5416
Comments (653)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
638
Dmajallen 638 points ago +648 / -10

So 5 rinos voted for it

616
Coldbyte 616 points ago +618 / -2

You mean communist insurgents

407
AmericaFloats 407 points ago +413 / -6

THIS is what we're calling them now.

add 'faggots' for flair if you like.

201
Pigpenlordofdirt 201 points ago +203 / -2

Communist Infaggents

70
Unpopular_Opinion 70 points ago +73 / -3

They will never impeach Trump because he is playing GOOD COP.

4
wartooth6 4 points ago +4 / -0

Fagrancy

30
doug2 30 points ago +30 / -0

Someone on GA.win said they hate thedonald because he always gets called a faggot.

I had to be the voice of reason... "well pal, are you a faggot?"

10
Saxonlady 10 points ago +10 / -0

rolls eyes Don't they know that Faggot is our word for 'numpty'.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
CreepyJoesOldBalls 1 point ago +6 / -5

kek. TRUST SESSIONS! 1253 DIVIDED BY .1032 EQUALS 12141.47 WHICH IS THE AMOUNT OF BITES IT TAKES FOR TRUMP TO FINISH A TACO BOWL WHICH MEANS Q IS REAL! WWG1WGA!

4
Cloudy_mood 4 points ago +4 / -0

Rhinos who voted for: “I’m sorry. It’s just that the whores that Pelosi bought us as a reward were too damn good. I mean they swallowed everything!”

2
AmericaFloats 2 points ago +2 / -0

damn

2
EddieFelson8 2 points ago +2 / -0

Redundancy is for the left

3
trauncher 3 points ago +3 / -0

The left invented the department of redundancy department

1
AmericaFloats 1 point ago +1 / -0

my bad

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
4
a_rogue_modron 4 points ago +4 / -0

Irving Kristol and all the offspring of his loins and his mind are rebranded Bolsheviks, change my mind.

2
navycuda 2 points ago +2 / -0

The correct term is collaborator.

1
Brulz_Lulz 1 point ago +1 / -0

I bet you can guess at least one of those names right off the bat.

1
UnbowedUncucked 1 point ago +1 / -0

Globalist*

155
freedom2520 155 points ago +161 / -6

No, 5 or more democrats voted AGAINST considering the point of order any further... That's what "table" means... Means kill it

Edit: This was a motion by Rand Paul.

So in fact, 5 Republicans did vote IN FAVOR of Impeachment (by way of shutting down Paul's obstruction).

But the headline is reading into the votes to infer that ONLY 5 Republicans will vote to convict, when 17 will be needed.

So it's not DOA, there will be a trial, etc. It's just that in the final vote, there is unlikely to be a conviction.

144
WiseDonkey 144 points ago +144 / -0

Tabled a motion by Rand Paul to vote on whether the impeachment is constitutional. 45 Republicans wanted to vote on constitutionality. 50 Democrats + 5 Republicans didn't want to vote on whether it is constitutional. So tabling is a loss for the Republicans, but it does show that only 5 Republicans seem to want to plow forward with this nonsense, which won't be enough to convict (so probably a win for Trump overall).

This post could have used a lot more context than just a title and a photo.

58
Dictator_Bob 58 points ago +58 / -0

Every one of them needs to be primaried, regardless.

27
jpower 27 points ago +27 / -0

Which Republicans voted for this motion?

20
deleted 20 points ago +20 / -0
33
ProphetOfKek 33 points ago +33 / -0

Lmao, they didn’t want to consider if it were constitutional? 🤡

10
p8riot 10 points ago +10 / -0

This is better for us IMO. A busy Senate during the impeachment will not get much passed from the House.

2
death 2 points ago +2 / -0

Why is that even an option?! It should be mandatory, anyone who voted no should be jailed for contempt.

11
Wood_Shampoo1 11 points ago +11 / -0

Any idea who the 5 are?

42
NeverInterruptEnemy 42 points ago +42 / -0

Sens. Mitt Romney (Utah)

Ben Sasse (Neb.)

Susan Collins (Maine)

Lisa Murkowski (Alaska)

Pat Toomey (Pa.)

Five primary losers.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
9
MaximumMAGA 9 points ago +9 / -0

By tabling it does that mean the could bring it back up in 2 years?

12
WiseDonkey 12 points ago +12 / -0

They tabled a motion by Rand Paul that would have (at least temporarily) stopped the impeachment trial from going forward. Since it was tabled, the trial will go forward. Rand Paul's motion wouldn't be relevant in 2 years (after the trial).

2
Taupkek 2 points ago +2 / -0

Thank you for the explanation.

1
WiseDonkey 1 point ago +1 / -0

You're welcome.

23
TheBigT03 23 points ago +23 / -0

Think they were tabling something paul introduced

21
freedom2520 21 points ago +21 / -0

Right... So in fact, 5 Republicans did in fact vote IN FAVOR of Impeachment (by way of shutting down Paul's obstruction).

But the headline is reading into the votes to infer that ONLY 5 Republicans will vote to convict, when 17 will be needed.

So it's not DOA, there will be a trial, etc. It's just that in the final vote, there is unlikely to be a conviction.

7
Khakiclay 7 points ago +7 / -0

I think 5 R voted against Rand and the idea the impeachment is unconstitutional. Trump is already impeached, that was done in the house. Then Senate does the trial and Rand was trying to say the impeachment itself was unconstitutional (already passed, he is impeached but not yet tried).

So 5 republicans dont think the already approved impeachment is unconstitutional. They may believe him innocent, that is unknown and seperate.

In reality, trump wants a world stage to present evidence. So this helps him.

1
TheBigT03 1 point ago +1 / -0

Makes sense fuck those rinos

22
Endprism 22 points ago +22 / -0

We don’t call them democrats anymore. They’re either socialists or the communists. Please take note.

8
GarudaDarkblack 8 points ago +8 / -0

Socialists are just Communists that don't know they are Communists.

4
Shoe 4 points ago +4 / -0

I think calling them tyrants is the most descriptive, that way it'll also include the neocons.

3
joefreed2020 3 points ago +3 / -0

Traitors maybe?

2
LibertarianXian 2 points ago +2 / -0

I just got Don Jr.'s Telegram video explaining exactly this. Rand forced a vote to basically flesh out the reality that they don't have enough votes to make it happen, so when they continue ahead anyway they look bad for pettily wasting everyone's time and money on a grudge match when real issues like job creation etc should be the focus.

1
Anaconda 1 point ago +1 / -0

yup. good thing is 45 will vote to block it. this was a great test vote to check who will vote for conviction and against conviction.

49
KamalasCamelHump 49 points ago +49 / -0

Uniparty gonna uniparty.

26
LemonTree 26 points ago +27 / -1

Who? Mitten, Turtle, ...

50
CJBarnacle 50 points ago +50 / -0

Sasse, Collins, Murkowski, Romney, and Toomey.

61
bck- 61 points ago +61 / -0

Romney is such a flaming faggot, HOW DOES HE GET ELECTED

30
CJBarnacle 30 points ago +32 / -2

because Trump endorsed him.

16
FireannDireach 16 points ago +16 / -0

Mormon mafia. And his niece runs the DNC.

9
GGodHand 9 points ago +9 / -0

Utah faggots who vote for him solely based on him being a Mormon. Low IQ morons who keep voting for a Rhino simply based off his religion instead of his polices and allegiance to the will of the people.

7
PepePinochet 7 points ago +7 / -0

He cheats.

4
georock 4 points ago +4 / -0

same way biden did

18
MarginofFraud 18 points ago +18 / -0

Amazing. So McConnell gassed up this impeachment and then voted in favor of the motion to table it? What a fucking jackass.

11
Peachykeen74 11 points ago +11 / -0

“Well, you see, it’s important to compromise... sometimes I vote to commit treason.. sometimes I don’t... you can’t win ‘em all. “

🤡

2
SteelDriver 2 points ago +2 / -0

Whatever McConnell is doing, you can rest assured he's thought it through. I'm not saying I always agree with him but I usually do, and sometimes when I think he's being a moron, it later turns out he was doing his thing. He's a shrewd motherfucker.

6
BananaWizard 6 points ago +6 / -0

No turtle? Changed his tune

2
IronSpector [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

That surprised me too until I got to thinking just how well he plays dirty politics. He may be trying to draw this out as long as possible.

1
nanowerx 1 point ago +1 / -0

Basically all of the usual suspects minus McConnell

33
keeponwinning 33 points ago +33 / -0

The Senate voted 55-45 to set aside Paul's motion, with all but five GOP senators siding with Paul. GOP Sens. Mitt Romney (Utah), Ben Sasse (Neb.), Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Pat Toomey (Pa.) voted with Democrats to table Paul's point of order.

18
MAGASpaceCat 18 points ago +18 / -0

The typical RINO suspects.

Collins and Sasse were just reelected too. Why do we keep making these mistakes?

12
KamalasCamelHump 12 points ago +12 / -0

Because we sleep during the primaries and never run good opposition.

8
keeponwinning 8 points ago +8 / -0

Palin can see her next job in government from her house!

4
grapenuts 4 points ago +4 / -0

really still have to ask?

2
SteelDriver 2 points ago +2 / -0

In Collins case, we're lucky to have her instead of another Dem. At least there's a chance she will go with the Reps on something.

Romney and Murkowski I don't understand at all, at this point, how they stay (or will remain) in office. Sasse is kind of a libertarian (the annoying kind, sometimes :D), but I can at least understand where the voters were coming from with him.

1
MSG1000 1 point ago +1 / -0

What?!? At this point what makes you think people are still fairly electing anyone?

22
ShakeYourTrumpThang 22 points ago +22 / -0

That cunt from Maine?

13
Coslin 13 points ago +13 / -0

Delecto, Collins, Toomey, Murkowski and Sasse.

1
IronSpector [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sens. Mitt Romney (Utah), Ben Sasse (Neb.), Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Pat Toomey (Pa.)

7
Data 7 points ago +7 / -0

You can probably guess which five... 🙄

21
NihilistCaregiver 21 points ago +21 / -0

Inky, Winky, Blinky, Dinky, and Pinky

the usual suspects

8
booblitchutz 8 points ago +8 / -0

What about Clyde?

6
NihilistCaregiver 6 points ago +6 / -0

never bring up clyde damnit