"A Blue Wave In November Guarantees Trump’s Impeachment"

[David Hartung]

https://www.toddstarnes.com/uncategorized/starnes-a-blue-wave-in-november-guarantees-trumps-impeachment/

Mr. Starnes may have a point.

When the House impeached President Clinton, I was absolutely livid that
the Senate chose unanimously, to hold a "show" trial. To me it appears
that the decision was made before the trial ever started that Clinton
would not be convicted. In my opinion that was inexcusable. Should the
House choose to impeach President Trump, the same standard holds. The
Senate should hold a fair trial with witness testimony, evidence, the
works. I simply do not believe that an honest trial would lead to a
conviction of President Trump.

Having said that, if the House impeaches, does the Senate have
Constitutional authority to refuse to try the case, or to schedule the
trial after the 2020 elections?

[Rudy Canoza]

On 8/13/2018 6:53 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> https://www.toddstarnes.com/uncategorized/starnes-a-blue-wave-in-november-guarantees-trumps-impeachment/
>
>
> Mr. Starnes may have a point.

Starnes is a fucking idiot.

> When the House impeached President Clinton, I was absolutely livid that
> the Senate chose unanimously, to hold a "show" trial. To me it appears
> that the decision was made before the trial ever started that Clinton
> would not be convicted.

That was the right thing to do, given that an earlier wrong thing - the
House articles of impeachment - had been done. Nothing Clinton did rose
to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors. It was pure political
"gotcha-ism". There really was a vast right-wing conspiracy, a
determination to destroy Clinton just because they hated him.

The right wing only hated Clinton because he was a constant reminder
that they had lost the 1960s culture wars. That's all it was. He
dodged the draft, he smoked pot and didn't apologize for it, he had long
unkempt hair, and he criticized the war while on foreign soil. Nothing
he did as governor of Arkansas or as president could explain the right
wing's insane rabid hatred of him.

[ed...@post.com]

If the Senate has a Democrat majority intent on removing fat Tubby, why would they refuse to try the case and why should they wait till after 2020?

[Matt]

On Monday, August 13, 2018 at 9:54:04 AM UTC-4, David Hartung wrote:

If your question is whether or not the Senate CAN refuse to try the case .. the answer is no, the process is spelled out in the Constitution. The House votes to impeach, the process moves to the Senate, where conviction means ouster and potential criminal charges.

If the Senate is tied, or held by a single vote, the best strategy would be to impeach members of that body, thus removing them from the process.

Don't think it wouldn't happen. The Republicans have proven that the law no longer applies.

[Siri Cruise]

In article <33fea11e-b93b-41bd...@googlegroups.com>,

"ed...@post.com" <ed...@post.com> wrote:

> If the Senate has a Democrat majority intent on removing fat Tubby, why would
> they refuse to try the case and why should they wait till after 2020?

It takes 2/3 of the Senate to convict. To get 2/3 Democrats would require most
or all of the November races, and you don't even you all Democrats would
impeach. iDJT is not in danger until most Republicans agree he goes.

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
An almond doesn't lactate. This post / \
Yet another supercilious snowflake for justice. insults Islam. Mohammed

[Rudy Canoza]

On 8/13/2018 7:31 AM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> In article <33fea11e-b93b-41bd...@googlegroups.com>,
> "ed...@post.com" <ed...@post.com> wrote:
>
>> If the Senate has a Democrat majority intent on removing fat Tubby, why would
>> they refuse to try the case and why should they wait till after 2020?
>
> It takes 2/3 of the Senate to convict. To get 2/3 Democrats would require most
> or all of the November races, and you don't even you all Democrats would
> impeach. iDJT is not in danger until most Republicans agree he goes.
>

An impeachment proceeding need not result in the removal of President
Shitbag from office in order for it to have great value, although
removal certainly would be the best outcome for the country. There
would be tremendous value in the political knee-capping it would be for
President Shitbag. He possibly wouldn't be completely paralyzed, but
close enough.

If there is a Senate trial, I wonder if Rehnquist's ornate Gilbert &
Sullivan robe would fit Roberts?

[milt....@gmail.com]

Starnes is not just a moron, I wouldn't call him "Mr." on his best day.

If the House impeaches, the Senate has to hold the trial. It's not a matter of choice.

Of course, there's a better than even chance Democrats will take the Senate, too. They only have to pick up two seats and they look like they could pick up at least 4-5. Arizona, for example, looks like it will go Blue to replace Flake this year, and that alone will make it 50-50.

[milt....@gmail.com]

He's assuming the GOP will keep the Senate. I might have done the same a year ago, but looking at polls right now, of the eight Republican seats that are up, the only sure Republican win is Romney in Utah. The rest are really close or led by Democrats.

[milt....@gmail.com]

Once they list the crimes and (especially) the misdemeanors (he is the most incompetent person to ever hold the office, so there are many), even a lot of moderate Republicans will vote to convict. Keep in mind, while there are 24 Democrats and 8 Republicans up for election this time, the number will be flipped in 2020, with 9 Democrats and 22 Republicans, with two seats undetermined right now.

[David Hartung]

As imperfect as Trump is, he has gone a long way to reverse the damage
to this country caused by President Obama. The Democrat desire to
impeach Trump is directly related to this fact.

[Rudy Canoza]

<yawn> Just another of your idiotic vague generalizations that is
provably false. You can't identify any "damage" President Obama did,
and you can't identify any positive changes President Shitbag has
undertaken to "reverse" the mythical damage.

The *only* reason you're such a slavish Trump lickspittle is because
he's a fat white male with (R) after his name, while Obama was black
with (D). You're a racist and a knee-jerk ideologue, that's all.

*I* can cite quite a laundry list of things Obama did that I think were
bad and wrong, but you can't - it's only that he was black and (D). You
are completely transparent.

Regardless of policies, Obama at least comported himself with dignity.
Trump is a fucking pig - the only way the word "dignity" can be used in
a sentence with "Trump" is in pointing out that he has none.

[milt....@gmail.com]

What damage is that, David?

Be specific. List all the things Obama fucked up and Trump fixed.

The desire to impeach Trump is based on his rank incompetence and his overwhelming corruption. He makes George W Bush look like a compassionate genius. Trump has never divested himself of his business, he and his kids, who are now government employees, continue to do Trump Organization business on the taxpayers' dime. That's a violation of the Emoluments Clause, as is the loan he received from China to build a resort in Indonesia, as is his regime's tendency to put foreign leaders up in the Trump International Hotel in the Old Post Office Building, for which he is both lessee and landlord right now.

Then, there are his weekly vacations at his own resorts, which means he and his entire entourage are essentially paying Trump himself for rooms, meals and other amenities. His kids have taken vacations on the taxpayers' dime and they are piggy-backing private business onto public junkets, again at taxpayers' expense.

Trump has unilaterally pulled us out of free trade deals without replacing them, or even proposing a replacement. He claims he made an agreement with North Korea, which was not actually an agreement to do anything but talk about an agreement, and he happily told the American people to sleep easy, that NK's nukes were going away. Well, since then, they have expanded their nuclear program. Trump also agreed to stop military exercises in the South, which was a concession, without getting anything in return.

Then, there is Helsinki, where he threw the patriots in the US intelligence community under the bus to curry favor with Putin and Russian oligarchs. Everything he does is actually positive for Russia and China, in fact. The purpose of the TPP, for example, was to create a trading bloc to compete with China, but when Trump pulled out of the TPP, guess who replaced us? I'll give you a hint; it begins with a "C"...

That's just off the top of my head.

Now, list all the horrible things you imagine Obama did. I say imagine because everything he wanted to do was essentially blocked by the GOP Congress, so...

One thing Trump keeps taking credit for is the economy, which is 100% Obama's, at least until the trade war's effects start to be felt, in about September or October...

[Rudy Canoza]

On 8/13/2018 9:40 AM, David Hartung wrote:

The wish to impeach Trump is due to his incompetence, his crookedness
and corruption, and now his treason in Helsinki.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

The BLUE WAVE is a MYTH.... it isn't going to happen.

Like wishing they could be a real boy or a real girl when they're the
opposite.... It only happens in a Disney Cartoon. Where a wooden boy
becomes a real boy. It's NOT science it's science fiction to imagine
that what you want is reality.

I spent a few hours researching the candidates in my area for Judges and
School Board.... to see what buzz words and other tell tail signs they
put out to actually signal what they are.... I picked out the Liberals
pretty easily, they can't help themselves, but to have a "tell" as to
what they lean towards. Just looking into their past tells a lot.

NOT one Liberal got past me.

--
That's Karma

[Matt]

On Monday, August 13, 2018 at 1:28:40 PM UTC-4, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
> On 08/13/2018 10:26 AM, Matt wrote:
> > On Monday, August 13, 2018 at 9:54:04 AM UTC-4, David Hartung wrote:
> >> https://www.toddstarnes.com/uncategorized/starnes-a-blue-wave-in-november-guarantees-trumps-impeachment/
> >>
> >> Mr. Starnes may have a point.
> >>
> >> When the House impeached President Clinton, I was absolutely livid that
> >> the Senate chose unanimously, to hold a "show" trial. To me it appears
> >> that the decision was made before the trial ever started that Clinton
> >> would not be convicted. In my opinion that was inexcusable. Should the
> >> House choose to impeach President Trump, the same standard holds. The
> >> Senate should hold a fair trial with witness testimony, evidence, the
> >> works. I simply do not believe that an honest trial would lead to a
> >> conviction of President Trump.
> >>
> >> Having said that, if the House impeaches, does the Senate have
> >> Constitutional authority to refuse to try the case, or to schedule the
> >> trial after the 2020 elections?
> >
> > If your question is whether or not the Senate CAN refuse to try the case .. the answer is no, the process is spelled out in the Constitution. The House votes to impeach, the process moves to the Senate, where conviction means ouster and potential criminal charges.
> >
> > If the Senate is tied, or held by a single vote, the best strategy would be to impeach members of that body, thus removing them from the process.
> >
> > Don't think it wouldn't happen. The Republicans have proven that the law no longer applies.
> >
>
> The BLUE WAVE is a MYTH.... it isn't going to happen.

Then don't worry about it. No reason to show up and vote.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

I'll be there, if for no other reason so I can laugh later when the
Democrats have a repeat performance of the Hillary implosion.

*Democrats Gone Wild*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeZ1vMc6CNQ

Democrats like this believe they should be telling me what to do....
They can barely function in "normal" society.


--
That's Karma

[Tom Sr.]

On Monday, August 13, 2018 at 9:54:04 AM UTC-4, David Hartung wrote:

> toddstarnes


Who?

. . .

[milt....@gmail.com]

We'll see what happens... isn't that Trump's primary policy?

I don't know what will happen on November 6, but I know a lot of people are fed up with the GOP right now, and not just liberals and center-left moderates. for eight years, the GOP has controlled Congress and they have passed nothing except tax cuts, the last of which is very unpopular. And the constant government shutdowns are also pissing off a lot of people. I don't see anyway the GOP keeps the House, and keeping the Senate will be difficult, since Dems only need to gain two, and there are very few Dem seats where the polls favor the Republican challenger.

[Matt]

On Monday, August 13, 2018 at 2:06:25 PM UTC-4, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
> On 08/13/2018 01:51 PM, Matt wrote:
> > On Monday, August 13, 2018 at 1:28:40 PM UTC-4, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
> >> On 08/13/2018 10:26 AM, Matt wrote:
> >>> On Monday, August 13, 2018 at 9:54:04 AM UTC-4, David Hartung wrote:
> >>>> https://www.toddstarnes.com/uncategorized/starnes-a-blue-wave-in-november-guarantees-trumps-impeachment/
> >>>>
> >>>> Mr. Starnes may have a point.
> >>>>
> >>>> When the House impeached President Clinton, I was absolutely livid that
> >>>> the Senate chose unanimously, to hold a "show" trial. To me it appears
> >>>> that the decision was made before the trial ever started that Clinton
> >>>> would not be convicted. In my opinion that was inexcusable. Should the
> >>>> House choose to impeach President Trump, the same standard holds. The
> >>>> Senate should hold a fair trial with witness testimony, evidence, the
> >>>> works. I simply do not believe that an honest trial would lead to a
> >>>> conviction of President Trump.
> >>>>
> >>>> Having said that, if the House impeaches, does the Senate have
> >>>> Constitutional authority to refuse to try the case, or to schedule the
> >>>> trial after the 2020 elections?
> >>>
> >>> If your question is whether or not the Senate CAN refuse to try the case .. the answer is no, the process is spelled out in the Constitution. The House votes to impeach, the process moves to the Senate, where conviction means ouster and potential criminal charges.
> >>>
> >>> If the Senate is tied, or held by a single vote, the best strategy would be to impeach members of that body, thus removing them from the process.
> >>>
> >>> Don't think it wouldn't happen. The Republicans have proven that the law no longer applies.
> >>>
> >>
> >> The BLUE WAVE is a MYTH.... it isn't going to happen.
> >
> > Then don't worry about it. No reason to show up and vote.
> >
>
> I'll be there

No no, no reason at all to show up. You already got this.

[Tom Sr.]

On Monday, August 13, 2018 at 12:40:53 PM UTC-4, David Hartung wrote:
> As imperfect as Trump is....


----------
https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/6lhIHSuGVWY/wL63UuwkAgAJ

On Monday, August 13, 2018 at 12:06:49 PM UTC-4, Lee wrote:

Trump Foreign Policy Held Back by
Struggle to Grasp Time Zones, Maps
Aug 13

Running an effective foreign policy for
a global hyperpower is always tricky
when the president happens to be a
personally corrupt authoritarian bigot
who is concealing shady ties to a
strategic adversary. The problem gets
even harder when the president is unable
to grasp some of the basic facts and
principles of diplomacy. Politico’s
Daniel Lippman rounds up several
harrowing new details of Trump’s
attempts to interact with world leaders.

Trump’s shortcomings as a global
strategist include, but are not
limited to, the following areas:

Knowing all the countries. Maps indicate
the world contains a bunch of countries
whose existence Trump was never made
aware of previously. “Trump appeared
confused by Nepal and Bhutan, which lie
sandwiched between India and China,” a
person familiar with one meeting tells
Lippman. “He didn’t know what those were.
He thought it was all part of India. He
was like, ‘What is this stuff in between
and these other countries?’”

Knowing how to read the names of the
countries after seeing them. “In one
case, Trump, while studying a briefer’s
map of South Asia ahead of a 2017 meeting
with India’s prime minister, mispronounced
Nepal as ‘nipple’ and laughingly referred
to Bhutan as ‘button,’ according to two
sources with knowledge of the meeting.”

It’s like having Homer Simpson as president,
but dumber.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/08/trump-foreign-policy-held-b
ack-by-grasp-of-time-zones-maps.html
----------


. . .

[Tom Sr.]

On Monday, August 13, 2018 at 12:40:53 PM UTC-4, David Hartung wrote:

> As imperfect as Trump is, he has gone a long way to reverse the damage
> to this country caused by President Obama.

----------
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-gop-awol-as-the-us-is-attacked/2018/08/12/d3279984-9cce-11e8-843b-36e177f3081c_story.html

*History Will Wonder Why These Men Defended Trump But Not Their Country*
by Joe Scarborough
August 12, 2018

Imagine that U.S. military leaders spent most of 1941 warning President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his Democratic Party of a coming Pearl Harbor attack. Then imagine history’s harsh judgment against FDR’s party had it ignored those concerns, voted against efforts to fortify the Pacific fleet and plotted the firing of generals who were working to expose the looming Japanese threat. Historians would have rightly savaged these politicians as traitors to their country.

Seventy-seven years later, President Trump and his Republican Party are showing a disturbing ambivalence toward Russia’s attacks on U.S. democracy. What exactly are we to make of their disturbing behavior? Even after Trump’s intelligence chiefs handed Republicans incontrovertible evidence of Russian malevolence, Trump dismissed the warnings as a hoax, the GOP House Intelligence Committee chairman secretly plotted against those leading the Russia investigation and Senate Republicans voted in lock step against a Democratic bill providing a stronger defense against future Russian attacks.

“The X-Files” this is not. The truth about Russia is out there, and it is staring every Republican right in the face.

Trump’s director of national intelligence said warning lights were “blinking red” and compared the threat level from Russia to what we faced leading up to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks [https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/please-dan-coats-for-the-good-of-the-country-dont-resign/2018/07/17/f24aebb2-8960-11e8-a345-a1bf7847b375_story.html].

The president’s secretary of homeland security declared that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s plot against America placed “democracy itself . . . in the cross hairs” [https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/whpb-08-02-18/h_b4373e9f04f5da63237586ce450a0962].

The president’s FBI director, in that same news conference, warned Americans that “the threat is not going away” [https://www.newsday.com/news/nation/trump-mueller-probe-russia-1.20257704].

But despite that clear and present danger, Trump still stubbornly sides with an ex-KGB spy over his own law enforcement and intelligence leaders. Just hours after his national security team delivered their harsh warnings in a White House press briefing, Trump bellowed to a Pennsylvania audience that “I had a great meeting with Putin. . . .Now we’re being hindered by the Russian hoax. It’s a hoax, okay?" [https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/02/politics/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-pennsylvania-rally/index.html]

No, Mr. President. This is not a hoax, and things are not okay.

The United States has already indicted more than two dozen Russians for their involvement in the conspiracy to undermine U.S. elections . Twelve of those indicted work for the Russian military intelligence agency, the GRU [https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/rod-rosenstein-expected-to-announce-new-indictment-by-mueller/2018/07/13/bc565582-86a9-11e8-8553-a3ce89036c78_story.html], and allegedly launched their attacks against the United States in the course of “their official capacities,” according to the Justice Department [https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/grand-jury-indicts-12-russian-intelligence-officers-hacking-offenses-related-2016-election]. Those indictments charge that Putin ramped up his attacks on the United States on July 27, 2016 — the day Trump asked Russia to find Hillary Clinton’s “30,000 emails that are missing.” [https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/13/us/politics/trump-russia-clinton-emails.html]

We don’t know yet if Trump or his associates had any direct involvement in Putin’s conspiracy to interfere in our electoral process. But only a fool would suggest that the Russian leader is an innocent man. Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s indictment documents in painstaking detail how Russia’s military spy agency hacked into America’s infrastructure and describes its ongoing efforts to destabilize our country [http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/national/read-mueller-probe-indictment-of-12-russians-for-hacking-democrats/3087/]. The forensic evidence proving Putin’s cyberwar against the United States is so comprehensive that neither the president nor his sycophants in Congress deny in good faith that Russia has been coordinating attacks against the United States for years.

So now is the time to ask again why Trump lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani is demanding a speedy end to the damning Russia investigation, when the Whitewater probe of the Clintons lasted much longer. And why did Vice President Pence spend months denying the Trump team’s contacts with Russian officials, only to pivot this past year to calling for a quick end to the investigation?

So now is the time to ask again why Trump lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani is demanding a speedy end to the damning Russia investigation, when the Whitewater probe of the Clintons lasted much longer. And why did Vice President Pence spend months denying the Trump team’s contacts with Russian officials, only to pivot this past year to calling for a quick end to the investigation? [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44072981]

Will Pence’s future presidential primary challengers remember that Americans would have never uncovered the scope and scale of Putin’s plot against Western democracies if Pence had had his way? Do House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes’s constituents in California understand that their representative is trying to use his chairmanship to destroy the careers of officials overseeing the Russia investigation? Let us hope the answer is yes.

One thing is certain: Republicans can no longer plead ignorance when it comes to Putin. Our country’s national security community has sounded the alarm. Congress has been warned that our democracy is under attack by the Russians. How GOP leaders respond to this threat will determine not only the legacy of their political party but also the resilience of a political system they have carelessly ceded to a buffoon. Unless Republican leaders begin putting country ahead of party, history’s judgment against them all will be harsh.
-----------


. . .

[Rudy Canoza]

Come on - you know Hartung never has any specifics behind his comically
vague generalizations.

[David Hartung]

What incompetence?

What corruption?

As you said, be specific, provide evidence.

[David Hartung]

the failures and corruption of the Obama Administration have been
endlessly discussed in this group, it is not necessary to list them again.

[David Hartung]

On 08/13/2018 12:14 PM, milt....@gmail.com wrote:

Specifics? Evidnce?

>That's a violation of the Emoluments Clause, as is the loan he received from China to build a resort in Indonesia,

Specifics, evidence?

> Then, there are his weekly vacations at his own resorts,

Would you rather he go to some high dollar area where he owns no
property and has to rent everything? Do you have evidence that resort is
billing the Administration for the visits?

> Trump has unilaterally pulled us out of free trade deals without replacing them,

You mean those deals which were bad for the USA?

> Then, there is Helsinki, where he threw the patriots in the US intelligence community under the bus to curry favor with Putin and Russian oligarchs.

You are welcome to your opinion, but understand that as usual you are
likely wrong.

> That's just off the top of my head.

As is usual, you are spewing trash.

[David Hartung]

Once again you are on bad drugs.

[David Hartung]

I am not saying that they should, it is merely a question which occurred
to me.

[Rudy Canoza]

You didn't answer the question.

[Rudy Canoza]

No, *you* have merely blabbered about "failures" and "corruption"
without providing any specifics at all. The fact that you have
blabbered about them doesn't mean they are real. You're a known liar,
and you're also known to spout bullshit generalizations that you have no
hope of supporting.

[Rudy Canoza]

Nope.

[Rudy Canoza]

One of your typically fuckwitted pointless thoughts.

[Steve is offline now]

On Mon, 13 Aug 2018 10:14:42 -0700 (PDT), milt....@gmail.com wrote:

>One thing Trump keeps taking credit for is the economy, which is 100% Obama's

That's nonsesne, of course. The economy was getting worse when Obama
left...