I trust Pelosi but I'm ready for impeachment to start.

[California_Republic]

I hope she feels the time is right soon.
Let’s go get those documents.

[vlyons]

1. Me too!

This Barr guy has pushed me over the edge.

[appal_jack]

13. Impeaching Barr would be a good start.

Of course, we all want to see the Gropenfuhrer frogmarched across Pennsylvania Avenue into a waiting squad car, but I'd say that the need and justification for obstruction of justice charges against Barr is pretty clear right now. k&r,

-app

[notdarkyet]

27. He shouldn't be allowed to go further. Our democracy is in peril , we must fight for it.

[marylandblue]

2. I don't think she will do it, and I agree with her.

Impeachment will make the election about Trump. It will suck all the air out of the room. We need that air to make a positive case for ourselves.

This is a political calculation, not a moral statement. She knows how that works.

[athena]

5. I have to agree.

I would love to have Trump impeached and convicted to show that the president is not above the law, but given that Republicans have decided they care more about abusing their power than about protecting democracy, impeachment would only make the point that Trump cannot be held accountable and that he has succeeded in weakening this country’s institutions.

Our best bet is to kick Trump out in 2016. That will show that American democracy is still intact and was only temporarily set back by (still-ongoing) Russian interference.

[vlyons]

15. Alas 2016 has come and gone

nt

[at140]

6. With only 18 months to next election, impeachment is

fading fast out of Pelosi's agenda. She wants a dem president ELECTED in 2020, and work on that instead of spending time and energy on impeachment, which if passes in House, senate will not remove Trump from office anyways. So it is just feel good but no practical benefit. I Trust Pelosi!

[uponit7771]

10. So the Russians helped him last time but wont this time? Taking impeachment off the table makes

... no sense if the Russians were and are a real threat.

[at140]

19. Russia collusion will fade away after

Mueller report in full is put out by Barr. Russians AND Americans have history of getting involved in foreign elections. Russians don't really care who wins, they just want democracies to crash and burn.
It has to stop! Best way to stop it is create smarter voters who can actually understand the issues. But that is a tall order indeed.

[uponit7771]

33. Yes the Russians do care who wins IE they helped Red Don last time why would they

... not help him again?!?!

[at140]

53. Russia even interferes in the largest democracy in the world,

India, which has elections coming up scheduled to be held in seven phases from 11 April to 19 May 2019 to constitute the 17th Lok Sabha. The counting of votes will be conducted on 23 May, and on the same day the results will be declared. 800 million voters are registered to vote.

Eligible voters must be Indian citizens, 18 or older, an ordinary resident of the polling area of the constituency and possess a valid voter identification card issued by the Election Commission of India. Some people convicted of electoral or other offences are barred from voting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Indian_general_election

Russians meddle in all democracies, because Russia wants dictatorships in every country.

[fescuerescue]

37. Why would they?

The Russians didn't just get all excited because Trump was running and decide to throw their support in.

The Russians have goals and agendas. Trump was just a way to advance those agendas.

And the Russians will be here doing this long after Trump is gone, because Russian will still exist, along with those goals and agendas.

[at140]

54. Russia has been meddling in elections since 1947

in India. My father ran for a municipal office in mid-50's in Gujerat State, and his communist opponent was being funded by USSR (since broken up, Russia being one of the components).

[uponit7771]

9. we can walk and chew gum at the same time. She feels safe with him in office, I don't

[marylandblue]

14. But we can't pat our heads and rub our stomachs at the same time.

So much for cliched anatomical analogies.

What do you think happened in 2016? Did you notice how much we talked about tweets, emails and walls and how little we talked about real crimes and workable policies? How did the size of Trump's dick become a campaign issue?

What about 1998? We were so obsessed with Monica Lewinski that even war in the Balkans and counter-terrorism became about Monica Lewinski.

I see zero chance that an impeachment would be anything but a 24/7 media circus beyond anything with Trump himself as the ringmaster.

[uponit7771]

16. Only if dems make it 24/7 media circus, they can just refuse to participate in the circus and ask

... others to wait.

To think Russia is just going to stop helping Red Don now is illogical at best

[JI7]

22. Democrats don't control media.

[uponit7771]

34. True, they control their mouths and they can keep them shut not to feed the MSM

[marylandblue]

38. So we are going to impeach him secret? You don't think people will notice and ask a few questions?

You think we'll be able to keep our mouths shut while Trump tweets 50 times a day that we are traitors and witch hunters and hate America?

[Hortensis]

12. Yes. If we can remove him from office before the end of his term,

it will be because enough Republicans in the senate have decided they need to join us to remove him. If there's a point before then when a symbolic statement of impeachment in the house might do more good than possibly a great deal of harm, Nancy & Co. will decide to take that step or not.

[uponit7771]

17. So basically we elect kings for 4 years now ?! No, republicans wouldn't hesitate to impeach and the

... last time they did they won the next national election.

[FBaggins]

31. That's not quite the right measure

“The next election “ was almost two years later.

It’s relevant that the lead-up to impeachment was immediately prior to an election and the actual vote was right after it. Gingrich expected it to be a winning issue for them (anticipating 30+ seats gained)

But instead they lost several seats (almost unheard of for a midterm) and Gingrich was the one who resigned.

There are few if any republicans who think impeachment went well for them

[uponit7771]

35. Red Don will never be as popular to Democrats as Clinton was to Republicans

... to expect anything like the 98 midterms is illogical

[FBaggins]

41. I'm not sure I get the point there

But it sure sounds like it’s a better argument than pretending that impeachment didn’t actually hurt republicans.

It’s also worth noting that the next election wasn’t good at all for republican senators who voted for conviction. Republicans had been on a winning streak in the senate (with ‘88 being the last election that they had lost even a single seat)... yet they lost four. And that despite theoretically winning the White House. Democrats actually took back control of the Senate for a short time.

You can reasonably argue differences between the two cases, but not that impeachment wasn’t a disaster for republicans. It would be a risky move with almost zero chance of removing him.

[uponit7771]

44. Impeachment hurt republicans cause Clinton was waaaay more popular with republicans than ...

... Trump is with democrats.

Comparing then to now is illogical looking at the facts.

[FBaggins]

45. That's merely an argument that it wouldn't be as bad

It doesn’t support a claim that an unsuccessful impeachment wouldn’t have negative consequences.

And unless there’s a bullet hidden in the report, right now I doubt impeachment itself would come close to passing

[uponit7771]

46. Any argument would mean "not as bad" seeing even a successful impeachment would

...mean some kind of negative consequence.

I guess the question here is the consequences bad enough to lose a general election...hell no !!!

Looking at the facts ... Because Clinton was more popular with Republicans ... Trump isn't popular at all with Democrats

What say you?!!

tia

[Fiendish Thingy]

36. The Constituon can't wait until 2020

I we don't act on moral imperatives, political calculations ain't worth shit.

[marylandblue]

39. We have a moral imperative. To do what will work, not what makes us feel good.

The Constitution is in tatters because they didn't predict the Senate would ever be such a bunch of wimps and weasels. They predicted that a Trump could come along, but never that the Senate would bow to him.


Federalist 65 says:

"Where else than in the Senate could have been found a tribunal sufficiently dignified, or sufficiently independent? What other body would be likely to feel CONFIDENCE ENOUGH IN ITS OWN SITUATION, to preserve, unawed and uninfluenced, the necessary impartiality between an INDIVIDUAL accused, and the REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE, HIS ACCUSERS?"

The Senate today is not dignified, independent or confident. A fundamental assumption of the Founders has been violated and for once, Trump didn't do it. Let's get off this nonsense that Trump is our real problem. No, our real problem is the people who voted him into office and the politicians who will not, under any foreseeable circumstances, challenge him.

So we are left with only one solution, vote the bums out. Which is Nancy Pelosi's conclusion and she doesn't seem like a woman who is easily swayed when she knows she is right. Live with that, or, if you prefer, string her up right along with Mitch McConnell.

[Fiendish Thingy]

49. You assume what is true now will always be so

The tide didn't turn against Nixon until just a few weeks before he resigned, after two years of hearings and investigations. You assume that, even after relentless investigations, the GOP Senate will not vote to remove Trump. Those facts are not in evidence, it's only your pessimistic opinion.

Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler, et al should ramp up the hearings and investigations, not wait for Trump and Barr and Mnuchin's obstructions to work their way through the court system. I think starting with impeachment proceeding for Mnuchin would be a good start, force the GOP to take a stand for/against the rule of law, then move onto Barr, then Trump.

When Pearl Harbor was attacked, and most of the US Navy sunk, did the troops on the ground shrug and say "well, we don't have the ships, no sense in shooting at these planes that are shooting at us and bombing us, we should only do what we know will work"

Wasn't it MLK who said that evil succeeds when good men stand by and do nothing?

Trump is aggressively consolidating his power and authority; by 2020, it may be too late. The 2020 election is not our only option, and in fact taking the steps I've recommended, while it may fire up the 25-30% of the electorate that are Trumps base, it would also fire up the rest of the voters, especially the young voters, who will likely be a deciding factor in who will be the next president.

I say FUCK "the math", the Constitution can't wait until 2020!

[marylandblue]

51. We all make assumptions. You assume this is like Watergate or Pearl Harbor.

This is far bigger and more insidious than Watergate. There is no precedent for this in American History so stop looking backwards and start looking forwards.

You are right that Trump could consolidate power by 2020. But you are wrong that we have enough Senators or voters who think he shouldn't. You are working under the illusion that the American people actually value democracy. Too many don't and it's obvious they don't.

You also are under the illusion that Republican Senators will, upon presentation of evidence, review it and turn their backs on Trump. They won't. They had many opportunities to turn against Trump, to reign him, and they refused each and every time. The few, like Jeff Flake, who made some mild protests saw their popularity plummet and left the Senate. Mark Sanford, another hardy soul, lost his election. Most of the others got the message.

So they aren't going to do like Howard Baker did and so "oh look there us evidence." They are going to the opposite. In unison they will call it a witch hunt and say WE are the enemies of democracy, and many will believe this lie because it will be repeated endlessly. Thus how authoritarian populism works. Read books like "What is Populism" and "How Democracies Die" to see how this works. Or look at the experience of Italy with their Trump, Silvio Berlusconi. Direct attacks did not work on him.

Only policy-oriented elections did. And run by political outsider at that.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/opinion/the-right-way-to-resist-trump.amp.html

We are not doing nothing, we are using our only powers left our votes and our organizing. To convince people we will in fact work in their interest. But to do that, we must actually work in their interest, not be stooges in the McConnell/Trump theater of illusion. Which, I'm sorry to say, you are doing.

At the end of the Roman Republic, some Senators thought that Caesar was their problem, so they killed him. Only afterward did they realize that killing Caesar did not solve their problem. They probably never figured it out their real problem, or maybe they did, and just didn't care because the solution would have cost them money. Their problem was uneven land distribution. Or in our terms, income inequality.

And my problem is that too many people still think our problem is Trump. But you don't have to worry about that one. You can keep being a stooge in the theater of impeachment.

Good talking to you. I wish I didn't think this way. But I read too much after Trump's election about authoritarian populism to go back to my innocent days when I thought the Constitution could protect from this. On the other hand, I am happy that at least two important people read seem to have read the same articles I read. One is Nancy Pelosi and the other is running for President. So I do think we can come out alright in the end.

[Wellstone ruled]

3. Watch for the Senate to

make waves in order to save it's self from Trump first. Mayor Pete responding to the Terrorist in Chief today,will and most likely be the start of actions to come.

Folks,it is only going to get much uglier in the coming weeks. Congress is in Recess and the Stupid will Run Amuck.

[at140]

7. Where are the waves? GOP senate has Judges nominated by tRump

approved on an assembly line pace. Almost at record breaking pace. The GOP is terrified of that 80%+ approval of tRump by repug voters and those crazy crowds who show up at his rallies.

[Wellstone ruled]

8. It is all about getting reelected.

Ego's are in play,and that is all that counts. The Stench is getting over whelming and McConnell will not be able to control it much longer. The Judge deal is a done deal. Watch for the Nuke from McConnell followed by a massive Presser blaming it on Schumer and his Leadership group. Followed by McConnell's not seeking reelection. Early June time frame.

Clue,China money in Rethug Campaigns being exposed this past week.

[winetourdriver01]

4. Wait

Lets leave the political calculus to the Speaker.

[uponit7771]

11. If there was no Russians to help Red Don and we were garrunteed a win this would make sense...

.. but 6 more years of a racist, child abusing traitor is not good.

[kentuck]

18. Would Repubs impeach under the same circumstances?

I fear the Democrats will look very, very weak in hindsight.

And not capable of making important decisions?

[JI7]

21. look weak to who ? that problem is large numbers of white people support Trump

[JI7]

20. are you ready for the Senate to not Convict ?

[California_Republic]

24. They impeachment proceedings will need to get his taxes and the mueller report

[JI7]

26. and ? you are ready for Senate to not convict ?

[Pope George Ringo II]

28. Impeachment is a scream of incoherent rage.

I haven't been able to get a coherent answer to this question from anybody making it.

[wiggs]

23. Gop and many dems are acting like they know Trump has a way through this. nt

[Iggo]

25. I trust Pelosi AND I'm ready for impeachment to start. (n/t)

[myohmy2]

29. +1

...

[RandySF]

30. It's a waste of time and energy while Senate Republicans keep protecting Trump

It’s time and energy better spent organizing.

[Takket]

32. Impeachment will never be taken seriously without the Mueller report

To back it up. Which is why Barr is doing EVERYTHING he can to stall and redact it.

[Dazbog]

40. She is keeping it off the table.

Powder dust and all that. Same thing she did for Chimp.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

42. Been ready!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[VOX]

43. Classic bind: Trumpists increasingly assaulting our democracy, but "impeachment isn't worth it."

45 and his cult are breaking laws in broad daylight, and they simply don’t care. These people are psycho: Trump & family, Stone, Manafort, Miller, Mnuchin, Steve Fucking Bannon... these are freaks who dwell on the margins of society. They are incapable of functioning as average human beings. They only emotional settings they have are infantile and delusional: rage, revenge, absurd self-importance and an endless reserve of self-pity.

The sheer dysfunction, demonstrated repeated lawlessness, ineptitude and incompetence should be enough fodder for impeachment. But add to that mix: filling heretofore non-partisan cabinet posts with “embedded” Trumpist-ringers, like William Barr.

And yet, we are told by some well-meaning, veteran Democrats (all of whom I respect) that impeachment would backfire, making 45 a living martyr, thereby pumping up his approval rating. This strategy is not with merit. But at what point does the accelerating criminality jeopardize the economic stability of the country?

[Kurt V.]

47. my trust in pelosi has dropped tremendously.

[cwydro]

48. The Senate will not convict, so what is the point?

[Calista241]

50. I'm against impeachment.

I feel it will only hurt us in the 2020 elections. And there's basically no difference between Trump and Pence.

We have a chance to take a huge lead in the house, and at least win back the Senate as well as the Presidency. I think 2020 - 2024 is more important for us in almost every aspect.

[empedocles]

52. Timing is crucial for impeachment. I trust Pelosi-Schumer in their sense of timing.