>>>Neither of our two prior impeachments (Andrew Johnson or Bill Clinton) had been shown to have committed a previously established crime.
>>>It's pretty broad. The house can impeach the president for not being a nice person.
>
>They didn't say "we want to impeach Clinton, lets investigate him until we find a crime".
>
>That's what Beria used to do, boasting "Show me the man and I'll show you the crime". He would choose his target, then use the power of the state to find a crime to destroy that target.
>
>Unless I'm mistaken, at least one new Representative boasts with profane delight of her intention to mimic Beria and the MSM fawns over her for it.
>
>By the way, I see that DHS just published the December figures for apprehensions at the southern border. There's a new record for family members attempting to cross illegally: almost 28,000 in December of whom more than half are minors. This excludes unaccompanied children, adults traveling alone and those presenting legally at border crossings. Total apprehensions for Q1 were over 184K which validates Trump's thousands per day. Of note is that family member apprehensions in Q1 exceed the *annual totals* in 5 of the last 7 years which appears to support Trump's humanitarian crisis. Seems to me that rather than trawling for reasons to call Trump a liar, hate checkers might consider the implications of 500 dehydrated exhausted kids illegally crossing somewhere along 2000 miles of border every day. If they must come, at least channel them to 48 legal crossings where you can concentrate humanitarian support.

The number is still lower than it has been in previous decades despite going up....so you need to look at a bigger picture here. If there is a humanitarian crisis then building a freaking wall and implementing policy to steal children from their parents or firing tear gas at them seems...uhh stupid and counter-productive doesn't it? And surely a bunch of kids in strollers with sippy cups is not an invasion emergency all of a sudden is it? Why is NOW a state of emergency when it wasn't before when the numbers were higher? I get the humanitarian piece ...but what on earth could lead anyone to believe that Trump gives a rats ass about any of these brown-skinned people?

His "wall" - which we all know will be ineffective - is less about securing the border than it is about a symbol of Trump's racist ideology..because at the end of the day that's all it really is.