fit their own ideals of government, and superimpose those ideals on everybody else, we have a true conflict. If that conflict cannot be resolved to their satisfaction through the instrumentalities of the provisions to do so, and so they decide to overthrow it and replace it with their own views or ideas, we have a war. We have those circumstances playing out before our eyes (and ears).

We can define a civil war as a conflict or competition between political factions or regions within the same country to take over the reins of governance without due process. A careful look at what some call the "Deep State" would tell us we have that here in the USA. Further, we have had that state of conflict for many years.

As evidenced by the statements of many current players behind the scenes who have been actively trying to fundamentally transform America, it would seem that in the 20th century, it was determined by those committed to this transformation that the people of the USA would never willfully throw away their own freedoms and embrace some form of Marxian socialism. Therefore, in order to effect this change, there needed to be an internal use of the system itself to subvert it through legislation and regulations to become a de facto state of Marxian socialism without ever calling it such, nor voting for such.

Ever since, there have been bureaucrats and presidents who have worked against the will of the majority in order to "overthrow" the duly elected government and replace it with their own view of what the USA government "should" look like. It is a war, not a coup. They are relentless. Indefatigable. They will never stop. What we are seeing with Mr. Trump is an "Antietam" or a "Gettysburg — a bloody battlefield, but just another battlefield.

It isn't a coup. Not soft. Not silent. And if we don't see it as a war, we lose. Why? Because we then think it's about Mr. Trump or his administration. It isn't.

Any conservative or any Republican who embraces the ideals of small government, personal freedom of choice, personal property rights, and the ability to defend our ownership of what we've created or accumulated will be the next target. A relative handful of people would superimpose their views as a minority onto the will of the majority because they believe themselves to be smarter, better, and more correct.

Note that the purpose of the Constitution is to limit the power of government and the tyranny of the majority. But it also makes us a nation of laws, not votes alone. A majority cannot vote to expel all people who are from a certain nation or of a certain religion. Majority alone does not rule. A majority must first conform to the rule of law. These civil warriors seek to negate that premise and foist upon us their own view, whether we like it or not.

Tyrants, dictators, and their minions are very clever when it comes to using the rules you agree to play with against those playing by the rules. This is war. When Trump leaves office, the war shall continue.

This is about who will run our government. Will it be those duly elected by the people and states, or will it be by the fiat and caprice of those who see themselves as smarter and more relevant than the rest of us?

Again, think of what a modern civil war would look like. There is no way a modern civil war would ever be fought against the most powerful military force in the history of mankind. No, it will come from within. As Khrushchev said, our nation will fall from within ("Your own working class will bury you," 1963), and communists will prevail as a result. That is what we are witnessing: a civil war, not a coup.

https://www.americanthinker.co...its_a_civil_war.html

Well, all of you who want this obscenity to continue, you got your wish, because the House passed the articles of impeachment this morning. Aren't you happy? Now it's "our turn", right? Jump for joy, gents. This crap goes on. Yes, by all means, let's drag it out for as long as we can, because this is what the country needs.

Gosh, I hope that Senate Republicans treat the Senate Democrats the same way House Dems treated House Republicans, because, after all, we're no better than they, are we? No, I guess not. Everyone knows that two wrongs make a right.

Getting through this as quickly as possible would be a bad thing for the nation, wouldn't it?

Next week will be the full House vote. Dems can afford 17 defections and still impeach. Right now reports say that they are facing at least 6 defections.

quote:

Originally posted by Shaql:

quote:

they can marginalize the impeach 45, soon to be 46,

That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

I see what you're doing there.....

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Well, all of you who want this obscenity to continue, you got your wish, because the House passed the articles of impeachment this morning. Aren't you happy? Now it's "our turn", right? Jump for joy, gents. This crap goes on. Yes, by all means, let's drag it out for as long as we can, because this is what the country needs.

Gosh, I hope that Senate Republicans treat the Senate Democrats the same way House Dems treated House Republicans, because, after all, we're no better than they, are we? No, I guess not. Everyone knows that two wrongs make a right.

Getting through this as quickly as possible would be a bad thing for the nation, wouldn't it?

Your making a number of straw-man arguments. I doubt any of us want an "impeachment," that is up to the House Dems. If he is to be impeached anyway, we want them to pay for it and hopefully help them lose the House in '20 so something can be accomplished.

We also don't want it drawn out as long as possible either. Swift blows can be struck, I'd dare say a fast trial is better, attention will be more focused. There are only a few key witnesses that need to be called, all of the weren't there hearsay types are irrelevant.

Finally, we don't want 2 wrongs to make a right or to do anything un-fair to them. Repubs are winning the argument in the most un-fair process in the House. A fair one in the Senate is all they need.

Fast, fair, but get a few key people on the stand in public and destroy them.

The House isn't going to be doing anything productive anyway...

NY Post Editorial Board Names Eric Ciaramella As Whistleblower

https://www.zerohedge.com/poli...amella-whistleblower

The New York Post Editorial Board has named CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella as the whistleblower at the heart of the Trump impeachment saga, confirming an October 30 report by RealClearInvestigation's Paul Sperry which has been widely cited in subsequent reports.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Well, all of you who want this obscenity to continue, you got your wish, because the House passed the articles of impeachment this morning.

The odds of the House Judiciary Committee not passing them were essentially zero. The Dems have painted themselves into a corner. They have to see this charade through. Even if, as some of the more intelligent among them know, it's doing the country and their Party more harm than good.

Personally, I agree with you. Best thing the Senate could do is look at the Articles of Impeachment, consider the "evidence" upon which they're based, and come back with "We're not going to waste our, and the country's, time. There's not enough here upon which to convict. Not even close," and toss it.

Get this crap over with asap.

Use your vote in 2020 to make a statement.

I would like it to include an admonishment of the House of Representatives for bringing an obvious political hackjob that perverts the Constitution and their duties as Representatives of the People not to mention their sworn oath.

quote:

Originally posted by Strambo:
Your making a number of straw-man arguments. I doubt any of us want an "impeachment," that is up to the House Dems.

Oh, really? Then, tell me- if President Trump is not impeached in the House, how will it ever get to be "our turn"? Strawman? Hardly? I'm reading the posts in this thread. We got to get some payback! Right? That's the attitude of several members who've posted in the last couple of pages of this thread.

quote:

OK, just what exactly do you think the Republicans in the Senate are "covering up"? Senator Graham is correct- this is nothing but a crock

So there are two issues that I think will play a part in whether the Senate shines total sunlight on all things Ukraine/FISA/Russia and the impeachment scam, but first, yes, you are absolutely correct that this a crock.

The two issues though.

1. The SSCI is deeply implicated in some pretty high level crimes with regards to the FISA mess. The gang of 8 has/had complete knowledge of the bullshittiness of everything and Senator Mark Warner is directly implicated in the FISA application leak, and possibly even stung by a leak investigation as it looks like, when Jeff Sessions was AG, the DoJ falsified some dates on releases in order to thwart the leakers. ( Deep dive with sources if you're inclined)

2. There are millions of dollars at stake regarding POTUS, and how he's decoupling the US from China, etc. Currently senators stand to gain untold millions through lobbying and foundations. ( Deepish dive)

Ukraine is the tip of the iceberg as far as personal gains are concerned, especially for US Senators.

I'm not going so far as to say there's any kind of official coverup, but I do firmly believe that there is a very real power struggle going on in D.C. currently, between POTUS and the people he represents, and the usual suspects (no matter whether they have an R or a D after their name).

I hope this helps. It's interesting and frustrating to try and navigate the BS hyperbole from the right side, while maintaining a healthy suspicion of the people that landed in D.C., for lifetime roles in the Senate, only to emerge a multi-millionaire for doing a job that only pays a hundred thousand and change.

quote:

This mess needs to go away ASAP. The result will be the same, witnesses or no, so let's get it over with quickly.

Absolutely correct. Anyone that says, "We need to get TRUMP on the stand so he can destroy them!" has no idea what they're talking about. The Senate needs to call this out for the idiotic farce that it is, refuse to take it up, and move on to USMCA. The DoJ can chase down all the lawbreaking as they're supposed to do, including the FBI, Senatorial, or any other law breaker in DC.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by Strambo:
Your making a number of straw-man arguments. I doubt any of us want an "impeachment," that is up to the House Dems.

Oh, really? Then, tell me- if President Trump is not impeached in the House, how will it ever get to be "our turn"? Strawman? Hardly? I'm reading the posts in this thread. We got to get some payback! Right? That's the attitude of several members who've posted in the last couple of pages of this thread.

Nobody who wants a trial in the Senate is saying anything that is nearly as ridiculous as you are trying to make it seem. President Trump himself, whose political instincts are near genius, wants such a trial.

Why?

Several of us have spelled it out over and over.

You might disagree, and think it's best to just end this travesty, but the argument to bring it to a trial in the Senate and call Nadler, Schiff, and the Bidens as witnesses, is a good argument, deserving of respectful consideration rather than insult and mockery.

quote:

Originally posted by Keystoner:
My first preference would be for this to die in the House.

Same here. To be clear, I for one hope President Trump is not impeached in the House. It would be best if enough Democrats realize the damage they are doing and refuse to vote for this travesty.

quote:

You might disagree, and think it's best to just end this travesty, but the argument to bring it to a trial in the Senate and call Nadler, Schiff, and the Bidens as witnesses, is a good argument, deserving of respectful consideration rather than insult and mockery

I'm not sure that any of that will be allowed since the "Articles" they finally landed on can be construed as anything the Democrats deem. "Oh that's not what the House sent you, so Schiff declines to testify."

It needs to just go away. The Senate needs to tell the house their idiots, as they are, and ignore it or vote to not even take it up. However that works legally.

It appears that the farce to date has not changed the numbers WRT Democrat and Republican voters. Furthermore the CNN viewership numbers are down, so even those who approve of the farce have lost interest.
The trial would very likely be comical, with witnesses refusing to testify, lots of theatrics and little substance. What facts are brought to light would be viewed by FOX news subscribers and few others.
The way ahead is to drop this turd at the first opportunity and let the AG start prosecuting the criminals. That is going to get coverage and change minds.