Sign of Republicans Lawmakers Turning on Trump

[Anonymous]

Romney's using some adjectives.

When the only American citizen President Trump singles out for China’s investigation is his political opponent in the midst of the Democratic nomination process, it strains credulity to suggest that it is anything other than politically motivated.

By all appearances, the President’s brazen and unprecedented appeal to China and to Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden is wrong and appalling.

https://twitter.com/MittRomney/status/1180151212030779392

[Anonymous]

Susan Collins on Saturday became the latest Republican senator to criticize President Donald Trump for calling on foreign countries to investigate a political rival, saying he made a "big mistake."

“I thought the president made a big mistake by asking China to get involved in investigating a political opponent,” Collins said at a press gaggle in her home state of Maine, according to the Bangor Daily News. “It’s completely inappropriate.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Susan Collins on Saturday became the latest Republican senator to criticize President Donald Trump for calling on foreign countries to investigate a political rival, saying he made a "big mistake."

“I thought the president made a big mistake by asking China to get involved in investigating a political opponent,” Collins said at a press gaggle in her home state of Maine, according to the Bangor Daily News. “It’s completely inappropriate.”

What happened to being an impartial juror? This woman is so full of crap.

[Anonymous]

Even if there are 10 more whistleblowers, they won't turn because they are snivelling cowards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Susan Collins on Saturday became the latest Republican senator to criticize President Donald Trump for calling on foreign countries to investigate a political rival, saying he made a "big mistake."

“I thought the president made a big mistake by asking China to get involved in investigating a political opponent,” Collins said at a press gaggle in her home state of Maine, according to the Bangor Daily News. “It’s completely inappropriate.”

What happened to being an impartial juror? This woman is so full of crap.

You mean a jury isn't impartial if it convicts you based on the fact that you committed the murder in public, in front of a bunch of tv cameras?

[Anonymous]

Yes Susan Collins has always been a bullshit artist. She’s a typical politician. A rich girl who is nothing special and will be long forgotten soon.

[Anonymous]

And while liberals fantasize about 20 Republican senators flipping and voting to remove Trump from office, we have "never trumpers" falling in line and supporting Trump after being opposed to him!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-never-trump-coalition-that-decided-eh-nevermind-hes-fine/ar-AAIjNMw

[Anonymous]

I am waiting for Trump to kill somebody on 5th Avenue and hear these people find excuses for that as well.

[Anonymous]

Anyone hear Rubio recently say that trump asking China for Biden dirt was just needling the media? A few years ago he called him a con man.

What a spineless f ucking weasel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And while liberals fantasize about 20 Republican senators flipping and voting to remove Trump from office, we have "never trumpers" falling in line and supporting Trump after being opposed to him!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-never-trump-coalition-that-decided-eh-nevermind-hes-fine/ar-AAIjNMw

I don't think that article says what you think it says

Moreover I'd consider that anyone who is willing to flip flop on their attitude toward Trump like that, is almost certainly willing to return to their old position of opposing him once that seems like the expedient thing to do. As the article says, these former never-Trumpers are not by and large people who have become convinced they were wrong in the first place - but have become convinced it's in their financial and career interests to say they are with Trump now. Once it's not anymore, they'll probably pretend they never knew the guy. Who him? He was just a coffee boy.

[Anonymous]

We almost certainly won’t get 2/3 of the senate. But if we get just a few republicans breaking from the party and having a majority of the senate vote to convict it will be a small victory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We almost certainly won’t get 2/3 of the senate. But if we get just a few republicans breaking from the party and having a majority of the senate vote to convict it will be a small victory.

Now that would be a heck of a price to pay if this effort to impeach the president results in the House going back to the Republicans - a risk that Pelosi herself acknowledges is a reality.

It explains why Pelosi is so reluctant to hold a vote to approve an inquiry because she does not want vulnerable Democratic House members to have this on record. And in the meantime, Trump has said he will not release any documents that were subpoenaed until the House approves the impeachment inquiry.

So the remedy is to go to court and all the way to the Supreme court which will likely take months to resolve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We almost certainly won’t get 2/3 of the senate. But if we get just a few republicans breaking from the party and having a majority of the senate vote to convict it will be a small victory.

Now that would be a heck of a price to pay if this effort to impeach the president results in the House going back to the Republicans - a risk that Pelosi herself acknowledges is a reality.

It explains why Pelosi is so reluctant to hold a vote to approve an inquiry because she does not want vulnerable Democratic House members to have this on record. And in the meantime, Trump has said he will not release any documents that were subpoenaed until the House approves the impeachment inquiry.

So the remedy is to go to court and all the way to the Supreme court which will likely take months to resolve.

Anything is possible, but every year the demographics of most districts turn more blue.

The dems had no choice but to open an inquiry. If they had continued to be meek and derelict in their constitutional duties it could’ve affected voter turnout.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We almost certainly won’t get 2/3 of the senate. But if we get just a few republicans breaking from the party and having a majority of the senate vote to convict it will be a small victory.

Now that would be a heck of a price to pay if this effort to impeach the president results in the House going back to the Republicans - a risk that Pelosi herself acknowledges is a reality.

It explains why Pelosi is so reluctant to hold a vote to approve an inquiry because she does not want vulnerable Democratic House members to have this on record. And in the meantime, Trump has said he will not release any documents that were subpoenaed until the House approves the impeachment inquiry.

So the remedy is to go to court and all the way to the Supreme court which will likely take months to resolve.

Anything is possible, but every year the demographics of most districts turn more blue.

The dems had no choice but to open an inquiry. If they had continued to be meek and derelict in their constitutional duties it could’ve affected voter turnout.

House Democrats are under increasing pressure to hold a politically risky vote to sanction their impeachment inquiry into President Trump.

The White House is expected as early as Monday to tell Speaker Nancy Pelosi it will not cooperate with an impeachment-related subpoena drafted by Democrats until the House votes officially to open an impeachment investigation.

"We'll be issuing a letter," Trump told reporters Friday on the South Lawn. "As everybody knows, we've been treated very unfairly, very different from anybody else."

Democrats threatened to impeach Trump for obstructing Congress if he fails to turn over the material requested in the subpoena related to the Ukraine whistleblower case. But Republicans are building an argument that the inquiry isn’t legitimate because Pelosi skipped the vote to sanction it.

Republicans contend Pelosi was shielding politically vulnerable Democrats when she broke precedent and announced last month that the House is holding an impeachment inquiry without the customary vote.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/mounting-pressure-on-pelosi-to-hold-vote-on-impeachment-inquiry

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We almost certainly won’t get 2/3 of the senate. But if we get just a few republicans breaking from the party and having a majority of the senate vote to convict it will be a small victory.

Now that would be a heck of a price to pay if this effort to impeach the president results in the House going back to the Republicans - a risk that Pelosi herself acknowledges is a reality.

It explains why Pelosi is so reluctant to hold a vote to approve an inquiry because she does not want vulnerable Democratic House members to have this on record. And in the meantime, Trump has said he will not release any documents that were subpoenaed until the House approves the impeachment inquiry.

So the remedy is to go to court and all the way to the Supreme court which will likely take months to resolve.

All this will help the GOP retain the Senate and probably win the House.