Gallup: 52 Percent Support Trump’s Impeachment And Removal

There is another poll showing a significant increase in support for the impeachment and removal of President Donald Trump. What should worry the White House is that among the 52 percent of Americans now supporting impeachment in the Gallup poll is a rising number of key independent voters. These various polls reflect, in my view, a continuing failure of the White House to reframe its impeachment strategy and narrative. It is not working. In the end, impeachment could end with a simple party muscle vote but that is not going to win over key voters like independents. There is clearly damage below the water line for the White House and the control of the Senate could rest in the balance.

Trump appears to be holding on to his core supporters with 39 percent approval. That includes an impressive 87 percent of Republicans. However, only 34 percent of independents now approve of Trump’s performance.

For Democrats, support for impeachment is at 90 percent. Only 6 percent of Republicans support impeachment — an amazing gap.

These polling numbers track the trajectory of Richard Nixon before his resignation. In late August 1974, 58 percent in Gallup polling were in support of Nixon’s impeachment — a 300 percent increase from the polling in June 1973. While that trending is comforting for Democrats, there still remain 46 percent against impeachment.

This can be a mixed bag for the Nancy Pelosi who has long expressed a willingness to impeach Trump while actively obstructing efforts to do so. She appears to have lost control of the issue with voters who are now expecting an impeachment vote by the House.

274 thoughts on “Gallup: 52 Percent Support Trump’s Impeachment And Removal”

  1. It’s sad to see so many lies and so much propaganda being published on Turley’s blog. Oh, and Hillary has a 95% chance of winning!

      1. Cringing. Whatever he started life out as, he ended his life as just another race-baiting, money-grubbing politician, who was quite willing to sell out his fellow black man for a few bucks and a chance to live on the Democratic Party Plantation. A few hundred years earlier, he would have been one of the ones waving good-bye to the slaves bound for wherever, as he counted his new stock of beads, iron axe heads, and trinkets.

        Sadly, he is only a drop in the bucket and his passing will not improve anything as he will be replaced by another race-baiting, money-grubbing politician who is quite willing to sell out his fellow black man for. . .

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

        1. Elijah Cummings was a failure as a father, husband, dishonorable Baptist, tax cheat, debtor to all, and a shadow of the hero his mother was who died at age 91 in a nursing home! She raised him in poverty in South Carolina while providing for him and his many siblings, while Elijah stuck her in a nursing home in her elder years after her stroke. Fitting that Elijah died in his 60s

          To say he was a race baiter is kind. He slid into Kweise Mfume (NAACP Head) Congressional seat in 1996 after starting in 1983 in the Maryland House of Delegates a few years after graduating from law school. He was unfaithful to his first wife, Joyce, had a daughter with her, a daughter with another woman, and a son whom no one knows his identity: his father never owned up to his existence until a parternity test. He practiced nepotism with his most recent wife, many years his junior, placing her in Democratic political leadership positions and bullying others with his totle to her profit. Joe and Hunter Biden probably learned from Elijah!

          LOL

          Gotta love how liberal politicos berate others about honesty, truth and disenfrachisement all the while screwing their own race and kin, children, spouses and black constituents after serving them for 30 years at the Federal and State legislative levels

          Elijah Cummings will be missed by elitist liberal polticians and the lying press both who hate Americans. Otherwise, Elijah leaves behind a lot of people whom he screwed and doubtful any of them shed a tear on his passing.

          Good riddance to such an evil person

          1. Re above

            Baltimore Sun, 1999:

            https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1999-10-17-9910170087-story.html

            A review of state and federal records and interviews with associates provide a picture of a man who has spent years warding off debt collectors, juggling unpaid tax bills and paying to support several children.

            Among his most serious troubles:
            In the mid-1990s, the Internal Revenue Service filed court papers declaring that Cummings was legally obliged to pay more than $30,000 in unpaid federal taxes. He finished paying those taxes earlier this year.
            Cummings appears to have violated campaign finance law by having a donor co-sign a loan that supplied $15,000 for his first House campaign, attorneys knowledgeable about that law say.

            In five instances, creditors went to court to force Cummings to pay a total of $24,000 in overdue debts.

            Debbie Serio, a Free State bookkeeper, said her company waited more than six months before suing. “I never was able to get in touch with him,” Serio said. “When I heard on the news who he was, I thought, ‘Ooof, what did I do?’ But if he’s not even going to bother calling me, we’re going to try to get our money back.” Eventually, she added, “he did pay us.” Cummings said he had no recollection of the debt or the lawsuit.

            Accident, tax bills
            In October 1990, while driving without auto insurance, Cummings struck another car on a Baltimore street. Though driving without insurance is a misdemeanor under state law, Cummings was not charged, according to traffic court records. Two years later, the other motorist’s insurer sued Cummings to recover $11,266 for car repairs and medical treatment. In 1993, Cummings settled the suit and paid the bill.

            Cummings said this month that he had not known he was uninsured when the accident occurred. He said he had mailed a check to his insurer for his auto policy, but “they said they didn’t get the check,” he said.

            In 1991, according to tax records, Cummings failed to pay $20,949 in federal taxes, mostly business-related. In 1992, he failed to pay $3,847. In 1993, the figure was $6,054. The total: $30,850. The congressman said he simply did not have enough money to pay all his taxes while balancing other priorities.

            As the March 1996 primary approached, Cummings asked William K. Blanchet, an early campaign donor, to help him secure a $25,000 loan. According to both men, Blanchet arranged the loan and co-signed it March 1.
            Cummings said he needed that money to pay debts, primarily overdue taxes. When pressed, Cummings acknowledged what his own campaign reports disclose: He immediately used $15,000 of the money to lend to his campaign for the last days of the pivotal Democratic primary.
            Several attorneys who deal with campaign finance law said his use of $15,000 from the co-signed loan for the campaign appears to violate the law, because it technically constitutes a $7,500 contribution by Blanchet — above the $2,000 legal limit for any donor.

            Cummings said he has been short of money, in part, because he helps to support three children: his college-age daughter with his now-estranged wife and two children he fathered by other women out of wedlock — a 16-year-old son and a 4-year-old daughter. Cummings said he paid about $30,000 last year in child support and tuition payments.

            The congressman has referred to his younger daughter in many speeches. But until now, he has never publicly acknowledged the existence of his son. The teen-ager lives with his mother in Baltimore.

            In June 1995, a 38-year-old Baltimore lawyer named DeBora M. Ricks sued Cummings, seeking a blood test to prove that her daughter, born in October 1994, was his. After the test, a consent decree required Cummings to pay $6,720 a year for child support.

            He has lived apart from his wife, Joyce M. Cummings, since 1982, though the couple has not divorced. He said he paid his older daughter’s tuition at Roland Park Country School, which was $10,600 in the 1995-1996 school year and rose to $12,875 by last year, which was her senior year.

            Cummings said he also pays $500 a month to the mother of his 16-year-old son.

            Nepotism: Maya Rockeymoore Cummings
            https://heavy.com/news/2019/02/maya-rockeymoore-elijah-cummings-wife/

          2. Given the predominant politics of most posters here, no doubt – like you – virtue in personal relationships is most critical in selecting leaders.

            1. Anon1 is jealous she cant sustain a monogamous relationship.

              Sorry hun. We all cant be successful wives and honorable mothers

              1. Dorothy,

                Anon1 is an amalgamation of Hillary, David Brock and Glen Close. Keep your distance, remain anonymous and stab like you only have one chance…then come back for more shots. Loads of fun

            2. Ricky, thanks for the abbreviated version of Elijah Cummings ill spent life. He has done so many nasty things it would fill the entire blog. If anyone questions your abbreviated version they can go to a more complete version at https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individuals/elijah-cummings/

              I do take note of what Anon says: “virtue in personal relationships is most critical in selecting leaders.” Anon would be right except among Democrats like the one’s constantly under discussion “virtue” is known as stealing, lying and cheating. All of those things fit snugly in Anon’s world.

          3. he had a good strong voice. that’s about all I can say about him. otherwise I never even heard of him until recent hearings.

  2. Trump’s Chief Of Staff Admits To Quid Pro Quo

    Admission Could Be Turning Point In Ukraine Scandal

    Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, threw the Trump administration’s defense against impeachment into disarray on Thursday when he said that the White House withheld nearly $400 million in military aid to Ukraine to further President Trump’s political interests.

    Mr. Mulvaney told journalists in a televised White House briefing that the aid was withheld in part until Ukraine investigated an unsubstantiated theory that Ukraine, not Russia, was responsible for hacking Democratic Party emails in 2016 — a theory that would show that Mr. Trump was elected without Russian help.

    The declaration by Mr. Mulvaney, which he took back later in the day, undercut Mr. Trump’s repeated denials of a quid pro quo that linked American military aid for Ukraine to an investigation that could help Mr. Trump politically.

    The comments sent Washington into turmoil as Democrats and some Republicans said they were deeply damaging to Mr. Trump.

    At the White House, Mr. Mulvaney said that Mr. Trump had demanded that Ukraine investigate the theory, even though a former White House homeland security adviser had told Mr. Trump that the theory had been completely debunked.

    “The look back to what happened in 2016 certainly was part of the thing that he was worried about in corruption with that nation,” Mr. Mulvaney told reporters, referring to Mr. Trump. “And that is absolutely appropriate.”

    Mr. Mulvaney’s acknowledgment of a tie between military aid and a political investigation came as House Democrats were summoning a stream of witnesses to the Capitol to investigate whether Mr. Trump had pressured Ukraine for his personal political benefit in 2020.

    Democrats called Mr. Mulvaney’s comments a potential turning point in their impeachment inquiry. “We have a confession,” said Representative Eric Swalwell, Democrat of California.

    By day’s end, after Mr. Trump told aides to clean up the mess, Mr. Mulvaney issued a statement flatly denying what he had earlier said.

    Edited from: “Mulvaney Says, Then Denies, That Trump Held Back Ukraine Aid As Quid, Pro Quo”

    This evening’s New York Times

    1. Regarding Above: This story was widely presented as a turning point in the Ukraine scandal. It totally contradicts Trump’s lawyers and the Justice Department. I strongly suspect Professor Turley will be addressing this story tomorrow. He might confirm this is a turning point.

    2. Hill – I watched that press conference in its entirety and he really did not admit it was a qpq. It was said quickly while trying to explain something else. It was more of a slip of the tongue.

            1. i listened to a roundup of all that on NPR last night and I still don’t get where you guys think you got what you wanted

              I’ll tell you another thing about people who get confused and say something and then clarify it. it’s a pretty common thing with witnesses.

              what stinks about it? they often make themselves useless for either side. by equivocating, they sometimes make their own contradictory remarks nullities.

              yesterday i also heard on NPR a reporter rapid firing multiple confusing questions at Scott Perry some guy with a role in this on some committee– it was very bad form for the “reporter” who sounded more like a police interrogator, trying to get somebody to slip up. the bias was plainly evident

              see, you’re not going to reach 1/3 of the trump supporters who are hard core.
              you have 1/3 who hate trump no matter what.

              so the action is in the middle. and if you want to convince people more than just the 1/3 lets say who hate trump under any conditions, you may actually have to try and approach the whole thing in a slightly less overtly hateful and unfair manner. just a thought.

              However, I’m hoping your leadership keeps up the bellicose and unfair tone, because it’s going to cost you on election day, cost dearly, by bringing forth phalanxes of hard core trump voters in state after state, where they finally feel like they get to have their little say, after 4 years of sabotage and total unfairness.

    3. “Trump’s Chief Of Staff Admits To Quid Pro Quo”

      Wrong! Not unusual for Peter. “Ukraine, not Russia, was responsible for hacking Democratic Party emails in 2016” That is what the Chief Executive is supposed to do. He is supposed to see to it that our foreign aid doesn’t enhance corruption in foreign nations that are against American interests. Peter thinks differently because to him lying and stealing are OK and he and fellow Democrats would sell the nation to the highest bidder and destroy it to make a buck. Just look at the ethics of the Bidens.

      The blame if any lies right at the Democrats feet in trying to win an election breaking all sorts of laws, rules and regulations along with weaponizing our intelligence agencies. Totally anti-American and Stalinist in nature.

      Articles like this in the NYTimes aren’t meant to be news rather to act as “co-conspirators” for the DNC.

      1. Peter was a delivery boy in our restaurant until we let go and hired a reliable employee who didn’t require such high maintenance and wasn’t a drama queen

        James

        1. Thank you James. Good to know. I guess now the taxpayer has to pay for Peter’s welfare and food stamps. Maybe that is why he took this gig and is working for David Brock.

      2. Funny s…t there. Yeah, Trump is a tireless protector of the purity of American elections and even the slightest hint of impropriety in American government and business.

        MPAWWWWW!

        1. “Trump is a tireless protector of the purity of American elections ”

          Anon, If you mean he had to fight Clinton (Obama administration) spying, cheating, lying, fraud and theft then perhaps that is totally correct. He’s a good man and has proven you and your type to be wrong so many times.

          I think you should listen to his rally’s. They create energy for his supporters and for those that support the USA.

            1. “Yeah, Jim Jones was good at rallies too.”

              Anoon, Jim Jones was a socialist and a member of the culture of death. His final rally included less than 1,000 persons most apparently lacking in self esteem that could not see the beauty of being an individual with individual rights. They killed themselves or were killed by the leaders of the movement in typical socialist fashion. You seem to be closely aligned with that type of thinking.

  3. Anonymous writes: “Greg T. is correct And it’s Allan who needs to “go back to mommy.”

    Greg, I just warned you to “Please don’t start sounding like that other idiot I had to contend with a short while back.” Low and behold anonymous the Stupid has piped in. He is trying to fly on your coat tails. He dumbs down everything he touches.

          1. Anonymous it looks like you are trying to start another record of postings.

            You are not original. You copied that site from DSS who has used it several times. You are like a kid who takes a test and copies from the person next to him. They generally don’t amount to much and end up like you.

                1. All that matters is that it’s true — that it fits.

                  “You are used to hand me downs by now.”

                  Allan certainly comes up with some of the most ridiculous comments.

                  1. “Allan certainly comes up with some of the most ridiculous comments.”

                    Ridiculous but true. That is what happens when one is born Stupid and acts that way.

    1. It’s ‘lo and behold’, sharp boy, not “low”. But you knew that, right?

      Just like you know everything, just like PCS threatens sheriffs, just like everyone is an idiot except you and the ‘facts’ you claim to post.

      1. Greg T. – I think that was more of a thought problem. However, considering that a sheriff killed a man over a red flag incident, I think some people will be more aware.

      2. Greg T., if you play with Anonymous the Stupid you will end up like him. We are all pulling for you not to get stuck in the mud. I’m not sure what you are saying about PCS. He’s a decent chap but sometimes people lack the ability to delve into the wryness of his posts. That’s OK because we will help you out if you need it as long as you warrant it.

    1. That he’s 67 years old and been in consequential offices for 18 years and would perhaps like to retire to his ranch in Texas?

      1. Tabby, Perry was just named as one of so-called “Three Amigos” who tried to take control of all Ukraine matters from the State Department. So it’s unlikely that his resignation is a simple yearning for the ranch.

      2. TIA…. Rick is not beloved by the Republican establishment in Tejas, like those who came before him.
        Other than the Ukraine unpleasantness, I think he is ready to get out of gov’t and get back home and make some money in private sector.
        Rick grew up without running water, but he doesn’t want to die that way.🤠

            1. Y’all give me too much credit because
              1) I didn’t know they were called emojis until a few months ago
              2) I use whatever is offered on my Samsung tablet.

              😍

                1. I was being specific to Rick Perry who is all throughout the article and the subject of your comment. BTW, Barbara Jordan married someone wit the last name Crook so you’re right, she is a crook after all.

                2. More specifically, you suggested Rick Perry, growing up broke, might be ready to cash in after years of government service. I suggested based on his actions he might not be waiting. Far more on target than a leap to Barbara Jordan.

            1. Cindy, Barbara Jordan died 23 years ago!

              Is this where we’ve come in the ‘development’ of ‘What Abouts’? Any name will do? No relevance necessary?

  4. https://babylonbee.com/news/democrats-storm-out-of-syria-meeting-after-getting-into-shouting-match-with-trump-over-whether-a-hot-dog-is-a-sandwich?fbclid=IwAR3iLc8iVWmazcPy8Znle1Qt4pqyEEMctwJ0tp3vDLKYXz1DFfqOYGLewEk

    Democrats Storm Out Of Syria Meeting After Getting Into Shouting Match With Trump Over Whether A Hot Dog Is A Sandwich
    October 17th, 2019

    WASHINGTON, D.C.—Democrats House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer all stormed out of the meeting on Syria with President Donald Trump, each side accusing the other of being “unhinged.” Apparently, the meeting broke down when Trump suggested they all order lunch and get “sandwiches.” When asked what type of sandwich he wanted, Trump suggested “hot dogs.”

    The room was dead silent for a few seconds before Pelosi yelled, “What did you just say?”

    “I said the type of sandwich I like is a hotdog,” Trump clarified.

    “Are you insane?” Pelosi demanded, barely keeping herself in control. “Are you really calling a hotdog a sandwich?”

    “It’s meat between two slices of bread,” Trump said nonchalantly. “It’s a sandwich.”

    Pelosi was now on her feet and shouting. “That’s not what it is!” Pelosi then turned to the other Republicans in the room. “How long are you going to put up with this madness? How long?” None of the other people would meet her eyes, though.

    “They, like me, also enjoy sandwiches!” Trump yelled. “Especially with ketchup!”

    At this point Pelosi stormed out of the room along with Schumer and Hoyer. At a later press conference, Pelosi said, “All we can do now is pray for the president’s health — his mental health. He has a sick, sick mind.”

Leave a Reply