To me the best part about Christmas was the lack of the any new impeachment news for 2-3 days. It was like a fresh breeze blowing through the room. Wouldn't it be nice if it were to continue? Now we're hearing that if the Senate acquits, the Dems may bring new charges. Anyone else remember that toward the end of the presidential election, the Dems were demanding a statement from Trump that if (they meant when), he lost the election, he would not contest the result ? Of course, that's all they've done and continue to do since they lost.

Didn't bother watching any of it. Pretty much tuned it out. Dhims had their mind made up they were going to do it whether they had evidence or not. Coverage of it was pointless as it was a foregone conclusion.

Same. Haven't paid attention thus far. I'll read the cliff notes when it's over.

It is as if it didn't happen. The House voting to impeach is not the same as being impeached, is it?

^^^^
The wife does farcebook and you’d be astounded at the number of mental midgets that think that the two are exactly the same. They can’t figure out why he’s still in office any more than how he got there in the first place. Idiots.

I thought the Mueller report was supposed to clear everything up.
Then I recall Schiff clamoring to have irrefutable evidence that would prove Trump was a danger.
The much ballyhooed whistleblower didn’t pan out.
Pelosi holding Up the impeachment process votes, until “we get more information” B/S.

I’d like to see these un-Americans strung up and left to rot.
You are not getting my country back!
Trump Trump Trump!!

quote:

Originally posted by Woodman:
It is as if it didn't happen. The House voting to impeach is not the same as being impeached, is it?

No. Impeachment by the House is like an indictment. The trial is then held in the Senate, with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presiding as the judge. A 2/3 majority vote by the Senators (67 votes) is necessary to remove the impeached official from office.

I hope the Democrats are catching hell for this sham-peachment when they are at home in their districts.

quote:

Originally posted by Woodman:
It is as if it didn't happen. The House voting to impeach is not the same as being impeached, is it?

It is. Impeachment is analogous to indictment. However being indicted is not being convicted.

What is going on would be similar to a DA having some total BS case but indicting someone anyway, then not having the testicular fortitude to take the case to trial because he knew he was going to absolutely get he backside handed to him if he did.

quote:

Originally posted by Woodman:
It is as if it didn't happen. The House voting to impeach is not the same as being impeached, is it?

Yes it is. Trump has been impeached, just like Clinton was impeached. But impeachment does not mean removal from office unless there is a conviction by the Senate.

^^ Not according to their own expert, Noah Feldman.
They voted to impeach but Articles must be sent to the Senate for impeachment to take effect.

Sooo is President Trump "technically" impeached if the House never submits the (inane) Articles of Impeachment to the Senate?

I think I get it. He was impeached, which happens in the House.

But the Senate has to judge the impeachment sound for it to be enforced.

In this impeachment, the House is so insecure about their actions that they have not sent it over to the Senate.

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
Sooo is President Trump "technically" impeached if the House never submits the (inane) Articles of Impeachment to the Senate?

No he is not, not even technically. The House did something like an indictment,

quote:

Originally posted by r0gue:
Same. Haven't paid attention thus far. I'll read the cliff notes when it's over.

Yup. Same here.

I think this whole strategy is the Dems know the incumbent President has the advantage for re-election. The Dems know their field is weak. I think there is another facet. It all boils down to Ruth Bader Ginsberg. They know she probably isn't going to last maybe 2020, but certainly not till 2024. They are going to try to deny another pick to the court based upon this President has been impeached, and that stain disqualifies him to make another pick. It doesn't matter if he was "technically" impeached or not. The Dems say he is, and the media say he is, therefore, he is. Everyone knows this is a sham, and the Dems insisting upon doing this I think they've re-elected him already. They need to get this done quickly to give them a few months for damage control. Pelosi delaying this makes no sense what so ever. If the Reps were smart they'd drag this thing out. Call a bunch of witnesses that don't want to be called. Shine the spotlight on what was going on and acquit shortly before the conventions.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
^^ Not according to their own expert, Noah Feldman.
They voted to impeach but Articles must be sent to the Senate for impeachment to take effect.

That's one pundit's opinion and it's debatable, but we'll see what happens next week when/if the House sends the articles to the Senate. It's all a moot point because there is zero percent chance of a Senate conviction and in the general public's opinion he will always have been impeached because the vote in the House passed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...-has-been-impeached/

quote:

Originally posted by XinTX:
Didn't bother watching any of it. Pretty much tuned it out.

I don't 'watch' any kind of national news channels and seldom read more than the headlines. What a shit show!

Yes, its a shit show. It is a game being played by the party with more votes. They have the votes and they make the rules. The problem being they only have votes in the House and they're making all of us hate them even more.

Maybe they're planning on some R's dying and then replacing them or McConnell with someone more favorable to their BS. They still have Hillary on their side. That's an ugly thought.

Maybe the Constitution says the trial can be held at a time or place of the Senate's choosing. I'd suggest if they wait much longer, that they decide on right there in Washington and during the D primaries. Let their little games inconvenience themselves. Or during the D convention. If they want to play dirty, lets play dirty. Or how about after then November election? If there is no rush, lets not rush.

All this show is about is more face time for the D's in the house, and advertising time for the PR wing of the D party. I know Para doesn't like political things and comments about the bastards looks, but its difficult to not point out that Nancy is a withered old hag and the chairman of the house is enormously fat. He hides behind the podium to shield it. If he's sensitive about it, we should point it out more...

I hate day time TV, but I do watch the biased news. Maybe just once in a while I can catch some honest reports, if only local ones. I'm pretty sure the foolish old women who watch daytime TV aren't happy with it. But they're so shallow that they believe the BS on the news.

But this is still a poorly played chess game. When the senate played honestly and made room for the "trial", the house just didn't bother to send the paperwork over. A move and a countermove. The Senate still has all the cards, so they need to play them to their best advantage.

Is imPEACHMint like a twist on Peach Cobbler?

I like Peach Cobbler, so maybe imPEACHMint is better?