i'm going to give you my "conspiracy" post. i say this because i cannot prove it, but i do have plenty of evidence to support my statements (can be provided). these questions set the 2 up rather well.

a good chunk of republicans are no different. Steve Bannon covers this rather well.
Trump stole the republican party. he was not widely accepted as a presidential candidate until he had over-whelming polling numbers. even then, and at least a year through his presidency, he was getting a good bit of push-back.
Trump's party is now the populist party, and a lot of that population is watching. i'm sure a lot of republicans just have a disguise on until the Trump train rolls bye. (hoping we stop watching again)

it's a long interview, but he touches on it in other videos as well if you look around




Trump leaving the middle-east. "everything" is about that. ever since he said he wanted to end the pointless wars in the middle-east when he was just a candidate.
everything is because of that. it's all continuing because he is continuing to try leaving the area. this is still Russiagate.

This post was edited by tagged4nothing on Dec 18 2019 09:33pm

Nancy Pelosi is now indicating publicly that she will not send the articles of impeachment to the senate, delaying indefinitely.
its unclear if she plans to hold back the impeachment articles permanently, or whether she will release them at a later date
this allows her to postpone a senate trial as long as she wants, or make sure it never occurs.
This could last up until congress's session ends and the new congress is seated

ok, i didn't expect that.

so he's "impeached", but they aren't going to let the senate vote to remove him from office?
i don't get it

This post was edited by tagged4nothing on Dec 18 2019 10:07pm

Crooks will be crooks.

This shit makes me laugh.. the BS R support of any of this trash is amazing.
>insert deep state conspiracy here<

Someone should tell the Dems about Youtube.


/e Ok, I got it... they want to keep having hearings....so as to provide (excuse) the Senate with everything they need to oust Trump. Which ofc really means...to keep making Trump look bad. Quantity over quality.


Ok, now I'm done.

This post was edited by Ghot on Dec 18 2019 10:23pm

Now that is unexpected. I'm not sure what to make of this move.

Is it about optics, about them being able to say "Trump was impeached" without Trump being able to retort "I was acquitted"?
Is it about them being concerned about the dirt a Republican-led investigation in the Senate could cover up?
Is it about concern that a Republican-controlled process in the Senate might sway public opinion by simply reframing the events, even if nothing new is revealed?
Is it about concern that the impeachment hearings in the Senate might suck the oxygen out of their primaries?
Is it about holding back a tactical weapon that can be used to distract the news cycle whenever they need it?


Overall, none of these explanations outweighs the potential benefits to Democrats if they send impeachment to the Senate - namely that they force blue state Republican senators up for reelection in 2020 (Collins, Gardner) to take a difficult vote which might be toxic for them either way. And also that they might well be able to break away at least one or two Republican senators (Pierre Delecto says hi). There is even a chance to get to over 50 votes for conviction, which would be a huge symbolic victory for Democrats even if they still fall well short of the 67 needed for actual removal.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Dec 18 2019 10:46pm