Surely he does. If it is good for country, but bad for Trump, it won’t happen.
I am going with Irruncible. I assume Trump is fighting releasing his tax returns because they will reveal something that even McConnell cannot ignore.
However, if that does not happen, I predict that Murkowski, Collins, and Romney will join all the rest of turkeys in the end. They talk the talk, but will not walk the walk.
Ok, but the rest of the article is (more) evidence of that playing out.
I’LL START!!
Trump “University”. Pam Bondi, the Florida DA sought a ‘donation’ from Trump when she was considering criminal charges. She got it and dropped any investigation.
They are both guilty.
In Trump’s head, there is no such possibility. If it’s good for him, it’s good for the country by definition. To Trump, they are one and the same.
Please note that this viewpoint is completely detached from reality and exists only in TrumpWorld. But it’s the mantra that guides him in thought,word and deed.
There’s no mistake.
The Senate is in recess anyway, so there’s no consequence.
By holding it, she allows the media more time to focus attention on her talking points, which is that Trump is not allowing witnesses to come forward and that the Senate is going to make this impeachment trial a sham. But there’s not much she can do beyond what she has already. She can only hold the articles for so long, and I predict she’ll release them once the Senate is ready for a trial.
By holding it she has destroyed the idea ‘Trump is Evil and Must be Removed Immediately!’. Now Pelosi is holding it simply to savor the one political win the democrats have in the last three years.
Trump hasnt committed any “high crimes or misdemeanors”, or even been accused of any in the impeachment indictments.
Pelosi HAS abused her power by using quid pro quo with the impeachment documents to try to influence a Senate-run trial. She isn’t in the Senate and has no authority there.
Where was the outrage when Trump was investigated by the previous administration for political motives in 2016? An investigation the IG report has shown to be corrupt?
Oh wow, this poster has been here for such a long time and contributed so much – like so many of the other “posters” here the last few weeks.
Coincidence that we’re having server problems, too, I’m sure.
The President was just concerned about law breaking, right? We expect our president to investigate crime, don’t we?
Can you remind me what law breaking Trump was investigating?
So, a President conducting an investigation for political motives is outrageous?
Since there’s no prospect of removing Tramp immediately, that argument is specious.
High crimes include abuse of power and obstruction of justice, of which he has bragged. Bribery is impeachable, too, and he’s bragged of giving and taking bribes. He really has impeached himself.
Congress, led by Speaker Pelosi, constitutionally has exclusive power to impeach (indict) the President or any other federal officer. She gets to present the articles of impeachment i.e. turn over the indictment whenever she sees fit. The accused does not get to dictate timing.
Tramp’s team were investigated before 2016 because Russian assets. Quite justified. Note that Putin’s defense minister and Tramp’s UN ambassador, both cabinet officers, declared that Russia is waging war on the US. See the Constitutional definition of treason.
That’ll earn you a warning, asahi.
Don’t be a jerk.
Another reason to hold the articles: to provide time to explore the theory that Trump may have committed a felony back in 2017 when he revealed to Russian officials the identity of an Israeli agent. Laurence Tribe mentions the part of the US Code Trump may have violated:
There was a lot of outrage at the time, but so far as I know there hasn’t been much mention of the US Code relating to the incident.
The May 10, 2017 meeting:
One other theory I’ve seen- Pelosi wants the trial not to be completed before the State of the Union speech. So instead of hearing him boast about total exoneration, he’s going to rant and rave about how he’s such a victim. He could possibly melt down in front of a national audience. I figure that’s worth a shot.
I don’t think that’s a goal of the strategy, but it seems like it would be a great fringe benefit. The visual of Pelosi looking over Trump’s shoulder during the SOTU address, happening while the Senate trial is ongoing, would be pretty cool, especially as everyone (and the news coverage) would remember Pelosi’s “clap back” from last SOTU.
Has he accepted the invitation for the SOTU?
If she sends the articles over now, it’s pretty much a given that they will be laughed at and given short shrift.
My best guess is that she’s holding them back to deliver if Trump triumphs in 2020. I don’t know what the odds are that the senate will flip during the election, but that could be part of her calculus as well. Better to hang onto a shot to remove him from office at the beginning of the next term than waste it on no chance now.
What’s her username here? I’ll PM her.
My take would be that Granny Nancy is following a strategy of keeping her options open. There is too much happening, pretty much relentlessly. It is usually preferable to decide on a solid strategy going forward, but not always. Because usually a “solid” strategy requires commitment that excludes other approaches which may prove to be more valuable. Shit happens, especially when there is an abundance of assholes.
The Pubbies have an out. Vote to proceed with witnesses, on the pretext of wanting a full, fair trial that acquits Il Douche. Accuse those who oppose this as having insufficient faith in the total innocence of Himself. If public opinion gets scary, they can say they were shockedshocked at the revelations of sworn testimony, and are now willing to consider censure. By which, they can hope to appease the Trump base and still claim some civic virtue.
Reasonable, utterly corrupt and cynical, whats not for a Senate Republican to love?
Also, there’s this by way of HuffPo and CalMeacham (hat tip)