It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Mueller finds no collusion with Russia, leaves obstruction question open
you were saying?
The special counsel found that Russia did interfere with the election, but “did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple efforts from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.” As far as obstruction, the Mueller report laid out facts on both sides but did not reach a conclusion. Barr’s letter said that “the Special Counsel states that ‘while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.’”
Mueller Report Doesn't Find Russian Collusion, But Can't 'Exonerate' On Obstruction
special counsel Robert Mueller did not find evidence that President Trump's campaign conspired with Russia to influence the 2016 election, according to a summary of findings submitted to Congress by Attorney General William Barr. "The Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election," Barr wrote in a letter to leaders of the House and Senate judiciary committees on Sunday afternoon. That was despite "multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign," he wrote.
so there was this and now there is this
The reasons Pelosi is not planning a vote are both practical and political: Taking the step of passing a formal impeachment inquiry resolution is a complicated and time-consuming endeavor that has political downsides, from drafting the exact language of the resolution, to holding a complicated floor debate and to putting some members in a tough spot. Moreover, having a vote on an impeachment inquiry resolution would give Republicans an opening to argue they should have subpoena power like in past impeachment proceedings, something that Democrats would almost certainly never allow.
House Democrats will not hold a vote to authorize an impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump as of now, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday, defying calls from the White House and Republicans to do so.
they KNOW they dont have the votes in the senate and that it will burn them in 2020 elections
WASHINGTON—House Democratic leadership is holding off on a vote to launch a formal impeachment inquiry for now, a move that could have upended a central Republican argument but also put vulnerable Democrats at risk.
what McConnel is doing its setting it up so when they do vote in the house it does not take long in the senate to end this nonsense
Yet Pelosi and other top Democrats couldn't come to an agreement among themselves during internal discussions on Tuesday over whether to move forward with the vote, which would mark an escalation of their impeachment battle with Trump. Vulnerable House Democrats from swing districts were also largely opposed, with some lawmakers fearing that the American public would confuse a vote authorizing an impeachment inquiry as actually impeaching Trump. Inside the leadership, Hoyer and House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.). were opposed to the vote, as were Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) and Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), two key players in the impeachment drama, said several Democratic aides. Pelosi privately told other Democrats she was "agnostic" on the issue, said a Democratic aide. During Tuesday's meeting, Pelosi told her colleagues that she "only has license this caucus gives me," meaning she wouldn't pressure her rank-and-file to hold the vote. House Democratic leaders also quietly reached out to the most vulnerable members of their caucus to gauge whether they would support a formal vote to authorize an impeachment inquiry against Trump, according to multiple Democratic aides. The response was "pretty strongly no," said an aide close to the issue. The idea has met with anxiety among some of the battleground Democrats, who fear it could distract from the rest of their agenda, according to multiple aides. Several “Frontliners” in key districts raised concerns as well, including freshman Reps. Anthony Brindisi (D-N.Y.), Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.), Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.).
a reply to: Agit8dChop
No one has shown anything yet where Trump had quid quo pro.
The anonymous leaker WORKED for Biden and the DNC and met with Brennan
originally posted by: Agit8dChop
a reply to: Oraculi
according to a person familiar with the meeting.
stop embarrassing yourself!
originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: drewlander
Do You Know the Definition of " Jack Sheit " ? It's Similar to what the Dems Claim to Have on President Trump . Yes , we are ALL Being " Entertained " with All this BS , but it is " Entertaining " for Just So LONG ............
originally posted by: ErEhWoN
a reply to: odzeandennz
How could trump obstruct in reference to crimes he didn't commit...?
ON THE DAY TRUMP'S LAWYER GIULIANI REFUSED TO COOPERATE WITH CONGRESS, LINDSEY GRAHAM SAID THAT IS AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
originally posted by: Gryphon66
So, which part of the source article do you guys think is not true again?
originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: Oraculi
" McConnell preps Senate for impeachment trial "
Hmm... How do you prep for a Senate Impeachment Trial ? Look at Presented " REAL " Evidence from the House Request , or just Say it SEVEN TIMES and just " Wing " it . ?
so there is this which sums it up nicely
As far as Rose is concerned, both parties bear responsibility for screwing over his constituents. The only thing that unifies the GOP, he storms, “is tax cuts for wealthy people.” But he also faults the Democratic Party for falling out of step with the people that built it. “Quite frankly, the Democratic Party should win most elections because if you poll traditional bread-and-butter Democratic policies here—pro-infrastructure, lowering health care costs, righting significant power asymmetries, making sure that the wealthiest among us don’t get away with total tax robbery—80% of these people support this,” he says. But voters “don’t trust Democrats as far as they can throw them.” Instead of trying to understand their constituents, Rose argues, too many Democrats end up patronizing them. They pander during elections, then abandon voters when they get to Washington.
and this is why democrats are scared they NEED to imepach him as more and more time goes on it becomes more clear they cant beat him ,or in the R/donald parlance" you cant stump the trump" but i guess using a known prostitute who rolled johns by drugging them isnt the best rebuttal but those on the left seem to love them some cardi b
Chance said: “I think Trump is going to win again at the next election because he’s got the biggest base.” Cardi agreed: “I really hate to say it, but sometimes I do believe that Trump will be winning. Just because every single time I don’t see nobody saying they love a Democratic candidate. There’s no candidate that people are saying like we love, we want them to win.”
now we will get into the meat of the article but its behind a paywall so ill post this
Trump Wins Every Democratic Debate Lots of voters dislike the president but will be convinced to vote for him by seeing his opponents.
but perhaps others will quote from this link least those that subscribe
The Republican National Committee should offer to be the official sponsor of a weekly Democratic presidential debate. There would be no better advertisement for President Trump’s re-election. Every time the Democratic presidential contenders gather together, it’s a contest between the merely delusional, the vaguely vindictive and the patently absurd.
and goes on to say this
According to Moody’s Analytics, Trump is headed toward another four years in the White House. And, if the numbers are right, it won’t even be close. In fact, his Electoral College victory could very well be wider than the 304-227 margin he enjoyed over Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. Since 1980, Moody’s has managed to nail the outcome every time but once — like many, it didn’t see Trump coming. “In our post-mortem of the 2016 presidential election model,” the report said, “we determined that unexpected turnout patterns were one of the factors that contributed to the model’s first incorrect election prediction.” Here’s Moody’s track record, including a 2016 adjustment for the turnout variable:
so dont count good old trump out yet but hey the dems have made a hobby of under estimating him
Moody’s uses three models to come up with its forecast. In each case, Trump gets at least 289 Electoral College votes. The “pocketbook” measure, which focus on how people feel about their money situation, is where Trump shines brightest, grabbing a whopping 351 electoral votes. “If voters were to vote primarily on the basis of their pocketbooks, the president would steamroll the competition,” the report said. The stock-market model gives him the slightest edge of 289-249, as investors continue to navigate a volatile investing landscape. Then there’s the unemployment model, which leans heavily in his favor at 332-206.