Chris Murphy: It’s ‘Possible’ Some Democrats Vote to Acquit Trump

[mystery-ak]

Sean Moran 25 Jan 2020

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) said Saturday it is “certainly possible” some Senate Democrats will vote to acquit President Donald Trump when the Senate impeachment trial concludes.

The Connecticut Democrat said that the Senate Democrat conference will likely vote for additional witnesses; however, he added that he cannot guarantee all Democrats will vote to convict the president.

Sen. Murphy said Saturday morning:

    I don’t have any reason to think there are Democrats that aren’t with us on procedural votes. It’s certainly possible there are Democrats that are going to vote no on one of the articles, two of the articles. And I don’t have a sense where everybody is on the articles. We haven’t talked about it.

more
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/25/chris-murphy-possible-some-democrats-vote-acquit-trump/

[Chosen Daughter]

If the President has nothing to hide they should allow the witnesses.  And then we should be done with this.

[mountaineer]

If the President has nothing to hide they should allow the witnesses.  And then we should be done with this.

The defendant is not required to prove anything. We should be done with this already.

[Snarknado]

What a load of crap. The dems can't afford to hand Trump a bipartisan acquittal. They made sure they had unanimity on at least the abuse article before they went forward with impeachment. The totally frivolous obstruction charge is only there to give one or two of them an "out" to appease their constituents.

[sneakypete]

If the President has nothing to hide they should allow the witnesses.  And then we should be done with this.

@Chosen Daughter

Quit lying. A quick end to this is the last thing you want because it would mean an acquittal.

What you really want is for this to still be going on on election day. Otherwise you have nothing to whine about.

[sneakypete]

The defendant is not required to prove anything. We should be done with this already.

@mountaineer

Proving guilt is not a requirement in Judgemental Chosen Daughter World. She wants you to prove innocence.

[sneakypete]

What a load of crap. The dems can't afford to hand Trump a bipartisan acquittal. They made sure they had unanimity on at least the abuse article before they went forward with impeachment. The totally frivolous obstruction charge is only there to give one or two of them an "out" to appease their constituents.

@Snarknado

I don't know how many Dims need to vote for acquittal are required for it to be considered a bi-partisan vote,but it wouldn't surprise me to see at least 6 vote for acquittal.  Not because they want to,but because Trump is popular in Dim districts,some are bound to vote that way to protect their jobs.

And....,chances are the Dims are going to push them out of the Dim Party when they do,so they will probably run as Republicans next time if they win this time.

[Snarknado]

@Snarknado

I don't know how many Dims need to vote for acquittal are required for it to be considered a bi-partisan vote,but it wouldn't surprise me to see at least 6 vote for acquittal.  Not because they want to,but because Trump is popular in Dim districts,some are bound to vote that way to protect their jobs.

And....,chances are the Dims are going to push them out of the Dim Party when they do,so they will probably run as Republicans next time if they win this time.

You think it would take more than one dem vote for Trump to gloat about the acquittal being bi-partisan?

[sneakypete]

You think it would take more than one dem vote for Trump to gloat about the acquittal being bi-partisan?

@Snarknado

I honestly don't know what to think about this. GENERALLY speaking,*I* THINK a minimum of 10 percent would have to vote to acquit for it to be truly bi-partisan,but who knows the number in today's world of "words mean what I want them to mean"?

I would not bet that 10 percent of the Dims will vote to acquit,regardless of the odds,though.

[Snarknado]

If the dems come out of this without a single repub vote in either the House or Senate, it's a crushing defeat that will go down in history as colossal hyper-partisan overreach. Losing even one dem senator on top of that would be an unmitigated disaster. That's why I say they had to have made sure Manchin's vote was locked up before they took it this far. I'm not sure how far gone Pelosi's mind is, but she's not that senile yet.

If you think about it, Schiff's failure to make a dent in public opinion might have made Manchin skittish, and that might well have been the real reason for Pelosi's delay in sending the articles. Maybe only when this "new evidence" appeared were they were able to squeeze a commitment out of him.

[sneakypete]

If the dems come out of this without a single repub vote in either the House or Senate, it's a crushing defeat that will go down in history as colossal hyper-partisan overreach. Losing even one dem senator on top of that would be an unmitigated disaster. That's why I say they had to have made sure Manchin's vote was locked up before they took it this far. I'm not sure how far gone Pelosi's mind is, but she's not that senile yet.

If you think about it, Schiff's failure to make a dent in public opinion might have made Manchin skittish, and that might well have been the real reason for Pelosi's delay in sending the articles. Maybe only when this "new evidence" appeared were they were able to squeeze a commitment out of him.

@Snarknado

All any of us are doing is just guessing. It is impossible to accurately predict what insane or stupid people who are TOTALLY lacking in actual moral convictions will do without seeing a list of who has blackmail on them and who is paying them behind the scenes.

We pretty much know what Pelosi and Schiff will do because they are locked into place by their positions and it is too late for them to back away unless they are ready to retire.

Every other Dim politician is nothing more than a guessing game.

Well,maybe not Mad Maxine and a few of the other outright loons,but I am sure you get the drift.