General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf you support impeachment now and are voicing frustration with the Speaker.
There are currently only 86 Democratic Representatives that support impeachment. Its not Pelosi, it very well may be your representatives failure to support impeachment.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)...for the undisciplined.
She either has super-powers, or is impotent... entirely dependent on the time of day, melodramatic rationalizations made, and hysterically-high expectations of her not instantaneously met.
GeorgeGist
(25,294 posts)comradebillyboy
(10,119 posts)How embarrassing would it be if the Dems try to impeach trump and fail.
MineralMan
(146,189 posts)She has the most experience and the most smarts about how the House of Representatives works.
The freshmen who just recently got elected have neither.
And random people on the Internet have no experience with any of it. There are some weird, weird ideas being floated on the Internet by people who understand nothing at all about how all of this works. That, however, does not stop them from pontificating about what MUST BE DONE RIGHT FUCKING NOW!
Thekaspervote
(32,605 posts)0rganism
(23,855 posts)how's your rep leaning these days?
MineralMan
(146,189 posts)We get another chance in 2020 - a chance to do very many things. We'd probably do better to focus on that, really, than on the machinations of Congress right now.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)Nancy Pelosi is winning the impeachment fight
in2herbs
(2,942 posts)brush
(53,467 posts)Long delayed by trump and Barr, revelations may come out which will lead more reps to support an inquiry.
Mueller has been coming to fix it all for a long long time now and the can keeps getting kicked down the road to the next iteration of "The Mueller report"... another year and a half of this shit and the repug trumplicans will have things well in hand..
Someone needs to take the lead, so far the house is failing in their duty, leadership is leading away from that...
Thekaspervote
(32,605 posts)brush
(53,467 posts)Even national TV coverage of him reading trump's crimes directly from the report will be news to 95% of Americans as so many were duped by Barr's lies that the report exonerated trump.
And btw, as much as we don't like it, things don't happen at light speed with Congress. There are subpoenas out now for additional witnesses like Kushner, trump jr and others which of course trump and Barr will try to stop and then they will have to be ruled on by a court. It's snail's speed for sure but things just might come around the bend for it all to be in full bloom by next summer, the run up to the election. And IMO with trump's criminal machinations being all over the news at that time, it'll be good for us.
Even Pelosi with all her super powers can't wave her wand and say: "You're impeached" with only 86 Dems in favor of it right now. Initiating an Articles of Impeachment now that fails in the House would be an election loser for us.
And maybe I am ill informed but I don't see any of the "leadership" pushing the idea very hard , in fact it seems to be pretty much the opposite..if "leadership" came out in favor of and pushed it I would bet that many of the fence sitters would come out in favor of impeachment... Meanwhile he keeps dragging this country further and further away fro democracy.
Just my humble opinion...T-rump and the senate are in charge and are a disgrace to the ideas that founded this country and for the first time in my life I am thoroughly ashamed to be an american...
shanny
(6,709 posts)that the question is impeach now or do nothing.
If it were framed as opening a public inquiry blanketing all the issues--Mueller report (collusion and cover-up), abuse of power, emoluments, tax fraud, corruption, money laundering etc etc etc (private emails!)...how many more might support it?
MineralMan
(146,189 posts)Each of them has to follow the rules and laws. There are many ways to delay such inquiries, and the Trump Administration is using all of those ways. There's not quick shortcut around that. It all takes time and filing of actions in federal courts, which must be prepared for very carefully. That takes time, too.
People are frustrated, which leads to calls for actions that cannot be taken.
Takket
(21,421 posts)One thing that needs to happen if we regain control is this shit needs to come to an end.
This business of...
Ask
Reject
Authorize subpoena
Subpoena
Schedule hearing
No one shows up
Sue in court to compel appearance
All this red tape and crap is taking MONTHS. process needs to majorly streamlined. These are important issues of national security that are being pushed off because drumpf is making us she for EVERY inch of ground
MineralMan
(146,189 posts)How would you suggest the process be streamlined? Under whose authority would that be done?
Congress has no law enforcement division. There is nobody they can call to arrest people like the Attorney General and force him to show up and answer their questions.
The processes are designed for people who will follow the rule of law and the Constitution. When people don't do that, it gets complicated and the federal courts get involved. When that happens, things go to a District court, then get appealed to an Appeals Court. In the end stage the SCOTUS gets the job, but can take months to decide.
When everyone is cooperating, it all works OK. When someone is not, things don't work as well.
In the end, Congress has one last resort: Impeachment and removal. It may come to that, frankly. But not before other things are tried and exhausted.
Takket
(21,421 posts)It should not as you said go through three layers if courts and appeals over the course of months. We have a SCOTUS. use it.
The Hoops being jumped through just to START investigating are ludicrous.
Ill use the same phrase I use when talking to my elected officials Offices about concentration camps: I dont know exactly what the solution to the problem is, but I know THIS isnt it.
MineralMan
(146,189 posts)It won't hear any other cases unless they have passed through the lower courts. The SCOTUS can hear or ignore any case.
Here's something to read:
https://www.fjc.gov/history/courts/jurisdiction-original-supreme-court
There's more at the link. I recommend reading the entire thing, so you'll understand just how few cases the SCOTUS considers under their original jurisdiction. It's very few, and it can require any case to be heard first in a lower court.
Takket
(21,421 posts)I think maybe you missed in my first post when I said that things need to change if we regain control.
shanny
(6,709 posts)More actions can be taken...within the rules...if Ds were willing to do so.
MineralMan
(146,189 posts)Everything in the House of Representatives is done based on majority rule. If you have a majority, you can do a lot of things. If you do not, you can't do anything.
So, arguing here doesn't mean a thing, does it? Have you contacted your House Representative and expressed your opinion. I have, and she agrees with me.
Each of us is represented by the House member in our district. Contacting that person is how you influence things. DU is not the House of Representatives. It's just not.
So, what action are you taking? There's only one that matters, really. Your House member will pay attention to you if you are known to that person. No other House member will listen to you, because you are not in that member's district.
So, time to call, email, or even snail mail. Express yourself to someone who matters. We DUers don't. We don't have a vote in the House.
How many times have I read here that not impeaching him = "doing nothing"? There are over six investigations going on now, and each time he obstructs them is one more count against him.
MineralMan
(146,189 posts)not what limitations there are on it. And, some of them aren't interested in learning about it, either.
Since there are not enough votes for an impeachment resolution, no impeachment can take place. It is that simple. Calls for it from outside of the House of Representatives do not change that in any way.
Many Democratic House member oppose creating Articles of Impeachment because it is absolutely clear that there is no way in Hell to get 2/3 of the Senate to vote to remove Trump. That means that Impeachment in the House would not result in removing Donald Trump from the White House and would be a futile gesture.
Some of the same people calling for an "immediate Impeachment" also appear to believe that an action based on the 25th Amendment would be an alternative. They forget that actual removal would require a 2/3 vote of both houses of Congress. That is an impossibility in the current environment in Congress.
And yet, we keep seeing the same calls to actions that cannot succeed. We need to stop doing that. It makes us look stupid.
wryter2000
(46,016 posts)Impeachment now is a futile gesture. Impeachment about a year from now during the heat of the campaign could hurt his chances of re-election. The media would be hard-pressed to ignore impeachment hearings. And by a year from now, there would be so many more reasons to impeach him.
Just this past week, the whole Epstein story broke open again and Trump's decided to ignore a Supreme Court order. How many more crimes can he commit in a year?
If we'd impeached him four months ago, as people have been demanding, it would be all over by now, and we'd look spiteful trying to bring up new offenses.
Thekaspervote
(32,605 posts)MineralMan
(146,189 posts)Thanks!
onecaliberal
(32,471 posts)MineralMan
(146,189 posts)And yet, few will take that advice. It's easier just to post stuff and think you've done something.
wryter2000
(46,016 posts)If you want impeachment, ask your member of the House if they support it. If not, that's where pressure should be applied, not on the Speaker. She can't order them what to think.
NBachers
(16,998 posts)Goodheart
(5,264 posts)We really can't know who supports impeachment until Pelosi calls for it.
MineralMan
(146,189 posts)You can do that, you know.
onecaliberal
(32,471 posts)Well you can decide why for yourself.
Goodheart
(5,264 posts)onecaliberal
(32,471 posts)They have made their positions public.
Timewas
(2,174 posts)maxsolomon
(32,975 posts)I didn't even have to ask.
How many support opening an inquiry? That's the immediate goal.
MuseRider
(34,057 posts)Are you saying we should just shut up?
onecaliberal
(32,471 posts)Does that say shut up? Where do I say or even suggest you shut up? Not sure how anyone interprets that as shut up.
meadowlander
(4,358 posts)If Pelosi publicly did support impeachment, the vast majority would with maybe a few hold outs in swing states. So using the "86" Democrats stats to imply that impeachment is a minority position among the Democrats is a little disingenuous.
Timewas
(2,174 posts)dansolo
(5,376 posts)Pelosi does not have the ability to force the Democrats to back impeachment. Look at what happened with the funding bill. A large block of moderate Dems forced her to accept the Senate Bill. I'd wager that these same moderate Dems are not in favor of impeachment, and wouldn't be even if Pelosi was backing it openly. Forget about conviction in the Senate, without them it won't even pass the House.
How do you propose getting their votes?
meadowlander
(4,358 posts)Tell the story.
Follow the facts.
Make the case.
Put people on the record and then make them run on it.
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)Poiuyt
(18,087 posts)I am going under the assumption that everyone here agrees that Trump has committed impeachable offenses and that these offenses are more serious and dangerous to our democracy than we have ever seen in a U.S. president.
As Speaker of the House, its Nancy Pelosis responsibility to determine the direction that the House moves. Therefore, she needs to convince her caucus that they should move forward with the impeachment process if she indeed feels that Trump has committed impeachable crimes. It shouldnt matter to her that the Senate probably wouldnt vote to convict. She should proceed with her duties and do whats right.
So how does she convince her caucus to start impeachment? That is what a leader is supposed to doinspire her members to follow her vision. She should use her powers of persuasion to put forth a powerful argument that will describe exactly what Trump has done, why its bad (put it into historical context), why its in the countrys best interest, and most importantly, why its in the individual Congresspersons best interest to vote to impeach.
If a Congressman or Congresswoman feels that they will receive pushback from their constituents, then she should engage in a PR campaign in those districts detailing what Trump has done and why its dangerous for our democracy. This campaign would need to be very clear, compelling, and easy to understand. We cant just tell people to read the Mueller report. Thats too long and complex for non-lawyers. Plus he didnt investigate everything. People would need to be force-fed this information and the justification for impeachment since they probably wont seek it out on their own.
Not everyone would be won over, but if shed at least try, Im sure shed convince most of her people. Right now, shes more interested in fighting AOC and the other progressive freshmen in her group than fighting Trump.