Pelosi says No Impeachment for Trump.

[berni_mccoy]

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/05/16/nancy-pelosi-town-hall-donald-trump-impeachment-sot.cnn

Despite Trump being under investigation for collusion with the Russians on election hacking.
Despite Trump firing the person who warned him about Flynn being compromised and not firing Flynn for 18 days until the story was broken by the press.
Despite Trump firing the person who was investigating him for collusion with Russia for investigating him for collusion for Russia.
Despite Trump endangering our National Security by giving the Russians Coded Intel of the Highest Classification that would compromise the sources of that information and make it very likely we will never get such intelligence again...

Impeachment is off the table.

Time to let her know what you think about that.

[LonePirate]

1. Perhaps she's part political strategist and part Devil's advocate?

For the political strategist angle, she probably believes Dems will fare better if he is President in November 2018 instead of someone else being in the Oval Office.

For the Devil's advocate angle, perhaps she is worried he (A) will receive an outpouring of sympathy if Congress goes to battle against him via impeachment or (B) will retaliate in such a way that massive pain and suffering will be inflicted upon some Americans.

[uponit7771]

6. +1

[berni_mccoy]

9. This shouldn't be about politics. It should be about doing what is right.

Saying impeachment is not an option because Trump is politically damaging to the GOP is playing with fire and may get us in a Nuclear war if we allow him to remain in that position.

[Foamfollower]

13. But she never said "impeachment is not an option"

She wisely staed you have to have the facts gathered before you go down the road of impeachment.

[berni_mccoy]

16. She said she doesn't subscribe to it.

[Foamfollower]

20. Now you are getting closer to the reality of what she said.

She stated she didn't subscribe to throwing around demands for impeachment at this early stage. She said you first gather the facts and if the facts support a case for impeachment, you proceed.

[berni_mccoy]

23. SHE should be a LEADER calling for it, not demurring on it.

She should be demanding justice, not tabling it for political purpose.

[Foamfollower]

26. BULLSHIT!

She is a RESPONSIBLE leader who calls for a special prosecutor to investigate the matter.

You know, gather the facts.

What you re demanding is a BLOWHARD IRRESPONSIBLE leader who will go off half-cocked and blow the whole damned thing.

[berni_mccoy]

30. Now you are contradicting yourself. Since you are concerned with the politics of it

What do you think the Repubs are going to do with this sound byte? They are going to use it as an excuse to NOT IMPEACH.

She NEEDS TO TAKE A STAND and VOCALIZE OPPOSITION AND RESISTENCE.

She could have easily said, IF ALL THE SHIT TRUMP SEEMS TO HAVE DONE IS TRUE THEN YES WE SHOULD DEFINITELY IMPEACH.

But she didn't do that. She's being too dismissive.

[Foamfollower]

34. Again, BULLSHIT

You know not of what you speak.

[Foamfollower]

41. You are now comparing fish to bicycles

A pundit is free to spout off whatever drivel they choose.

The minority leader of the House has a different set of priorities.

Again, you know not of what you speak.

[triron]

46. Perhaps not in these words, but I agree

she could have made a stronger statement. Dems are too damn polite.

[skylucy]

31. ++++++++++++++ Thank you foam follower!

[skylucy]

152. Amen! +100

[Demsrule86]

91. bullshit...she has no way of doing it... so what would be the point?

[George II]

104. She didn't "demur" on it or table it for political purpose. She clearly said that the evidence...

...isn't there yet. He can't be impeached until there are grounds for impeachment with a case to impeach.

[Cha]

126. FYI.. this is what LEADER Nancy Pelosi is Doing...

Link to tweet

[Me.]

128. Mahalo Cha

[Cha]

132. A ole pilikia, Me.

[Yorkist]

159. Why ?

The role she's in requires her to judge it right when the big moments, not just the day to day political tittle-tattle, come along.

If she's not going to be " statesmanlike" now, then when ? Don't see the benefit of her playing the role of a student protestor.

[pnwmom]

65. She said not right now -- because we don't yet have the facts. What is unreasonable about that?

She is NOT ruling out impeachment once the investigation is completed.

[Demsrule86]

93. The Pelosi haters always looking for an excuse...don't know why...she is the most effective speaker

and a very effective minority leader.

[mcar]

95. One of the best Speakers this nation has ever seen

And a good Democrat. I don't get the haters either.

[Demsrule86]

118. Right up there with the legendary Tip O'Neil.

[George II]

114. I think it may have something to do with the unsubstantiated rumors that she'll be primaried...

...in 2018.

Of course she'll win any primary and be re-elected.

[Demsrule86]

117. She is being primaried by a Bernie supporter.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-nancy-pelosi-just-got-a-challenger-and-1493224950-htmlstory.html

[George II]

120. Thanks. That explains some of the anti-Pelosi angst.

I noticed this from your LA Times article:

He "criticized Pelosi for raising money from corporations and special interests."

If he's interested in running in the primary or ANY election, he'd better bone up on FEC regulations - Pelosi did NOT raise money from corporations, that is illegal.

Simply stated, she didn't!

[mcar]

121. That person is doomed to lose

Why aren't people like him fighting Republicans?

[DrDan]

69. exactly - not unlike being the adult in the room - let's keep our wits about us

instead of charging off with feel-good rhetoric.

[yardwork]

58. Do you understand that the Democrats aren't in power?

[elleng]

2. WHEN was this? Before/After/During/ Audio on???

[George II]

74. I didn't hear her say that.

[madaboutharry]

3. She's playing the good cop.

We don't know enough yet to make that determination. She probably wants him around until 2018 so the democrats can win back the house by running against the chaos caused by this ignoramus.

[uponit7771]

4. Hmmm, off the top of my head I'm thinking she should've kept that to herself but then a LOT of dems

... want to tie Red Don around the necks of KGOP congress folk for elections.

I'm thinking we can't wait till then

We'll see, Nixon was in the low 20s before the KGOP decided to take action with dems

[Warpy]

5. She knows he's not her problem

and the fucking asshole Republicans are going to have to clean up their own filthy mess for once.

I agree with her this time. I didn't agree with her when Stupid was in office. I think the threat should have been there when the Democrats had control. The threat might have kept him more in line.

[WinkyDink]

14. "not her problem"? Trump's EVERYONE'S problem, menace, worst nightmare!

[Warpy]

49. Not this time

They shut us out of government, they're going to have to clean this up, we can't be expected to do it for them.

I'd think the spectacle of all those overstuffed Republicans trying to shovel away the elephant shit would amuse you.

[Hekate]

7. Time to let the REPUBLICANS know what you think about that. What people fail to understand about NP

..is that SHE CAN COUNT VOTES. What that means is she will not bring something to the fore that HAS NO CHANCE.

Nancy Pelosi is an extremely good Democratic liberal politician, but she cannot manufacture votes out of thin air. She is the minority leader of a minority party, and the majority party is not budging yet.

So PLEASE, call and write and protest Republican politicians, and let every Democrat know you will have their back when they do the right thing.

The votes for impeachment simply are not there. --- Yet.

[moonscape]

21. Well-said. She is an extremely adroit politician, esp with her members, and

I trust her on this. For her to raise the heat and cry for impeachment gets us nowhere, stiffens backs. T is doing a really good job of hanging himself. Futile pressure from Pelosi gets us nowhere.

[betsuni]

8. She didn't say no impeachment, never said it's off the table in this video.

She said wait until you have a solid case with factual evidence, it's still early in his term.

[still_one]

59. What you said is exactly correct. This is the same distortions they threw at Hillary, and they are

doing the same thing with Nancy Pelosi.

Gee, I wonder if it is because they favor that jerk Stephen Jaffe who is going to try and run against Pelosi in 2018. Jaffe is the ignoramus who brought up the bullshit lawsuit that (No Party Preference) voters weren't given proper voting instructions. That was thrown out of court in a New York minute, and Jaffe will go down even quicker.

[betsuni]

60. Yes. I don't think distortions like this belong here. We've had enough.

Especially when non-Democrats say things but when we discuss them we're accused of distorting things even when exactly quoting them. It's a mind game.

[still_one]

61. ....................

[Foamfollower]

10. If you listen to her, her stance is legitimate.

First you get the facts. The facts have to be there to impeach.

We don't have the evidence for a case of impeachment yet.

[mucifer]

90. But, that means that impeachment is on the table.

[Foamfollower]

92. Exactly.

[WinkyDink]

11. Is this a bad joke? A quote from 2003? Deja-vu ain't funny.

[Foamfollower]

15. Go to the link and listen to the video

What she said barely resembles anything the OP said she said.

[berni_mccoy]

19. She clearly said she doesn't subscribe to it when asked about calls of Impeachment

From Democratic members of the House.

[Foamfollower]

22. Now you are backpedaling on your OP, but you still havent got it right.

She doesn't subscribe to calls for impeachment at this early stage. First you gather the facts. The facts must support a case for impeachment before you call for impeachment.

Did you even listen to the video you linked?

[mvd]

29. I heard it and that is true

I think she was a bit hesitant in her answer. Like she wasn't sure how to put it. She took impeachment off the table before (and I strongly disagreed), and while she did not do that here, I feel we are developing the facts quickly. I don't always agree with how she communicates things.

[emulatorloo]

33. Your OP has been demonstrated to be false. Consider self-deleting.

[SaschaHM]

37. And miss the chance to smear Pelosi?

This OP is going nowhere.

[George II]

71. And then she went on to explain what she meant by that. What she said....

...made a lot of sense, she continued after saying "she doesn't subscribe to "it" " that there has to be a case, people have to review the facts.

Cuomo didn't ask her if he should NEVER be impeached, he was speculating about it happening NOW or SOON, to which she said she doesn't subscribe to THAT!

Watch the video again, to the end.

[CentralMass]

12. Nancy "Lets sweep this under rug" Pelosi.

[Foamfollower]

17. You obviously didn't go to the link and watch the video.

The OP is making stuff up about what she said.

[Ninsianna]

116. This seems like a literal right wing attack on Nancy Pelosi, she really does

inspire much anger, lies and name calling among the Right wing and their allies who infiltrate Democratic and liberal blogs. What is your purpose in typing out such a blatant lie on a thread that is deeply dishonest on its face?

[CentralMass]

138. Not at all. I eas referring to her taking impeachment off the table for G..W. Bush.

[GulfCoast66]

18. This is a fact based site and minority leader Pelosi understands the facts

She understand the politics of the possible. Impeaching Trump is a popular thing here on DU, but is total BS in the real world. He is the president and his party controls both houses of congress. Name one thing that would be gained by the minority leader of the house, who has no power, declaring that she is going to impeach the president. When all rational people know that it is not going to happen unless the republicans do it.

[berni_mccoy]

24. If the LEADERS of the party don't make a STAND when it's needed, then Trump

Can do whatever he wants and he will get away with it. Someone needs to take a stand and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

[Cha]

143. Yeah! Im Not There at This Point: Sanders Isnt Ready to Jump on the Trump Impeachment Wagon Yet

Link to tweet

[BainsBane]

25. If only if she had insisted Democrats not politicize the Russia issue

Then she'd be a progressive hero.

[Foamfollower]

38. +1

[emulatorloo]

39. fascinating, isn't it?

[betsuni]

47. +1

[melman]

51. Message deleted by DU the Administrators

[BainsBane]

55. I know it's ridiculous of me to expect people to adhere to principle

Sadly, I've learned that is the very last concern, but that doesn't stop me from pointing out blatant hypocrisy when I see it.

And here you are, continually outraged that someone doesn't share your uncritical adoration of a member of the political elite. Why you have such trouble accepting that is your problem entirely.

[Cha]

142. Snap!

[SticksnStones]

82. +1. We are a party divided against itself...

[BainsBane]

97. This entire thread is a distorted attack on Pelosi

The House minority leader, yet you don't object to that on the grounds of unity. Instead,my pointing out a recent incident--one of many--in which the same people savaging Pelosi defended comments attacking Democrats for standing up to the GOP as taking political advantage. But that you think I'm referring to someone held as superior to Pelosi and the rest of humanity, that is divisive. No it isn't. It's pointing out the blatant hypocrisy and lack of principle.

I will never, ever go along with the notion that one man takes precedence over the Democratic Party and over citizens. I believe in principles and equality, not submission to great men. I will never acquiesce to the pre-modern, anti-egalitarian ethos that holds one above the many. If you want to build unity, it needs to be around something that matters. As long as people continue to insist that one or two powerful men come before the citizenry, before issues and policy, there is nothing worth unifying around.

[SticksnStones]

112. Look, I respect your writing...

But you've lost me on this.

Yes, the OP is clearly an unjustified attack on Pelosi. Around here, Pelosi is often derided as part of the political elite. And also around here, there is a growing chasm between two camps that shall not be named.

I think a lot goes on behind the scenes that we are not witness to...the making of the sausage, if you will. Pelosi has been exceptional at keeping her caucus together. I find tremendous value in that. I'm in that camp.

I'm also in the camp that has noticed that since it is against TOS to relitigate the primary, some folks have found clever ways of continuing the battle through hit pieces. Like this one.

Beyond that, while I respect the passion with which you express your politics and your ethics...I don't understand your beef with my post.

Peace.

[Me.]

129. That Seems To Be A Habit Here

Strong women are always suspect

[Cha]

130. No matter how much you try.. the Hypocrisy is NOT

going to be covered up.

[uponit7771]

63. +1

[NCTraveler]

80. +1 nt.

[mcar]

96. +1000!

[Cha]

125. lol.. right! omg. Nancy is a STRONG LEADER..

just making crap out of thin air.

Link to tweet

[Chasstev365]

134. She empowered Trump/GOP crimes when she took impeachment off the table for Bush!

Can't you just this one time criticize her? Blind alegence is bad, Cha!

[Cha]

135. "Blind alegence is bad", Chass.. you're not one to talk

Nancy Pelosi is doing right NOW what a strong Leader does.. getting all her ducks in a row.

And anyone who says she's "weak" has an agenda.

[Cha]

137. Well you're Wrong and that's a really nasty insult at our

Democratic Leader of the House and former Democratic Leader of the Senate, GaYellowDawg.

[Chasstev365]

150. Wow, Cha doesn't like my post: WHAT A SHOCK!

[Cha]

156. BS said it wasn't a priority to impeach bush..

https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2519174

[still_one]

139. Except that isn't what she said. In fact she said the same essential thing that Sanders

said today:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1776824

Perhaps you need to understand what blind bias is about

[Cha]

140. Thank you for that, stillone..

[still_one]

145. .............................................

[Cha]

147. ...

[Cha]

144. Only Nancy Pelosi is doing something about it..

Link to tweet

[Cha]

149. sanders said it wasn't "a priority" to impeach bush... so

he "empowered" this, too.. according to you.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2519174

[Dem2]

28. doesn't matter all that much what she says

She has little power over the process, I think she was being a little coy after that a-hole Doucheowitz suggested that "she better not make it political"

[berni_mccoy]

32. She's showing weakness by not vocalizing RESISTENCE.

[Dem2]

40. I disagree

I liked what Rep. Green said this afternoon. I'd like to see more "ordinary" Democrats making the argument for impeachment.

[Foamfollower]

43. Bingo!

Back benchers can make a name here and push the "I" word into the narrative.

The leadership doesn't have that sort of freedom in the rhetoric they choose.

[Dem2]

44. And if you need to convince a few Republicans to get on board

I'd prefer a well spoken unknown over, well, Google "most hated Democrats". Sure, she should signal her support, but leading on this is not the best use of her clout IMO - at least until the Republicans get on board and the ball is clearly rolling that direction.

[Foamfollower]

45. She, Schumer, Hoyer, and Durbin's efforts are best spent forcing the issue of a special prosecutor

You know, making sure the facts are gathered.

If a case for impeachment is to be built, it requires a non-partisan third party investigator.

[BainsBane]

50. Like this?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9051385

[JTFrog]

101. Onward Together!

Your weak attempts to trash Hillary are transparent as hell, so if we have to get this shit done without you, so be it!

[Ninsianna]

113. You're upset that she specifically stated that we need a solid case? Weak analysis.

[Cha]

131. Nancy Pelosi is Showing STRONG RESISTANCE

Link to tweet

Why are you trying to drag her down.. what is your agenda?

[hrmjustin]

35. Bullshit!

They need to run on impeachment!

[brush]

42. Is your OP head purposely deceptive, or did you forget to add the word "now" on the end?

She said there wasn't enough evidence yet.

[Hortensis]

54. Kind of an important little word in this context.

[oasis]

48. Speaker Pelosi spoke with the wisdom of the responsible party

leader she has become over the years. Pelosi knows what's doable and when to do it.

[Jarqui]

52. We do not have all the facts yet

That's at least part of the reason why Trump fired Comey - to slow down the process.

For a case of impeachment to succeed, you need 2/3rds of the Senate. With so many GOP senators, that's a heck of a slam dunk case that is required. I haven't seen that yet.

It is going to take some time.

I think it is premature to call for impeachment - because with what we have right now, there's zero chance it will pass. But there's nothing wrong with musing about it in the media.

[Duppers]

53. JFC!

[still_one]

56. THAT ISN'T WHAT SHE SAID. This is the same typical bullshit that the media pulled when they said

the FBI had reopened the email investigation after Comey sent the letter to the republicans in Congress. That was a lie,, and this is a deliberate misrepresentation of what she said.

She said performance, and reckless behavior by itself are not grounds for impeachment. However, if it can be shown he broke the law, those ARE GROUNDS FOR IMPEACHMENT.

However, even if there were grounds for impeachment, it may shock some who decided not to vote for Hillary by voting third party, that Congress is controlled by the republicans, so unless they decide to impeach it isn't going to happen.

but please, keep propagating the distortions and bullshit

[JustAnotherGen]

62. Thank you n/t

[brer cat]

75. Some people would much rather attack Democrats.

but please, keep propagating the distortions and bullshit

It sure makes it hard to see sometimes where the the line is between far left and far right.

[Sparkly]

109. Thanks.

[yardwork]

57. The Democrats don't have the votes to impeach. As you know.

[pnwmom]

67. Right. If they were in charge the investigation would be much farther along,

and there might already be a strong case for impeachment. As it is, she says we need more facts.

[Warren DeMontague]

64. i have tremendous faith in Nancy Pelosi.

She knows her shit, and as circumstances develop she will do the right thing.

[pnwmom]

66. You are smarter than so many people here who didn't bother to listen to the video.

She isn't against impeachment in theory. She is simply saying that in her view it's premature to talk about impeachment; that we need to have the facts first.

[Warren DeMontague]

68. Exactly.

"What are the facts"

As we get more if those, shit may very well change- and fast.

[George II]

70. That's not what she said.

[obamanut2012]

72. Except she didn't say that at all -- epic fail

[DonCoquixote]

73. How did "impeachment is off the table?"

work out last time?

I may think Bernie is off his rocker sometimes, but statements like this make people want to clean house rather than be the plote losign team that jobs to the GOP.

[Madam45for2923]

76. Except she did not say that. Agenda in the title of this OP

[Madam45for2923]

77. Agenda much?

Forgetting a key word in that title?

LOL! I love how people give themselves away.

[riversedge]

78. She basically said-What are facts? We need the facts. She did not say Impeachment was off the

table. I agree.

[NCTraveler]

79. Dishonest headline in the subject line of the op.

I suggest you all watch the video. Truly dishonest representation of the video.

[AllaN01Bear]

81. this man is going to ruin and has aready begun the self distruct sequence

ugh. cowardss . all

[bullwinkle428]

83. Meh - she had the power in 2007 when they regained control of Congress.

She doesn't have that power right now, so I can totally understand her not wanting to go all "Thelma and Louise", speeding off the cliff into the abyss.

[Miles Archer]

84. She most certainly DID NOT SAY "Impeachment is off the table."

“You’re talking about impeachment,” she said, “you’re talking about ‘what are the facts.’ Not, ‘I don’t like him,’ and ‘I don’t like his hair,’ what are the facts? ‘I don’t like what he said about this’ – what are the facts that you would make a case on?”

“What are the rules that he may have violated?” She asked, rhetorically. “If you don’t have that case, you’re just participating in more hearsay. And that’s not the basis of a – and we owe the American people just some stability in all of this.”

“This is the time where here’s supposed to be having his honeymoon – what a marriage!” she joked, to some laughter from the audience.

“So we watch and see, what he’s going to do, what is his vision, how is he going to implement the rest,” she concluded. “And it’s been sloppy.”

https://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/05/15/nancy-pelosi-we-cant-impeach-trump-just-because-we-dislike-his-hair/

[LanternWaste]

85. I can certainly understand the narrative ignoring her call to find objective facts

I can certainly understand the narrative necessarily ignoring her call to first find and investigate objective and relevant facts prior to making any decisions.

[Madam45for2923]

86. Correct your title or this is fake news

She did not say that

[Bleacher Creature]

87. She said no such thing.

And considering the fact that the OP hasn't been corrected after multiple people have pointed out that it's not accurate, the only logical conclusion is it's intentionally deceptive.

[DURHAM D]

88. Wrong again. nt

[Demsrule86]

89. Why would she put impeachment of the table...she has no way of doing it..

Maybe if we take the House and Senate with enough votes in the Senate but otherwise...the GOP should impeach him.

[Madam45for2923]

94. Watch video please. OP having a way with words.

[Demsrule86]

119. Thanks Madam...I get so sick of the Nancy bashing.

[tammywammy]

98. You should delete this POS OP.

Disgusting. That is NOT what she said.

[JTFrog]

99. This and most of his posts for the last 2 years. nt

[obamanut2012]

148. this

[Madam45for2923]

100. Asking people to harass her over a fake take on her words.

[JTFrog]

102. We don't buy into alternative facts here. But nice fucking try.

Let's just call it what it truly is. Fucking lying bullshit. Just like the lies spread about her by the right wingers got gleefully repeated and reposted by far lefters. And we already know just how aware of that you are.

[sheshe2]

103. NO. She did not say...

Impeachment is off the table.

[H2O Man]

105. Respectfully disagree.

I don't think she said that. While she did not advocate impeachment now, it's likely because she knows where the Senate and FBI/Treasury investigations are going. If she advocated impeachment right now, she'd risk becoming "the story." Better to let Trump be the national focus.

[JHan]

107. exactly

[JHan]

106. I just watched the video, you are wrong.

[brooklynite]

122. Let's not think about this rationally, let's just react impulsively and angrily...like Donald Trump

If you tried to impeach Trump TODAY, he would NOT be impeached, and if he was, he would NOT be convicted by the Senate. Therefore, in the eyes of non-activists voters, he'd be acquitted of whatever charges you threw at him. Is that what you want?

[JHan]

124. I have no issue with Pelosi's position tho?

[KingCharlemagne]

108. Pathetic - nt

[Madam45for2923]

110. OP is twisting her words. Hope that is what you meant!

[bdamomma]

115. so they are going to give this

POS a pass on everything. He is no Bush, he's worse.

He is taking the country down.

[Cha]

133. The OP is WRONG.. he's been called out continuously on this trhead..

Link to tweet

[Blue_Tires]

123. That's fine... Keep the cards close to your vest

I don't even want to the word "impeachment" said by anyone until all the research is done, the foundation of the case set, the articles absolutely fucking 100% foolproof airtight, and the votes to make this happen are confirmed... There's only going to be one shot at this...

[mhw]

127. + 1000

Thanks for your statement.

[Cha]

141. BS:Im Not There at This Point: Sanders Isnt Ready to Jump on the Trump Impeachment Wagon Yet

Link to tweet

[oberliner]

146. He is not going to be impeached

Republicans are in control of Congress.

[still_one]

153. The bottom line is that in order for impeachment to happen, as you said, it will require

the republicans to bring to the floor of the House, because the Democrats do not have the majority.

However, if the special counsel uncovers enough incriminating evidence of impeachable crimes, I do not believe the republicans are going to provide cover for him.

Of course that actually wasn't the purpose of the OP. The purpose of the OP was to mischaracterize what Nancy Pelosi said, in order to start a flame bait against Pelosi.

Pelosi never said that impeachment is off the table. What she said is that impeachment cannot be done until the investigations demonstrates there were impeachable offenses. Bernie Sanders, and others have said essentially the same thing.

[nycbos]

151. Good

If we remove Trump we get Pence.

He is worse in many mays.


If Pence is removed we get Paul Ryan as president.

She is thinking 10 steps ahead.

[Blue_true]

154. She is wise. Trump damages republicans so much that

we can effectively turn him into a lameduck in 2018, then vote him out in 2020 as well as destroy republicans more and get the country back on track.

[Trial_By_Fire]

155. Then, when exactly is impeachment ON the table?

Only when a president lies about getting a blow-job?

We need some Dems with a backbone...

[emulatorloo]

157. Read the whole thread. Pelosi didn't say that. OP is misrepresenting her.

There's video of what Pelosi actually said linked throughout the thread.

The OP is false. Watch the video, see for yourself.

[Tiggeroshii]

158. Don't tell me reverse psychology won't work on these idiots

Remember at the end of the day Republicans want what Democrats don't.

[AgadorSparticus]

160. Interesting that the pitchforks didn't come out when Schumer suggested THE SAME

The rationale is NOT because they love Trump...it is because they want to make sure it doesn't take away from the trump russia collusion. And I don't want it to either. It looks the GOP is guilty in the collusion. Lets focus and give it some time to cast the net far and wide.