The Impeachment Thread

#42,452
#42,452
RockyTop85 said:
You should petition Thomson Reuters to put that in a footnote of the history books. Pretty sure there won’t be room on the body of the page now that they have to add “most votes to impeachment and most votes to remove of any president in US History.”
🤣
Click to expand...
Nobody will remember or care about this. It’s a very minor footnote in history. A trivia question at best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40, SpaceCoastVol, hog88 and 1 other person
#42,453
#42,453
RockyTop85 said:
You should petition Thomson Reuters to put that in a footnote of the history books. Pretty sure there won’t be room on the body of the page now that they have to add “most votes to impeachment and most votes to remove of any president in US History.”
🤣
Click to expand...
What will the history books say about him being pronounced not guilty, and then reelected by the electorate after the Dems voted to impeach? The Dems better hope there's no room for writing what that rejection will say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40 and AM64
#42,454
#42,454
RockyTop85 said:
You should petition Thomson Reuters to put that in a footnote of the history books. Pretty sure there won’t be room on the body of the page now that they have to add “most votes to impeachment and most votes to remove of any president in US History.”
🤣
Click to expand...

in raw numbers maybe but the Andrew Johnson impeachment trial had more votes to convict than acquit and fell only one vote short of convicting. This one wasn't even close.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40 and AM64
#42,456
#42,456
RockyTop85 said:
You should petition Thomson Reuters to put that in a footnote of the history books. Pretty sure there won’t be room on the body of the page now that they have to add “most votes to impeachment and most votes to remove of any president in US History.”
🤣
Click to expand...

They better make room for additional pages from his 2nd term.
 
#42,458
#42,458
volinbham said:
Theoretically this is supposed to be a happy occasion. We were told it's a terrible thing to have a POTUS removed. Turns out he was 19 votes short of conviction; less than 1/2 the Senate. This is a good thing right?
Click to expand...
Until one party gets a 67-33 majority partisan hacks are never going to remove a president.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#42,463
#42,463
BowlBrother85 said:
Those votes are inconsistent with each other. However, Sen. Susan Collins did the same thing.
Click to expand...

they are not as I explained earlier.

Not guilty is saying Congress did not exhaust (or even come close to exhausting) it's remedies for seeking witnesses and thus seeking the final remedy of removal is not merited.

That's an entirely different question than the Senate determining if they would like additional information brought forth.

Article 2 was always ridiculous on its face.
 
#42,470
#42,470
JOEY'S ALL VOL !!! said:
Did you watch his interview with Chris Wallace ? Would you or anyone else like to explain this answer he gave to Wallace ?

Wallace : Have you thought about the blowback from this ? You know Donald Trump will probably never forgive you for this.

Romney : Yes I've thought about that, but I have to vote my conscious. I have been dreading my task here. Ever since I heard that there was going to be an impeachment investigation opened I have dreaded the decision that I would have to make here today. I wasn't looking forward to it and am not happy about it, but knew it had to be done in good conscious.

Would anyone who thinks that Romney is sincere here like to explain that answer ?

Why would he be dreading a decision he didn't even know he would have to make ? There was only an announcement of an impeachment investigation, there was no evidence brought forth yet not even to the Democratic majority House much less the Senate. Why is he dreading giving a guilty verdict or any verdict for that matter when there hasn't even been a hearing yet or any evidence put forth just an announcement of an investigation ?

The only logical conclusion that I can come up with is that he already knew where this was going and how far and how he was going roll when it got there. I'm open to listening to all conclusions here, but that sure makes it look like complete political stabbing and himself sound full of sh!t to me.
Click to expand...


Any of you on the left ? or anybody at all ?
 
#42,471
#42,471
Orange_Crush said:
What will the history books say about him being pronounced not guilty, and then reelected by the electorate after the Dems voted to impeach? The Dems better hope there's no room for writing what that rejection will say.
Click to expand...
There will be plenty of room. The Trumpism period of American history will be dissected like few others.
 
#42,472
#42,472
VolStrom said:
Until one party gets a 67-33 majority partisan hacks are never going to remove a president.
Click to expand...
This should prove to everyone what I have been saying for some time. Also, it represents the reason I couldn't vote for Bredesen after voting for him twice for Governor. Vote for the party, not the man (or woman). It makes no difference who they are. Party is everything.
 
#42,474
#42,474
1972 Grad said:
Vote for the party, not the man (or woman). It makes no difference who they are. Party is everything.
Click to expand...

Oh hell no. Voting for an R or a D over the person is asinine and borderline idiotic. This is one of the reasons we need to abolish parties - to pull America's heads out of our collective butts and get back to knowing what's going on instead of pressing a button like a good little Pavlovian voter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
#42,475
#42,475
luthervol said:
There will be plenty of room. The Trumpism period of American history will be dissected like few others.
Click to expand...
I guess it won't take all the room needed, then. "Repudiation" doesn't take up much space, and that's exactly what it will be when Trump is reelected after the Dem turd show.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top