Trump calls on Adam Schiff to resign immediately!

[Aldebaran]

No, actually, they voted for a Democratic president in 2016 by 3 million votes. The odd configuration of our electoral college is the reason we have a Republican president.

That same configuration is what elected all our other presidents as well. People shouldn't complain so much about it just when their own favorite candidate fails to win the election.

 

[Belk]

That same configuration is what elected all our other presidents as well. People shouldn't complain so much about it just when their own favorite candidate fails to win the election.

Not complaining. Simply pointing out that your statement that the people selected a Republican president in 2016 was incorrect.

 

[Aldebaran]

Everybody will be held to account. The actions of Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler are not without oversight as well.

When they discover that, it will be interesting as to which direction the investigation turns. Of course, if the MSM covers up any negativity toward the investigators as "conspiracy theories, distractions, obfuscations", etc., then things will keep going as they have been so far.

 

[Aldebaran]

Not complaining. Simply pointing out that your statement that the people selected a Republican president in 2016 was incorrect.

Well, the people who cast their votes for him won the election. That still counts for something in America, even if the House of supposed "representatives" are willing to do their best to overturn the results of it and help out Trump's political opponents in the process.

 

[Belk]

Well, the people who cast their votes for him won the election. That still counts for something in America, even if the House of supposed "representatives" are willing to do their best to overturn the results of it and help out Trump's political opponents in the process.

They are not trying to overturn the election. They are trying to impeach a president that they view as unfit for office. The same as the Republicans did with Bill Clinton.

 

[Aldebaran]

They are not trying to overturn the election. They are trying to impeach a president that they view as unfit for office. The same as the Republicans did with Bill Clinton.

And it didn't do much good back then either since Clinton never was removed from office. I suspect the same will be the case this time, as do the democrats who seem so desperate to put the country through it once again. It's just a political stunt, and that's all it will amount to.

 

[Belk]

And it didn't do much good back then either since Clinton never was removed from office. I suspect the same will be the case this time, as do the democrats who seem so desperate to put the country through it once again. It's just a political stunt, and that's all it will amount to.

I disagree. I think that holding a President who has demonstrated corruption accountable is the correct action. I believe it was correct in Bill's case and I believe it correct in this case. It might not amount to anything. It might even backfire. I still think it is the correct thing to do.

 

[Aldebaran]

I disagree. I think that holding a President who has demonstrated corruption accountable is the correct action. I believe it was correct in Bill's case and I believe it correct in this case. It might not amount to anything. It might even backfire. I still think it is the correct thing to do.

How about letting the people of the United States (that would be the voters) decide? That's what elections are for, and why they happen every 4 years. Only 13 months to go til the next one. This whole impeachment circus could very well keep the country distracted until then, which would go a long ways toward making it look to the voters as if the democrats are just trying to keep it going through the entire election cycle as a means of helping their own candidate win, which could backfire in the same way it did for the MSM when they attempted to help Hillary (only admitting to it after the election was over).

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

How about letting the people of the United States (that would be the voters) decide? That's what elections are for, and why they happen every 4 years. Only 13 months to go til the next one. This whole impeachment circus could very well keep the country distracted until then, which would go a long ways toward making it look to the voters as if the democrats are just trying to keep it going through the entire election cycle as a means of helping their own candidate win, which could backfire in the same way it did for the MSM when they attempted to help Hillary (only admitting to it after the election was over).

It cannot wait until the election. One of the articles of impeachment is likely to be how Trump used the powers of his office to get a foreign government to dig up dirt on a political rival. That means we can’t have a fair election because one of the candidates is cheating. This needs to be cleared up first.

 

[Aldebaran]

It cannot wait until the election. One of the articles of impeachment is likely to be how Trump used the powers of his office to get a foreign government to dig up dirt on a political rival. That means we can’t have a fair election because one of the candidates is cheating. This needs to be cleared up first.

That's only an assumption that hasn't been proven. The comments being posted as to what the "evidence" for a case are proof of this. However, there's a good chance that the lies about Trump and the political motives behind them will come to light, which would end up backfiring on the accusers.

 

[NightHawkeye]

That means we can’t have a fair election ...

I know what you mean ... though not for the reasons you imagine.

 

[Belk]

How about letting the people of the United States (that would be the voters) decide?

I think that holding a President who has demonstrated corruption accountable is the correct action. The house of representatives is there to interpret the will of the people. Most of whom agree with the impeachment investigation.

That's what elections are for, and why they happen every 4 years. Only 13 months to go til the next one. This whole impeachment circus could very well keep the country distracted until then, which would go a long ways toward making it look to the voters as if the democrats are just trying to keep it going through the entire election cycle as a means of helping their own candidate win,

It is my estimation that the only people who think this is simply a ploy by the Democrats are those who would never vote for a Democrat. I think most of the electorate see this as holding a president accountable for malfeasance.

which could backfire in the same way it did for the MSM when they attempted to help Hillary (only admitting to it after the election was over).

I'm willing to take that chance to ensure we do the right thing.

 

[Aldebaran]

I think that holding a President who has demonstrated corruption accountable is the correct action. The house of representatives is there to interpret the will of the people. Most of whom agree with the impeachment investigation.

Most people don't even look beyond the headlines to get their information.

It is my estimation that the only people who think this is simply a ploy by the Democrats are those who would never vote for a Democrat. I think most of the electorate see this as holding a president accountable for malfeasance.

Don't forget those who have been around awhile and watched them do whatever is convenient and effective to get into power.

I'm willing to take that chance to ensure we do the right thing.

Will many Trump-haters be saying that if it really did backfire? It reminds me of people who take someone who is accused of a crime, and say, "Let's put him on trial and then lock him up for the rest of his life!", but then when the trial gets all the evidence laid out on the table and the guy is found not guilty, then the entire process is claimed by them to be as corrupt and terrible as the guy they thought was so guilty.
I guarantee you that people who are Trump-hating now will not quietly accept the findings if the impeachment process turns out to be in his favor. And if he gets re-elected as a result, I predict the riots from the haters will be worse than the first time their candidate lost.

 

[Belk]

Most people don't even look beyond the headlines to get their information.

You have determined this how?

Don't forget those who have been around awhile and watched them do whatever is convenient and effective to get into power.

You mean like paying off inappropriate content stars? Let's not pretend both sides have not had their bad actors.

Will many Trump-haters be saying that if it really did backfire?

Likely not. Just like everyone else they will change their tune if things do not go their way.

It reminds me of people who take someone who is accused of a crime, and say, "Let's put him on trial and then lock him up for the rest of his life!", but then when the trial gets all the evidence laid out on the table and the guy is found not guilty, then the entire process is claimed by them to be as corrupt and terrible as the guy they thought was so guilty.

Such as the Benghazi investigations? Yes, there will always be those on both sides who resort to pure tribalism.

I guarantee you that people who are Trump-hating now will not quietly accept the findings if the impeachment process turns out to be in his favor. And if he gets re-elected as a result, I predict the riots from the haters will be worse than the first time their candidate lost.

Your predictions are noted.

 

[Aldebaran]

You have determined this how?

I talk to people. I hear what they say, and I've heard the reasoning they use.
Have you come to a different determination?

You mean like paying off inappropriate content stars? Let's not pretend both sides have not had their bad actors.

Or wiping their hard drive of incriminating evidence and then pretending to not even know what wiping a hard drive means.

 

[Belk]

I talk to people. I hear what they say, and I've heard the reasoning they use.
Have you come to a different determination?

Yes. Most of the people I talk to tend to have a more in depth view then I do.

Or wiping their hard drive of incriminating evidence and then pretending to not even know what wiping a hard drive means.

As I said. Bad actors on both sides.

 

[KCfromNC]

Everybody will be held to account. The actions of Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler are not without oversight as well.

Donald did say they should be impeached, after all, and who are we to question his wisdom? I mean ignoring the part that impeachment isn't a thing for members of the house.

Currently, the House is doing neither. Ever since Nancy Pelosi passed Obamacare against the will of the American public, congress's approval has mostly stayed in the range between 10% and 20%

Fox_October 6-8, 2019_National_Topline_October 9 Release.pdf | Opinion Poll | The United States

donald : 43% approve, 56% disapprove (-13)
Speaker Pelosi : 42% approve, 48% disapprove (-6)

The "strongly disapprove" columns are particularly interesting.

Looks like the Speaker wins over Donald in recent polling.

 

[KCfromNC]

How about letting the people of the United States (that would be the voters) decide?

They did, in the 2018 blue wave.

 

[Arcangl86]

The job of the House of Representatives is to pass laws and exercise fiscal constraint. Currently, the House is doing neither. Ever since Nancy Pelosi passed Obamacare against the will of the American public, congress's approval has mostly stayed in the range between 10% and 20%, the lowest it's ever been in the half century Gallup has been measuring congressional approval.

The current House has passed 315 bills in the past year. The Senate has passed 75. It's not the House keeping laws from being passed.

 

[Aldebaran]

They did, in the 2018 blue wave.

Then why not just let that play out in 2020? Why interfere in the election process with all these investigations and impeachment hearings during an election cycle?