I think when he debates against whom ever it will expose him especially to midwestern states and the ones Hillary lost. I’d rather not see him debate against democratic socialism as I think it gives him an edge in those areas. Time will telll.
He has reportedly said he won;t debate this time around. He's a lazy man who knows he gets exposed when he opens his mouth especially when it isn't at a rally. There are so many talking points that an opponent can use against him.
Impeached basically means "charged". Not sure that's such a big stain when the recorded verdict is for an acquittal. I get that the Dems have to claim some sort of a win out of this shit show, but I'm sure Team Trump will be waiving the acquittal flag.
Not much of an aquittal either when no witnesses or documents turned over and the defendant obstructed by refusing to allow people to testify and didn't allow requested documents to ne turned over to the house. Everyone with half a brain knows it was a shame of a trial.
Oh, sure, both sides are going to say the other side was just playing politics and were unethical douchebags. IMHO, they're both right.
"impeached" means exactly what it implies. Split hairs all you want but Trump was IMPEACHED. And history will judge him as such.
But have you ever seen a trial where witnesses weren't allowed to testify. I think the the pubs blew it by not allowing any witnesses as they knew they already had the votes. Gave the dems some good ammunition going forward. trump can wave his acquittal flag all he wants, but it's obviously a shallow victory for a guy well known for lying and cheating.
In my view, the Dems totally blew it when they didn't take the time to get the witnesses that they wanted prior to the impeachment vote. I know, it would have taken time, but there was zero chance that the Republicans were ever going to allow witnesses to be called in the Senate proceedings. Frankly, from what I've read, that was the same in the Clinton impeachment. It would have taken time to bust though a claim of Ex. Priv., but from a political standpoint, I'd certainly think that months of bashing Trump for trying to block getting witnesses before the House would have been a lot better than a quick acquittal by the Senate.
They tried to 'get witnesses"...and were stonewalled., which meant it could have been hung up in courts for months...or longer. I don't think they had much choice.
Witnesses were allowed in the Clinton trial and the November election would have likely come and gone before it reached a final verdict in the Supreme court for the subpeonas to be decided. Doesn't help when we have an AG not doing his job as he should have enforced the subpeonas. How long were the dems suppose to wait?
Well, gee, I'm sure glad Trump didn't stomp on it, then.[/QUOTE] It could have been so much better. And now look at what's happening to both the annual deficit and the national debt. Republicans no longer worry about the debt until a Democrat gets elected.
Thousands of pages of documents were released. Zero pages of documents were released by Trump. Trump also opposed every single witness requested.
I believe it was sometime around July or August that McGahn was issued his subpeona and then the court ruled he must obey it in November and yet nobody from the DOJ would enforce it and still waiting for him to testify. That's at least 5 months.
I wonder when someone will try to assassinate Trump. If a Dem did this shit no doubt your traditional white gun nut would have ended this a long time ago.
