Pelosi Impeachment Inquiry
- Thread starter Big AAPL
- Start date
Interesting news item... the Senate in the Clinton impeachment voted 100-0 on set of rules for the trial. It was a partisan issue but they all voted unanimously on the rules.
Not sure why they cannot just do that here.
Not sure why they cannot just do that here.
Clearly, the impeachment is a scam or Pelosi would hand over the articles of impeachment. Dems just wanted political talking points for 2020. They are not sure what to do now.
I agree with this sentiment. Pelosi tried to pull some political strings to guarantee testimony but the senate majority has spoken and it’s time to get this show on the road.
Correct. as discussed before.
And as I mentioned, my state had two republican senators- both voted against impeaching Clinton. Those days are gone.
The thing cycling around now is this idea that bolton must testify, and has offere, whatever, so the dems insist that the Senate must do that. But the question is: Why doesn't the House just call him right now? The House says that it is sitting now - more or less as a standing impeachment committee- and is willing and able and committed to keep looking for additional charges. So call Bolton in before the House, rather than the Senate if the dems have a burning desire.
Pelosi says she is sending the Articles over next week.
No doubt, the tards will be along to explain to us how that is a win for her.
Whatever.
Or maybe the dems telling her that she needs to cap off the gameplaying was a factor. Just a thought.
Howd she make out on extracting an agreement on witnesses in advance?
No doubt, the tards will be along to explain to us how that is a win for her.
Whatever.
Or maybe the dems telling her that she needs to cap off the gameplaying was a factor. Just a thought.
Howd she make out on extracting an agreement on witnesses in advance?
To the surprise of no one:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps...k-of-iran-strike-11578619195?mod=hp_lead_pos5
White House officials told the Journal that advisers disagreed whether the order was wise, but they decided to go along with the plan after they said intelligence forecast Iranian-backed attacks on U.S. military personnel in the Middle East.
They ultimately went along with Trump’s plan once intelligence showed Suleimani would be traveling near Baghdad International Airport, where they felt he could be targeted without harming Iraqi civilians in an area where the U.S. already controls the airspace.
Republicans — including Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), who long has advocated military action against Iran — have largely backed the president’s decision.
“The important point that’s been established is that Iran is once again scared of the United States,” Cotton said.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps...k-of-iran-strike-11578619195?mod=hp_lead_pos5
White House officials told the Journal that advisers disagreed whether the order was wise, but they decided to go along with the plan after they said intelligence forecast Iranian-backed attacks on U.S. military personnel in the Middle East.
They ultimately went along with Trump’s plan once intelligence showed Suleimani would be traveling near Baghdad International Airport, where they felt he could be targeted without harming Iraqi civilians in an area where the U.S. already controls the airspace.
Republicans — including Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), who long has advocated military action against Iran — have largely backed the president’s decision.
“The important point that’s been established is that Iran is once again scared of the United States,” Cotton said.