DOJ Initial Russia Hearings

RedNebraskan said:
Honestly, at this point in this, I don't really know who to believe.  The thing is though: What's the goal of all of this?  Is it to impeach? Because if so, I don't think they have the evidence for that.
Click to expand...


Cohen is but one of many pieces in the impeachment puzzle. It's not simply a question of having enough evidence to impeach, it's also about the support/votes in Congress to convict, and the public support to push it in that direction.

The Cohen testimony is not checkmate, it is simply moving a knight from C3 to D5. There are still a lot of pieces and a lot of moves.

 
RedNebraskan said:
I think the Republicans are right in asking about Cohen's lying and credibility.  And I love when he was asked about recording people, and Cohen said "I don't", then 30 seconds later said "I've recorded about 100 times", plus where's the hard evidence to impeach Trump?  I mean, isn't this the endgame for the Democrats?
Click to expand...




There is plenty of evidence to impeach Trump. The evidence isn’t the hard part. 

 
RedNebraskan said:
I have a lot of thoughts about that, but I'm sure they aren't true.  I guess what it comes down for me is that this Russian collusion thing doesn't seem to have any real evidence, and that's what they've been hanging their hats on this whole time.
Click to expand...


Al Capone was a gangster who ran liquor past the border and murdered or orchestrated the murder of several dozen men.

He was convicted of tax evasion and spent the rest of his life in jail.

I'll almost guarantee you they don't try to convict Trump of anything like Collusion. That'll be something for historians to chew on.  Prosecutors are going to go for what they absolutely know can stick.

 
RedNebraskan said:
Really? Like what?
Click to expand...
There is evidence of illegal campaign donations: Stormy Daniels payoff

There is evidence of using the office of POTUS for personal financial gain: Maralargo membership, foreign leaders staying at Trump Hotel, etc...

There is evidence of his foundation illegally using donations: they are being forced to dissolve

These are just a few that could be used pretty easily if Democrats were up for the political fight that would ensue.

 
RedNebraskan said:
Really? Like what?
Click to expand...




They could probably impeach him for violating the emoluments clause alone.

Impeachment rules are very vague. The House can define “high crimes or misdemeaners” in a number of different ways.

I’d also say having 2 witnesses that Stormy Daniels was paid for her silence, plus the checks, might be enough by itself. 

There are probably going to end up being dozens of ways they could impeach him that have enough evidence to back them up.

And what @funhusker said about Trump’s “charity.”

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RedNebraskan said:
If that was true, he would have been impeached by now or at least begun the first stages of impeachment.
Click to expand...


Not without the the senate in control of Republicans sympathetic to Trump. The house can introduce articles of impeachment with a simple majority, but conviction requires two-thirds majority from the Senate after the trial.

GOPers in the Senate are going to have to start turning their backs on Trump for impeachment to work. Which will require intense public pressure.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RedNebraskan said:
If that was true, he would have been impeached by now
Click to expand...


By whom? The Republican-held congress? C'mon.

RedNebraskan said:
or at least begun the first stages of impeachment. 
Click to expand...


They have. So far there are convictions and/or cooperation by Trump's:

Campaign Chairman

Lawyer

National Security Advisor

Campaign Staffer

Campaign Advisor

What do you think has been going on the past two years?

 
RedNebraskan said:
If that was true, he would have been impeached by now or at least begun the first stages of impeachment.
Click to expand...


Yeah...the fact he hasn't been impeached yet, is not evidence that there isn't grounds for it.  Ulty pretty much sums it up.

Ulty said:
Not without the the senate in control of Republicans sympathetic to Trump. The house can introduce articles of impeachment with a simple majority, but conviction requires two-thirds majority from the Senate after the trial.
Click to expand...




After watching what was shown today, do you honestly think enough Republicans would break ranks to impeach him no matter what evidence they saw?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top