23 to 17 on both Articles. One side voted one way, the other voted differently. Two truths? No, just one group being cry closeted fools. I am going to thououghly enjoy this. I will gloat.
[This message has been edited by Tony Kania (edited 12-13-2019).]
Here are ALL of the people who voted for Nancy Pelosi
NO ONE outside that green shaded area voted for Pelosi.
Think about that.
I believe I am acutely aware of who put her there. If, there were to be another Sodom and Gomorrah, this would be the place. I don't pretend to be a Saint but, that area is worse than the armpit of the country.
I believe I am acutely aware of who put her there. If, there were to be another Sodom and Gomorrah, this would be the place. I don't pretend to be a Saint but, that area is worse than the armpit of the country.
Rams
I did not mean to imply otherwise. I know you are a wise and informed man. I was only making a point for all to see.
I know that this is how our government is structured, but Pelosi seems to think she has the mandate to run the country, even though her actual support base is not only minuscule but is far from representative of the average American.
I did not mean to imply otherwise. I know you are a wise and informed man. I was only making a point for all to see.
I know that this is how our government is structured, but Pelosi seems to think she has the mandate to run the country, even though her actual support base is not only minuscule but is far from representative of the average American.
Me thinks you give me more credit than I am due but, we can agree on the "Pelosi" thing. She made a number of deals to maintain Speaker of the House and it now appears she's paying off. Apparently, she believes her "leadership" will result in her getting something she has ambition to get to. I have no inside knowledge of what that might be but, I have no doubt she'd like to inhabit the Oval Office. What I don't think she realizes is, the vast majority of Americans can't stand her or, what she stands for. Just my opinion.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 12-14-2019).]
This is coming from a registered Democrat. Additionally, I don't personally like President Donald J. Trump. Having said that, this is simply a lynching. The Democratic leadership knows the Impeachment won't pass the Senate, they just hate President Trump. He's made them look like fools. They don't believe they can beat him unless they can at least say they tried to Impeach him. The sad part is, currently I don't see a single candidate that DJT wouldn't eat alive. Even Joe BIden. Warren shouldn't even show up for a debate. Look at our economy, check out the Stock Market, look at un-employment numbers. I've known a lot of foolish people in my life but, even I (as a non-Trump fan) have to give President Trump a for trying to keep his pre-election promises.
Originally posted by blackrams: The sad part is, ...
I have a couple of nominations.
The Dumbocrats in the House, and their witnesses, were all invoking the memory of the Founding Fathers. Their intentions, and how they would feel. Yet, the Founding Fathers warned about purley political coupes (impeachment).
How it would divide the country. Even Shifty and Botox have said this, yet they are doing it anyway. They keep claiming how the 'orange man' weakened "National Security". A divided country does not strengthen it.
Debbie Dingle, (D) Michigan, said she is going to impeach, after saying "we all know the Russians want to divide the country.
I see on the "news" that the Dems are accusing the Republicans of being biased and not impartial as it applies to the DJT impeachment.
Give me a frigg's break. I don't know of one person and especially our political leadership regardless of party that isn't biased one way or another.
We all knew in the beginning how this was going to work out in the end, DJT will be acquitted. My opinion, your opinion or perspectives mean nothing. Perspective means nothing, facts and evidence are what convict people of crimes, this assumes the charged accusation is actually a crime. I don't have a lot of trust for any politician but, I like those that try to keep their pre-election promises.
BTW, I still want to know what Hunter Biden got paid to do.
I did not involve myself with the national rally for impeachment. But, I did laugh loudly as I drove under their anti-Trump signs in my nice warm pickup while I sipped my coffee yesterday morning.
I have to an understanding because of the impeachment. I realized that I have been wrong, because I looked at this from the wrong perspective. I now understand that America should have been impeaching more Presidents in the past, given the ease of the requirements.
I have to an understanding because of the impeachment. I realized that I have been wrong, because I looked at this from the wrong perspective. I now understand that America should have been impeaching more Presidents in the past, given the ease of the requirements.
Heard during the testimony today that of the last five Republicans who served in the Oval Office, the Dems tried to impeach four of them. Since this was from House of Reps, I assume it was correct. Then again, who knows.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 12-18-2019).]
I'm not the biggest fan of this guy. No specific reason except that I find his voice and manner to be annoying to me. However, the political talking news(?) clips used in the video are interesting. I lived through this being that I was over 18 before Clinton was elected to the oval office. Memory though isn't specific enough for me to remember all these and have any drive to search them out. For that, I can appreciated what was done. I may search for more complete videos to see what was said before and after these blurb videos. Just to see if it was in some way taken out of context. I find it interesting the way some have the drive to express contempt for others those things they would do or have done themselves. Anyways, I thought some might enjoy the video.
Well, it's done. The House has voted to Impeach but, Speaker Pelosi has not sent HR1 on to the Senate.
Why not? I have no doubt she has another "political" reason. She's sly and politically savvy. She's also a low life snake, I am not a fan.
Even though I know the chances are slim, when this is all said and done, I really hope she is removed from office.
Rams
Imagine the confusion and disappointment of all the soft children of the Left that woke up this morning and had to realize that the President is still in office as they sit there stammering "but, but he's impeached!!"
Nasty Nan says that she is waiting for the Senate to agree on procedures for a trial, and only then will she send the articles over. She said she wants “a fair trial.” (NOW she's supposedly concerned with "fairness"?!)
In reality it means she and Schmuckie Schumer, want to be able to also control how the Senate trial will be conducted and to call dozens of pointless witnesses in the Senate again and try to turn that proceeding into the same carnival sideshow that they made of the House hearings.
Senator McConnell needs to remind the House majority that they don't run the Senate........or the Judiciary or the Executive.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 12-19-2019).]
I'm trying to figure how someone so stupid got to be Speaker of the House.
It's being reported that she will not send the two articles of impeachment to the Senate until she's agreed to the rules that the trial will be conducted under.
I guess she thinks the Senate majority is looking forward to conducting this trial? She doesn't seem to understand that just like the House majority got to make the rules up for the inquiry and impeachment hearings, the Senate majority gets to make up the rules for the trial. The Constitution and history is very clear on this. I'm confused as hell as to what she thinks she's going to accomplish unless she thinks Senator Schumer can turn some Republicans to the Left. I am constantly amazed by her actions. I suspect Senator McConnel is laughing his ass off.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 12-19-2019).]
This has become so absurd, I don't even know what to say. There are full grown adults who do not have the ability to distinguish between reality and fantasy.
A few will remember the old Soviet adage: "There is no pravda in Izvestia and no izvestia in Pravda."
[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 12-19-2019).]
The train of thought seems to be that she got what she wanted, President Trump has been impeached and by not sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate, he can not be acquitted. Many think this could back fire and result in a lot of left leaning Independents moving right. I guess we'll see. What I can assure anyone of is, even as a registered Democrat, I won't vote for any Liberals, Progressives or left leaning Democrat. I sincerely hope I can make the deciding vote. Though we all know that ain't gonna happen.
I am just frustrated that so many will not extend the effort to find the truth. They are belligerently ignorant, and for some unfathomable reason, seem to take pride in that.
It has been said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. It is disheartening that some aspire to be the tour bus driver.
So abuse of power. Right before an election the sitting president is impeached in the house but they do not send it to the senate? Regardless of who is sitting in the office how does this happen and why are they getting away with it?
Because if they do send it then the sitting president has a chance to an actual trial with witnesses? Because the case will fall apart and spin up other charges, charges they don't want to address?
We the people should know that we can trust our government, no one part of it should be able to say this is it and not have a fair day in court. If they cant govern for all of the people than they should be removed.
Jake, the Democrats are doing this because they think they can get away with it. They have the media in their pocket and had the forum of the House to do this despicable Impeachment. So Barr and the prosecutor who is looking into the corruption will soon (well maybe not soon, its a relative term) be handing out charges like they are candy to those who have perpetrated this illegal and unconstitutional abuse of power.
While they have succeeded in Impeaching President Trump. He is still our president. He will not be removed by this. And you can see that the Democrats are flailing about trying to make something stick. The sad thing is that there are still significant amounts of people who believe all of that Shiff. They still claim that our president was colluding with Russia, even though they had what 2 years of investigation, $40 million dollars spent and a crew of radical Democrats trying to find something. Anything. But, they couldn't. They hate our president and it is very apparent that they do and that is the only reason for this Impeachment push. Now they just want to drop it without following through. It would be laughable if it weren't so serious.
It is my hope that many of these criminals end up in a real prison, not some federal golf club. And for a long time. They certainly deserve it. And as for the media. All I can say is that they are already suffering for their abuse of their power. People know that they were not only biased in their reporting they were leading the charge to try to remove our president any way possible. Just don't watch them anymore. That is my plan. I refuse to be lied to continually. They will fail do to their own behavior and collapse under their lack of funding.
And I certainly hope that it is a long time before we have a Democratic president. And maybe there will not be another crazy Impeachment pointed at their president in retaliation.
There are some constitutional scholars who are of the opinion that until the Articles of Impeachment are handed to the senate, there is no impeachment. Trump may not yet be the third president to be impeached. I am not sure I agree, but it is something to ponder.
There are some constitutional scholars who are of the opinion that until the Articles of Impeachment are handed to the senate, there is no impeachment. Trump may not yet be the third president to be impeached. I am not sure I agree, but it is something to ponder.
So if they do impeach him and null this term he could run for two more
Originally posted by Tony Kania: I did not involve myself with the national rally for impeachment. But, I did laugh loudly as I drove under their anti-Trump signs in my nice warm pickup while I sipped my coffee yesterday morning.
I will gloat.
Gosh Tony, to me, you come off like a NFL lineman sacking the quarterback in the second quarter. The game ain't over. It's going to get more interesting in the second half.
Or not. ? More on that later.
Nancy Botox, , ... she is the Speaker of the House. The Speaker of the House 'presides' over the House. THEY RULE !
Last night, for sure historic, our third President has been impeached. Who was presiding over the House ? Not Nancy. How many "Where is Hunter ?" T-shirts were sold ? Where IS Nancy ? A historic moment.
She was there. She chose not to preside. She was given opening remarks. And the impeachment vote tally count.
Is it going to be sent to the Senate ? Just after the vote tally count, she took questions. She was asked when she was going to send the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate ?
Gosh ! It was a "we have to pass this Bill to see what is in it" moment. She didn't know what to do. She embarrassed herself. As well as the Dumbocrats and the USA in the eyes of the World.
Let me give an analogy. Impeachment like a gunfight.
Nancy Botox was given the first chance to empty her gun. She chose to bring a derringer that produced two shots. Now she is holding those shots from getting to her target, while holding the empty derringer in a threatening manner.
The House did not impeach their President. The House can not impeach a President. It is a process that has not been completed. The House can only pass Articles of Impeachment, ... which must go to the Senate for trial. If you want a President impeached.
Even the House Dumbs own Constitutional scholar witness has the same view, as posted in some op-ed in some liberal 'rag'.
Gosh Tony, to me, you come off like a NFL lineman sacking the quarterback in the second quarter. The game ain't over. It's going to get more interesting in the second half.
Or not. ? More on that later. ...
Proudly.
I believe that you know where I stand. I am not interested in the first half, let alone the second half. But, I must pay attention.
There are some constitutional scholars who are of the opinion that until the Articles of Impeachment are handed to the senate, there is no impeachment. Trump may not yet be the third president to be impeached. I am not sure I agree, but it is something to ponder.
Honestly, I do not know for a fact if he needs to have a trial from the Senate to be considered "impeached". But the more I think about it, the more it makes sense to require a Senate trail. Out on the streets, the everyday "Joe" can't be convicted of a crime without a trial, even though "suspicion" cost them time in Jail and charges brought up against them.... they are still not convicted of the crime till the proper due process has played out. And even then the process is so strict on "dotting the i's and crossing the t's" that the case against the person can be dropped, dismissed or appealed on the smallest of issues. It just makes sense to me that the full process needs to be carried out to the end. Without an end to the process, Trump can't be legitimately declared "impeached". He technically can only be called "in the process of being impeached". This is the equivalent of being accused of a crime, being arraigned to court, having the charges against you formally read: then dismissing the Courtroom before the Jury is selected.
for trying to keep his pre-election promises.
.
I don't know of one person and especially our political leadership regardless of party that isn't biased one way or another.
, ... she is the Speaker of the House. 
