Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues The Trump Administration The Impeachment of Donald trump

We're closing in on a month's of hearings. Here is the public's response to those hearings by comparing 13 Nov numbers when the hearings began to today's. There's really been little change except the hardening of views whether Trump should be impeached and removed or not. Make of these numbers what you will.

Impeachment hearings began on 13 Nov 2019 vs. 10 Dec 2019
Trump’s approval 13 Nov 43.9%, 10 Dec 44.6%

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html

13 Nov Democrats for impeachment and removal 82%, 10 Dec Democrats for impeachment and removal 86%.
13 Nov Republicans for impeachment and removal 12%, 10 Dec Republicans for impeachment and removal 7%.
13 Nov Independents for impeachment and removal 38%, 10 Dec Independents for impeachment and removal 44%.
13 Nov Democrats against impeachment and removal 6%, 10 Dec Democrats against impeachment and removal 9%.
13 Nov Republicans against impeachment and removal 80%, 10 Dec Republicans against impeachment and removal 89%.
13 Nov Independents against impeachment and removal 39%, 10 Dec Independents against impeachment and removal 45%.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...and_removal_of_president_trump-6957.html

Not all that much different than the dynamic in 72-74-74 if you remember. Then suddenly...blammo, the dam broke and Nixon impeachment support spiked dramatically.

People finally figured out that we were in trouble.

I’m not speaking for you Jeff

I’m speaking for myself.

I’m saying many argue that authoritarianism can’t exist with socialism. I agree with that. It’s a mischaracterization like dry water. A contradiction of terms. What may have started out as a socialist enterprise can mutate into something else altogether.


It’s also not uncommon for reactionary politics to occur within a state when external political forces are bearing down from without. Hell, look at the amount of state violence we’ve done since the Saudis threw jets into the towers. What’s it up to now? Half a million dead? A million? Point being, external forces can effect internal politics.

If socialist countries collapse into authoritarian governments should the external forces bear any responsibility for that transformation?

What’s the problem bringing it up?

Stop gaslighting, it's not a good look for you.
I took issue with this:


And none of what we did, or might have done, or attempted to do elsewhere is going to cause me to accept what Putin is attempting to do to us right now.

Thanks.

The official impeachment hearings on Nixon began 9 May 1974 although the house gave the judiciary committee permission to investigate on 6 Feb 1974. So 9 May 1974 equates to 13 Nov 2019 when both official hearings on impeachment began. At least in my mind.

At the end of May 1974 after the official or formal hearings begun, 3 weeks worth, you can compare the numbers Nixon Democrats for impeachment and removal 59% for, 27% against to Trump's Democrats for 86%, 9% against. Republicans for impeachment and removal Nixon, 19%, against 70%, Trump, for 7%, against 89%. Independents for impeachment and removal 43%, against 42%, Trump 44% for, 45% against.

Above is comparing the numbers after 3 weeks of formal, official hearings on Nixon vs. 4 weeks for Trump.

Now I realize we're talking two different eras, Nixon and Trump's. Back in 1974 we weren't as polarized as we are today and there wasn't the record breaking ultra high partisanship either.

Another huge difference if Nixon's had gone to trial in the senate, the Democrats needed only 9 GOP senators to vote to convict and remove. The Democrats controlled the senate along with the House. Today, the Democrats will need at least 20 Republican senators, more than double Nixon's amount. I think that is a pipe dream in today's polarized and I will use the word hateful of the other party environment. I personally don't think all 47 democrats will vote to convict and remove. I can see two who may not. That means 22 Republican senators.

With me, it's all about the numbers. Numbers have no personal feelings, they state what they state. Now other may interpret them differently, that's normal.

Once the articles of impeachment are passed by the current House, we then can compare numbers with those of 30 July 1974 when the House passed three articles of impeachment against Nixon.

Could you provide me with your definition of what gas lighting means to you? I'm not convinced you are using it properly.
I think you've found a good insult and are overusing it now.

Waddya do when someone likes a meal you don't. Do you tell them to stop gas lighting you?

I don't see the absence of left wing political parties in the U.S. being related to what you imagine Putin is 'trying to do to us'.


Bill Clinton got paid 500k for a speech in Moscow in 2015. Podesta worked for Manafort in the Ukraine. I dont believe in simple narratives about 'what Putin is trying to do to us'. It does make for thrilling TV programming. I'll admit to that.

So when's the betting?
My money's on No Conviction.

Which (for me Jeff) raises two questions:

What was the rational to try an elected president for... well... procedural (?) type violations and not others like emoluments?

What will the ramifications be for this course of action democrats are pursuing?

I was told once that a way to persuade people to do what you want is to first light a fire under them, then give them a bucket of water to put it out with.

I think we're ready for the bucket of water, Chunks.

There was never any chance of conviction.

I think I have finally come to the realization why Republicans say and believe there is not a basis for impeachment and it sorta touches on your comments.

Emolunemts is a tough case to prove (and it is going to be even tougher in court), ergo it was not included. Likewise the case for obstruction of justice (as a salient stand alone item) from the Mueller Report.

The current set of allegations is clear cut. Mr Trump did indeed leverage WH meeting and military aid for investigations into the Bidens and 2016 election theories. And it is clear he did obstruct Congress in their mandated impeachment inquiry.

Now for the bad news. Republicans do not believe these rise to the level of impeachment because neither is a crime. Let me repeat .... neither is a crime. They believe only crimes are impeachable. So in order to make a dent in their ranks, the prosecutors have to prove to Republicans a crime has been committed. The only thing which comes to mind is the possible FEC violation of solicitation of foreign aid in an election.

Unless they focus on the possible criminal act, I predict they do not have a chance of changing anyone's mind.