mugwurt said:

---

Do our resident concerned moderates actually think there is a snowball's chance in hell the Senate will remove Trump?

---

I think etcetera still clings to some fantasy dream of it happening.

BQ78 said:

---

That's a foolproof prosecution method. He said X so it was X. He said Y so he really meant X.

Guilty either way, right?

---

Or you could look at the actions taken by Trump, Giuliani, Sondland, and Mulvaney and ascertain: do their actions match up with Trump's and Mulvaney's denials, or do their actions match the incriminating admissions they made? The aid was held back by Mulvaney on Trump's order, Giuliani's meetings and texts, Trump making the quid pro quo in the phone call.

mugwurt said:

---

Do our resident concerned moderates actually think there is a snowball's chance in hell the Senate will remove Trump?

---

eric76 said there was a 25% chance that the senate would vote for removal.

BadMoonRisin said:

---

mugwurt said:

---

Do our resident concerned moderates actually think there is a snowball's chance in hell the Senate will remove Trump?

---

eric76 said there was a 25% chance that the senate would vote for removal.

---

Yeah, and he thought Trayvon Martin was 100% innocent.

Bo Darville said:

---

mugwurt said:

---

Do our resident concerned moderates actually think there is a snowball's chance in hell the Senate will remove Trump?

---

I think etcetera still clings to some fantasy dream of it happening.

---

Bo continues to cling to the Republican theory that: "Since the Senate R's won't convict, therefore the impeachment investigation isn't important to the American people."

MetoliusAg said:

---

Bo Darville said:

---

mugwurt said:

---

Do our resident concerned moderates actually think there is a snowball's chance in hell the Senate will remove Trump?

---

I think etcetera still clings to some fantasy dream of it happening.

---

Bo continues to cling to the Republican theory that: "Since the Senate R's won't convict, therefore the impeachment investigation isn't important to the American people."

---

I think recent polls make it clear that the impeachment investigation isn't important to the American people...

MetoliusAg said:

---

Bo Darville said:

---

mugwurt said:

---

Do our resident concerned moderates actually think there is a snowball's chance in hell the Senate will remove Trump?

---

I think etcetera still clings to some fantasy dream of it happening.

---

Bo continues to cling to the Republican theory that: "Since the Senate R's won't convict, therefore the impeachment investigation isn't important to the American people."

---

Ya, that's kinda the whole point of impeachment. If the high crime or misdemeanor is that apparent there should be some reasonable chance he's removed.


In this case it's 0% so it's completely pointless and just a dog and pony show.

There was no high crime or misdemeanor

Quote:

---

I think recent polls make it clear that the impeachment investigation isn't important to the American people...

---

Riiiiight.

MetoliusAg said:

---

Quote:

---

I think recent polls make it clear that the impeachment investigation isn't important to the American people...

---

Riiiiight.

---

I feel the same way every time you and your ilk try to manufacture a smoking gun crime committed by the POTUS...

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Bo continues to cling to the Republican theory that: "Since the Senate R's won't convict, therefore the impeachment investigation isn't important to the American people."

---

Ya, that's kinda the whole point of impeachment. If the high crime or misdemeanor is that apparent there should be some reasonable chance he's removed. In this case it's 0% so it's completely pointless and just a dog and pony show.

---

Keep clinging to that theory, Bo.

captkirk said:

---

There was no high crime or misdemeanor

---

Exactly my point. A true high crime or misdemeanor would easily coalesce enough people to consider removing him early in the process to make it worthwhile. Even if everything the democrats are saying is true then Trump early escapes removal and it isn't close. That tells me all I need to know.

captkirk said:

---

There was no high crime or misdemeanor

---

Then the Potus should let his WH, State Dept, OMB, and NSC subordinates testify, right? They'll back him and Mulvaney and Rudy G. up, right?

MetoliusAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Bo continues to cling to the Republican theory that: "Since the Senate R's won't convict, therefore the impeachment investigation isn't important to the American people."

---

Ya, that's kinda the whole point of impeachment. If the high crime or misdemeanor is that apparent there should be some reasonable chance he's removed. In this case it's 0% so it's completely pointless and just a dog and pony show.

---

Keep clinging to that theory, Bo.

---

It's a fact. Impeachment is meant to remove a president. That's not a theory. It's fact. Theres 0.0% chance this happens. So what's the point? If any DA in the country knows there's zero chance he's getting a conviction he doesn't bring a case because he knows it's pointless.

MetoliusAg said:

---

captkirk said:

---

There was no high crime or misdemeanor

---

Then the Potus should let his WH, State Dept, OMB, and NSC subordinates testify, right? They'll back him and Mulvaney and Rudy G. up, right?

---

Just like Obama let them talk in the whole Fast and Furious thing, right?

To my knowledge, Trump has yet to claim EP in order to hide the facts...

Keep trying, bro...your attempts are quite entertaining...

MetoliusAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Bo continues to cling to the Republican theory that: "Since the Senate R's won't convict, therefore the impeachment investigation isn't important to the American people."

---

Ya, that's kinda the whole point of impeachment. If the high crime or misdemeanor is that apparent there should be some reasonable chance he's removed. In this case it's 0% so it's completely pointless and just a dog and pony show.

---

Keep clinging to that theory, Bo.

---

As you will keep clinging to the theory that somehow, some way, orange man did SOMETHING bad and will eventually be removed...

How's that worked out for you so far? "Got him!", yet???

Bo Darville said:

---

captkirk said:

---

There was no high crime or misdemeanor

---

Exactly my point. A true high crime or misdemeanor would easily coalesce enough people to consider removing him early in the process to make it worthwhile.

---

History shows the opposite, Bo.

They had TAPES on Nixon...where is the hard evidence on Trump?

There is none...AT ALL...

Look bro, we all know what the next card to be played will be in this...it's already been telegraphed...

Once Ukraine fails, next up will be tax returns...

We get it...

FireAg said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

captkirk said:

---

There was no high crime or misdemeanor

---

Then the Potus should let his WH, State Dept, OMB, and NSC subordinates testify, right? They'll back him and Mulvaney and Rudy G. up, right?

---

Just like Obama let them talk in the whole Fast and Furious thing, right?

To my knowledge, Trump has yet to claim EP in order to hide the facts...

Keep trying, bro...your attempts are quite entertaining...

---

And right now if memory serves me in the new rules released last week, if he does claim Executive Privilege on anything, the House (Schiff/Pelosi/Nadler) won't let his lawyer in the room.

MetoliusAg said:

---

Bo Darville said:

---

captkirk said:

---

There was no high crime or misdemeanor

---

Exactly my point. A true high crime or misdemeanor would easily coalesce enough people to consider removing him early in the process to make it worthwhile.

---

History shows the opposite, Bo.

---

Impeachment hearings for Nixon began on May 9th, 1974 in the senate judiciary committee. That's where we are now with Trump. At that point there was a realistic chance for Nixon to be removed and many GOP senators were considering it.

Two months later it's known enough GOP votes exist to remove him.

Nixon resigns the next month.



We aren't even close to that.

FireAg said:

---

They had TAPES on Nixon...where is the hard evidence on Trump?

There is none...AT ALL...

Look bro, we all know what the next card to be played will be in this...it's already been telegraphed...

Once Ukraine fails, next up will be tax returns...

We get it...

---

Interesting comparison.

Nixon, like Trump, provided edited transcripts to Congress until the Supreme Court ordered him to release the tapes.

MetoliusAg said:

---

captkirk said:

---

There was no high crime or misdemeanor

---

Then the Potus should let his WH, State Dept, OMB, and NSC subordinates testify, right? They'll back him and Mulvaney and Rudy G. up, right?

---

I get what you're saying but why should Trump agree to play the games that democrats want him to play? You know full well that democrats would be acting the same way, as they did with Clinton, if the roles were reversed.

I expect nothing less than gridlock. Frankly I don't care if the parties EVER work together. It's better when they don't agree on anything because then, nothing gets changed just for the sake of change. There really isn't middle ground. The beliefs held by most liberals are fundamentally different than mine and I will not compromise my beliefs in name of "bipartisanship". Poo poo on me all you want but I also refuse to associate with those that fall under the umbrella of liberalism. I can be professional at work but I dang sure won't go hang out with them and pretend to get along bc at the end of the day that person wants me to change the way I live my life to fit their idea of how a life should be lived.

Next Wednesday will be popcorn time. For whatever reason, Schiff is calling Bill Taylor (he of the so-called damning quid pro quo text to Sondland).

Hope Jordan's on Intel Committee by then so we can get to the bottom of the Schiff staffer, Thomas Eager's meeting with Taylor the same day he sent that text. Schiff authorized the travel after his office knew about the "whistleblower" a/k/a Ciaramella. Trip was sponsored by the Atlantic Council a/k/a the usual globalist (Soros) suspects.

will25u said:

---

---

So he's bringing back the same people again, will block any Republican questions that disrupt his narrative, and will then claim they have all the "proof" they need because of the "witnesses'" opinions.

nmag34 said:

---

FireAg said:

---

They had TAPES on Nixon...where is the hard evidence on Trump?

There is none...AT ALL...

Look bro, we all know what the next card to be played will be in this...it's already been telegraphed...

Once Ukraine fails, next up will be tax returns...

We get it...

---

Interesting comparison.

Nixon, like Trump, provided edited transcripts to Congress until the Supreme Court ordered him to release the tapes.

---

You're comparing those two transcripts as the same thing?

I gave you a star.

Rapier108 said:

---

will25u said:

---

---

So he's bringing back the same people again, will block any Republican questions that disrupt his narrative, and will then claim they have all the "proof" they need because of the "witnesses'" opinions.

---

These will be open hearings so Republicans get equal time. Taylor will likely implicate Schiff and his staffer, Eager, under cross.

aggiehawg said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

will25u said:

---

---

So he's bringing back the same people again, will block any Republican questions that disrupt his narrative, and will then claim they have all the "proof" they need because of the "witnesses'" opinions.

---

These will be open hearings so Republicans get equal time. Taylor will likely implicate Schiff and his staffer, Eager, under cross.

---

The rules they voted on say Schiff can block any question the Republicans ask, and no doubt he will.

Rapier108 said:

---

will25u said:

---

---

So he's bringing back the same people again, will block any Republican questions that disrupt his narrative, and will then claim they have all the "proof" they need because of the "witnesses'" opinions.

---

That's the way I think it will play out. He's going to try to shut down lines of questioning that go to these witnesses motives and potential loyalties and backgrounds which to me is highly relevant.

Bo Darville said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Bo continues to cling to the Republican theory that: "Since the Senate R's won't convict, therefore the impeachment investigation isn't important to the American people."

---

Ya, that's kinda the whole point of impeachment. If the high crime or misdemeanor is that apparent there should be some reasonable chance he's removed. In this case it's 0% so it's completely pointless and just a dog and pony show.

---

Keep clinging to that theory, Bo.

---

It's a fact. Impeachment is meant to remove a president. That's not a theory. It's fact. Theres 0.0% chance this happens. So what's the point? If any DA in the country knows there's zero chance he's getting a conviction he doesn't bring a case because he knows it's pointless.

---

A majority of the American people don't see this impeachment investigation as pointless, Bo.

MetoliusAg said:

---

Bo Darville said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Bo continues to cling to the Republican theory that: "Since the Senate R's won't convict, therefore the impeachment investigation isn't important to the American people."

---

Ya, that's kinda the whole point of impeachment. If the high crime or misdemeanor is that apparent there should be some reasonable chance he's removed. In this case it's 0% so it's completely pointless and just a dog and pony show.

---

Keep clinging to that theory, Bo.

---

It's a fact. Impeachment is meant to remove a president. That's not a theory. It's fact. Theres 0.0% chance this happens. So what's the point? If any DA in the country knows there's zero chance he's getting a conviction he doesn't bring a case because he knows it's pointless.

---

A majority of the American people Democrats don't see this impeachment investigation as pointless, Bo.

---

FIFY

If you want a circus to go out of business you don't send them more animals.

Since Metollius and co. seem so confident, perhaps they care to place a friendly wager on Trump being removed from office?