House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) conceded to other top Democrats in a meeting this week that public opinion on President Donald Trump is so baked in, it may be hard to sway people’s opinion with the impeachment inquiry — but that they must go ahead and do it anyway.
While politicians reflexively consider the political ramifications of their actions, Pelosi is right here. She had no choice but to proceed with impeachment. She knows the chance of Senate removal is remote. But Trump is on a crime spree. He threatens our very electoral system if he isn’t stopped. Pelosi is putting our Constitution first.
Agree with her. If they do not do their job, then that is game over.
“Meanwhile, they are struggling to figure out the scope of what should be included in the articles of impeachment.”
Everything would be good, eventually.
Yup. Spanky left the house no choice. They were forced to impeach POTUS.
Yup.
It’s not just the egregiousness of the testimony and the open, venal, day-to-day criminality of this administration, which gives a moral imperative, but also, whether you agree with her on the scope or not, if they hadn’t taken this step, the Dems might have splintered. Even though we may disagree on some stuff, on one thing we are united: impeaching the mfer and firing him by Nov 2020 at the latest.
I keep wondering about a kitchen-sink approach to articles of impeachment. The caveat: a raft of criminal offenses that are easy to understand.
Most people understand the concept of “bribery.” I wonder how many counts of bribery could be included in articles of impeachment. The concept of “extortion” is easy to understand too. What about “conspiracy” related to one of the crimes that top the potential list?
And what about “money laundering?” Is that a bridge too far?
She’s right, of course. But as that recalcitrance continues, as it likely will, it would make sense to selectively add a few more incidents to the investigation. That might include obstruction of justice assuming the arguments being used to instruct the administration’s lackey’s to refuse to testify are properly rejected. Trump’s “lawyers” already seem to be setting the stage for refusing to obey court orders on the ground that the president gets to determine the scope of not only executive privilege but ‘immunity’ from being required to testify as well.
Speaker Pelosi is right. Impeach the MF as well as the other corrupt individuals in the cabinet, including Pence, Barr, and Pompeo.
I keep hearing from some Dem friends “What’s the point? The senate will never convict .”
You can not ignore illegal behavior , and as Spanky likes to say “Trust me”
We have not seen the worst
This is going to turn over some rocks exposing him for what he is
Speaking of CNN happen to catch a roundtable discussion last night on Anderson Cooper show. Jeffery Toobin seems to be convinced that "so called second " accounts may not fly.So what is Toobin trying to say,that unless Trump says YES I did it nothing matters ?
And what about “witness intimidation and tampering”
And what about “emoluments”
And what about …And what about …the list goes on
And the BIggie Contempt Of Congress.
As usual, Pelosi is both tactically correct and morally correct. You should want every president to succeed in his or her capacity to effectively lead the United States, even if you want to replace him or her with a different candidate in the next election cycle. You should certainly root for the failure of policy proposals you consider stupid or odious, but you should never wish for the entire executive branch to be paralyzed by corruption and incompetence.
Yes, indeed. The list of offenses gives me vertigo. As it has been stated in this thread already, obstruction is an obvious charge. A charge that can be leveled against Barr as a co-conspirator as he leads the Justice Department tasked with prosecuting any obstruction case.
I need to lie down. I’m dizzy.
and yet 30- 40% of the population are OK with this
Thanks Murdoch
If Bloomberg really wants to help he needs to buy Fox news and shut it down
She’s right. This is the Dems Job and they need to do it to show they all have as much of a spine as she has.
Re: what to put in–Put in the most clear, slam-dunk cases. Carrying out a prosecution like this is more like a criminal trial than civil. You want to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this thing was done wrong. If you put stuff that might or might not be provable–then it weakens the whole case.
Nail his ass on Ukraine. If he gets impeached and then removed, it doesn’t matter how many things were in the impeachment trial.
Also–re: senate–I think the biggest thing to watch in terms of a senate trial right now is what happens in Louisiana tomorrow. If–after Trump’s full court press in a second nominally “Republican” state–the Republican candidate loses, then the perception of Trump’s power will take a HUGE hit amongst the Republican legislators who have been cowering in fear of his electoral power.
If Bel holds on to win, then Trump will seem weak… and then perhaps a few more Republican Senators will–not out of principle, but out of cravenness–get on the “let’s get this asshole out before he destroys all of us!” bandwagon.
It’s a big “if” of course–and I am not counting on LA going our way or even then of Republicans being sane–but it’s something to watch.
I have to disagree. Not on needing to impeach regardless of whether it moves public opinion. That’s a given. But on the unlikelihood of moving public opinion, I disagree. I think it’ll happen. Not to the extent that we’d like, but enough to make senate Repubs very uncomfortable and retaking both the senate and WH next year easier, and both are worthwhile goals.
Trump’s hard core support is pretty much baked in and unmovable, and of course the vast majority of Dems and Dem leaners loath him, but there’s this whole in-between group that’s still up for grabs. It may only be 5-15% of voters, but in our polarized political reality that can make all the difference.
Once Trump’s support drops much below 40%, and support for impeachment passes 60%, all bets are off, and everything’s possible. That’s the political purpose of impeachment, and with all that’s yet to come, I think it’s quite possible, and worth all the trouble. Far more upside than downside.
"Meanwhile, they are struggling to figure out the scope of what should be included in the articles of impeachment. "
Ms Riga:
The Dems are not ‘struggling.’ They are debating the merits of various options available to them, which is PRECISELY what they should be doing.
Don’t know about that, but everything there is evidence for should be included, including defacing government property, spitting on the sidewalk, jaywalking, and impersonating a president.
Sometimes the pesky Constitution and basic justice get in the way of politics. Once right and wrong issues are handled the politicians can go back to sucking up to billionaires and entertaining the voters with culture war food fights while doing nothing of importance for America’s future.