Hah, reminds me of the seahawks under Holmgren. ‘Oh, we have a 3pt lead in the first quarter? Run out the clock! Wait, they scored again and we lost all momentum? Run out the clock!’
2 Likes
I think she and Obama have the same ‘core values’ that you listed. Faith in ‘the institution’ however misplaced.
It did not serve us well, when Obama was basically threatened by McTurtle if he went public with the breadth of Russian interference. Obama trusted the system, the institution, the ‘voters’ to do ‘the right thing.’
Pelosi believes in impeachment by the ballot box. She is on the exact same heading - believing that surely, this time, the truth will prevail and ‘the system’ will work in our favor. “Don’t rock the boat” - just like President Obama’s approach. “Don’t rile THEIR base… our’s will be compliant no matter what.”
I really hope they don’t come back from recess and cave to the R’s eminent demands “You can’t hold impeachment inquiries/hearings in an election year - WAIT FOR THE WILL OF THE VOTERS!!” -
10 Likes
I believe there are no more than about 90 House Ds saying they’d vote for impeachment. A near unanimous D caucus would have to say the same for that vote pass, and a big consideration is those people who were elected from previously R districts. So, no, the Speaker’s not going to fling herself headlong into an issue where there’s not enough support whatever people may think her motives are.
11 Likes
I think Nadler and Pelosi are playing good cop/bad cop. I’m dubious about machinations. I think they work together.
10 Likes
He’s not being aggressive enough to be the bad cop.
6 Likes
That would sure explain why he said the other day the report contains evidence of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” My eyebrows shot up at that but if he’s a pro-impeachment voice then it makes sense.
5 Likes
No, he’s not aggressive in the way Gym, Mark Meadows and others in the Freedom Caucus are and we think they’re fools playing for cameras.
6 Likes
Nadler, obviously peeved, nevertheless held back on his ultimate threat: Holding a hearing on the matter. He’ll need to poll his committee, do some fact-finding, talk to Pelosi, and then maybe throw bones and read tea leaves. But the DOJ better be careful, because those hearings, well, you know. I know you know. You just wait. And wait. And wait. You’ll see.
3 Likes
Broncos fan here…feel your pain about Dan Reeves as coach. Except–it was run up the middle for the first two downs and gain 2 yards, then ask Elway to bail you out.
Given 2 weeks to prepare for the Broncos in the Super Bowl–his tendencies were so obvious that he was crushed every time. Of course, the Broncos were on the winning side of that against the Falcons.
1 Like
“I I think it’s incredibly arrogant of the department to try instruct him as to what to say. It’s a part of the cover-up
It’s not arrogance, it’s obstruction.
Stop volunteering innocent motives for people who have been very clear about their commitment to evil.
Hitler wasn’t “ambitious”
Mengele wasn’t “inquisitive”
Torquemada wasn’t “dedicated”
Barr is a criminal who is breaking the law to protect another, worse criminal.
12 Likes
I believe the count is at 87, but possibly higher if we consider the vote last week that was doomed to fail on going right to impeachment without the inquiry.
The concern I have is that she just doesn’t believe that impeachment is the right way to handle Trump. And as long as she believes that, she isn’t going to be a neutral judge sitting in silence while the Caucus determines what its going to do. She is going to use her considerable influence, skills and powers to dissuade people from getting on the impeachment bandwagon.
I have problems with that thinking, morally, constitutionally AND politically. I think she is making a very big mistake…with just one possible caveat that needs to be considered.
It is entirely possible that she is considering the situation in which Trump wins in 2020, and the House will have to engage in impeachment after the November election. I concur with the idea of having a safety net, but I am skeptical that by tabling it now, it is going to be viable in 2 years. And I am even more skeptical that by tabling it now, it doesn’t actually improve the chances that the GOP wins…both by giving them unintended cover and by depressing our base.
8 Likes
What is this spin from Nadler?
Mueller requested this letter from DOJ.
Mueller also released this letter to media not DOJ
Why is this being spun by media “DOJ instructs Mueller”
and Nadler “DOJ telling Mueller”
Exactly opposite??.
Mueller is driving all this not DOJ
Why?
And why is he being given cover by claiming DOJ “instructed or is telling” him anything?
What is this kabuki
4 Likes
Mueller, being Mueller will be loath to talk about anything not in the report, but I would bet that some of the investigators from his team might be more forthcoming and maybe even eager to speak. Why haven’t they been invited in? I hope the Dems are considering it.
1 Like
That’s the serious flaw in that thinking. Not rocking the boat while this President is on the ballot will result in demoralizing our own base…which is far from being compliant. Theirs is going to be riled up anyway.
5 Likes
I would like to know if Jabarr the hut asked Mueller to shut down the investigation(s)
4 Likes
And giving Barr another year to wipe out all evidence and disappear witnesses, etc.
3 Likes
Nadler and PP have history going back decades when PP lived there and wanted to do outrageous real estate deals and Nadler became a thorn in his side and of course he’s made the feud very personal. April 2019:
“Fat Jerry,” Trump called the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee as he prattled on about Nadler’s weight-loss surgery in the 2000s and suggested that the Democrat was still overweight, despite it.
“I’ve been battling Nadler for years,” Trump told the GOP lawmakers, who were embarrassed by the outburst, according to several individuals in the room who spoke on the condition of anonymity to freely discuss the remarks.
7 Likes
The problem I have with most of those questions is that Mueller can continue referring to the report as his answer, failing to provide any further clarification. I’d like to see some questioning on topics relevant to the investigation, but that are not addressed at all in the report. I think he needs to be hammered over the implications and contradictory opinion and precedent as related to the decision to not reach a finding on obstruction, especially the implication that criminal justice for the president is politicized by the decision. Also, was the decision or related topics discussed etc. with anyone outside the special counsel’s office prior to publication of the report? if so, with whom and when?
3 Likes
Interesting. And Trump calls people fat, because they used to be fat? They said at Wonkette one time he owns everything but a mirror.
7 Likes
I don’t know the contents of her mind, I can only guess at them based on what I’ve read and heard, but it’s clear she doesn’t want to rush into something which as yet is not fully supported either by her caucus or by the public at large which is reflected in polling.
4 Likes