4 to 1 odds that he gets impeached within the first 6 months

priapism

https://mic.com/articles/166360/can-donald-trump-be-impeached-heres-what-experts-have-to-say#.t0ws3E98L

"Online betting site Paddy Power has the odds of Trump getting impeached in the first six months of his presidency at 4 to 1 — and the odds of him failing to complete his first term at 7 to 4."


https://www.yahoo.com/katiecouric/conservative-radio-host-hugh-hewitt-thinks-trump-might-be-impeached-212447403.html



Trump has dozens of lawsuits coming up. If he fucks up in any of them, which many people expect him to do with his big mouth, he could be impeached for perjury in any one of them.

dhdawg

and the gop congress will not hesitate to dump him if he doesn't rubber stamp

JaWarrenJaHooker

The fuck is Paddy Power

Pitchfork51

I would happily bet that he doesn't get impeached within 6 months. Doesnt the actual process for impeachment take awhile to begin with

bananasnblondes

JaWarrenJaHooker said:

The fuck is Paddy Power

I'm hearing that Paddy girls give good head

TierbsHsotBoobs

JaWarrenJaHooker said:

The fuck is Paddy Power

Online betting site.

dnc

The GOP would love this but is too pussy. He would have to epically fuck up for this to happen. The GOP will lose too much of what's left of it's base to Impeach Trump.

Now, 2019 when the Democrats control Congress? Sure.gif.

Southerndawg

Pitchfork51 said:

I would happily bet that he doesn't get impeached within 6 months. Doesnt the actual process for impeachment take awhile to begin with

Yes, it would take time and massive cooperation by a republican congress to bring an indictment (impeachment). But the democrats real aim, conviction by the senate, would be highly unlikely even if congress were to impeach him. A senate conviction would come about only if Trump did something in his capacity as president that truly rose to the standard of the charge(s) and there would have to be popular support for the conviction. Only two presidents have been impeached, Johnson and Clinton, and neither were convicted by the senate. Bill Clinton was impeached for committing perjury and obstruction of justice. But it took a republican majority congress to do so, even though both charges against Clinton were overwhelmingly supported by evidence of his wrongdoing. However, in the end, a republican senate did not have the political will for a conviction as there was not enough popular support for it. Self preservation always wins out in politics.

dnc

Southerndawg said:

Pitchfork51 said:

I would happily bet that he doesn't get impeached within 6 months. Doesnt the actual process for impeachment take awhile to begin with

Yes, it would take time and massive cooperation by a republican congress to bring an indictment (impeachment). But the democrats real aim, conviction by the senate, would be highly unlikely even if congress were to impeach him. A senate conviction would come about only if Trump did something in his capacity as president that truly rose to the standard of the charge(s) and there would have to be popular support for the conviction. Only two presidents have been impeached, Johnson and Clinton, and neither were convicted by the senate. Bill Clinton was impeached for committing perjury and obstruction of justice. But it took a republican majority congress to do so, even though both charges against Clinton were overwhelmingly supported by evidence of his wrongdoing. However, in the end, a republican senate did not have the political will for a conviction as there was not enough popular support for it. Self preservation always wins out in politics.

This is both true and also misleading. Nixon was well on his way to impeachment and conviction, but resigned first.

It can happen.

That said, I agree with your ultimate conclusion. There won't be enough support among the GOP base for them to impeach/convict. When the Democrats take over Congress they'll have plenty of support for it, they'll just need the right charge.

Of course, even then it probably won't happen because Pence.

Trump stays.

TierbsHsotBoobs

Southerndawg said:

Pitchfork51 said:

I would happily bet that he doesn't get impeached within 6 months. Doesnt the actual process for impeachment take awhile to begin with

Yes, it would take time and massive cooperation by a republican congress to bring an indictment (impeachment). But the democrats real aim, conviction by the senate, would be highly unlikely even if congress were to impeach him. A senate conviction would come about only if Trump did something in his capacity as president that truly rose to the standard of the charge(s) and there would have to be popular support for the conviction. Only two presidents have been impeached, Johnson and Clinton, and neither were convicted by the senate. Bill Clinton was impeached for committing perjury and obstruction of justice. But it took a republican majority congress to do so, even though both charges against Clinton were overwhelmingly supported by evidence of his wrongdoing. However, in the end, a republican senate did not have the political will for a conviction as there was not enough popular support for it. Self preservation always wins out in politics.

You need a 2/3 majority in the Senate to convict.

As we learned from Clinton, impeachment is a massive waste of time if there isn't bipartisan support of a Senate conviction.

2001400ex

Republicans will never support impeachment. Democrats won't win the house. Even if they did, they are too big of pussies to try to impeach him.

Southerndawg

dnc said:

Southerndawg said:

Pitchfork51 said:

I would happily bet that he doesn't get impeached within 6 months. Doesnt the actual process for impeachment take awhile to begin with

Yes, it would take time and massive cooperation by a republican congress to bring an indictment (impeachment). But the democrats real aim, conviction by the senate, would be highly unlikely even if congress were to impeach him. A senate conviction would come about only if Trump did something in his capacity as president that truly rose to the standard of the charge(s) and there would have to be popular support for the conviction. Only two presidents have been impeached, Johnson and Clinton, and neither were convicted by the senate. Bill Clinton was impeached for committing perjury and obstruction of justice. But it took a republican majority congress to do so, even though both charges against Clinton were overwhelmingly supported by evidence of his wrongdoing. However, in the end, a republican senate did not have the political will for a conviction as there was not enough popular support for it. Self preservation always wins out in politics.

This is both true and also misleading. Nixon was well on his way to impeachment and conviction, but resigned first.

It can happen.

That said, I agree with your ultimate conclusion. There won't be enough support among the GOP base for them to impeach/convict. When the Democrats take over Congress they'll have plenty of support for it, they'll just need the right charge.

Of course, even then it probably won't happen because Pence.

Trump stays.

Not misleading at all. Only two presidents have been impeached and neither were convicted.

I agree, Nixon would have been impeached and most likely convicted. He, like Clinton, committed crimes that rose to the level of impeachment and conviction. The difference in the end was that there was popular support for Nixon's conviction, and he knew it, while Slick Willy & Co. conflated his crimes with the idea that it was all about a blow job, so there was not enough popular support for a conviction. It did cripple Clinton's presidency, resulted in personal fines and disbarment, and put a mark in the history books that taints his legacy, but those are trivial things compared to a senate conviction.

The left's strategy right now is in line with their strategy against Nixon, Reagan, and both Bushes. Use the mass media to delegitimize and disparage the president, make him as unpopular as possible and attempt to oust him by any and all possible means. Their ideas are bankrupt so this is what they're left with. It might work, it all depends on what Trump does and how the economy in particular does. If we see Reaganesque growth rates, get ready for eight years of the Donald. If not, he will likely be a one and done president.

dnc

Southerndawg said:

dnc said:

Southerndawg said:

Pitchfork51 said:

I would happily bet that he doesn't get impeached within 6 months. Doesnt the actual process for impeachment take awhile to begin with

Yes, it would take time and massive cooperation by a republican congress to bring an indictment (impeachment). But the democrats real aim, conviction by the senate, would be highly unlikely even if congress were to impeach him. A senate conviction would come about only if Trump did something in his capacity as president that truly rose to the standard of the charge(s) and there would have to be popular support for the conviction. Only two presidents have been impeached, Johnson and Clinton, and neither were convicted by the senate. Bill Clinton was impeached for committing perjury and obstruction of justice. But it took a republican majority congress to do so, even though both charges against Clinton were overwhelmingly supported by evidence of his wrongdoing. However, in the end, a republican senate did not have the political will for a conviction as there was not enough popular support for it. Self preservation always wins out in politics.

This is both true and also misleading. Nixon was well on his way to impeachment and conviction, but resigned first.

It can happen.

That said, I agree with your ultimate conclusion. There won't be enough support among the GOP base for them to impeach/convict. When the Democrats take over Congress they'll have plenty of support for it, they'll just need the right charge.

Of course, even then it probably won't happen because Pence.

Trump stays.

Not misleading at all. Only two presidents have been impeached and neither were convicted.

I agree, Nixon would have been impeached and most likely convicted. He, like Clinton, committed crimes that rose to the level of impeachment and conviction. The difference in the end was that there was popular support for Nixon's conviction, and he knew it, while Slick Willy & Co. conflated his crimes with the idea that it was all about a blow job, so there was not enough popular support for a conviction. It did cripple Clinton's presidency, resulted in personal fines and disbarment, and put a mark in the history books that taints his legacy, but those are trivial things compared to a senate conviction.

The left's strategy right now is in line with their strategy against Nixon, Reagan, and both Bushes. Use the mass media to delegitimize and disparage the president, make him as unpopular as possible and attempt to oust him by any and all possible means. Their ideas are bankrupt so this is what they're left with. It might work, it all depends on what Trump does and how the economy in particular does. If we see Reaganesque growth rates, get ready for eight years of the Donald. If not, he will likely be a one and done president.

It's only true on technicality because Nixon fell on his sword. True on technicality = misleading.

Southerndawg

dnc said:

Southerndawg said:

dnc said:

Southerndawg said:

Pitchfork51 said:

I would happily bet that he doesn't get impeached within 6 months. Doesnt the actual process for impeachment take awhile to begin with

Yes, it would take time and massive cooperation by a republican congress to bring an indictment (impeachment). But the democrats real aim, conviction by the senate, would be highly unlikely even if congress were to impeach him. A senate conviction would come about only if Trump did something in his capacity as president that truly rose to the standard of the charge(s) and there would have to be popular support for the conviction. Only two presidents have been impeached, Johnson and Clinton, and neither were convicted by the senate. Bill Clinton was impeached for committing perjury and obstruction of justice. But it took a republican majority congress to do so, even though both charges against Clinton were overwhelmingly supported by evidence of his wrongdoing. However, in the end, a republican senate did not have the political will for a conviction as there was not enough popular support for it. Self preservation always wins out in politics.

This is both true and also misleading. Nixon was well on his way to impeachment and conviction, but resigned first.

It can happen.

That said, I agree with your ultimate conclusion. There won't be enough support among the GOP base for them to impeach/convict. When the Democrats take over Congress they'll have plenty of support for it, they'll just need the right charge.

Of course, even then it probably won't happen because Pence.

Trump stays.

Not misleading at all. Only two presidents have been impeached and neither were convicted.

I agree, Nixon would have been impeached and most likely convicted. He, like Clinton, committed crimes that rose to the level of impeachment and conviction. The difference in the end was that there was popular support for Nixon's conviction, and he knew it, while Slick Willy & Co. conflated his crimes with the idea that it was all about a blow job, so there was not enough popular support for a conviction. It did cripple Clinton's presidency, resulted in personal fines and disbarment, and put a mark in the history books that taints his legacy, but those are trivial things compared to a senate conviction.

The left's strategy right now is in line with their strategy against Nixon, Reagan, and both Bushes. Use the mass media to delegitimize and disparage the president, make him as unpopular as possible and attempt to oust him by any and all possible means. Their ideas are bankrupt so this is what they're left with. It might work, it all depends on what Trump does and how the economy in particular does. If we see Reaganesque growth rates, get ready for eight years of the Donald. If not, he will likely be a one and done president.

It's only true on technicality because Nixon fell on his sword. True on technicality = misleading.

It's not misleading at all, it's simple fact. You lefties seem to be more about feelings than facts. Sad state of affairs. The fact is that Nixon resigned in disgrace. That's worse than impeachment IMHO. Hopefully that makes you feel better.

Southerndawg

2001400ex said:

Republicans will never support impeachment. Democrats won't win the house. Even if they did, they are too big of pussies to try to impeach him.

You're one third right

dnc

Southerndawg said:

dnc said:

Southerndawg said:

dnc said:

Southerndawg said:

Pitchfork51 said:

I would happily bet that he doesn't get impeached within 6 months. Doesnt the actual process for impeachment take awhile to begin with

Yes, it would take time and massive cooperation by a republican congress to bring an indictment (impeachment). But the democrats real aim, conviction by the senate, would be highly unlikely even if congress were to impeach him. A senate conviction would come about only if Trump did something in his capacity as president that truly rose to the standard of the charge(s) and there would have to be popular support for the conviction. Only two presidents have been impeached, Johnson and Clinton, and neither were convicted by the senate. Bill Clinton was impeached for committing perjury and obstruction of justice. But it took a republican majority congress to do so, even though both charges against Clinton were overwhelmingly supported by evidence of his wrongdoing. However, in the end, a republican senate did not have the political will for a conviction as there was not enough popular support for it. Self preservation always wins out in politics.

This is both true and also misleading. Nixon was well on his way to impeachment and conviction, but resigned first.

It can happen.

That said, I agree with your ultimate conclusion. There won't be enough support among the GOP base for them to impeach/convict. When the Democrats take over Congress they'll have plenty of support for it, they'll just need the right charge.

Of course, even then it probably won't happen because Pence.

Trump stays.

Not misleading at all. Only two presidents have been impeached and neither were convicted.

I agree, Nixon would have been impeached and most likely convicted. He, like Clinton, committed crimes that rose to the level of impeachment and conviction. The difference in the end was that there was popular support for Nixon's conviction, and he knew it, while Slick Willy & Co. conflated his crimes with the idea that it was all about a blow job, so there was not enough popular support for a conviction. It did cripple Clinton's presidency, resulted in personal fines and disbarment, and put a mark in the history books that taints his legacy, but those are trivial things compared to a senate conviction.

The left's strategy right now is in line with their strategy against Nixon, Reagan, and both Bushes. Use the mass media to delegitimize and disparage the president, make him as unpopular as possible and attempt to oust him by any and all possible means. Their ideas are bankrupt so this is what they're left with. It might work, it all depends on what Trump does and how the economy in particular does. If we see Reaganesque growth rates, get ready for eight years of the Donald. If not, he will likely be a one and done president.

It's only true on technicality because Nixon fell on his sword. True on technicality = misleading.

It's not misleading at all, it's simple fact. You lefties seem to be more about feelings than facts. Sad state of affairs. The fact is that Nixon resigned in disgrace. That's worse than impeachment IMHO. Hopefully that makes you feel better.

Fuck I've been found out! I'm also just a coog/duck troll just trying to make REAL Dawgs look bad!

2001400ex

Southerndawg said:

dnc said:

Southerndawg said:

Pitchfork51 said:

I would happily bet that he doesn't get impeached within 6 months. Doesnt the actual process for impeachment take awhile to begin with

Yes, it would take time and massive cooperation by a republican congress to bring an indictment (impeachment). But the democrats real aim, conviction by the senate, would be highly unlikely even if congress were to impeach him. A senate conviction would come about only if Trump did something in his capacity as president that truly rose to the standard of the charge(s) and there would have to be popular support for the conviction. Only two presidents have been impeached, Johnson and Clinton, and neither were convicted by the senate. Bill Clinton was impeached for committing perjury and obstruction of justice. But it took a republican majority congress to do so, even though both charges against Clinton were overwhelmingly supported by evidence of his wrongdoing. However, in the end, a republican senate did not have the political will for a conviction as there was not enough popular support for it. Self preservation always wins out in politics.

This is both true and also misleading. Nixon was well on his way to impeachment and conviction, but resigned first.

It can happen.

That said, I agree with your ultimate conclusion. There won't be enough support among the GOP base for them to impeach/convict. When the Democrats take over Congress they'll have plenty of support for it, they'll just need the right charge.

Of course, even then it probably won't happen because Pence.

Trump stays.

Not misleading at all. Only two presidents have been impeached and neither were convicted.

I agree, Nixon would have been impeached and most likely convicted. He, like Clinton, committed crimes that rose to the level of impeachment and conviction. The difference in the end was that there was popular support for Nixon's conviction, and he knew it, while Slick Willy & Co. conflated his crimes with the idea that it was all about a blow job, so there was not enough popular support for a conviction. It did cripple Clinton's presidency, resulted in personal fines and disbarment, and put a mark in the history books that taints his legacy, but those are trivial things compared to a senate conviction.

The left's strategy right now is in line with their strategy against Nixon, Reagan, and both Bushes. Use the mass media to delegitimize and disparage the president, make him as unpopular as possible and attempt to oust him by any and all possible means. Their ideas are bankrupt so this is what they're left with. It might work, it all depends on what Trump does and how the economy in particular does. If we see Reaganesque growth rates, get ready for eight years of the Donald. If not, he will likely be a one and done president.

Um no. Trump sends his own tweets, the media doesn't have to make shit up about Trump. Same with Bush Jr. When you go into war on the premise of WMDs and there's no WMDs, it's not going to go well.

If you think the media is all out to get Republicans, why was Bush's popularity in the 90s after 9/11? Why didn't the media blast Bush about that? There was plenty of opportunity to blast him.

Seriously, you fags with "it's the liberal media fault" are as faggoty as the people saying Russia was the reason Hillary lost.

Southerndawg

2001400ex said:

Southerndawg said:

dnc said:

Southerndawg said:

Pitchfork51 said:

I would happily bet that he doesn't get impeached within 6 months. Doesnt the actual process for impeachment take awhile to begin with

Yes, it would take time and massive cooperation by a republican congress to bring an indictment (impeachment). But the democrats real aim, conviction by the senate, would be highly unlikely even if congress were to impeach him. A senate conviction would come about only if Trump did something in his capacity as president that truly rose to the standard of the charge(s) and there would have to be popular support for the conviction. Only two presidents have been impeached, Johnson and Clinton, and neither were convicted by the senate. Bill Clinton was impeached for committing perjury and obstruction of justice. But it took a republican majority congress to do so, even though both charges against Clinton were overwhelmingly supported by evidence of his wrongdoing. However, in the end, a republican senate did not have the political will for a conviction as there was not enough popular support for it. Self preservation always wins out in politics.

This is both true and also misleading. Nixon was well on his way to impeachment and conviction, but resigned first.

It can happen.

That said, I agree with your ultimate conclusion. There won't be enough support among the GOP base for them to impeach/convict. When the Democrats take over Congress they'll have plenty of support for it, they'll just need the right charge.

Of course, even then it probably won't happen because Pence.

Trump stays.

Not misleading at all. Only two presidents have been impeached and neither were convicted.

I agree, Nixon would have been impeached and most likely convicted. He, like Clinton, committed crimes that rose to the level of impeachment and conviction. The difference in the end was that there was popular support for Nixon's conviction, and he knew it, while Slick Willy & Co. conflated his crimes with the idea that it was all about a blow job, so there was not enough popular support for a conviction. It did cripple Clinton's presidency, resulted in personal fines and disbarment, and put a mark in the history books that taints his legacy, but those are trivial things compared to a senate conviction.

The left's strategy right now is in line with their strategy against Nixon, Reagan, and both Bushes. Use the mass media to delegitimize and disparage the president, make him as unpopular as possible and attempt to oust him by any and all possible means. Their ideas are bankrupt so this is what they're left with. It might work, it all depends on what Trump does and how the economy in particular does. If we see Reaganesque growth rates, get ready for eight years of the Donald. If not, he will likely be a one and done president.

Um no. Trump sends his own tweets, the media doesn't have to make shit up about Trump. Same with Bush Jr. When you go into war on the premise of WMDs and there's no WMDs, it's not going to go well.

If you think the media is all out to get Republicans, why was Bush's popularity in the 90s after 9/11? Why didn't the media blast Bush about that? There was plenty of opportunity to blast him.

Seriously, you fags with "it's the liberal media fault" are as faggoty as the people saying Russia was the reason Hillary lost.

You are one daft mofo, gotta hand it to you, boundless.

RaceBannon

This thread


Filled with morons

greenblood

He would have to perjure himself, basically lying under oath. I'm pretty sure in 80% of the suits will be settled out of court and the others he probably won't take the stand. FYI, you can't perjure yourself on twitter.

Southerndawg

greenblood said:

He would have to perjure himself, basically lying under oath. I'm pretty sure in 80% of the suits will be settled out of court and the others he probably won't take the stand. FYI, you can't perjure yourself on twitter.

It's almost like there's a legal definition of perjury.