Did Pelosi stall impeachment to lock Sanders/Warren in the Senate to help Biden in the Primary's?

www.foxnews.com...

I have now seen several articles that claim one of Pelosi's reasons for stalling the impeachment was to help Biden win the Primary.

A Senate trial would tie up Sanders and Warren in the Senate and they could not go out campaigning in these final crucial days.

There has to be a reason for the stall. Pelosi said Trump was an immediate, imminent, clear danger to the country, then stalls and stalls sending over the articles of impeachment. I don't believe she has sent them yet.

Many speculated she didn't send them to make sure the trial was close to the election to hurt Trump.

But a more sinister reason has emerged. To do once again to Sanders what the DNC did to him last election cycle - make certain he loses. Within that is making sure Warren also loses, the two most radically far left candidates who are sure to alienate the more conservative Democrat Party voters.

Leaving Biden and Buttigieg the only ones who can campaign.

Interesting theory. What say you? Is Pelosi out to destroy Sanders once again like the DNC did in 2016?

a reply to: The2Billies

if it's left up to Sleepy Joe and Kid Pete, it will be and interesting trial. And when the Dems get what they want and find that getting "witnesses" also includes Sleepy Joe and his boy Elroy, it may make even less sense. Being as this is a dumb move, I predict it's the correct assumption. I mean, I heard "stupid is as stupid does".

a reply to: The2Billies


It's not about the Presidential race...they know they have already lost that...

It's about the senate races....they want to run ads 24/7 about how the senate refused to hold a fair trial and encourage their constituents to vote against the republican senators.....just watch the ads for the upcoming senate seats.

a reply to: The2Billies

I think the reason why it was stalled is they wanted to clarify the way the Senate would perform the trial. My understanding is she is going to get a vote from the caucus on whether or not to proceed with the article of impeachment this week.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: The2Billies

I think the reason why it was stalled is they wanted to clarify the way the Senate would perform the trial. My understanding is she is going to get a vote from the caucus on whether or not to proceed with the article of impeachment this week.

We all know the "official" line. We don't believe it.

The "official" line is often not the truth as we have seen over and over and over.

What is the real reason?

Why hold back after having a totally unfair investigation and then demand a "fair" trial. Everyone knows the reality has nothing to do with that.

Neither, obviously has it to do with the "immediate" danger of Trump, if Trump were really an immediate and imminent threat to the US, the articles would have been sent immediately with charges more serious than hurting the feelings of Congress, which is basically what the charges are. Of course, we all know, these days, if one is a liberal, hurt feelings are probably the worst possible crime one can commit.

a reply to: The2Billies

While I wouldn't put that reasoning past Nancy, Warren and Sanders are doing a fantastic job by themselves ensuring they won't win.

In fact, I'd go as far as saying none of the democratic candidates stand a chance at winning anything.
It's an exercise in futility, though I guess they have to go through the motions.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: The2Billies

I think the reason why it was stalled is they wanted to clarify the way the Senate would perform the trial. My understanding is she is going to get a vote from the caucus on whether or not to proceed with the article of impeachment this week.

since the house impeachment was so fair, I can totally get behind this.

a reply to: watchitburn

who else can you spend "Brewsters Millions"

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: The2Billies

I think the reason why it was stalled is they wanted to clarify the way the Senate would perform the trial. My understanding is she is going to get a vote from the caucus on whether or not to proceed with the article of impeachment this week.

It's not her role to interfere with the way the Senate will run the trial - he job is to select and help prep her Impeachment managers to make their case to the SEnate.
I think she stalled because there is no case and teh Democrats wanted to excerpt pressure via the media and attempt to turn some Republicans.
It's a clear case of Pelosi abusing the power of her office. Quite ironic really.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: The2Billies

I think the reason why it was stalled is they wanted to clarify the way the Senate would perform the trial. My understanding is she is going to get a vote from the caucus on whether or not to proceed with the article of impeachment this week.

Sad to see the House thinking they can tell the Senate how to do things. Especially when it's specifically stated in the impeachment wording that the House and Senate both have independent freedom to handle things as they see fit.

a reply to: dfnj2015

My understanding is she is going to get a vote from the caucus on whether or not to proceed with the article of impeachment this week.

Weird considering they needed this done immediately since Trump is somehow a danger to the world if you ask your average Democrat politician.

Thankfully Bernie is power-crazy and will never go quietly into that good night..

To be fair, Hillary stole the 2016 nomination from Bernie with super delegates and a pipeline of debate questions from the dnc-media cabal...

I’m so happy watching the Democrats eat their own ideology...if leftism is to be considered an “ideology” rather than a mental illness...

-Chris

People are giving Pelosi way too much credit for her political savvy. The reason she held on to the articles is she's just plain stupid and doesn't have a clue what she's doing.

AOC and the rest of the Squad are running the show. Look at AOC, already sucking all the oxygen out of the room this week about not paying DNC dues. She's telling Nancy she can do whatever she wants and is going to go on a rampage uprooting DNC darling candidates around the country.

a reply to: Stupidsecrets

In the same vein, you're giving Cortez way too much credit.

Look to her handlers.

Maybe it is to help Hillary.....


1. Joe Biden wins the democratic nomination.

2. Biden selects Hillary Clinton as his VP.

3. Democrats flip and decide Biden needs to be impeached over Ukraine.

4. The Queen ascends to her throne.


Implausible? Nothing surprises me anymore.

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: Stupidsecrets

In the same vein, you're giving Cortez way too much credit.

Look to her handlers.

I don't know, there are lots of pockets of poor, ignorant white haters in the country. She can do a lot of damage to moderate Democrats like Pelosi. If she mobilized all the homeless in Nancy's district she could push that old bag to the curb easily.

Rickin, a shiver just went down my spine.

originally posted by: RickinVa
Maybe it is to help Hillary.....


1. Joe Biden wins the democratic nomination.

2. Biden selects Hillary Clinton as his VP.

3. Democrats flip and decide Biden needs to be impeached over Ukraine.

4. The Queen ascends to her throne.


Implausible? Nothing surprises me anymore.

I was contemplating the same scenario.

An alternative for 3. and 4. could be that Sleepy Joe will stay president, just for show, and Crooked Hillary will be pulling the strings, just like Cheney pulled Bush Junior's strings.

I don't think it's so far fetched.

But what worries me more, is that they've got something very sinister planned for Trump... just in case. They've had three years to organise whatever that may be. That's why Pelosi said Trump won't be president next year, one way or another... with a smile on her face.

soulwaxer

a reply to: soulwaxer

Pelosi said that the first time though. Video of her saying Trump would not be President and you could take that to the bank. She even repeated it. She also said he was not getting a wall. He won and built over 100 miles of it.