O.J. Simpson likes this post.
O.J. was acquitted of murder by a jury, but the effect of the trial wasn’t that it made everyone think that he wasn’t guilty.
Forty-two. 
He can say anything he wants - First Amendment, you know. He can say it today if he wants.
This is an evidence-free assertion.
IYHO.
ETA: it definitely is NOT ‘smart and political’ to be contradicting each other about whether they are or are not having an impeachment inquiry. You’d at least have an argument if they’d decided one way or the other what they’re doing. Nothing smart and political about being evasive of either alternative. That IS “weak and vacillating.” Practically the textbook definition.
Cool! With the whole nation watching, we lay out Trump’s worst crimes, first in the House Judiciary Committee, then on the House floor, and then on the Senate floor - and the Republicans all go on record as saying Trump shouldn’t be removed from office anyway.
Yeah, I’ll take that. I want the Dems to be able to run against every GOP Representative, and every GOP Senator up for election in 2020, on the basis of the crimes they considered to be A-OK.
And you say on the basis of what, exactly, that this is what Trump wants? Am I privileged to know a genuine psychic? How many fingers am I holding up right now?
But he’d have proof, since the senate will vote Not Guilty- making him…Not Guilty.
Most political experts say the same. I have included cites in this thread.
No, they are looking for enuf evidence to perhaps get some republicans to vote Guilty. It’s a long shot, but why not continue investigating?
“With the whole nation watching”…? It is to laugh. No, they didnt watch the Mueller hearings and they wont watch these either. And, most Americans dont want Impeachment.
Political experts say it wont matter, and in fact will help trump.
One- the middle one.
So you say.
No, so polls say:
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/458530-poll-majority-want-trump-out-but-not-through-impeachment
*
A majority of voters wants to see a new president in the White House, according to a new poll, but 59 percent say President Trump should not be impeached.
Fifty-seven percent of respondents said it is time to have a new president, according to a Monmouth University poll released Thursday. However, only 35 percent said they think Trump should be impeached.
Democrats overwhelmingly backed impeachment, at 72 percent. Only 39 percent of independents and 8 percent of Republicans agree, based on the poll.
Overall support for impeachment has ranged between 35 and 42 percent since Monmouth started polling that question in July 2017.*
*While some 2020 Democrats and House leaders are eager to open impeachment hearings against President Trump, the public has lost interest.
According to the latest Monmouth University Poll, which has been tracking the issue, 59% disagree with the Democrats, and just 35% agree.
“Support for the president’s removal via impeachment has ranged between 35% and 42% since Monmouth started asking this question in July 2017, with the current results at the low end of that range,” said the analysis.
What’s more, only 1 in 5 think impeachment will lead to a Senate conviction and removal from office.
“Donald Trump is not a popular president by most measures, but the appetite for impeachment remains low,” said Patrick Murray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute.
Added polling expert Ron Faucheux, author of a daily statistical newsletter, “Impeachment is a loser issue for Democrats.”*
That’s why we need leadership.
It’ll be like the trials of the killers of 1960s civil rights workers in the South. They were acquitted, but whether you believed the verdict was right depended on where you stood.
I didn’t know there was a well-defined universe of ‘political experts’ to be able to reach any conclusions about what ‘most’ of them say. Were they polled? What was the sample size? And what was the sampling frame?
Seriously, that’s one truly bullshit statement.
Well, it’s better than your bare opinion, with nothing to back it up.
mr nadler needs to get tough on things like today’s inquiry. start holding them in civil contempt, and levy fines. this is ridiculous.
You might ask yourself why he isn’t currently claiming that the Senate has acquitted him of all charges, since, as you note, he could be claiming that today.
Possibly it’s because he knows that actual headlines will be more influential than anything he could say. Senate Acquits Trump will reach the millions who barely pay attention to politics, in a way that Trump’s usual blortings cannot.
^This.
Particularly the emphasized (by me) part. The fantasy that millions of Americans will put down their phones and game-controllers and other devices and make their way to C-SPAN (which I’d bet money is the only outlet that would show impeachment hearings in anything like complete coverage) is as persistent as it is ridiculous.
Please tell me you use a Groucho voice!
(my emphasis in the quotes)
Agreed. If this is the best Nadler et. al. can do, they are fucked from the beginning. He needs to recall the goofball Lewandowski, demand answers, and if he brings up his bullshit executive privilege defenses again and refuses to answer, have him thrown in jail for contempt of Congress.
That will never happen. It’s gonna go just like yesterday for another year, then we’ll have an election.
If they feel other witnesses will pull the same bullshit, it’s gonna have to happen or obviously as I said they are fucked. Since I believe they will continue to hold these hearings, I believe they will also try to find ways to force witnesses to answer questions and that it won’t go just like yesterday.
I hope it doesn’t. But I have no faith that it won’t. Except for a couple of bulldogs (AOC for one), these House Democrats seem to be disappointing me like rooting for a crappy sports team in a game they’re flubbing. I also know this is no game.
As much as it pains me to say so, after a long life of watching these things play out, oh it is ABSOLUTELY a game.
Rules? Laws? Pshaw!
The game is about raw political power.
Nadler doesn’t have the votes to do so.
I believe under inherent contempt someone can actually be hauled off to jail without a vote. Not sure. But no matter. Nadler must at least attempt getting a contempt citation going, or just give it up. That is the gist of what I’m saying. No more just going along with whatever bullshit a witness tries to pull.