What in hell is going on ?

[Independent Voter]

What am I missing here. I always thought that the impeachment process was two separate actions. The Congress conducted a trial and when the trial was complete, they presented the information to the Senate which acted as a jury looking at the information the Congress had presented and making a judgement.

Now it seams as if the Congress has decided that it did not do the job it was required to do and wants the Senate to continue the trial rather than be the jury.

Seams to me that the system is a bit out of whack .

[Truckman]

Apparently, since some Congresspersons started gathering evidence for the impeachment process before President Trump had even been elected, they have now come to the conclusion that four years was not enough time to get the dirt they need...Now they want additional time to make their case...Very well, they can have four more years, but then no more do-overs......Ben

[wacojoe]

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), the Ranking Member of the Appropriations Committee adamantly opposed Senate impeachment witnesses during former President Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial, declaring that the trial was “not a make-up exam for an incomplete inquiry by the House.”

Leahy, who escorted Chief Justice Roberts to the Senate on Thursday, opposed the proposition of witnesses in the Senate impeachment trial of Clinton, contending that the inquiry conducted by the House should have sufficed.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...plete-inquiry/

Just to further along this hipocrisy parade.

This process is often likened to a trial. Not even close. In a real trial, the jurors are chosen by processes, which attempt to select jurors by eliminating those with preformed prejudices against one side or the other, especially the accused in a criminal proceeding. Not here, where the jury is predetermined as the single most politically prejudiced group in America — the whole of the U.S. Senate. There is no option to winnow or cull jurors with predetermined opinions or even stakes in the game (try the batch of senators who have campaign all over the country for the accused’s job and have each already declared him “guilty” on numerous occasions). In other words, impeachment is a political farce.

[Billy_Rightwing]

What a bunch of bull roar, if they get rid of him he would get reelected to a third term.

[Honda]

History may not treat Trump kindly, but it damn sure won't treat this bunch in the House as anything more than a bunch of unethical partisan idiots. And you heard it here first if Trump is reelected and the Dems hold the House they will impeach him again. If the Senate goes Dem after 2020 Trump will be impeached, convicted and out before the end the first year of his second term. Anybody wanna have a friendly wager?

[wacojoe]

^^^
The senate, even with a Democrat majority, would still have to have at least 67 vote to convict.

[Honda]

^^^
The senate, even with a Democrat majority, would still have to have at least 67 vote to convict.

True but I fear that there are more cheesy prick Rep imposters like Mitt wandering around.

[Mike]

I think Trump will be re-elected and we will win back the House and gain seats in the Senate due to the behavior of the democrats. The people are sick and tired of their collective BS of an impeachment. On top of that, most people don't want anything to do with the new socialist movement the democrats have put forth. I count is as a landslide win in 2020.

[Independent Voter]

Everyone [ Repb ] is preaching LANDSLIDE IN 2020. That may not be so unless, we get out the vote. NEVER assume the Dems won't try to out vote a complacent Repb voter party.

[Honda]

I think it is going to be closer than some may think. The hatred for Trump runs strong and deep and those folks are angry, very angry. They are also engaged. I think it will go to the wire and certainly no landslide, but that would be fun a landslide that is.

[Truckman]

Everyone [ Repb ] is preaching LANDSLIDE IN 2020. That may not be so unless, we get out the vote. NEVER assume the Dems won't try to out vote a complacent Repb voter party.

Clinton and the Democrats learned that lesson in 2016...No politician should ever forget it......Ben

[CactusCurt]

Trump ain't doing anything to appease the wimmenz. I believe they hold the key, the rest of us are just fortifying our positions.

[UTAH]

...Mitt wandering around.

Hey!

Some of you may recall that I opposed Mitt when he was going for the Presidency. Much of my displeasure came from serving under him for 3 months during the 2002 Winter Olympics. I did not like him at all because of the way he treated people.

However, since that time, I've gotten to know Mitt. He's in the same Stake as my father and they often talk at church (when Mitt is in town). Romney has a beautiful mansion in Holiday (which is an older section of Salt Lake City). I think aging and some political losses matured Mitt. He just does not seem to relish power and authority as much as he did. In fact, he seems to be a rather pleasant guy. If I had the opportunity to vote for him again - I would.

People change. And, I think Mitt has. Others may not see that, but, who can tell another why we really like or dislike someone?

Carry on, my friends. Please don't consider this an attempt to derail the discussion. I merely wanted to throw in my thoughts about Mitt Romney while I was here.

Hunter

[Mike]

My biggest fear is Bloomberg's money. If the voters don't pay attention, he will buy the presidency and much more. We really need spending limits to help even the field.

[Honda]

^^^^^^

I saw one of Bloomies ads today. He is unequivocally absolutely promising free health care for all. If that could be done without bankrupting the nation and taxing the middle class at 40% I would be all for it but I don't think it can.