Kristol: GOP Senators Saying in Private They Could ‘Convict’ Trump

[sneakypete]

Bill Kristol?

Wasn't he a RINO, before he defected to the other side....?

@Fishrrman

Kristol is the son of a Life Long Jewish Communist "intellectual". It is entirely possible he has "Undercover RINO" listed as his gender on his birth certificate. He seems to have never had an actual job,but is an authority on everything. His entire career has to be based on connections,because he has nothing to offer anyone but a smug look on his face and a head full of brain farts.

On his BEST DAY EVER,he is an insufferable fool,and always has been.

I am not and never have been a fan. Even when he was pretending to be a conservative. He's just too "smarmy".

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Cost them the primary? What does that mean?

@Snarknado
It means some brain-dead knuckledragging pro-Trump candidate will run against them in the primary.

I don't see how supporting Trump can cost repubs the election

A lot of smart House Republican's quit in 2018.  They knew Trump was an albatross around their necks.  The 2018 elections had the lowest number of U.S. House incumbents seeking re-election since 1992.  33 House incumbents were defeated in the 2018 general election. 

176 Democratic House incumbents ran for re-election in 2018. Two were defeated in primary elections and none were defeated in the general election.
202 Republican House incumbents ran for re-election in 2018. Two were defeated in primary elections and 29 were defeated in the general election.

[sneakypete]

Victoria33 wrote:
"My opinion is, Republican Senators know Trump needs to be removed..."

(sigh)
That's it.
I've had enough.
One more onto my ignore list.
Arrivederce!

@Fishrrman

While it is true that Trump is not the "prim and proper metrosexual RINO" of her dreams,all she was doing was stating how she thought the Senate would vote on impeachment,and why some would hesitate to vote to impeach.

IMNSHO,I think she was probably close to spot on with her prediction when it comes to outcome,even though she most likely dreams about it happening.

There are plenty of her posts to criticize her on,but not that one.

MY opinion,and worth every dollar you paid for it.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

   I noticed you failed to mention 'Raccoon Eyes' @skeeter   

tiny doll hands @skeeter

[roamer_1]

They’ll be here shortly to assure us the founders would have no problem with congress expelling a president because he has funny hair or wears ‘high-waters’. Or is a member of the opposing party.

That ain't right.

Disclaimer: I am on the record opposing impeachment at this time.

But in FACT: Impeachment is, for all intents and purposes, the very same thing as indictment.
As with the old saying, "you can indict a ham sandwich", impeachment at the discovery stage works the very same way. Anything can be dressed up to be an impeachable offense. 'High crimes and misdemeanors' is an incredibly vague standard.

In an indictment environment, the case is purposefully weighted toward the prosecutor. Many the prosecutor has been given enough rope to hang himself. Impeachment is exactly the same, but with a partisan flavor. The dems have every right to act in a partisan manner (albeit that it is likely 'enough rope to hang themselves') in exactly the same way that a prosecutor can indict in a wholly biased manner, to include secret proceedings in some cases.

At some point, the case must be finally aired before a grand jury - In the case of impeachment, that is the whole House, and the jury votes to either indict (impeach) or not. No doubt there must be a bipartisan and even-handed presentation upon the House floor, to include rebuttal for the defense. If that is not found, THAT is the point in time to cry Bullsh*t.

Up until that point, all this drama is just a waste of time, because we do not know the motive for the Dems actions... Is it all bullcrap and an attempt to ramrod a partisan conclusion, or are they playing their cards close to the vest with a bombshell waiting in the wings? Nobody knows.

So keep your powder dry.

That is all I am doing.

The point of real danger in this process is not even what they may have, in my opinion. What should have you shaking in your boots is that Tumpy may lie under oath... Or rather, that he WILL lie under oath, because that is his nature. Just like ol Billy Jeff Clinton.

And I predict that will be the endgame.

[PeteS in CA]

Did Kristol hold a seance to call up the spirit of John McCain III?

[skeeter]

That ain't right.

Disclaimer: I am on the record opposing impeachment at this time.

But in FACT: Impeachment is, for all intents and purposes, the very same thing as indictment.
As with the old saying, "you can indict a ham sandwich", impeachment at the discovery stage works the very same way. Anything can be dressed up to be an impeachable offense. 'High crimes and misdemeanors' is an incredibly vague standard.

In an indictment environment, the case is purposefully weighted toward the prosecutor. Many the prosecutor has been given enough rope to hang himself. Impeachment is exactly the same, but with a partisan flavor. The dems have every right to act in a partisan manner (albeit that it is likely 'enough rope to hang themselves') in exactly the same way that a prosecutor can indict in a wholly biased manner, to include secret proceedings in some cases.

At some point, the case must be finally aired before a grand jury - In the case of impeachment, that is the whole House, and the jury votes to either indict (impeach) or not. No doubt there must be a bipartisan and even-handed presentation upon the House floor, to include rebuttal for the defense. If that is not found, THAT is the point in time to cry Bullsh*t.

Up until that point, all this drama is just a waste of time, because we do not know the motive for the Dems actions... Is it all bullcrap and an attempt to ramrod a partisan conclusion, or are they playing their cards close to the vest with a bombshell waiting in the wings? Nobody knows.

So keep your powder dry.

That is all I am doing.

The point of real danger in this process is not even what they may have, in my opinion. What should have you shaking in your boots is that Tumpy may lie under oath... Or rather, that he WILL lie under oath, because that is his nature. Just like ol Billy Jeff Clinton.

And I predict that will be the endgame.

I understand all that, as I understand the rats are hoping through all of this trump slips up and ‘the coverup’ becomes the crime.

I am saying that although what constitutes ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ is purposely vague, it is not as vague as rats and assorted NTers are currently making it out to be. The founders are pretty clear that they did not intend for the process to be used as a means for gaining an office they could not gain at the ballot box.

[roamer_1]

I understand all that, as I understand the rats are hoping through all of this trump slips up and ‘the coverup’ becomes the crime.

I am saying that although what constitutes ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ is purposely vague, it is not as vague as rats and assorted NTers are currently making it out to be. The founders are pretty clear that they did not intend for the process to be used as a means for gaining an office they could not gain at the ballot box.

@skeeter
That is very unlikely to happen. Even if they successfully impeach Tump, and go after Pence, Pence will have time to appoint a VP... So Pelousy is not going to ascend regardless.

And any other means is largely covered by 'enough rope to hang themselves'... A witch hunt followed by a lynching would not be politically wise. Especially within the election season.
 

[truth_seeker]

I am saying that although what constitutes ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ is purposely vague, it is not as vague as rats and assorted NTers are currently making it out to be. The founders are pretty clear that they did not intend for the process to be used as a means for gaining an office they could not gain at the ballot box.

In Clinton's case, the "jury" did NOT feel the coverup (perjury) constituted the "high crime or misdemeanor" contemplated by the Founders.

So Ford was wrong, suggesting a removal would/could be for next to nothing of consequence.

Clearly from election day, the dems, the media, and #nevertrump scum, do not like the person the voting system rightfully put into the highest office.

They feel special, elite, above the unwashed masses of Trump's voters.

And like Antifa, they feel justified in using "Any Means Necessary" to prevail.

That scenario is NOT what our Founders intended.

[jmyrlefuller]

Kristol's lying.

[skeeter]

In Clinton's case, the "jury" did NOT feel the coverup (perjury) constituted the "high crime or misdemeanor" contemplated by the Founders.

So Ford was wrong, suggesting a removal would/could be for next to nothing of consequence.

Clearly from election day, the dems, the media, and #nevertrump scum, do not like the person the voting system rightfully put into the highest office.

They feel special, elite, above the unwashed masses of Trump's voters.

And like Antifa, they feel justified in using "Any Means Necessary" to prevail.

That scenario is NOT what our Founders intended.

let trump get caught flat committing perjury and you’ll see a far different outcome.