• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Nervous Nancy's two alternatives

Trump

DP Veteran
Joined
May 4, 2019
Messages
5,857
Reaction score
2,333
Location
Laguna Beach
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
could Nancy have a vote on resolution of censure instead of impeachment? Never heard that idea .....thoughts?

Barring any major "smoking guns" from here on out (or anything else severely changing the landscape of these impeachment proceedings), Nancy Pelosi will have quite a decision on her hands. She knows that any impeachment, to have any kind of historical validity, must have (as Jerry Nadler repeated said) broad, bipartisan support. Here are the speaker's choices:

1. Go for (in football terms) the "short, high percentage pass" and propose a resolution of censure.

In this instance, it is widely believed that she would get her broad, bipartisan support. The president would receive a loud and clear message from Congress, without the ability to take numerous victory laps while claiming "complete vindication." The country would be spared (in Pelosi's words) a "traumatic impact." The news coverage would focus on the election season and not have to provide wall-to-wall coverage of a Senate trial, which could prove politically destructive to the Democrats. Likewise, the senators currently running for president will be spared the obligation of returning to Washington having to (effectively) suspend their respective campaigns for an indefinite length of time, while they will have to "sit there quietly" and watch all that goes on in a trial, which could last weeks or even months. The many House members in "Trump districts" would likely suffer far lesser consequences at the ballot box with such a vote. And in the end, history will ultimately judge this unfortunate chapter in our history as fair to all sides.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/11/nervous_nancys_two_alternatives.html
 
could Nancy have a vote on resolution of censure instead of impeachment? Never heard that idea .....thoughts?



https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/11/nervous_nancys_two_alternatives.html
Yes she could. Many would have preferred that to impeachment, and they make good arguments in political terms. However in terms of Abuse of Power & Obstruction of Congress, she's got Trump nailed to the wall. It's not her problem if the GOP Senate won't do their job. So it seems it's going to be up to use voters to finish the job Nancy started.
 
twump and his criminal cabal are in massive legal jeopardy.

Threads like this won't change that.

Sorry about all the pain you're in, but it's going to get a LOT worse.

Threads like this are like a safe place for Trump's boys.
 
Yes she could. Many would have preferred that to impeachment, and they make good arguments in political terms. However in terms of Abuse of Power & Obstruction of Congress, she's got Trump nailed to the wall. It's not her problem if the GOP Senate won't do their job. So it seems it's going to be up to use voters to finish the job Nancy started.

Yeah, and here's what the voters will KNOW after the Schiff show is over....
Transcript/memo of calls shows no pressure, no quid pro quo.
Zelensky has said to the press all over the world, no pressure, no quid pro quo.
The Ukrainian government says they had no knowledge of promised aid money being delayed.
Ukrainian government insists that they did nothing to procure aid.
No testimony from the do gooder faux wb who met with Schiff prior to the complaint being filed.
 
Threads like this are like a safe place for Trump's boys.
Yes, here they are safe to go into their fantasies about Durham and Horowitz locking up every Democrat in DC, and jerk off to images of Nancy Reagan.
 
Yeah, and here's what the voters will KNOW after the Schiff show is over....
Transcript/memo of calls shows no pressure, no quid pro quo.
Zelensky has said to the press all over the world, no pressure, no quid pro quo.
The Ukrainian government says they had no knowledge of promised aid money being delayed.
Ukrainian government insists that they did nothing to procure aid.
No testimony from the do gooder faux wb who met with Schiff prior to the complaint being filed.
We've been through this before, and I completely disagree on the bolded point, no matter how often you try to pound it home.

I see:

1] Abuse of Power
2] Obstruction of Congress

With #1 being apparent in the call memo, and #2 being Trump S.O.P./M.O
 
Yes she could. Many would have preferred that to impeachment, and they make good arguments in political terms. However in terms of Abuse of Power & Obstruction of Congress, she's got Trump nailed to the wall. It's not her problem if the GOP Senate won't do their job. So it seems it's going to be up to use voters to finish the job Nancy started.
Back in 1998 the Democrats were in the position that Republicans are right now.

When the GOP decided to push through articles of impeachment and table a censure resolution, there was nothing the Democrats could do to stop them. The majority party sets the rules as to what gets voted on in these kind of matters, and there's really no parliamentary trick the minority can pull to stop the majority.

Now, the Democrats can do the same thing to the Republicans, some twenty years later.

The Democrats are in charge now. They can block any proposals from the GOP (as they did today), do things along total party lines, and pass articles of impeachment to the full floor, and there's not a damn thing the Republicans can do to stop them.
 
We've been through this before, and I completely disagree on the bolded point, no matter how often you try to pound it home.

I see:

1] Abuse of Power
2] Obstruction of Congress

With #1 being apparent in the call memo, and #2 being Trump S.O.P./M.O

3# Bribery.
 
Back in 1998 the Democrats were in the position that Republicans are right now.

When the GOP decided to push through articles of impeachment and table a censure resolution, there was nothing the Democrats could do to stop them. The majority party sets the rules as to what gets voted on in these kind of matters, and there's really no parliamentary trick the minority can pull to stop the majority.

Now, the Democrats can do the same thing to the Republicans, some twenty years later.

The Democrats are in charge now. They can block any proposals from the GOP (as they did today), do things along total party lines, and pass articles of impeachment to the full floor, and there's not a damn thing the Republicans can do to stop them.
Uh, just wondering? What has all this got to do with the decision to censure, or not?
 
Uh, just wondering? What has all this got to do with the decision to censure, or not?
I'm saying that the Republicans have only their own precedents to blame for any theoretical censure never seeing the light of day for a vote.

FTR, censure should be reserved for those who take responsibility and express remorse, of which the POS in the WH has none.
 
We've been through this before, and I completely disagree on the bolded point, no matter how often you try to pound it home.

I see:

1] Abuse of Power
2] Obstruction of Congress

With #1 being apparent in the call memo, and #2 being Trump S.O.P./M.O

I'm merely telling you what the voting public will KNOW when going to the polls to vote, thanks to Nancy's ill-thought-out decision to choose impeachment instead of censure.
My opinion.
Of course, you have the right to yours.
 
I'm saying that the Republicans have only their own precedents to blame for any theoretical censure never seeing the light of day for a vote.

FTR, censure should be reserved for those who take responsibility and express remorse, of which the POS in the WH has none.
I might have preferred a censure earlier for something general, like Abuse of Power or Obstruction of Congress. Then when he does it or something similar again, Congress would have plenty of ammo to go full monty.
 
twump and his criminal cabal are in massive legal jeopardy.

Threads like this won't change that.

Sorry about all the pain you're in, but it's going to get a LOT worse.

Yeah, yeah...we've been hearing that for over 3 years now.
 
I might have preferred a censure earlier for something general, like Abuse of Power or Obstruction of Congress. Then when he does it or something similar again, Congress would have plenty of ammo to go full monty.
The only problem with that idea is that Trump has done this twice already. He did this in the Mueller probe, and he's doing it all over again because there were no consequences the last time.
 
I'm merely telling you what the voting public will KNOW when going to the polls to vote, thanks to Nancy's ill-thought-out decision to choose impeachment instead of censure.
My opinion.
Of course, you have the right to yours.
Obviously. But we've been down this road before. If the majority of the country was against impeachment, you might have a point.
 
Democrats = Endlessly crying "Wolf!!!!" :eek:

When the wolf eats The Schiffer, will even the Democrats have the energy to care?

Censure = Not happening

Impeachment = A ridiculous clown orgy going nowhere
 
Yeah, yeah...we've been hearing that for over 3 years now.

Lulz. And you haven't been paying the slightest attention as to why.

Not surprising, really.

Enjoy your magical thinking and worship of twump while it lasts.
 
Back
Top Bottom