Impeachment Megathread Part 3

[emailking]

The impeachment is going nowhere anyways, the fix was in the House, because Chris Matthew's protects Hunter Biden. So, calling Fox news a biased network, isnt right, because Chris Matthew's cant even moderate debates due to his bias towards the Biden. Its backfiring due to Bloomberg and his ads helping Bernie

What in the hell are you talking about?

Seriously that was only slightly more coherent than a post from t_host1.

[emailking]

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-California) has already accused Pelosi intervening into the Democratic Primary on FOX NEWS by holding the Papers this long to help Biden.

Fortunately, his accusation has no bearing on the truth of the matter.

[emailking]

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-California) has already accused Pelosi intervening into the Democratic Primary on FOX NEWS by holding the Papers this long to help Biden.

Fortunately, his accusation has no bearing on the truth of the matter.

Then you're really blindsided here. Kevin McCarthy is one-hundred percent right here. Klobuchar, Warren and Sanders are basically off the Campaign Trail for the forseeable future and of course this will help Biden and to lesser extend Buttigieg.

Whether he's right or not, he has no special insight into the matter, so his opinion is random and irrelevant.

[emailking]

Chris Cillizza looks incredibly stupid right now... which, in all fairness, isn't too difficult for him.

What did he say?

[emailking]

Random opinion: none of the Democratic Senators who are running for President should bother making themselves present for the impeachment hearings beyond up or down votes. We all know (and have always known) how this is going to end, so why take valuable time away from the campaign trail for what was always going to be a farce?

Yeah I keep hearing how it's a hard requirement, but I don't see how. It's just Senate rules. Worst that can happen is they're expelled from the Senate, which won't happen. Guess they've all committed to attending though.

[emailking]

I can always assume that I'm outside of the firing zone when you slam Atlas blue, right?

I try not to slam Republicans too much haha. But I definitely appreciate you and a few other blues that have been eminently reasonable about all this! 🙂

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/redamor_/status/1217602206876209154?s=21

What did this tweet say? It's been deleted

[emailking]

The big headline on foxnews is that Parnas undermined the claim that Yovanovitch was surveilled. Nothing about any of the other stuff he said.

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1218164098212474881

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/ChadPergram/status/1219034010594291712

Impeachment is going to turn out to be a major disaster for the Democrats and a boon to Trump, but you didn't need to hear it from me a dozen times to know that.

The first day (and maybe more) is going to be consumed by largely procedural votes. A lot of this will get hashed out in that time.

[emailking]

He's retweeted like 40 or 50 times this morning. I don't think it's very effective, I just start skimming through them because it's all the same stuff.

[emailking]

I agree with her on that. You think he's going insane and won't be able to take the stage by year's end. Ham handed statements like these would be expected.

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1220017667387445248

[emailking]

However, GOP lawmakers are hearing from constituents back home now who are watching and are surprised to see this playing out in a one-sided format at the moment.

What do you expect from Public Opinion when it's totally one-sided the last 48 Hours.

I expect the constituents who are expressing those concerns do not overlap with the pollees who only recently have concluded Trump should be removed.

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/manlnthehoody/status/1220190924291969024?s=21

Actually, if the Republican survived I'm pretty sure s/he would vote to acquit.

[emailking]

When Trump's team gets their 24 hours for their case, watch the GOP senators applaud every single sentence.

They get imprisoned if they say anything/don't sit in silence, under the rules. Or at least they are supposed to, if the rules are followed.

So I think you are confusing the GOP Senators with Trump - it is Trump, not them, who belongs in prison.

The GOP is the party of Trump though. And yes, I know it is illegal to not be quiet in the trial, but I still think there will at least be the urge for the GOP senators to cheer.

I thought the imprisonment was a maximum penalty and only applied to visitors in the gallery, and that it's just a general rule not specific to the trial. Does it actually apply to Senators making an outburst during the trial?

[emailking]

At the start of all of this I use to think they could get manchin but now I don't see even him voting with them. it will be years before he has to faces voters again so I don't see him under any real pressure to vote to acquit trump. some on here have said Kyrsten Sinema could be the one but if joe manchin votes to impeach I don't see Sinema  being the lone dem who votes no.


you would think GOP would been getting Doug Jones support since he is a red state Dem but So for  Doug jones seem to be 100 percent behind his party and supports their call for more witness.

Sinema is not going to lose in 5 years because she voted to impeach. If she loses, it will be due to other issues. For Manchin it's a little more dicey but it sounds like it might be his last term anyway, because he's fed up with politics. So I don't see them voting to acquit. Jones is in a lot of danger, especially if Sessions is the nominee, and particularly if he votes to impeach. He might do it anyway though since he is a principled person.

[emailking]

If nothing else, the Parnas recording shreds Trump's claim he didn't know Parnas. Not that it was particularly credible anyway since they're in several pictures together.

[emailking]

Adam Schiff (D-CA) made a BIG, BIG collossal Unforced Error with his "Head on a Pike Thing" Remarks.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/democrat-schiffs-head-pike-comment-draws-outrage-gop/story?id=68527054&cid=social_twitter_abcnp

Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, a Key Swing GOP Vote said quote:"This is where he lost me".

Without Murkowskis Vote it's Game Over to call witnesses by Democrats.

She also said he was a good orator aside from that part.

[emailking]

Atlas Democrats and Senate & House Democrats are the most NAIVE People I've ever seen.

Really? In your entire life you've never met a person who was more naive than any of the Senate and House Democrats?

[emailking]

Suppose it is true that Murkowski decided to change her vote based just on Schiff saying "head on a pike."

Whether or not Schiff said "head on a pike" is entirely immaterial to the facts of the case and to the law.

So if Murkowski (or anyone else) would have changed their votes based on that, that simply means that they were not deciding how to vote based on the facts of the case and on the law.

This means that Murkowski (and any other such Senator) is violating their oaths by their own admission and is operating in bad faith - it means that she has no interest in upholding her duty under the Constitution.

I do feel like he's somewhat mischaracterizing her comment. She wasn't saying that's when she decided to change her mind on impeachment. I believe she was saying that was the part of his presentation she didn't liked.

[emailking]

Starr literally said that Trump is guilty and Republicans should pressure him to resign, just a few weeks ago. But who cares, Big Brother Trump will deny it and his cult will forget it.

I don't recall that. On the morning Sondland was going to testify (November), after his prepared testimony was released, Starr said that Republicans might have to consider pressuring Trump to resign. But after Sondland had testified and answered questions, and affirmed Trump never explicitly outlined a quid pro quo to him directly, Starr basically walked this back.

[emailking]

https://mobile.twitter.com/RyanLizza/status/1221594548293586944

I'm not sure it matters. Lawyers are allowed to lie to the jury. They are not allowed to convince or trick a witness into lying. Maybe the lying to Congress statute could apply.

I am still trying to figure out what the crime is with which he is charged.

He's not charged with a crime and he doesn't have to be to be impeached. Abuse of power and obstruction of Congress are misdemeanors.

[emailking]

No, they are not misdemeanors.

They are misdeeds.

And also, that’s a complete misunderstanding of what misdemeanor means here: it relates back to High Crimes. Constitutionally, it has to be a High Crime similar to that of Bribery or Treason. READ and ANALYZE carefully.

That seems to be acknowledging that they're misdemeanors 🤔 but don't apply here.

It says treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. It doesn't say the crimes have to be like treason or bribery. That may be one way to interpret it, but most scholars don't. It also isn't clear that "high" has to apply to misdemeanors, although that may be a reasonable assumption. In any case, I think that abuse of power* and obstruction of congress are pretty big deals.

Due diligence would be nice.

I promise I will be better for you.

* Republicans agreed in 1998, bring such an article to the floor.

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1222907250383245320