POLL: Impeachment

[Robert]

I think the testimony last night pretty much derailed the impeachment path. There is just not enough there there to bring along the populous to accept impeachment. So far, light weight issues that do not raise to the level of impeachment. Vindman did not look so good after last night.

It is also very hard to keep my focus. A lot of boring back and forth. I think Schiff is not looking good as an orbiter. You can ell he likes the power too much. His political games are easy to see. He has an easy tell when he is lying and not a really good actor. He better stay in politics because he would never make it on the big screen.

If they move forward with what they have now, I can not see it going anywhere in the Senate. Of course, the purpose is not to remove President Trump, but just to dirty him for the 2020 election. The IG report and Durham may wipe all this away. The IG report will be out the first of December. I think all this will become lost once that hits.

[Bootstrap]

If we want to know what the American people think, FiveThirtyEight has a great track record. I think it's too early to tell, the best way to find out is to wait a week after the hearings are over, but currently, most Americans think Trump committed an impeachable offense.

In building their case against Trump, Democrats are using a set of key questions that are likely to serve as the foundation for articles of impeachment. In broad strokes, they are:

1. Did Trump ask Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter?
2. Did Trump withhold military aid to pressure the Ukrainians into opening an investigation into the Bidens?
3. Did the Trump administration try to cover up Trump’s actions regarding Ukraine?

According to our poll with Ipsos, a majority of Americans agree that all three of these things happened and that they’re inappropriate behaviors for a president. But there’s less consensus about whether they’re impeachable offenses. Republicans, in particular, seem unconvinced that any of the three prongs in Democrats’ case against Trump are impeachable offenses.

Ideally, I think the hearings should be about these three questions. Most Americans think these things happened, most Americans think there was an impeachable offense, most Republicans think there was not. Of course, this is polling data, and I don't think there has been a lot of serious public discussion about what is or is not an impeachable offense. To me, the comparison to Watergate will be important. Was this at least as significant as Watergate?

[Republicans] ... agree, for the most part, that Trump did ask Ukraine to investigate the Bidens. But they mostly don’t think it’s inappropriate or impeachable for Trump to have done so. And while majorities of Republicans think that it would be inappropriate for Trump to have withheld military aid over the investigations or tried to hide information from Congress, they are much less convinced that either of those things actually happened.

The problem for Democrats is that the people who haven’t fully made up their minds about impeachment — regardless of their political orientation — don’t seem to be very engaged with the process. Only about 34 percent of respondents who aren’t as certain about their stance on impeachment are following the process somewhat or very closely, compared to 66 percent of respondents who are more certain. So while there are people out there who could still be convinced by the Democrats’ case against Trump, they’re also less likely to be paying attention.

But optimistically, maybe a lot of these people who aren't paying close attention are waiting for the facts to come out and for various people to summarize them so they don't have to wade through hours and hours of detailed testimony.

They may pay more attention when the hearings finish up and people try to summarize the findings in ways that are easy to digest.

[JimFoxvog]

So the concerns are that we need an investigation to find out if Trump asked for an investigation?

Yes, a legal investigation into whether there was an illegal request.

[Bootstrap]

So the concerns are that we need an investigation to find out if Trump asked for an investigation?

Yes, a legal investigation into whether there was an illegal request.

In many countries, authoritarian leaders use the "justice" system to protect their cronies and hound their enemies. Democracy requires safeguards to keep politicians from doing this. I feel safer in a country that has these safeguards.

Sessions was fired precisely because he refused to do this. The question is this: did Trump try to take advantage of Ukraine to get them to do it? Did he hold up miltary aid to put pressure on them, releasing it only after the whistleblower complaint came out and investigations began? We are now having an investigation to find out the answer.

That's what the impeachment inquiry is.

There are legitimate ways to conduct investigations. The question is not whether Hunter Biden or Burisma could legitimately be investigated. But Trump and Giuliani can also legitimately be investigated.

[JimFoxvog]

i think every reminder of how FEW days Congress is in session EVERY YEAR is a good reminder.
great part-time job, marvelous pay+benefits, opportunities to gain “untold” person wealth.

This seems unfair. Voting in session is not their only job. There is much research, bill-writing, and constituent services needed. Also campaigning and fund-raising, of course. Publicly financed elections could take some of the big money out of politics and allow the congressfolk to do more work.

[ohio jones]

“Democrats Tried to Impeach Every Elected GOP President Since Eisenhower”
https://www.newsmax.com/michaeldorstewi ... id/940786/

This report is not “without bias” so to speak. But, it’s not all false, either.

Starting with Nixon, there were impeachment moves of some kind into every president, I think. Most of these fizzled out quickly. It's always the opposing party that does this, some of these are mostly political stunts with little substance, others are substantive. Most of us don't even remember the ones that were not substantive.

Here are the presidents and the impeachment proceedings they faced:

• Richard M. Nixon (Republican) - Watergate

Ford?
Carter?

[*] Ronald Reagan (Republican) - Iran/Contra Affair
[*] George H. W. Bush (Republican) - Congressman Henry B. Gonzalez introduced resolutions to impeach him for starting the Gulf war, they didn't get much support and quickly died.
[*] Bill Clinton (Democrat) - Monica Lewinsky
[*] George W. Bush (Republican)
[*] Barack Obama (Democrat)
[*] Donald Trump (Republican)[/list]

Note the precision in t1's headline: Ford was not elected; Carter was a Democrat.

[temporal1]

i think every reminder of how FEW days Congress is in session EVERY YEAR is a good reminder.
great part-time job, marvelous pay+benefits, opportunities to gain “untold” person wealth.

This seems unfair. Voting in session is not their only job. There is much research, bill-writing, and constituent services needed. Also campaigning and fund-raising, of course. Publicly financed elections could take some of the big money out of politics and allow the congressfolk to do more work.

it may well be inaccurate and/or ignorant.
but i think it’s “fair” to question.

[temporal1]

This is “grapevine moment,” i read it in comments, have no idea who posted it, i don’t recall which report it was a response to. i know nothing of military protocol, possibly others here are the same.

What this does point out, tho, there is more involved than is reported (AS ALWAYS) and, different people have different views, and, priorities. So, for another perspective:

A friend posted this. I agree 100%.

Regardless of what he heard or didn’t hear, Lt Col Vindman is a disgrace to his uniform.
As a veteran it made me sick to watch this man break just about every rule in the Uniform Military Code Of Justice (UCMJ).
Just for starters..Dereliction of Duty, insubordination, unauthorized disclosure of classified information, failure to properly use the chain of command, disobeying lawful orders, etc...
The man in his own words said he set U.S. policy when he doesn’t, the President does.
His first duty when he felt something was going wrong was to direct his concerns to the President and then to his superiors.
When his superiors didn’t act as he thought the should he shared classified data with someone without a need to know.
Based on his own words he could be tried for treason because he put the interest of a foreign government above his own saying he needed to protect the interest of the Ukraine.

This man is a disgrace and should not be allowed to wear the uniform.
He may of heard something valid, but he did everything wrong after that and being a whistle blower should not protect him from what he did wrong and from violating his oath of office.

i did not write one word in the quote.
(i added line spacing, only because it helps me read details.)

[Bootstrap]

Starting with Nixon, there were impeachment moves of some kind into every president, I think. Most of these fizzled out quickly. It's always the opposing party that does this, some of these are mostly political stunts with little substance, others are substantive. Most of us don't even remember the ones that were not substantive.

Here are the presidents and the impeachment proceedings they faced:

• Richard M. Nixon (Republican) - Watergate

Ford?
Carter?

[*] Ronald Reagan (Republican) - Iran/Contra Affair
[*] George H. W. Bush (Republican) - Congressman Henry B. Gonzalez introduced resolutions to impeach him for starting the Gulf war, they didn't get much support and quickly died.
[*] Bill Clinton (Democrat) - Monica Lewinsky
[*] George W. Bush (Republican)
[*] Barack Obama (Democrat)
[*] Donald Trump (Republican)[/list]

Note the precision in t1's headline: Ford was not elected; Carter was a Democrat.

Ooops, I forgot Carter! Nice catch. I don't think there was ever any kind of impeachment proceeding involving Carter.

[temporal1]

I think the testimony last night pretty much derailed the impeachment path. There is just not enough there there to bring along the populous to accept impeachment. So far, light weight issues that do not raise to the level of impeachment. Vindman did not look so good after last night.

It is also very hard to keep my focus. A lot of boring back and forth. I think Schiff is not looking good as an orbiter. You can ell he likes the power too much. His political games are easy to see. He has an easy tell when he is lying and not a really good actor. He better stay in politics because he would never make it on the big screen.

If they move forward with what they have now, I can not see it going anywhere in the Senate.

Of course, the purpose is not to remove President Trump, but just to dirty him for the 2020 election.

The IG report and Durham may wipe all this away. The IG report will be out the first of December.
I think all this will become lost once that hits.

This is where so many are so turned-off by this process, they aren’t trying to listen.
Those hoping for damage are following.

This is a “The end justifies the means” situation that is sour. 4 years’ sour.

It’s also the reason (i suspect) if a USSC justice were involved, it might be thrown out without being heard. Now, these folks involved have law degrees, and/or lawyers aplenty, so, they know very well the games they’re playing.

They know the senate votes are not there; they know judges take a dim view of courts being exploited. Judges value the integrity of their courts. i have a hunch they do not plan to let it get to a judge, it could be grossly humiliating. so, again, gaudy political theater is fueling.

To put the country through this, knowing it will not stick, AND NOT CARING, but, they HOPE to do as much damage possible in the process, and call that a “WIN,” is pretty low.

Law school strategies.
No one expects “lofty.” Not anymore.

Who’s to blame?? - Mirrors all around.

But. What do i know?
i never dreamed DJT would be POTUS, i was convinced he did not even want the job!
why would he?? so, fwiw.