WASHINGTON — It was only a few weeks ago that the top Senate Republican was hinting that his chamber would make short work of impeachment. But this week, Senator Mitch McConnell sat his colleagues down over lunch in the Capitol and warned them to prepare for an extended impeachment trial of President Trump. According to people who were there, he came equipped with a PowerPoint presentation, complete with quotes from the Constitution, as he schooled fellow senators on the intricacies of a process he portrayed as all but inevitable. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...rial-as-inevitable/ar-AAJ0eVR?ocid=spartanntp
Ooooh! Ignore him completely? Thing is beyond a nebulous comment which could have meant anything from setting a meeting date through to.. whatever.........you have nothing Whereas the list of what Trump has done is absolutely appalling https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_between_Trump_associates_and_Russian_officials Disclosure of state secrets https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump's_disclosures_of_classified_information https://www.businessinsider.com.au/...-classified-info-oval-office-2019-9?r=US&IR=T Siding with Putin https://www.newyorker.com/news/current/trump-putin-helsinkiSeems Ukraine may not be the only country Dirty Donnie has had “perfect” phone calls with https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09...talks-should-not-be-released-kremlin/11556630
That 'timely' manner requires a full and complete investigation and that requires that those subpoenas be honored, that witnesses cooperate when testifying and that the Trump administration hand over any and all documents. Nobody who opposes the above have any business criticizing the length of this process.
Well yea, if you pretend 4 million Americans didn’t vote for Clinton, you can claim trump won by a million. But that would be retarded.
No, I don't speak Breitbart. When you refer to ho's spreading their legs to get ahead in the world, Ivanka and Melania Trump immediately come to mind. If you meant a "harris," you should say "harris." It would be even more helpful if you were specific about which "harris" you were referring to, seeing as how there are at least 600,000 in the US alone...
You know what harris ? The dem candidate that slept her way to the top of politics . Come on, i know your kidding . What a sense of humor.
Of course there is the bidness of the Fox News Poll which arrived at 51 % of the poll thought Impeachment was fine. What wasn't fine,let alone dandy was the polling firm used to arrive at the 51% figure.The poll was adjusted to favor Democrats and Independents.The real number if done fairly and above board should have been 44 % instead of 51 %. That has been a constant in most Polling.It favors Democrats { more Democrats than Republicans polled }.Might explain why on the morning of Nov. 8th 2016 every major poll had Hillary winning. Even the data-based and accurate Nat Silver FiveThirtyEight. Which had Hillary at 72 % chance of winning. For Context the New York Times had Hillary at 85 % winning The reason for the total failure of Polling.Faulty Polling. One poll which got it right was mocked strategically. That being The USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times " Daybreak " poll.
Except that this process isn't about punishing Trump for what he has done. It's about casting doubt about him for the 2020 election.. It's a political ploy not a legal proceeding
"it was perfectly appropriate for an American president to pressure Ukraine to assist an American investigation — the fact that this involved a quid pro quo and can be seen as extortionate is unremarkable." Would it be perfectly appropriate for an American president to ask the Governors of Massachusetts, Vermont, or Texas to assist his lawyer and the AG in investigations of leftist influence of Warren, Sanders or Beto?
He's already cast plenty of that doubt with his own mouth. That shipped sailed about two weeks ago. Does the full House have access to a full special council report on which to decide whether the scope of presidential conduct on the issues of abuse of power, obstruction and contempt of Congress as it did under Nixon or Clinton? If it doesn't how can you expect it to guess on whether a Presidential impeachment is appropriate?
Then again, you might be correct. McConnell could surprise everybody and actually stand up to the Democrats. Who knows!