Beto: ‘Yes, I Think There’s Enough Evidence’ for Congress to Impeach Trump
O’Rourke voted twice against impeachment proceedings as a member of the House.
2020 presidential candidate Robert O’Rourke became the latest Democrat to call for Congress to begin the process to impeach President Donald Trump after the release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report.
From The Dallas Morning News:
“We’re finally learning the truth about this president. And yes, there has to be consequences. Yes, there has to be accountability. Yes, I think there’s enough evidence now for the House of Representatives to move forward with impeachment,” he said in an interview with The Dallas Morning News. “This is our country, and this is the one chance that we get to ensure that it remains a democracy and that no man, regardless of his position, is above the law.”
When O’Rourke served in the House of Representatives, he voted twice “against opening impeachment proceedings.” He avoided the impeachment talk at the start of his presidential campaign and during his Senate campaign.
In New Hampshire, O’Rourke told reporters:
Asked about the shift here Sunday morning, O’Rourke acknowledged he used to discuss impeachment only when asked about it, and he indicated the Mueller report had given him cause to be more vocal on the stump.
“I spoke about it as something that we all need to be thinking about and asking our elected representatives about,” O’Rourke told reporters. “Because now there is the report that we have been waiting for. There is an ability to answer any outstanding questions about whether there was obstruction, about what the president attempted to do about the pattern of lies and cover-up, and [it’s] very clear to me that if there is not a consequence to that, we are saying to this and future generations that this kind of behavior is acceptable, and that cannot stand.”
Other candidates have called for impeachment, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Sen. Kamala Harris, and former HUD Secretary Julian Castro. Former Vice President Joe Biden said Congress should only start “impeachment proceedings if the White House works to block Democrats from its efforts to investigate the president.”
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has consistently pushed aside impeachment as she claimed it causes too much division. She also thinks it would hurt the chances of a Democrat winning the presidency and other seats in Congress in 2020.
Reporters asked O’Rourke about Pelosi’s position. He explained that he respects “the speaker and what she’s been able to do, but when asked my opinion I’ve got to give my opinion and not anybody else’s.”
O’Rourke previously stated that the 2020 election is the best way to remove Trump.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Something looks odd about that guy, like he’s a cult leader or something.
He does bear an odd resemblance to Warren Jeffs (look him up if you don’t know).
To a democrat, the narrative is evidence. Facts, logic, etc. are the stuff of white privilege. Or, something.
Omar is much lower.
“Ugh. This dimwit is about as low wattage as you can get.”
My reply was meant for this comment.
One must realize how low the bar is for the Dems to consider impeaching Trump for obstruction of justice. (Hey, we realize it, but the press is perpetually clueless)
Lock her up = a coded command to the AG to open criminal investigation of Hillary – Impeach!
Witch hunt = a coded command to Mueller to ignore Russian collusion – Impeach!
Two scoops = vicious heterophobic white-nationalist slurs against minority LGBQTMIFW views – Impeach!
Ugh. This dimwit is about as low wattage as you can get.
I have the same feeling. How is this guy even relevant.
He’s relevant because the Leftist media (but I repeat myself) has decided that he’s sufficiently “woke” to represent their ideology.
Look what that took, though. He’s a Democrat (naturally) of Irish descent, but he defined himself by taking a Hispanic-sounding nickname (you didn’t really think “Beto” was his given name, did you?; he’s legally Robert Francis O’Rourke – how much more Irish can you get without “Patrick”?), and he’s reachable to millennials (he played in a rock band, hablas espanol, and skateboards).
In short, all he had to do was publicly reject his entire “old white patriarchy” identity and replace it with youth and minority (Hispanic) cultures. Metaphorically gut himself and build a facade. That’s it. That’s this hollow-shell’s entire claim to relevance.
Where’s the beef? If this counterfeit Mexican claims that there is evidence, apparently in the Mueller report, why doesn’t he just stop with the political BS and state that evidence, chapter and verse. This would greatly aid his fellow Democrat Obstructionists in getting impeachment proceedings moving. He would be a hero.
But he lies. There is no more evidence for impeachment than there was for Rachel Mad-cow’s collusion case. And Mueller is hardly what they were looking for as it wiped out their entire program to remove Trump. Now they are left with trying to dirty-up the AG…
On the Mueller investigation: We heard how Trump was saying he could fire Mueller. As it turns out, he had plenty of good, legally-solid reasons to do so.
Mueller was not particularly impartial, and he filled his investigation team with DNC and Clinton operatives. There was a clear bias against Trump, and that conflict of interest was reason enough to can them all.
But — amazingly! — even with all that anti-Trump bias and incentive for finding any shred of wrongdoing, even with the scope of the investigation expanding over the entire two years, they found nothing.
That’s the part the media will never focus on: An entire team of investigators with every ability, resource, and incentive to find something actionable, couldn’t find anything.
Now that the DOJ has investigated and found no evidence, the “Russia collusion” narrative is dead. It’s false, and documented so. Every time Rachel Mad-Cow opens her mouth about it and doesn’t couch her statements in “my opinion” or “this is undocumented” disclaimers — IOW, every time she presents it as objective fact — she should be held liable for slander, libel, and/or defamation, for continuing to spread reputation-damaging proven-falsehoods.
They’re never going to let it go until it costs them to keep it going.
Where would this guy be if he did not have a silver spoon?
I cannot take this twit seriously — he is an egotistical man-child, in every sense. What has he accomplished, in life, that qualifies him to be President? Another empty suit demagogue, like the sainted Obama, whose odious ideological beliefs and non-existent professional accomplishments (e.g., “community organizer”) are ignored, while a worshipful, water-carrying media gleefully creates a cult of personality and glowing mythology around the most ridiculously superficial facets of his personal history (“He was a hacker!;” “He played in a rock band!;” “He knows how to skateboard!”).
No one is above the law, but exactly what law is he accusing Trump of violating and what evidence does he have??? He begins with a fact and proceeds with a fiction.
AND it takes one criminal to know another
DWI with an attempt to leave the scene, somehow that part got scrubbed from the record
Don’t forget, he was a nanny and he had absolutely gifted humanity, not with giving to the poor, but just existing
Wow, what a manchild
“This is our country, and this is the one chance that we get to ensure that it remains a democracy and that no man, regardless of his position, is above the law.”
#1: No, we are a constitutional Republic. That he worries about “Democracy” tells me he hasn’t a clue about this fantastic country
#2: If no man is above the law, then you need to get right on Hillary and her “above the law” self
#3: What substantive actions have you taken to further the cause of working people in America, you silver-spoon jackass?
“Hillary is no man.” 😉
So you’re saying they could get “Big Mike” if said person has committed a crime?
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: If you have the evidence, impeach him. F@#$ing do it!
Understand, though, that the Senate gets to determine guilt, and you’ll have to convince 67 Senators that he’s guilty. And if you fail, the President is just as covered by the 5th Amendment against “double jeopardy” as anyone else.
(Besides which, is “obstruction” even an impeachable offense? The Constitution only says “The President … shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” [Article II, Section 4]. Does that description apply to “obstruction”? It also says that “Judgment in Case 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…” [Article I, Section 3, Paragraph 7], so there’s no criminal sanction inherent in impeaching him; they won’t be able to “lock him up” like they want to unless some other jurisdiction decides to pursue it.)
So again to the Dems: If you have the evidence, do it. Now. Clear the air.
If you don’t, you either don’t have the evidence, or you don’t have the spine. Pick whichever you like and own it.
Is obstruction even an impeachable offense? The assertion- that an Obstruction of Justice (that didn’t happen) of an investigation into a crime (that didn’t happen) is even offensive.
BUT, it’s also irrelevant as impeachment remains a political (not a judicial) remedy; anything is an “impeachable offense” if you’ve got the votes to impeach.
Nonetheless, one wonders if these grandstanders are even considering the long-term effect on the Republic’s stability should it ever become common to impeach presidents whenever one has the votes to do so, for any reason (“I don’t like that man!”) or no reason, just so long as one has the votes to do so.
Ridiculous and quixotic though the impeachment crusade may be, the D’rats really do need it.
DJT’s administration is turning out to be a success, whether it be the economy, foreign affairs, or any of the other things which were conspicuous failures during the Obama Malaise era. The Republicans as a party remain weak, disorganized, and ridiculous, but Trump himself will obliterate any opponent in an election. So the D’rats need some non-electoral way to get him out of office.
Or, of course, they could wait for their chance, and just admit that 2020 won’t be it.
But they can’t do that either. They can’t wait six years; for the first time since, probably, ever, there’s a distinct possibility that a whole slew of them might go to jail for their crimes. Just a possibility, but that’s too much. This isn’t about politics (i.e., normal power and graft), it’s about survival. That’s why something basic, like a total lack of evidence of criminality on the part of Orange Man Bad, can’t be allowed to get in the way. Ridiculous and hopeless though it may be, impeachment is all they’ve got.
And Beta is just signaling that he’s signing on with the program. This is hardly a radical position; at this point, it’s the obvious course for a lazy Dem who wants to maintain the illusion that he’s a contender.
Betas are still hunting witches, and dreaming of warlock trials. He’s not a baby, Beto. #HateLovesAbortion
Obama spied, Clinton colluded, DNC denied, and the press carried out a multitrimester cover-up. Deep Plumber exposed the conspiracy, but there is still a lot of work to clear the soiled political climate left in the wake of Water Closet.
“…I think there’s enough evidence…”
Bobby has read all about impeachment in the Little Red Facebook.
Beta is a moron
That’s insulting morons. Beeto is a sub-moron.
“I think…”. No you don’t.
The funny thing is that half of these morons think that if Trump is removed from office Hillary becomes president.
He’s still trying to be relevant.Trying.
So, get to it. Quit BSing around and get after it; let the American people know what democrat “leadership” looks like, as if we’re not getting enough of a reminder.
But the problem is he doesn’t think.