Old Jungle Sayings
- I had so much fun when I made this the other night!
1 Like
All true @peterma - but there is a slight twist - Hereâs the experience of a truly thinking lady who mentioned that incident on âTwitterâ (vid starts a few seconds before she speaks of it)
When your enemy is committing suicide,
get out of the way, and let it happen.
Go for it, Democrats !
The Donkeycrats are fun to watch.
The Nadler Impeachment Side-Show continues today, beginning at 10 am ET. â yawn 
The Nadler Committee has tweaked the recommendations of the Schiff Committee, and has voted to send draft Articles of Impeachment to the full membership of the House of Representatives.
The House will vote on the draft Articles next Wednesday. Democrat votes to impeach the President are expected to be nearly unanimous. Republican votes against impeachment will not affect the outcome.
After this vote, formal Articles of Impeachment against President Trump will be drawn up by the House of Representatives, and those formal (official) Articles will be sent to the Senate for trial.
For her part, Pelosi will be remembered in the history books as the Mother of this Debacle.
I know Fox News is showing 31 Demâs that were first elected 2 years ago from Trump-winning districts
in 2016. Should be some interesting votes on Wednesday, then again in November 2020. I had heard that Speaker Pelosi had told her caucus that their vote will not be âwhippedâ but who knows if that was just a public proclamation?
Stupid Quote of the Week
Senator Diane Feinstein â âThere is no Deep State.â
Over 100 years ago,
President Theodore Roosevelt
warned against the Deep State,
which existed even then.
I think it safe to say if you are in it, it doesnât exist?
Its hard to see the full detail of this process and the possible routes ahead. These could impact market volatility over coming sessions.
From the numbers of respective Democrat and Republican representatives involved, it seems probable that -
Trump will be impeached
but
the Senate will not convict.
But there might be intermediate stages and alternative outcomes which could be of interest to traders. I canât find out the definitive on these possibilities -
- is the House legally required to find?
- is the House restricted to only two decisions - Impeach or Not Impeach? - or can they find differently?
- is the House legally obliged to pass an Impeach decision to the Senate?
- is the Senate legally obliged to hear the case?
- is the Senate legally obliged to find only either Guilty and Not Guilty? - or is there an alternative verdict?
As the markets are not very negative, they donât seem to be rating the probability of conviction as very high. If the Democrats think likewise, they might find a way to avoid bringing this to a final conclusion. An adverse verdict from their point of view might strengthen Trumpâs position, and/or strengthen the Republicansâ position, and/or strengthen/weaken certain Democrat presidential candidatesâ chances over others.
I can imagine lots of horse-trading going on if this thing is less simple than the BBC say it is.
1 Like
Let me spew some of my frustrations when it comes to politics especially as of lately.
To be honest both parties are blaming one another and have been doing this for decades. When one party does something they wag their finger in discontent like they wouldnât do it themselves if they were in the same position which is simply a farce as we all know. Republicans and Democrats alike are both bullshitting the American public, but alas when has any of these parties truly worked for the people in the past? Donât get me wrong Trump is not even a great liar heâs just terrible and I find it so funny when he lies because he could literally go on a murder rampage and his base would eat that up like a fat kid with cake. Now do I like Trump - not even remotely close but Iâm not a Democrat as well. Democrat have been trying to sell bullshit stakes to minority voters like myself for decades and have never actually done much in improving the system. The majority of them talk a good game and when they get in power they are usually easily corrupted or follow their own agenda. Republicans are looking more unified like a fraternity but itâs also become obvious there isnât anyone their who has a backbone to stand up and Trump runs that party like his own letâs be honest. Again - I donât care for Trump nor do I like him. I would be lying though if I was to say this isnât probably the easiest time to make money under him. Just because he vocalizes a lot of what he likes and doesnât like in the markets itâs pretty easy to see where you could place your money and let it grow. Never entered the S&P 500 until about 2 years ago and literally that portfolio is just steady gaining. Pretty similar with the forex positions I expected some type of deal or work-thru so I went long on USD/JPY, CAD/JPY, AUD/JPY a few months back when USD/JPY was respectfully around the 107-108 | CAD/JPY around the 81-82 level | AUD/JPY 73-74 level|. Again Iâve been having the most profitable 3-4 years under him which I canât deny because itâs pretty easy to speculate moves with him and his temperament.
One thing I will say is the impeachment is hurting the Democrats so badly they donât even understand. They havenât learned from the first election when they tried to vilify him and he won by a landslide via electoral college. Your better off just speaking on what you can do instead of trying to make him the enemy. In making him the enemy youâve actually just fueled his base and heâs gaining more supporters . Again Trump is a dunce but itâs the easiest time to make money. The large investors and mega funds all know this. Even though are assets are bubbling & corporate debt is just becoming unmanageable when that melting pot does explode eventually itâll be notorious wipeout for the markets. Alas Iâm done with my political rant for today.
1 Like
Bring on the Senate hearings, I have not watch any of the circus from the House but I cannot wait to see the Republican controlled Senate make Joe Biden testify, that will be golden. Only the Democrat party would be so dumb as to impeach Trump over a case that exposes the corruption of the man they think can beat Trump in the next election
1 Like
For my Brit mates, I saw someone describe the House impeachment of the President as the same
as our Founders saw in England with a no-confidence vote. They put the trial in the Senate to overcome
any blatant party bias that wasnât in their homeland of England and requiring a 2/3 vote. Genius!
Thereâs a bigger play at this I can already see how the Democrats will try to rationalize it. Once it goes through Senate and it gets rejected & revoked theyâll try to use this as a flip coin heading into 2020 election saying something like we tried to bring justice to the American public and the Republicans stood in the way of that. They havenât realized once this measure finally gets through and rejected theyâve wouldâve alienated anyone who was remotely in the middle/on the fences. Just setting up their defeat to be even bigger and itâs sad because Iâm pretty sure theyâre some sensible Democrats that know this is a waste of time & resources at this current moment. There are towns & cities in America that are still dealing with 3rd world issues. Letâs address those problems as they matter way more to the American public than some glorified c-span trial. I wish our constituents would have an open ear to the American public. Majority of Americans donât see Trump in the highest light but even we can see the tactics that have been deployed to go against Trump are simply political and nothing else and thatâs the saddest thing for me. Again you wonât find me defending Trump on a lot of things but hereâs one of the few times where Iâm like this is completely pointless and just wasting time and resources when we could be focused on so many other important things.
2 Likes
Hereâs my take on your five questions â
1. is the House legally required to find?
Prior to an actual vote to impeach, the House could (but, wonât) scuttle this whole process, by simply announcing that impeachment is off the table.
2. is the House restricted to only two decisions - Impeach or Not Impeach? - or can they find differently?
If impeachment is brought to a vote (as it will be), there are only two possible outcomes: (i) The vote to impeach passes, in which case the President is impeached, or (ii) the vote to impeach fails, in which case the Democrats will have a lot of egg to wipe off their faces, and Trump will have Tweet-material to last through his second term, and beyond.
If the House scuttles the impeachment effort prior to actually taking a vote on the question, there are other ways they can try to embarrass the President: They could, for example, pass a resolution of censure, which is a purely symbolic gesture â about as meaningful as the U.S. House of Representatives censuring the British Prime Minister.
3. is the House legally obliged to pass an Impeach decision to the Senate?
Yes. If the House votes to impeach, then the President will be (essentially) indicted or charged. In this case, the U.S. Constitution provides that the Senate will try the President on the Articles (specific charges) sent up by the House of Representatives.
Note: Itâs theoretically possible for only one of the two Articles of Impeachment currently under consideration to be approved. That is, the President could be impeached on Article I, but not impeached on Article II. In that case, the Article (singular) of Impeachment sent up to the Senate would be tried by the Senate.
4. is the Senate legally obliged to hear the case?
The Constitution does not say that the Senate may (or may not) refuse to hear the case. But, itâs generally accepted that the Senate has the obligation to deal with it in some manner.
Here is the exact language in Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution:
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
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.
Some comments:
(1) There has been a suggestion that the Senate (i) receive the Articles of Impeachment (assuming the House approves them and sends them on), (ii) read the Articles into the record, acknowledging that they have been received, and (iii) then (without debate) immediately vote to convict or acquit based on those Articles â a vote that would surely result in acquittal by the Republican majority.
Whether this would spark a so-called constitutional crisis, I canât say. (But, it would certainly cause Senator Schumerâs head to explode.) If a constitutional crisis ensued, it would obviously be over the question of whether âthe sole power to try all Impeachmentsâ, as worded in the Constitution, implies the obligation to try all Impeachments.
(2) Article I establishes the legislative branch of the U.S. government â the Congress â consisting of the House and the Senate. Even before establishing the President as chief executive (in Article II), and the Supreme Court and the rest of the federal judiciary (in Article III), Section 3 of Article I establishes the procedure for removing the (yet-to-be- defined) President, in a trial presided over by the (yet-to-be-defined) Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
(3) Note the German-style capitalization of nouns, as rendered by the authors of the Constitution. And note also the peculiar placement of colons in two places in the portion quoted above (after the phrase, ââŚthe Chief Justice shall preside:â and after the phrase ââŚor Profit under the United States:â
5. is the Senate legally obliged to find only either Guilty and Not Guilty? - or is there an alternative verdict?
Itâs a binary choice â either Convicted or Not Convicted â on each Article of Impeachment.
Presumably, if two Articles are sent to the Senate, they will be voted upon individually, and theoretically the President could be convicted on one, but not the other.
But, this is strictly a political process, wrapped in the trappings of a legal process. As a (partisan) political process, the chance of a conviction on any Article of Impeachment by the Republican-controlled Senate is nil.
1 Like
Nasty Pelosi, The Mother of Impeachment
is planning to call for for a vote on
the Schiff / Nadler Articles of Impeachment
at about 7 pm EST today
Meanwhile, in the Senate, theyâre getting ready to deal with this farce
Democrats have no answers to the major issues of the day that is why they need this Sh-t show to divert attention from the real issues. Democrats ( the politicians not the voters) have for all my life been the party of Blame and No Action, when out of power they blame Republicans for everything then when they get into power they take No Action to fix the very things they blamed Republicans.
1 Like
So, the President is Impeached. Market reacts with a minor negative price move. There seems to be a low probability of conviction. All other outcomes I see as being more positive for price than the Impeachment was negative. My buy order is already set.
And now Pelosi is refusing to send the impeachment to the Senate, Is Washington broken , Hell Yes!