Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 2475 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (56)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
New York Times Website! (Original Post)
George II
Jan 2021
OP
Don't get me wrong. I am all about the impeachment, and happy that it's moved as quickly as it has.
BobTheSubgenius
Jan 2021
#5
Talitha
(6,613 posts)1. Woo-Hoo !!!!
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)2. K&R
Aussie105
(5,432 posts)3. 232 votes to impeach?
Votes that say Trump is useless? Great!
197 votes that say Trump is a good boy?
Take those 197 names please, and set up some Chinese style re-education camps, please!
mcar
(42,372 posts)4. Oh yeah!
BobTheSubgenius
(11,564 posts)5. Don't get me wrong. I am all about the impeachment, and happy that it's moved as quickly as it has.
But that 197. Whoo boy. Almost 200 legislators think this was acceptable behaviour? Seriously? I can see 200 not wanting to go along with "Shoot On Sight," but this...there is something seriously wrong with the process.