- Joined
- Aug 7, 2018
Impeachment is set at two levels. For ex. The President. House can vote to impeach the President, which is essentially an indictment level process. It then moves on to the Senate, which actually tries the charges set forth by the House impeachment. Upon "conviction" which is 2/3s, it's then decided upon removal and or exclusion from running for office again. That's the basics.
That said, if the Dems impeach Trump in the House, it will be a purely political move, which is exactly the same thing that the Republicans did to Clinton when he was impeached. Never had a chance of being pushed through the Senate, but wanted to make a political statement by "impeaching the President". Which is funny, because if memory serves, Clinton's approval rating shot up to something absurd like 70% AFTER he was impeached. Will history follow the same course? Never can tell, but at least there is a precedent to follow.
Once it became apparent that Pelosi was self-aware to see that impeachment would HELP the Republicans/hurt the Democrats ala Clinton in 1998 and started stalling, the lunatic lefties who keep screeching "Impeach the motherfucker" started rewriting the narrative of the Clinton impeachment now that the old narrative long shilled by the lunatic left, was of no use to them and history rewritten to justify their evil.
1. The lunatic left now argue that Gingrich's losses in 1998 were not due to impeachment backlash but was a natural "course correction". IE the nation "had buyer's remorse" after 1994 brought about the GOP taking full control over Congress after decades in the minority; and that Gingrich's failure to solidify his super majority was a sign that "the nation was slowly wanting to restore Congress back to the Democrats"
2. That it didn't matter that impeachment blew up in Gingrich's face, because at the end of the day the GOP won the White House in 2000.
Of course, the later ignores the fact that the GOP cheated like motherfuckers to win THAT election complete with getting the Supreme Court to basically appoint Bush President. And the former is super fucking laughable, given how craven said revisionism is as one of the chief cornerstones of the left's version of the Clinton impeachment mythology is that Newt bet his entire career on impeachment giving him his fevered dream of a House and Senate super-majority which would have allowed him to pretty much run the country and launch his own dreams of a Presidential bid afterwords. And it backfiring on Newt to such a degree that the GOP ran him out of town on a rail and rendered him persona non grata for a decade.