Formal Impeachment Inquiry of Trump Begins

This is all Trump wants people to latch on to from the transcripts. He’s blind to the fact it damns him:

As far as Trump is concerned, these supposed motivations are all that matter. The truth of his accusations, and the truth of his motivations don’t actually mean anything. He just figures that if people see this in print they’ll believe him simply because he said it, because worthy people will understand that Trump knows best.

And besides, how could we possibly question or impeach him when the real criminal, Biden, is still out there trying to take over our country for those Democrat ingrates.

So, forgive my ignorance here, but if the House impeaches, is the Senate actually required to hold a trial?

You know what they don’t even have to defend it. Just repeat over and over that Joe Biden is a criminal and the media will run with it. Then, have a temper tantrum if anyone in the media has the balls to point out the truth of the matter, and do nothing and laugh while foreign journalists get arrested or killed in Egypt or Saudi Arabia and say, “Wouldn’t it be a shame if this happened to you?”

This is our government. Sorry, but I expect nothing at this point. No faith, no hope, our populace is too evil or stupid to care.

OK. I thought labeling it the “… but I did not shoot the deputy” defense was clever. But the Henry II reference is even better, as it appears to exactly reflect how Trump (and mafia dons) operate.

They are. And required to vote and go on record with that vote.

Thanks. I was hoping it wouldn’t be the case where McConnell could just decline to take it up.

I would bet a bunch of money that McConnell will only bring it up after a long court battle to do so. He will do everything possible to avoid it, no matter what the risk.

I did too, though the “that baby had it coming” defense might be a better descriptor before all is said and done.

What requires them to hold a trial?

“The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.”

Nothing there seems to compel it, any more than the Senate was compelled to vote on Garland’s nomination.

True. But maybe the question is how much of the media runs with Trump’s defense. Literally nothing will move Hannity, Dobbs, etc. But the dedicated bothsiders may change. Hell, someone linked Chuck freaking Todd asking tough questions – even followups – upthread! He’s been right there with Habermann on the both-sides spectrum.

If everyone outside the Fox/ Breitbart orbit rejects Trump’s bullshit, I think that’s a really big deal.

True, it is essentially implied, though with the Garland hearing McConnell could constitutionally argue that the Senate’s “advise and consent” duty was what he was doing by refusing to bring Garland to a vote.

There is no advise and consent on impeachment.

I suspect that refusing to bring this to a trial and vote is far more politically damaging than doing so.

Probably nothing. And even if there is a requirement, it’s not like Mitch won’t do whatever he wants anyway.

But where does that leave Trump, exactly? If he’s impeached, but not convicted, he can’t claim victory. There’s no plausible claim of exoneration. It will be seen as a purely partisan move. If the public believes there was some real wrongdoing, I don’t think Mitch burying it helps Trump much.

Maybe. WTF do I know. WTF does anyone know, really, about how this all plays out ;)

Who’s going to hold him accountable? Kentucky voters? Angry liberals at fancy restaurants is the best we can hope for. Mitch McConnell can’t eat $250 farm to table meals anymore, he’ll have to order Grubhub.

So, I came over to the forums in a panic because one of the main headlines I saw one Bing this morning was “The whistleblower complaint may end up being worse for Joe Biden than Trump,” Washington Post. I assumed that we were looking at the Mueller testimony all over again.

And here’s the thing, Trump is absolutely achieving his goal with regard to tainting Biden. It’s the classic authoritarian misinformation campaign where the thing you are saying doesn’t need to be true, it’s enough to sow suspicion and make folks who aren’t paying close attention assume that there could be something there and who knows what to believe.

Which is not to say that this isn’t absurdly harmful to Trump as well but, in the meantime, while this all plays out, mission accomplished as far as putting questions about Biden on a national stage.

I don’t think so…not this time.

Trump sycophants tried this yesterday, and the folks on CNN who normally just nod along were shutting that shit down hard. It wasn’t working.

I gotta say… I am blown away that even this transcript that Trump released is ridiculously damning.

Mitt Romney’s brow is going to be working overtime today, that’s for sure.

Poor Lindsay Graham isnt going to know who to blow today. Reek without master is sad Reek.

Remember when Trump Jr released the emails of him setting up a Trump Tower meeting with Putin’s people, on Twitter. Man, Twitter people sure thought that was the end for Donald!