The Mueller report thread

It's not as if Mueller didn't warn everyone about what was going to happen…

I must have missed Mueller saying don’t question me cause I am “kind of out of it”


The first 90 minutes were brutal. It’s not that he didn’t expand on the report…it’s that he seemed a bit senile…that was the damaging part

I guarantee anyone even sympathetic towards him watching the first 90 minutes felt sorry for him and turned it off…it was painful

It was like watching someone you heard was the man having a 90 minute senior moment

As usual democrats strategy backfired

TIME TO JUST ITMFA.

This is NOT HELPING.

Impeachment?

That’s over thanks to Mueller

hutch wrote:
Impeachment?

That’s over thanks to Pelosi

Fixed that for you

hutch wrote:
Impeachment?

That’s over thanks to Mueller

I definitely don't think it's over re: impeachment

I think it's foolish to get it started and end up in the Senate to die on arrival…

So I think it's a better plan to have the Impeachment trial start in the summer of 2020, in the middle of the RNC and conclude at the end of October before the Senate gets it

I wrote:

hutch wrote:
Impeachment?

That’s over thanks to Mueller

I definitely don't think it's over re: impeachment

I think it's foolish to get it started and end up in the Senate to die on arrival…

So I think it's a better plan to have the Impeachment trial start in the summer of 2020, in the middle of the RNC and conclude at the end of October before the Senate gets it

Depends on what you think you can achieve from impeachment.  Seems to me that there are two big downsides to waiting.  1) The closer you get to the election the more it seems like a political stunt 2) impeachment is a valuable tool for getting information, and so by postponing you are limiting your ability to use it.

I personally think a long, drawn out impeachment is best, just have a ton of impeachment hearings and don't rush the vote. 

gavroche wrote:
Depends on what you think you can achieve from impeachment.

Well what I want and what can be achieved are two different things
but I know it's chances of success in the senate are about as likely as Michelle Pfeiffer trying to hook up with guests at one of Epstein's parties

So finishing the impeachment trial in the House should not happen any time before Nov 2020

I wrote:
So finishing the impeachment trial in the House should not happen any time before Nov 2020

Zero chance of that.  Too many Democrats currently in office need to be back home running for re-election to be spending time in DC from summer recess on.  Most constituents not on the coasts want to see that their representative cares about their local issues, not wasting time on a surely failed process that the voters will have decided long before it fails in the Senate.

I know the progressives hate this, but Pelosi is playing this right.  She waited until the Mueller report, which didn't contain enough damning evidence to put the Senate into a bind when it came their turn to decide.  Losing an impeachment case would embolden Trump, embolden his base even more, and generally be seen as bad for the country.  Look at the impact a failed impeachment move had on Newt in 1998 as evidence.

Best to keep pressing him on his unmet promises, develop a winning economic strategy for the rust belt and swing states, and focus on the best way to remove Trump from office, and that is victory on Nov 3, 2020.

The main problem democrats continue to have - and this has been the case since the Hillary is going to destroy Trump days- is a failure to understand reality

First we heard Trump would resign then the deep state would take him down then Stormy then the Southern District of NY then Cohen then Mueller Report then Mueller testimony then impeachment


It’s embarrassing as the only thing that will take him down is the ballot box

But people just can’t accept that…let’s blame Pelosi!!

hutch wrote:
then impeachment

It’s embarrassing as the only thing that will take him down is the ballot box

The question is whether impeachment helps take him down at the ballot box.  Pelosi thinks no.  I am not alone in thinking having the investigation, and the additional information they are likely to find (including making it more likely that they get his tax returns), would help them in 2020.

You can make credible arguments either way, depending on what history you think is relevant.  That said, I think doing it further away from the election would be more beneficial to them and that they have probably missed their window.

This is all about winning in 2020 though (it's not like anyone wants Pence). 

gavroche wrote:(it's not like anyone wants Pence).

you know I don't like pence and there would be some serious religion in gov't stuff I wouldn't like
but I would take him over Trump for sure
there is no way he'd win reelection

You would take Pence over, mister faking it for fun Trump?  I, hate you, for realz.  Either you understand why Pence is the dark hole,  or I, still hate you.

pence is one backwards m-fer.  but he would not be as bad as trump

he wouldn't be able to get gay-concentration camps approved although the ten commandments might end up on my drivers license

He wouldn't be the cult of personality that trump is and wouldn't be able to get anything done

Maybe…I do worry that through like a contact high, he'd have some residual MAGA strength, especially if Trump was removed or died (KILLED BY THE DEEP STATE).

But my bigger worry is getting a psycho like him in office, who adheres to the Norms, would have most Dems bending over backwards to work with him, and breathing a sigh of relief that, while we may disagree on policy, it's nice to have things sane again. I mean, they already give Trump a blank check all while mentioning that he's a unique horror that's propped up by foreign governments.

EDIT: Quick edit to confirm, however, that if Trump does die, I'm immediately heading to the first bar I can find and buying a round for everyone.  Fuck these pigs.

I wrote:
pence is one backwards m-fer.  but he would not be as bad as trump

he wouldn't be able to get gay-concentration camps approved although the ten commandments might end up on my drivers license

He wouldn't be the cult of personality that trump is and wouldn't be able to get anything done

Be careful what you say on the internet.

Renditioned to a Black Ops site for Truth

Space wrote:
Be careful what you say on the internet.

It's the duty of congress to impeach.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/03/impeachment-trump/580468/

K8teebug wrote:
It's the duty of congress to impeach.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/03/impeachment-trump/580468/

Such a bold, straightforward statement: "With a newly seated Democratic majority, the House of Representatives can no longer dodge its constitutional duty."

Then the author immediately explains it isn't actually true:

"Although the process is fairly clear, the Founders left us only vague instructions about when to implement it."

The Speaker of the House is under no compulsory, statutory duty to start an impeachment process.  Even the author agrees "This is where the dual nature of impeachment as both a legal and a political process comes into sharpest focus."  And he cited the leading authority on the case from the Nixon days, Bill Weld: "In the end, Weld came to believe that impeachment is a political process, aimed at determining whether a president has fallen short of the duties of his office."

But the author does a fantastic job at revisiting the history of impeachments in the US.  I really enjoyed that part.

well, well, well and we thought this was done

Howell rules that DOJ must provide the House the grand jury material redacted form Mueller's report by Oct. 30.

also in this The key quote from Howell: "Even in cases of presidential impeachment, a House resolution has never, in fact, been
required to begin an impeachment inquiry."

I know….this means nothing and all the original unredacted copies will go missing or something