Senate shows that Trump impeachment has no chance of passing - but i bet House goes through with it anyway

Rand Paul called forced a vote in the past few days to show to the world that this attempted post-leaving-office impeachment of Donald Trump is not going to make it through the Senate. As one would expect, the vote went down to almost entirely party lines due to the uselessness of our gang-like leaders, but the showcase is very real if you are paying attention: In order for the impeachment to pass, they need a certain amount of votes if and when this silly impeachment gets through the House, and the people who would like to see Trump impeached have been shown that they do NOT have the votes necessary to make that happen.


src

I didn't watch the entire speech because I like to think that as someone who actually works pretty hard at his job (and I make a pretty great living because of this work ethic) that I have too much to do in my work life in order to watch 30 minute grand-standing speeches, even if they are done by one of the few politicians that I actually admire.

However, Paul's calling to a vote on this topic not only exhibited the fact that Congress does not have the votes necessary to pull off a second impeachment of Trump, but also raised questions on whether or not doing so would even be Constitutional. Not that anything being Constitutional actually matters to our elected leaders or anything but still!

Now comes the fun part: The ravenous Democrats in the House have been talking about the 2nd impeachment for a few weeks now and we, the people who pay these people and voted them into office (or did we?) are going to have to see if these folks who are already a group that most voters believe do a terrible job in their work, are going to waste a bunch of time pushing for something that they are fully aware has zero chance of actually passing in the Senate, which it must in order for the desired result to occur.

The desired result of course is to prevent Trump from running for office in 2024. They will pretend that it is about protecting democracy or something along those lines but come on man! you know what they are really trying to do. They are trying to squash the momentum of one of the most popular politicians of all time.


src

No matter where you stand on the political side of things I think we can all agree on one thing: No one should be simply wasting their time at their job. I employ on average 20 people per job and if I were to discover that a few of them were performing tasks that have a 100% chance of failing, they would not be working for me for very long. Why should we treat our elected officials differently?

If the House decides to draw out this procedure anyway, even though they know it will fail, we can and should view their actions as exactly what it is: A chance to get in the spotlight to progress their own self-serving purposes. But then again, I think we can look at most of these people and come to the immediate conclusion that this is what they are doing basically all the time anyway.

H2
H3
H4
3 columns
2 columns
1 column
7 Comments