Discussion in 'Politics' started by mascale, Nov 8, 2019.
Pathetic, he's trying to save his own skin.
Fell free to disprove what you like, I was simply answering some of your comrades absurdities.
WaPo reporter: We’re hearing behind the scenes that more House Dems are getting “cold feet” about impeachment
WaPo reporter: We're hearing behind the scenes that more House Dems are getting "cold feet" about impeachment
November 24, 2019 ~~ I'll take the opportunity up front to double down on this post from Friday. I’d bet my life savings plus several internal organs that Pelosi will have 218 to impeach. That’s based on the simple reality that failing to do so at this point would cost Democrats more politically than proceeding with impeachment would. Voters who hate Trump would be furious and voters who like Trump wouldn’t give Pelosi and Schiff an ounce of credit for standing down in the end. The president would gloat about it every day unto eternity. Pelosi, long respected by both sides for her ability to whip votes, would be humiliated utterly. Her legacy would be in ruins. They’ll have 218... But. They might not have a lot more than 218, which would itself be horribly humiliating for Dems. There are 233 Democrats in the House right now; only two voted against opening the impeachment inquiry. If more than two vote against impeachment, the inescapable conclusion for many Americans will be that Schiff’s two weeks of hearings were so unpersuasive that he actually *lost* support for impeachment within his own party. According to WaPo reporter Rachel Bade, the phrase of the day is “cold feet”:
Look at it this way: A Democrat who voted yes to authorize the impeachment inquiry may already be doomed to pay a price no matter how he or she votes ultimately on impeachment. If you’re a swing voter in a certain congressional district and you believe this process has been a waste of time or a cynical attempt to delegitimize Trump based on little hard evidence, you’re going to blame your Democratic representative for voting to open the inquiry even if he or she gets cold feet in the end and votes against impeachment. *Maybe* that would be different if Dems ended up failing to impeach and that representative’s “no” vote was part of a majority that defeated the effort. But it won’t be; as I say, Democrats really are going to do this even if they don’t do it with 231. Which means everyone who voted yes on opening the inquiry will be partly to blame for the final vote, if only by having enabled it.
In which case, Dems with cold feet might as well vote to impeach anyway. If they’re destined to be blamed no matter what, they might as well make sure their base is happy with them, at least.
The "Ukraine stuff" began in the 2013-2014 time frame, with the CIA-aided overthrow of the duly elected but Russia-friendly President and installing an Obama Administration replacement (as was attempted in Egypt). This is what the Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat party is so desperate to cover up. The public is only now discovering but the tip of the iceberg.
If Madame Pelosi pushes forward with Schitf in the Impeachment, Trump’s lawyers will call Paul Pelosi to testify and explain just what he did in the Ukraine for all that money. It appears Paul Pelosi is neck deep in the same scam that involves Hunter Biden, Kerry's son and stepson.
When this Stalinist witch hunt goes to the Senate, PMS/DSA corrupt Democrats true crimes will be exposed.
Hmm...., If the rest of their bodies were as cold as their feet, it would be much better for all concerned.
Agreed But taking down lying scum is a good thing No??
Call us when you strip Schiff of his leadership roles.
Wow, what a pile of crap. If this so called WB didn't have a need to know, anyone who relayed the content of the call to him broke the law. shitt is protecting people who potentially violated the espionage act.
Also the ICIG had no authority under the law to even entertain the complaint. A presidential diplomatic call does NOT fall with the responsibility or authority of the DNI, which is required by the law, for the ICIG to even take the complaint.
There's a lot of possible criminality involved in this hoax and there's no way to investigate that without talking to the non-whistle blower. Fortunately it appears the FBI will be interviewing the CIA spy.
So try learning the facts before spewing your disinformation.
The man is one cool guy and really honest and smart Not at all like Nunes
Amazing the number of nails in Trump's coffin the Left have found! Enough to build an apartment complex in Queens! Or maybe a skyscraper in Manhattan! Yet like the horizon, they never seem to get any closer to their goal and only succeed to increasingly build the case around themselves instead.
HOW MUCH LONGER can the Leftist-controlled media keep it all together for them before it explodes?!
That is a possibility, Ray. They could always claim that their case has been stymied by all of Trump's obstruction and refusal to cooperate! Then they could back out citing GOP corruption and duplicity.
I don't know if the administration has manufactured a reason after the fact of why the funds were held but reported emails from the chief of staff certainly show they were looking for a sound reason. There seems no doubt as too why the funds were released on Sept 2, two days before the House announced they were starting an investigation.
Separate names with a comma.