Whine,whine, whine. That’s all you get from democrats today. There is no shortage of calls for the impeachment of Donald Trump but I don’t think it’s going to happen despite all caterwauling we’re hearing from the left.
For a while democrats, hearing the dog whistle, were falling all over themselves calling for Trump’s impeachment.
A growing number of Democrats running for president in 2020 say the House of Representatives should begin impeachment proceedings against President Trump.
The latest is Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton, who declared his candidacy on Monday and who, in an interview on NPR’s Morning Edition, said, “We absolutely should be having this debate.”
Moulton said he was ready to begin impeachment proceedings last year. “Don’t tell me there’s not enough to debate impeaching the president,” Moulton said, accusing Trump of obstructing justice, violating campaign finance laws and profiting from his office, in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Emoluments Clause. “He is subject to the same laws as the rest of us are, and that’s why we should move forward with this debate.”
At a CNN town hall Monday night, other Democrats running for the nomination made similar arguments. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., renewed her call for impeachment after the redacted Mueller report was released last week. “If any other human being in this country had done what’s documented in the Mueller report,” Warren said Monday, “they would be arrested and put in jail.”
Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., said the Mueller report “tells us that this president and his administration engaged in obstruction of justice.”
Pelosi has tapped the brakes on impeachment in no small part because the country has no appetite for it. The chairwoman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee wants democrats to shut up about it.
Additionally, I don’t think democrats want all the facts out. They want the issue.
That’s all they want. They’ll continue to go on sputtering about impeachment and smearing Trump is but I don’t think anything will come of it. The plan is electoral loss by a thousand small cuts.
And of course, change the rules of elections.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
They used the promise of instant impeachment (something they have been saying they were going to do since BEFOFE Trump was sworn in) to capture the House. Now, the leadership wants to back away, mainly because they still cannot find any grounds for impeachment. Once again, they lied to their voters and treated them like total fools.
Maybe that’s how they deserve to be treated.
There was never going to be a full impeachment as long as we held the Senate.
So what if Dems impeach, or don’t. What possible difference would either make?
Trump has not done one thing to get Impeached however Obama commited many acts that would called for his Impeachment but the Stupid jackass party chose to ignore the whole thing
@Ajay42302:
Because the Senate wouldn’t convict?
@Ajay42302: Democrats themselves have, apparently, figured out they are incapable of making ANY difference so they are satisfied to whine, whimper, stamp their feet and hold their breath trying to impede the progress Trump is accomplishing.
@Michael: If they have cause to impeach, they should impeach. They say that have AMPLE cause (sort of like all the proof they had of collusion), so what is holding them back?
@Michael:
Exactly.
@Deplorable Me:
Trump could travel the country lobbing hand grenades into maternity wards and his followers would still defend him and the Senate would still be arguing no justifiable cause.
I suspect you know this to be true.
@Deplorable Me:
Their voters Are fools.
The dems have been lying to them for decades, but they keep voting dem.
The majority of the left’s base is dumb enough to actually belive “I hate that guy’ is legal grounds for impeachment. ;op
@Deplorable Me: not just ample Schiff had mountains of evidence, I guess he did not give it to Mueller.
@Ajay42302:
I think you’re projecting your support for whoever has a (D) on people who are not INSANE, like the left.
Nice try, but no kewpie doll for you. ;op
@Ajay42302:
Oh… you mean like Obama killing hundreds of women and children with drones and you still worship him? Like that?
Do you have all that obvious, blatant, available mountainous evidence of collusion hidden away? No one else seems to be able to find it anymore.
@Deplorable Me: This is amazing, like like who knew
Wait til she finds out what is under grass!
My goodness when does it grow its plastic covering and walk to the grocery, so she can buy it?
Food common, AOC eat the dahlia…do it!
@Deplorable Me:
No, I don’t mean like but Obama anything. I mean that impeaching Trump is a useless tactic, a non-winner for anyone. The GOP controls the Senate and they’re all in for Trump. It isn’t even a matter of governance anymore. It’s about the money. That governing Republican party is on a ship that ain’t coming back.
Impeachment would just be another bad mark against Trump that his supporters would denounce as partisan and his adversaries already knew about him. It’s kinda like racist or a hate crime instigator or con man or grifter or serial liar or the many other things his opposition points out and his supporters cannot or will not see. No one will convince the other and he will still occupy the WH.
@Ajay42302: Oh, I forgot Liberal Rule #1: Liberals can do anything, break any law, tell any lie and no liberal sycophant will complain because… liberal.
So, a hypothetical murder by Trump is bad, but REAL murder by Obama is Okie Dokie. Got it; hypocrite to the core.
@Deplorable Me:
Liberals “doing anything, break any law, tell any lie” isn’t the argument on why impeaching Trump would be pointless.
It is understandable why a Trump supporter would try to make it so. I mean, over here in the real world, what else do they have?
One possible function of impeachment could be to clearly lay the entire case out for public examination. Whether that would be useful or not—knowing that republicans would almost certainly end the process in the Senate, and that many people are now fully immunized against the effects of facts and reason—is another question. People are now divided between two different versions of reality.
@Greg:
What possible case against Trump hasn’t been clearly laid out? Trump could order another Kristallnacht and it wouldn’t phase a single supporter. Most likely energize them.
Perhaps catch the attention of a few independents? Trump’s Fox News Brownshirts would counter quickly and the lawless GOP Senate failing to convict would give fodder to render the House as a partisan attack.
Trump very well knew what he was talking about when he said he could shoot someone dead and not lose a supporter.
@Greg: No, they are divided by reality versus dimocrat fantasy.
@Ajay42302:
No, the fact that you have no REASON to impeach him is what makes it pointless. The list of common Democrat actions is why it will probably be attempted anyway.
@Greg:
So, what’s the hold up? Pelosi is a real arm twister, but she is not assured enough votes in the House for impeachment. While there are many Democrats in the House from red states benefiting from Trump’s management of the country, there may also be a few Democrats with some remaining scruples, honor, honesty and dedication to the Constitution to not go along with the crybabies in a spite-vote for impeachment without any cause.
@Bookdoc, #19:
Thank your for the illustrative example.
@Deplorable Me, #20:
Maybe they’re waiting for testimony from Bob Mueller and Don McGahn? Or for an examination of Trump’s tax returns and Deutsche Bank records?
Maybe they’re thinking his efforts to block all of these things will gradually wake people up to the dangers of a president who thinks he has the power to rise above the reach of the law.
@Ajay42302:
I guess you haven’t been paying much attention for the past two years, but that is all the Democrats have been attempting to do.
Again, you project upon Trump the mentality of your Democrats in Congress.
@Greg:
Yeah, obviously being spied on by Obama, investigated by the FBI, Senate and Mueller for over three years is not enough time to find anything impeachable, is it? Does your own desperation simply completely miss your notice?
@Greg: Former White House counsel Don McGahn, 30 hours of testimony 2 short paragraphs in the report. Do the Democrats get to cross examine every former White House person? This was the Presidents attorney, is there no attorney client privilege? I know Mueller and his merry band dont believe in such trivial things. That and innocent until proven guilty, oh so 5 minutes ago. They did not PROVE Trump guilty of anything not 1 thing. Its over, take your precious report and read it. It was created with thousands of hours testimony millions of documents.
Not Guilty of anything.
GREAT JOBS report! Wages growing! President not a Putin puppet get the bubbly!
@kitt:
Yes.
@Deplorable Me:
So, what’s the hold up?
Considering today’s so-called conservatives default to “but Obama” for most any justification of their own scandals AND they continue to insist that the Obama Admin was so criminal, what precisely was the hold up on that Obama impeachment? Didn’t they have full control and had that option at their disposal?
@Michael: no, wrong so often, executive privilege.
Perhaps you should look things up not just blurb out what ever brain fart causes excessive pressure.
Executive privilege is the power of the President of the United States and other members of the executive branch of the United States Government to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government in pursuit of information or personnel relating to the executive. The power of Congress or the federal courts to obtain such information is not mentioned explicitly in the United States Constitution, nor is there any explicit mention in the Constitution of an executive privilege to resist such requests from Congress or courts. The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled this privilege may qualify as an element of the separation of powers doctrine, derived from the supremacy of the executive branch in its own area of Constitutional activity.
@kitt:
Article 3 of impeachment against Nixon.
@Michael: We will never know the results of that because he was never impeached, you really really suck at history dude, worse at making a point.
@Ajay42302:
Oh… you think the Obama DOJ that ran guns to Mexican cartels, lied about it then got found in contempt for stonewalling Congress, refused to investigate the IRS targeting scandal, had an Attorney General that secretly (she thought) met with the husband of the subject of an FBI investigat… er, “matter” and then directed the FBI director NOT to bring any charges was going to investigate their boss for a trivial little thing like utilizing the CIA and FBI to spy on an opposition Presidential campaign? Really? Gosh, that’s cute.
@Deplorable Me, #23:
Everyone noticed the reaction across Trump World when Barr blew that particular dog whistle. All the red hats moved when the ears pricked up.
“Spying” is a pejorative word. Barr tipped his hand when he deliberately used it. He is not a politically unbiased Attorney General. He is a political tool, and as such cannot be trusted to perform his duties in an unbiased fashion. Robert Mueller would not have used such language.
@kitt, #29:
I’d settle for the same result with Donald.
Actually, Nixon was impeached. Impeachment is the process, not the outcome. Nixon resigned during the course of his impeachment.
@Greg:
That is like saying someone is on trial for murder, but they die before it goes before the jury for a verdict so the trial is ended. By your thought, a verdict has been levied even though the jury never voted on a verdict.
The “process” (trial) is not the verdict.
Nixon was NOT impeached. There was never a vote on impeachment.
And you remain an idiot.
@Greg: Impeachment is more a recipe you can mix all the ingredients and never put it in to bake at 350 for 30 minutes by resigning the impeachment process stopped, basically he dumped the batter down the drain.(he was guilty as hell for the cover up of a proven break in)
Clinton and Johnson were the only 2 Presidents ever impeached, both cases failed removal at senate level.
The democrats can bring up articles I dont think they have the numbers for even the house impeachment. The 2/3rd in the senate is insurmountable.
The attempt to Disenfranchise 62 million Trump voters might be a coffin nail for the Party of Booth, with the economy going gangbusters, Pelosi knows it.
@Deplorable Me:
I didn’t imply an opinion of the Obama Admin one way or the other. I simply asked why the GOP didn’t impeach Obama over crimes so many so-called conservatives accused him of.
You ask ed the question of “what’s the hold up” of Dems implying if there were crimes, they would act. Either there weren’t significant crimes of Obama or the Rs are guilty of negligence. Which is it?
I suppose Nixon was not. He resigned after the House Judiciary Committee filed the Articles of Impeachment, but before those Articles were acted upon. He was then preemptively pardoned of any Watergate-related crimes by his successor, Gerald Ford.
I will concede the point. Nixon was not impeached.
@Greg:
Many were already aware of it. If you will remember, Trump himself revealed the fact some time ago.
Yet spying is what it was. If you don’t like the sound of it, don’t support people who abuse the power of the government and do it.
@retire05:
Greg has already established his belief that their is no such thing innocence until proven guilty, in regards to Republicans, anyway.
@Ajay42302:
No, you never do. It’s as if it never existed when you proclaim your morally superior judgments. Yet it DID exist and it DID kill women and children by the hundreds and it DID illegally spy on innocent citizens and it DID mishandle thousands of classified documents… and so on. And you DID support and continue to support ALL that.
@Deplorable Me:
Okay, you’d rather run in circles rather than confront your very own failed argument. Again.
@Ajay42302: Yeah, right. In other words, you have no answer to why you are totally hypocritical so… you declare “victory”? You sound like Nadler.