Support for impeachment jumps in new poll

The lib polls will say whatever the lib pollsters want them to say

 

First of all, I think it's you who better hope they DO fail to find enough. I'm not desperate to impeach him, I think he's beatable at the polls anyway so this is just icing on the cake as far as I'm concerned.

That said, you're right that this isn't the end, just the beginning. The key now is whether or not the dems have enough compelling evidence to force the recorded transcript to be made to Congress and/or the public. The White House won't willingly do that, so just like with Nixon's tapes, there will likely be the need for the supreme court. And if your response is good thing we packed it with Trump supporters, you should rethink that. There is no defense there. Trump may think they owe him a favor but look where a quid pro quo presidency has gotten him. That's the real problem here, this guy thinks he's Tony Soprano in the White House. But the White House isn't a place for an absolute leader. It's a political office whose power is kept in check. Again, not something he's used as a spoiled little rich boy.

 

Ok, he helped shut down a corrupt prosecutor. So where was the wrong doing?

The whistle-blower — a C.I.A. officer who once worked at the White House — said in the complaint that White House officials moved a transcript of the July 25 call with the Ukrainian leader, Volodymyr Zelensky, onto a secure, classified system in order to conceal actions by Mr. Trump that officials in his administration found “deeply disturbing.”

A Ukrainian investigation has already cleared Biden and his son of any wrongdoing. So please post the investigation you claim is going on.

 

No, because...

But support for impeachment, and more importantly the fact that it has rapidly increased since the announcement, means that Democrats will have the momentum and energy to continue with the inquiry.

And if "those who despise Trump" is 47-49% of the population, then Trump is very much in trouble. But in the end, every Democrat learned the lesson from 2016. The only day that a poll matters is election day.

That lesson was proven in 2018 when Democrats won by a historic margin.

 

No. But if Trump had directly said "Do this, or I won't do this, for this reason", it'd be different. It's not clear and obvious that this is what that is. You can't just impeach on assumption.

 

The trumpette supporters will dismiss whatever polls that trump tells them to dismiss.

 

It would depend on his motives, nothing wrong with asking to see what happened in all that mess.

The "whisleblower" with no first hand knowledge? haha..and you know he/she was a CIA officer? who worked at the WH? Where did you get that information?

Yes, the WH keeps things on a secured server....this WH cares about security...obviously vastly different then the prior admin.

I agree, the Ukrianins found they didn't do anything illegal in Ukraine...they then turned over tax fraud information to the DOJ in regards to Hunter.

It appears you really have little clue what's going on heree

 

As I've said, I'm not worried. The Democrats are claiming there's dots, and they can be connected. Good luck.

 

Congress can impeach based on the notion that Trump improperly crossed the street.

Given, as you say that it's not clear and obvious, let me ask you this instead: Is the lack of clarity on that front enough justification, in your mind, to continue and expand the investigation? To see if there was another directive made by Trump to someone like Giuliani or another associate that was much closer to an explicit quid pro quo?

As for the lack of a "do this, or I won't do this, for this reason," I would encourage you to read this article and the analogy he makes:

Republicans are hanging their defense of Donald Trump on the thinnest of threads

 

We were wise to the lying lib pollsters long before trump became president

 

Sure, keep investigating. I suspect that was part of Pelosi's strategy anyhow.

 

The media is talking about the whistleblower complaint and not the transcript which shoots down much of the complaint which, BTW, the complaint is second and third hand knowledge and media reports. Much like the dossier. Pelosi jumped the shark going for impeachment before the transcript was available.

 

True, but without a senate conviction this is just wasting tax payers money to satisfy a few egos?

and how many of the 49% of the population that despise Trump actually votes or puts their money where there mouth is?

Lets be honest the left has a bigger platform and greater voice, but that doesnt really matter when it comes time to vote as we seen in 2016, sure the Democrats won back the House, but they didnt win the Senate and come 2020 if the impeachment does go through, the public will take it out on the Democrats as they will see the impeachment for what is really is

just my opinion .

 

The prosecutor was investigating a corrupt company doing nefarious business practices.. He was doing his job. Are you saying Burisma Holdings was an ethical company doing ethical business practices or are you saying the prosecutor was like our congress and make up stories to take down an innocent company? Do tell!

Of course he was as there was a billion dollar quid pro quo they honored with the prior administration of this country.

 

You can certainly impeach on circumstantial evidence...

1. Ukraine Aid withheld by a single man with no policy explanation.
2. Ukraine KNOWS this (important!)
3. Phone call a week later mentions a favor need be done after Zelensky brings up defensive military hardware.

It's not a smoking gun, but that gun was clearly aimed at Zelensky's head, and no pitiful exclamation that he wasn't under pressure on TV while sitting with Trump isn't going to do it either..

 

Good luck.

 

I know this guy doesn't have the gravitas he used to have, but he KNOWS these people.... I doubt you would get 35, but you'd get enough to impeach...

SNIP
Former Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake made a bold claim on Thursday when he said "at least 35" GOP senators would privately vote for President Trump's impeachment.

Appearing at the 2019 Texas Tribune Festival, Flake, a frequent critic of the president, offered his own reaction and predicted that close to three dozen Republican senators would back impeachment.

"I heard someone say if there were a private vote there would be 30 Republican votes. That's not true," Flake said during a Q&A. "There would be at least 35."
ENDSNIP

I highlighted the key word there.... but it's funny that he's not pulling 35 out of the air. He's responding to what he heard about 30, and feels he could fine tune it to 35...

Fascinating...

https://www.foxnews.com/media/jeff-flake-35-gop-senators-impeach-trump

 

Actually, the polls totally suggested Trump could win. All the counties that made his electoral college win possible were polling within the margin of error and had a high number of undecided voters right up to election day. Anyone could interpret that as a poll indicating a possible Trump or Clinton victory. So this myth that the polls got 2016 all wrong is just that, a myth spread by you guys to invalidate any news contrary to what you want to believe.

I'm not sure I follow your analogy about the millennial guy and conviction by the senate. Most millennial's would fully understand and know which bars various groups of sexual orientation hang out at much better than older generations who often were fond of saying if a woman wasn't into them, they must be gay. So like understanding polling data, you don't understand much of anything it seems.

That said, the polling on impeachment doesn't mean much. The American public in general opposes impeachment. Both with Nixon and Clinton there was never majority support for impeachment prior to it becoming a reality. With Nixon is wasn't until after his own tapes were released that the majority supported impeaching him. With Clinton, support barely hit 50% only after it was clear he wouldn't be removed by the Senate and even then 57% of Americans opposed his removal from office. So all you are pointing out is that impeachment isn't fun or popular. That's like screaming from the roof tops that water is wet. We all know this already.

 

Actually that isnt what I said or implied

 

Which articles have you read? He has been proven right over and over in spite of the media hysteria which said otherwise.

 

Do you live in the US?

 

He was investigating before Hunter Biden got there is my point, not if the company was or wasn't corrupt.

He was not there.

 

Biden was not in a one-on-one with an interviewer. He was on a stage with several others at a forum. He appears to be relaxed and telling a story to amuse an audience. The camera appears to be in that audience.

He was recalling blackmailing the Ukrainians into firing a prosecutor investigating Burisma Oil and his son. Joe was in a jovial mood did not acknowledge the camera when he spun this story.

He simply let his guard down. You can watch his gaffe on youtube.

In this day of opposition research, it was be interesting to know who found this video and released it.

 

Yes.

 

Biden was not investigated for blackmailing the Ukrainians because he got away with it--until he was foolish enough to brag about it at a foreign relations forum with a camera nearby.

Joe is famous for these offhand blunders.