Why Did Impeachment Hearings Fail?

[JimL]

OK, so maybe you think they didn't, but something happened.

Was it Schiff's handling of the thing, being too controlling? (That's my personal choice, given that the made himself judge, jury, chief prosecutor AND media liaison.

Is, as has been suggested elsewhere on this board, that Americans are just stupid?

Current polling (and that may change) suggests the Democrats actually LOST ground by having public hearings.

Didn't they put on their most vigorous prosecution?
Didn't they call their best witnesses?

Since impeachment is entirely a political process (in that it's run by politicians, and, in this case, is incredibly partisan) what could the Democrats have done differently to persuade America to support them in their impeachment prosecution, instead, appearing to convince Americans NOT to support impeachment?

For Bonus Points... well, let's put that in a poll...

So, you think Trump is guilty, you just didn't like Schiffs "handling of the thing, being to controlling?" Yeah, I guess maybe the american people are just too stupid!

[Charles]

All is well, ff - just do what I do and all will be well. Just trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. 6 In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.

It's worked great for me for over 6 decades.

The consequeces of some of the decisions taken by evangelicals these days seem to be ignored. Children separated from their parents, lack of concern for the weak, damaged international realtions, corruption and the like might work great for them. Not for those who have to deal with it or live with the consequeces.

[oxmixmudd]

All is well, ff - just do what I do and all will be well. Just trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. 6 In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.

It's worked great for me for over 6 decades.

On one hand I agree with you CP. Trusting in God to help us deal with troubles is the only real solution to anxiety. And we often see God's provision and faithfulness as we trust Him.

However - there is a real problem here if the person telling the person in need to trust in God is not doing anything themselves to help resolve the problem if it is in their power to do so.

And worse

If the person telling the other fellow to trust in God is advocating FOR the source of the trouble. Is in fact, a mouthpiece for, an instrument of the trouble itself.

Consider: A Trump supporter who rallies for the policies that are separating immigrant parents and children and who tells a woman separated from her child by those same policies to 'Trust God, He'll get you through this' all the while when not in the presence of those suffering working, advocating for those same policies.

While it is true, it is just so, so wrong for the two to be juxtaposed in the same person. Like those James mentioned that see a person hungry and poor and naked and, with eyes 'full of compassion', prays for them telling them to 'be warmed and filled' and then turns away, walks on, leaving them hungry poor and naked.


Jim

[Cow Poke]

So, you think Trump is guilty, you just didn't like Schiffs "handling of the thing, being to controlling?" Yeah, I guess maybe the american people are just too stupid!

I'm going to demonstrate tremendous reserve and not point out the delicious irony in your analysis.

[Cow Poke]

The consequeces of some of the decisions taken by evangelicals these days seem to be ignored. Children separated from their parents, lack of concern for the weak, damaged international realtions, corruption and the like might work great for them. Not for those who have to deal with it or live with the consequeces.

Charles, please take your load of horsie poo to some other thread -- this one is about the impeachment PROCESS.

[Cow Poke]

On one hand I agree with you CP.

Jim, this thread is just about the impeachment process, and where you think it might go.

Thanks

[Cow Poke]

Back on topic, I'm pretty certain that IF the Democrats vote to impeach, it will be on a very clear partisan basis, and would fail in the Senate.

I'm just not sure if the Democrats are looking for a way out, now that it appears they don't have the overwhelming support of the "stupid" American people.

[JimL]

Back on topic, I'm pretty certain that IF the Democrats vote to impeach, it will be on a very clear partisan basis, and would fail in the Senate.

And would fail in the Senate on a very clear partisan basis.

I'm just not sure if the Democrats are looking for a way out, now that it appears they don't have the overwhelming support of the "stupid" American people.

You're deluded if you think the dems are looking for a way out. The Dems are carrying out their responsibility and hoping that in doing so they will "unstupify" the American people will. There is no gaurantee, but in order to protect the constitution, they have no choice.

[Cow Poke]

And would fail in the Senate on a very clear partisan basis.

I'm not so sure of that, Jim. The Senate trial would be much more 'conventional', and overseen by an actual judge.

You're deluded if you think the dems are looking for a way out.

You think everybody but you is deluded, Jim. I don't "think" they are looking for a way out, I'm just not sure they're as confident as they pretend to be.

The Dems are carrying out their responsibility and hoping that in doing so they will "unstupify" the American people will. There is no gaurantee, but in order to protect the constitution, they have no choice.

The Dems are using impeachment as part of their ongoing war with Trump, Jim. If they truly wanted to win over the American people, there were much better ways to go about this.

[oxmixmudd]

Jim, this thread is just about the impeachment process, and where you think it might go.

Thanks

No problem - just note I was responding to your post in the direction you were taking the thread. But I will not continue that line per your request.

Jim

[Cow Poke]

No problem - just note I was responding to your post in the direction you were taking the thread. But I will not continue that line per your request.

Jim

I was just bantering with my atheist friend, Jim. I give him tremendous leeway because he's never disrespectful, angry, reactionary, accusatory..... he's just different.

[rogue06]

I'm not so sure of that, Jim. The Senate trial would be much more 'conventional', and overseen by an actual judge.

Chief Justice of the SCOTUS, John G. Roberts Jr., who I'm willing to bet will have little tolerance for the sort of behavior exhibited in the House.

[Charles]

Charles, please take your load of horsie poo to some other thread -- this one is about the impeachment PROCESS.

What part of the following post is about impeachment PROCESS?

All is well, ff - just do what I do and all will be well. Just trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. 6 In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.

It's worked great for me for over 6 decades.

[Mountain Man]

I don't "think" they are looking for a way out, I'm just not sure they're as confident as they pretend to be.

Rep. Brenda Lawrence signals a possible exit strategy.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...out-of-office/

[Cow Poke]

What part of the following post is about impeachment PROCESS?

A) It's my thread.
2) As I said....

I was just bantering with my atheist friend, Jim. I give him tremendous leeway because he's never disrespectful, angry, reactionary, accusatory..... he's just different.