The House Judiciary Committee approved a resolution Thursday outlining its procedures for moving forward with an impeachment inquiry into President Trump, after a two hour debate in which Republicans accused Democrats of muddying up the issue.
“What happened today is great. The Judiciary Committee became a giant Instagram filter to make you appear that something is happening that is not,”
Doesn’t that describe pretty much all of the “investigations” when the GOP controlled House committees?
For the rethugs everything was a circus. Mostly clowns.
Uh oh…Trump Tanty Time!
Clowns and elephants.
Waiting for someone to say he agrees with Collins.
interesting> i had predicted (incorrectily) that Collins would offer a poison pill amendment that would have forced the issue of whether impeachment powers have been invoked.
Instead, it appears that Team Trump likes the ambiguity at the moment. We’ll have a better idea what is going on tomorrow, when the DoJ reply brief on Nadler’s request for Grand Jury materials is due.
"It is wrong, I suggest, it is a misreading of the Constitution, for any member here to assert that for a member to vote for an article of impeachment means that that member must be convinced that the President should be removed from office.
The Constitution doesn’t say that. "
Barbara Jordan, D-Texas, July 25, 1974
After all the pissing and moaning by TPMers about this over the last 10 or 12 months, I cannot believe how little interest there is in it when it actually happens.
So far it is all optics.
LOL – this is one of the better examples of folks letting words do their thinking for them.
You know what optics are for? Clarity.
FOCUS.
That is indeed the entire purpose of a lens.
Ok, everyone, step back…the Dems are getting serious now. They’ve decided to consider the idea of possibly starting to form an investigative committee that will hold hearings on the prospect of maybe looking into what would happen if someday they wrote a sternly worded letter threatening the GOP with the outside chance that impeachment would be discussed.
Time to put the pedal down.
Do we finally have a destination?
Can everyone please get on board?
Let’s do this.
A few months ago, something like this was a pipe dream for pro-impeachment folks like me, so I’m pleased. There is no ambiguity (at least to me) that there is in fact an impeachment inquiry underway.
The issue now is turning to whether there will be impeachment articles voted to the floor and whether there are 218 votes to impeach.
From a town hall I attend with my MoC, Dem leadership still seems confused by the speculative notion that impeachment might help Trump win re-election. Impeachment isn’t good for the guy getting impeached. Putting the decision on removal to Moscow Mitch and his cronies in the Senate is a good thing for Dems. The polling shows impeachment is popular among the Dem base, and particularly so among the groups the Dems need to motivate to vote in 2020: women, minorities and voters < 50 (civiqs has the best polling on this topic). The reason for this is simple: Trumpism is an existential threat for minorities, and white women/men below a certain age also see it in stark terms. Show those voters you’re ready to do what it takes to defend them from Trump and they’ll reward you.
In my view, impeachment is both good for the Republic & Constitution and good politically for Dems.
That was my argument a little earlier. When I came on to the site an hour ago, there was no mention of the story, though I’d seen it in the hotel on CNN first thing today. The little interest is in that there’s no display of this story on the front page. I finally found it with the help of @beattycat a little while ago. There’s no interest because no one can see the story.
To wit, we’re a couple hours after it finally showed up and we’re up to 14 comments at this writing. Poor front page management.
"Republicans mocked Democrats for failing to hold a full House vote on launching an impeachment inquiry "
“Judge” Rao was given her questions to ask about whether the whole House had voted to authorize an impeachment inquiry and this is all part of a coordinated strategy. She’s a fucking plant…both in the “mole” sense and the vegetative sense.
LOL – that’s why I noted lots of folks let words do their thinking for 'em.
I respect Pelosi’s political skills, so I’m not prepared to say she’s wrong in what she’s doing. I think I understand it (and to the extent I do understand, I disagree), but I’m not certain she doesn’t see something I don’t, particularly about marginal districts Ds want to win next year.
That’s why I quote Barbara Jordan (rest her soul), on the actual meaning of impeachment. Ds have always been way ahead of themselves on this point, including folks in these threads.
As Jordan noted, impeachment is a power the House of Representatives has to check a President for abusing the public’s trust.
Beginning an impeachment inquiry – even voting to impeach a President – does not mean that the House majority, nor any individual Representative, believes the President should be removed from office.
And yet, impeachment ain’t nothing. Until Clinton, it was by far the most serious thing a House of Representatives could do to a President: the mark of Cain.
That’s why folks using optics, without considering what the word means (or, hell, what impeachment itself means) makes me laugh.
perhaps because it isn’t really happening. In reviewing the draft resolution again last night, I noticed that not only was Art 1, Sec 2, Clause 5 not mentioned, but “Article 1” was not mentioned in the non-quoted text of the resolution either (i.e. the phrase “Article 1” only appears within quotations from other documents.) And most of those citations are from documents in which the word “impeachment” is little more than an aside.
As long as the hearings are handled professionally and without the posturing that seems to infuse all of these hearings; as long as the witnesses speak freely and don’t pull this nonsense of ignoring/disregarding subpoenas and getting away with it, without someone coming with handcuffs to drag them away, I think it could hurt the pres. Once the income tax and Deutsche Bank stuff is revealed as smoke and mirrors for his billionaire status and more people are found to be in flagrant violation of statutes, yes, this could be bad.
But will the House be able to control the monkeys in the circus? Stay tuned.