Just one Congressional R taking this position would have quite an effect on the situation.
“There is a point, though, at which that expectation turns from a mix of loyalty and pragmatism into something more sinister, a blind devotion that serves to enable criminal conduct.”
This is just like the Iraq War debate. We lost the 2004 election because our position on the war was a political and moral muddle. We won the 2006 election because we developed clarity that the war was a failure and the policy needed to change. Don’t be the muddle. Don’t be overcautious. This isn’t hard. You won’t lose any points by saying that Trump is a crook who needs to be dealt with.
This is snowballing because so many people who have worked for the Trump administration really hate him. As the evidence mounts he gets weaker and those who hate him fear him less. Over the next few months a flood of witnesses will probably come forward to bury him.
And be utterly shocking.
So, not EVERY Republican is irretrievably locked to Trump.
I’d still like to know what happens in the Senate should Articles of Impeachment be voted for by the House. Who runs the trial? Do both parties get to bring their own witnesses? etc.
Seems to me anybody in favor of impeachment would want to know that all the right witnesses would be brought forward, that Trump would be compelled to testify, as Clinton did, that there’s a good chance (even via SCOTUS) that all the relevant documents would be made available, etc.
Unfortunately, those who bankroll him “Fall In Line For His Reelection Fight.” Give them their tax cuts and deregulation and the votes cast themselves.
We already knew about Bill Krystol, George Conway and some others… but it’s always good to get more on board.
“At a minimum,” Verret wrote, “there’s enough here to get the impeachment process started.”
Marvelously apolitical. Let’s just get the process started without pondering tactics, strategy, and dealing with various kinds of resistance and failure.
Law school professor, though. He makes a living thinking about things from the compartmentalized perspective of the legal system. And he never liked Trump at all, from the beginning. He represents a slice of the pie so thin you could read through it.
But it might offend his supporters!
The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. . . When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside - Article I, §3
OT: Jared Kushner is being questioned right now at the Time.com Summit in NYC. MSNBC decided to give live coverage to his answers. Boy does he seem nervous - non-stop talking, all over the place, etc. especially about that June 2016 meeting. He actually said that the speculation emerging from the Mueller investigation was more damaging to the country than “a couple of Facebook ads” put out by the Russians.
so we know:
Who did what (at least that which was not successfully covered up)
When - duh
What - again, at least that which was successfully covered up
so let’s talk WHY, which might be the line of discussion that actually moves this along to the next stage
Why was it so important to the KGB to get this one person in office that the retaliation for doing such would be risked?
we need to use the colloquial term KGB, Americans know the KGB as a monster and have a visceral reaction to it, and let’s be real, that’s who we are talking about here, the KGB’s handpicked President of the United States, it’s a fucking bad movie plot at best, but somehow became reality
Has tRUmp delivered to his KGB handlers?
time for nuanced discussion is over, speak in terms that we stoopids can understand and know
So this is one the rats who have recognized that the ship is sinking.
Eh, all will be forgiven once he produces a permanent Middle East peace.
I assume Mr. Verrett will join the Democrats to be part of Ms. Lindsey’s perceived stampede?
Does McConnell have to bring it up for a vote or can he shit-can it like he is with all bills passed in the House?