Discussion: Pelosi Pours Cold Water On Impeachment: 'We Can Investigate' Without 'Drafting Articles'

[mames5]

If the Republicans were true to their oaths, they would be on board as well. This whole thing being portrayed as a moral dilemma for the Democrats is only one piece of the story. The bigger piece is that one entire political party has no interest in upholding the law, or protecting our form of government.

[cervantes]

@steviedee111

Polls vary. I’ve seen very recent polling that indicates 2/3 of Democrats and 1/2 of independents favor impeachment. Certainly those two groups tally more than a third of the electorate?

In a March poll, support for impeachment stood at 36% (and 68% among Democrats).

Some comparisons over time:

[sickneffintired]

@cervantes

[ 1 ] is absolutely true and [ 2 ] is a meaningless platitude at best.

I much preferred the statement issued by Rep. Cummings:

“A lot of people keep asking about the question of impeachment. We may very well come to that very soon, but right now let’s make sure we understand what Mueller was doing, understand what Barr was doing, and see the report in an unredacted form and all of the underlying documents.”

Lets impeach Barr first
A rich target if there ever was one

[steviedee111]

@cervantes

That’s sort of like objecting to an investigation of John Mitchell because it was more important to go after Nixon.

I wasn’t aware a consensus was building that in addition to stating a case for Trump’s impeachment Dems were laying the groundwork for investigating and somehow sanctioning or impeaching Barr. We didn’t get on this boat to hunt down Moby Dick only to lose a few hours here and there distracted with fishing for mackerel.

Hang Trump today, hang Barr next week.

[benalpers]

You’re right that none of us know whether or not Pelosi is giving serious consideration to impeachment. But, ultimately, we cannot afford to let that be a decisive factor here. If impeachment develops momentum in her caucus or among the American people, she will be able to do precious little to stop it. The fate of the republic cannot stand or fall on the Speaker’s commitment to risk aversion.

[henk]

So we have to go with what she says publicly and from where I sit that looks very bad. Democrats are really bad at building a narrative. If you’ll recall way way back in 2016, before the election was even called Republicans were already talking about impeaching Hillary. Maybe they can’t govern, but they sure as hell know how to build a story and get the press talking about their issues.

[cervantes]

@henk

So we have to go with what she says publicly and from where I sit that looks very bad.

Yes.

[sickneffintired]

@docd

I realize that there is the possibility that the corrupt judges that McConnell has pushed through will declare that POTUS is not bound by Congressional oversight,

Oh he’s already been bleating …Nothing to see here …move along.
I sure hope that one of those “Open” cases that Mueller passed along is the investigation of the Oligarchs funding to the NRA
Ain’t heard much from O’l Wayne LaPierre recently have we?

[atldrew]

There’s a Bigger Prize Than Impeachment
Keeping Trump in office will destroy the Republican Party.

unless they rig elections.

[henk]

Bullshit, I’ve been hearing that for a long long time and all I see is a stolen Supreme Court and a cretin in the White House. We can’t sit around waiting for Republicans to destroy themselves, we need to DO SOMETHING to precipitate it.

[longtimeobserver]

Draft the charges and bills. Take them to the mat. Finish the grifters off.

[esva]

Excellent comment. It’s not a moral dilemma at all for the Democrats, but it is a political one. As for the Republicans, they have both moral and political dilemmas on their hands. If there is any karma in this world, the way they are (not) handling the moral dilemma should cause the political dilemma to blow them apart.

[stevieg]

Pelosi is channeling some editorial opinions I read often on this site. Has Josh been hired as a consultant to Dem leadership?

[cervantes]

@mames5

If the Republicans were true to their oaths, they would be on board as well. This whole thing being portrayed as a moral dilemma for the Democrats is only one piece of the story. The bigger piece is that one entire political party has no interest in upholding the law, or protecting our form of government.

@esva

Excellent comment. It’s not a moral dilemma at all for the Democrats, but it is a political one. As for the Republicans, they have both moral and political dilemmas on their hands.

 

[Nothing to add. Both comments repeated for emphasis.]

[dave48]

She’s right. There’s no need to start the articles of impeachment before a lot more evidence has been gathered. Congress needs to take it’s time to do this right. By the end of summer, after several more hearings have exposed to the public just how obscenely atrocious this administration really is, much of the public will be demanding impeachment. Until then, people need to calm down and be patient.

[georgeh]

Rep. Barbara Jodan, 1974:

"James Madison again at the Constitutional Convention: “A President is impeachable if he attempts to subvert the Constitution.” The Constitution charges the President with the task of taking care that the laws be faithfully executed, and yet the President has counseled his aides to commit perjury, willfully disregard the secrecy of grand jury proceedings, conceal surreptitious entry, attempt to compromise a federal judge, while publicly displaying his cooperation with the processes of criminal justice. “A President is impeachable if he attempts to subvert the Constitution.”

If the impeachment provision in the Constitution of the United States will not reach the offenses charged here, then perhaps that 18th-century Constitution should be abandoned to a 20th-century paper shredder!

Has the President committed offenses, and planned, and directed, and acquiesced in a course of conduct which the Constitution will not tolerate? That’s the question. We know that. We know the question. We should now forthwith proceed to answer the question. It is reason, and not passion, which must guide our deliberations, guide our debate, and guide our decision."

[steviedee111]

@henk

We can’t sit around waiting for Republicans to destroy themselves, we need to DO SOMETHING to precipitate it

Then again, when I look at them standing over the sink, stirring together bleach and Drano, I’m kinda OK with the thought they’re doing just fine on their own.

[mattinpa]

@benalpers

The fate of the republic cannot stand or fall on the Speaker’s commitment to risk aversion.

She’s trying not to get the fucker reelected inadvertently. I’m averse to that risk as well. Maybe we all should be.

[apotropoxy]

‘We Can Investigate’ Without ‘Drafting Articles’

---

Impeachment articles will arm the Treason Coalition with their best rhetorical weapon (Dems are trying to overthrow the 2016 election). Congress has four different committees poised to thump Grump like a pinata. They can take their time and work him over right up until the 2020 election.

[georgeh]

@dave48

She’s right. There’s no need to start the articles of impeachment before a lot more evidence has been gathered.

Nonsense. The evidence is there in plain sight. It has been gathered. The Muller Report is clearly a roadmap for impeachment. The House must rise and perform its duties under the Constitution.

Impeachment Now!