Place your bets, will the democrats actually vote for impeachment or abstain from voting.
>Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) filed articles of impeachment against President Trump on Tuesday under a process that will force a House floor vote by the end of this week.
>Green introduced his articles of impeachment after the House passed a resolution largely along party lines condemning Trump for suggesting that four progressive freshman congresswomen of color - Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), Ilhan Omar (Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.) - "go back" to their countries.
>Green said that the House should go beyond condemning Trump and move to remove him from office.
>It will be the third impeachment floor vote forced by Green in the last two years, but the first since Democrats took control of the House.
>Green previously forced procedural votes on articles of impeachment against Trump in December 2017 and January 2018. Both efforts drew the support of about 60 House Democrats.
>A total of 84 House Democrats currently support launching an impeachment inquiry, as well as independent Rep. Justin Amash (Mich.), according to The Hill's whip list. >But Democratic leaders -- and the majority of the caucus -- are not yet on board as they seek to continue ongoing investigations of the Trump administration.
>A floor vote will force all House Democrats to go on the record about an issue where they have yet to reach consensus.
>Some Democrats in favor of impeachment said on Tuesday that Green's timing isn't ideal given that special counsel Robert Mueller will be testifying before Congress next week about his report on whether Trump obstructed justice in the Russian election interference investigation. Those Democrats, however, said that they would likely vote in favor of Green's latest effort.
>Green gave House Democratic leaders a heads up that he would be filing the articles of impeachment on Tuesday.
>He filed them as a "privileged" resolution, meaning that under House rules it must be considered on the floor within two legislative days. That would mean the House will have to take action by Thursday.
http://archive.is/ST5us
https://youtu.be/bQDG-ru6PTQ
/mlpol/ - My Little Politics
Archived thread
1563323957_1.jpg (108.7 KB, 1024x694, Optimized-Trump-Impeachment-1024x694.jpg)
>>231264
>impeachment
It looks to me like desperation. So many blunders committed by the commies will hand over to Trump a victory in 2020.
But, because all these politicians are muppets on kikes' payroll and do as told, I doubt this move is going anywhere or is real.
>impeachment
It looks to me like desperation. So many blunders committed by the commies will hand over to Trump a victory in 2020.
But, because all these politicians are muppets on kikes' payroll and do as told, I doubt this move is going anywhere or is real.
>>231351
No kidding. Democrats are really shooting themselves in the foot when they try to impeach the most popular president in recent history.
No kidding. Democrats are really shooting themselves in the foot when they try to impeach the most popular president in recent history.
There are literally no grounds for impeachment. More time and money wasted to virtue signal. It's all so tiresome.
>>231264
It amazes me how they are still taking his bait after all this time. Referring to anything Trump does to screw with these morons as 4D chess at this point is giving everyone involved entirely too much credit. This is like one dimensional checkers, and he probably couldn't lose to these cretins if he wanted to.
It amazes me how they are still taking his bait after all this time. Referring to anything Trump does to screw with these morons as 4D chess at this point is giving everyone involved entirely too much credit. This is like one dimensional checkers, and he probably couldn't lose to these cretins if he wanted to.
>>231381
It's counterproductive for them to waste their time with this but they're too stupid to know that. I'm starting to think Trump INTENDED to piss them off with those tweets and rile them up into doing this.
It's counterproductive for them to waste their time with this but they're too stupid to know that. I'm starting to think Trump INTENDED to piss them off with those tweets and rile them up into doing this.
>House votes to set aside impeachment resolution against Trump
>The U.S. House of Representatives voted Wednesday to table an impeachment resolution against President Donald Trump, effectively killing the measure for now but not burying the issue that has divided Democrats.
>The resolution's sponsor, Democratic Representative Al Green, was seeking to capitalize on growing criticism of Trump after the president's recent attacks on minority congresswomen.
>The House voted 332 to 95 to set aside the measure.
>Green had failed twice before to get an impeachment resolution passed, but Wednesday marked the first time the full House had addressed the matter since Democrats took the majority earlier this year.
http://archive.is/ALWCo
>The U.S. House of Representatives voted Wednesday to table an impeachment resolution against President Donald Trump, effectively killing the measure for now but not burying the issue that has divided Democrats.
>The resolution's sponsor, Democratic Representative Al Green, was seeking to capitalize on growing criticism of Trump after the president's recent attacks on minority congresswomen.
>The House voted 332 to 95 to set aside the measure.
>Green had failed twice before to get an impeachment resolution passed, but Wednesday marked the first time the full House had addressed the matter since Democrats took the majority earlier this year.
http://archive.is/ALWCo
>>231384
>I'm starting to think Trump INTENDED to piss them off with those tweets and rile them up into doing this
That's exactly what he did. Everyone on both sides at this point is pretty familiar with his Twitter schtick and nobody is going to change their mind about him one way or the other on the basis of something like this. People who think he's racist and icky for tweeting stuff like this will continue to do so, people who aren't bothered will continue to not be bothered. He is basically baiting the Democrats into one-upping themselves on their crazy "we hate America" rhetoric, and to waste their time trying to impeach him when they should be campaigning. Probably the one thing that could realistically sink him in 2020 is if Joe Biden successfully gets his party to calm down so he can present himself as the "moderate, reasonable" option. That can't happen if the whole party keeps pushing itself further and further left, which is what Trump is currently goading them into doing. The best situation for Trump is for the left to be as crazy and angry as possible and for everyone to see it, and so far all he has to do to keep that particular fire stoked is to keep acting like the Trump we've already seen and have already made up our minds about.
>I'm starting to think Trump INTENDED to piss them off with those tweets and rile them up into doing this
That's exactly what he did. Everyone on both sides at this point is pretty familiar with his Twitter schtick and nobody is going to change their mind about him one way or the other on the basis of something like this. People who think he's racist and icky for tweeting stuff like this will continue to do so, people who aren't bothered will continue to not be bothered. He is basically baiting the Democrats into one-upping themselves on their crazy "we hate America" rhetoric, and to waste their time trying to impeach him when they should be campaigning. Probably the one thing that could realistically sink him in 2020 is if Joe Biden successfully gets his party to calm down so he can present himself as the "moderate, reasonable" option. That can't happen if the whole party keeps pushing itself further and further left, which is what Trump is currently goading them into doing. The best situation for Trump is for the left to be as crazy and angry as possible and for everyone to see it, and so far all he has to do to keep that particular fire stoked is to keep acting like the Trump we've already seen and have already made up our minds about.
>>231379
Did Democrats vote against Trump's impeachment?
Why?
Does even the DNC's pedos not want "La Excrementa Squadra starring Prostitutio" in charge?
Did Democrats vote against Trump's impeachment?
Why?
Does even the DNC's pedos not want "La Excrementa Squadra starring Prostitutio" in charge?
>>231867
Perhaps they've realized it will just annoy the normalfags even more, which is not in their interests during an election.
Perhaps they've realized it will just annoy the normalfags even more, which is not in their interests during an election.
>Two Democrats vow to press forward on Trump impeachment
>House Democratic leaders were successful Wednesday in staving off a bid to impeach President Trump, but the effort is far from dead.
>A handful of Democrats added their names last week to the long list of lawmakers now endorsing an impeachment inquiry, growing the tally to more than a third of the caucus.
>Rep. Al Green, the Texas Democrat who forced last week's impeachment vote, is threatening to revisit the issue later this cycle. And Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), who had introduced articles of impeachment in the last Congress, says he plans to do so again, likely after the long August recess.
>An escalation in the Democratic effort to oust the president could deepen the dilemma facing Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and her leadership team, who have walked a delicate line between discouraging impeachment, which most voters oppose, without incensing a liberal base that's grown increasingly outraged with Trump's behavior - and the go-slow strategy of Democratic leaders.
>Pelosi and the party's top brass favor a methodical investigative approach, featuring a series of committee probes into Trump's actions, including those related to former special counsel Robert Mueller's probe into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.
>"We have six committees that are working on following the facts in terms of any abuse of power, obstruction of justice and the rest that the president may have engaged in," Pelosi said hours before the vote on Green's impeachment resolution. "That is the serious path that we are on."
>Still, a growing number of Democrats are backing the more aggressive move to launch an impeachment inquiry, with at least four lawmakers - Reps. Peter Welch (Vt.), Bill Pascrell (N.J.), Ann Kirkpatrick (Ariz.) and Rick Larsen (Wash.) - endorsing the effort last week after Trump implored four minority congresswomen to "go back" to their countries.
>The announcements brought the tally of Democratic impeachment supporters to 87. And that list is likely to grow after Mueller testifies before both the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees on Wednesday.
>Green's resolution, accusing the president of inciting racial tensions across the country, highlighted the Democratic fissures. Siding with Pelosi, 137 Democrats voted to table the measure, effectively killing it. But 94 Democrats bucked leadership and joined Green - a jump from the 66 Democrats who supported a similar resolution, also sponsored by Green, in January of 2018.
>The list of Democrats opposing the motion to table featured several standout names, including members of the leadership team - Reps. Katherine Clark (Mass.), David Cicilline (R.I.) and Ted Lieu (Calif.) - and the chairmen of the Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.).
>Both Clark and Nadler said afterwards that they don't support an immediate move to impeachment, but were simply protesting leadership's decision to table Green's resolution, in lieu of referring it to the Judiciary Committee.
>Nadler, who has reportedly pressed Pelosi behind closed doors to launch an impeachment inquiry, said it's "premature to say"if he would have acted on a referral to his panel.
>"I thought it was the wrong motion. ... I thought it should have been referred to the Judiciary Committee," he said. "We're investigating the president, so I've said all options are on the table."
>Green, meanwhile, said he was encouraged by the growing support, versus the two measures he brought to the floor in the last Congress, and vowed to force votes on another resolution this cycle - if no one else does.
>"The process isn't over," he said after Wednesday's vote. "I've said all along this is not something I desire to do. But if it is not done by someone, then I will.
>"The president, at some point, will be impeached."
http://archive.is/BsQfm
>House Democratic leaders were successful Wednesday in staving off a bid to impeach President Trump, but the effort is far from dead.
>A handful of Democrats added their names last week to the long list of lawmakers now endorsing an impeachment inquiry, growing the tally to more than a third of the caucus.
>Rep. Al Green, the Texas Democrat who forced last week's impeachment vote, is threatening to revisit the issue later this cycle. And Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), who had introduced articles of impeachment in the last Congress, says he plans to do so again, likely after the long August recess.
>An escalation in the Democratic effort to oust the president could deepen the dilemma facing Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and her leadership team, who have walked a delicate line between discouraging impeachment, which most voters oppose, without incensing a liberal base that's grown increasingly outraged with Trump's behavior - and the go-slow strategy of Democratic leaders.
>Pelosi and the party's top brass favor a methodical investigative approach, featuring a series of committee probes into Trump's actions, including those related to former special counsel Robert Mueller's probe into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.
>"We have six committees that are working on following the facts in terms of any abuse of power, obstruction of justice and the rest that the president may have engaged in," Pelosi said hours before the vote on Green's impeachment resolution. "That is the serious path that we are on."
>Still, a growing number of Democrats are backing the more aggressive move to launch an impeachment inquiry, with at least four lawmakers - Reps. Peter Welch (Vt.), Bill Pascrell (N.J.), Ann Kirkpatrick (Ariz.) and Rick Larsen (Wash.) - endorsing the effort last week after Trump implored four minority congresswomen to "go back" to their countries.
>The announcements brought the tally of Democratic impeachment supporters to 87. And that list is likely to grow after Mueller testifies before both the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees on Wednesday.
>Green's resolution, accusing the president of inciting racial tensions across the country, highlighted the Democratic fissures. Siding with Pelosi, 137 Democrats voted to table the measure, effectively killing it. But 94 Democrats bucked leadership and joined Green - a jump from the 66 Democrats who supported a similar resolution, also sponsored by Green, in January of 2018.
>The list of Democrats opposing the motion to table featured several standout names, including members of the leadership team - Reps. Katherine Clark (Mass.), David Cicilline (R.I.) and Ted Lieu (Calif.) - and the chairmen of the Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.).
>Both Clark and Nadler said afterwards that they don't support an immediate move to impeachment, but were simply protesting leadership's decision to table Green's resolution, in lieu of referring it to the Judiciary Committee.
>Nadler, who has reportedly pressed Pelosi behind closed doors to launch an impeachment inquiry, said it's "premature to say"if he would have acted on a referral to his panel.
>"I thought it was the wrong motion. ... I thought it should have been referred to the Judiciary Committee," he said. "We're investigating the president, so I've said all options are on the table."
>Green, meanwhile, said he was encouraged by the growing support, versus the two measures he brought to the floor in the last Congress, and vowed to force votes on another resolution this cycle - if no one else does.
>"The process isn't over," he said after Wednesday's vote. "I've said all along this is not something I desire to do. But if it is not done by someone, then I will.
>"The president, at some point, will be impeached."
http://archive.is/BsQfm
>>232192
Can't they just do it already? I'm sick of waiting.
Either impeach the guy or don't. Make up your goddamn minds.
Can't they just do it already? I'm sick of waiting.
Either impeach the guy or don't. Make up your goddamn minds.
>>232209
After thinking about it, I am for impeachment.
War is needed as a stepping stone to hang those commies.
After thinking about it, I am for impeachment.
War is needed as a stepping stone to hang those commies.
>>232209
>>232211
I fully agree. But I think Pelosi's plan is to start the impeachment around election time, so we have to wait until then. This way the main stream news will be about the impeachment and the dems candidate can sail under the radar as all questions will be about how bad Trump is.
I don't think the dems will start impeachment after the election as that will show that it's only because they are sore losers and that impeachment is a political ploy. What I'm excited to see is the counter card that will be played once impeachment is initiated.
>>232211
I fully agree. But I think Pelosi's plan is to start the impeachment around election time, so we have to wait until then. This way the main stream news will be about the impeachment and the dems candidate can sail under the radar as all questions will be about how bad Trump is.
I don't think the dems will start impeachment after the election as that will show that it's only because they are sore losers and that impeachment is a political ploy. What I'm excited to see is the counter card that will be played once impeachment is initiated.
13 replies | 4 files | 8 UUIDs | Archived