Giantaxe

Double jeopardy? Not sure that's correct though given that there is impeachment is a political act, not a criminal justic act per se.

caretaker

Maybe she meant that if impeachment failed there is no way he'd be convicted later in criminal court.

scrubbedexpat099

Impeachment is supposed to be a criminal justice act.

zargof

Trump has committed numerous crimes. I've no doubt SDNY could find something from his businesses unrelated to obstruction of justice if they wanted to.

Giantaxe

I think the speaker can, just as McConnell has frequently stopped legislation being considered in the Senate.

kimilseung

The Constitution says: "Judgment in Cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law" which makes me think double jeopardy in an actual trial, would not apply. But I am no lawyer.

Anian

The Mueller questioning wasn't a loss for the Democrats at all, but it wasn't much of a gain either. It pretty much confirmed what everyone with half a brain already knew - that Trump wasn't exonerated and Barr misrepresented it, and the reasons why Mueller didn't recommend indictment. At least it was put into plainer words for the uninformed voters to understand better.

I saw quite a bit of it. It was funny when Republicans would clearly have a set of prepared statements and questions that were meant to lead Mueller into a trap, but would fail halfway through and they soldiered on flustered but regardless, ending with a statement that made no sense and was completely wrong given what Mueller just told them.

So we end up where we were before, with Republicans denying reality in order to confuse their voters into thinking Trump did nothing at all, and Democrats sitting on their hands despite knowing they have enough to start impeachment. But they want maximum political impact, so now is the wrong time to do it. They'll wait until a good time before the election so that even if it fails it is recent enough to linger in people's minds.

scrubbedexpat099

So they will delay impeachment, let Trump stay in place, for political expediency?

Not sure that will sell very well.

Anian

I don't know if you've been following the news much lately, but yeah it hasn't.

Hiro11

I'll wade in here with a few "Republican talking points" designed to "troll" the agreeing masses here. This is pointless. Still, I can't help myself.

1. It's not Mueller's job or indeed the job of any Special Council to "exonerate" anyone. This whole discussion of "exoneration" is nonsense.
2. Mueller's job WAS to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election. Given that, an investigation into the Democrat's hired gun Fusion GPS's partnerships with Putin mouthpiece lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya (you know, of Trump Tower meeting fame) and Putin money-laundering bagmen Prevezon seems relevant. After all, Fusion GPS likely kicked off this whole mess... but apparently this is "not in his purview". OK, what role did the DMC/Clinton campaign-hired International Man of Mystery Christopher Steele play here? Not in his purview. Potential FBI violations of the FISA? Not in his purview. All of these things should very plausibly have been in his "purview". A reasonable person might look at these holes in Mueller's "purview" and think that this investigation was somewhat "politically directed" shall we say.
3. I can't wait for the Democrat mud-slinging machine to wind up and be directed at Messrs Barr and Horowitz given the ongoing investigation into the aforementioned *ahem* "peculiar" behavior of the FBI in its use of FISA warrants in the "investigation" of the Trump campaign. Again, a reasonable person could look at at the highly suspicious Fusion GPS/DMC/Justice Department/FBI/Christopher Steele coziness and wonder if the decidedly less plausible "Russian collusion" stuff was in fact a smokescreen.
4. The Democrats are continually shifting goalposts here: "Russian Collusion" didn't work? How about just investigating Trump for everything and anything, just make sure that he's "under investigation"? How about subtly shifting the positioning of the Mueller investigation, that Trump cooperated with the vile Russkies, to general Russians interference in the election, which are two different things but sound kinda-the-same at a glance? Do as the endlessly entertaining Democrat pitbull Adam Schiff does: rant and rail with vague, impossible to prove or disprove statements, confuse morality and legality, keep the story alive. A compliant and supportive media will surely help in creating the headlines. In Washington when all else fails, obfuscate.

OK, I've got that off my chest. You may begin calling me a Trump fanboy stoogemoron.

scrubbedexpat099

I was wondering if you were new around here.

BenK91

It was essentially watching a frail, bumbling old man who couldn't remember names or even the questions he was asked 30 seconds previously.

Pretty depressing/comical depending on how you look at it. Immense waste of time and money.

zargof

So, second debate part one quick summary:

The generic moderate Republicans on stage all came for Sanders and Warren and they all lost badly. None of them will make the stage next time.
Buttigieg does a better White Obama act than Beto.
Marianne Williamson is an interesting character. She has some good ideas and is very intelligent, and her answer on reparations was compelling. But it is still spoiled by the spiritualism and woo.
Warren and Sanders worked together very effectively to fend off the right wing and the disingenuous CNN clowns. It will be interesting to see if there will be the same dynamic the next time when the survivors will all be on the same stage together. Biden will be toast, assuming he isn't destroyed by Harris and Booker tonight.

MidAtlantic

He couldn't even remember his own report, calling into question if he wrote or even read it.

civilservant

I liked O'Rourke (as I mentioned earlier on in the thread) but it seems that it was easy to like him when he was running against Cruz but against the rest of the field, not so much.

I don't really like Warren or Sanders policies, but boy do I believe Warren when she speaks. Bernie on the other hand, grates on me. This time around he seems irrelevant and entitled.