General Discussion

Celerity

(49,803 posts)

140. I do not want impeachment now, but if we wait 5, 6 months or even until early or mid-2020

Fri May 31, 2019, 09:44 AM

May 2019

(which really opens us up to charges of launching an election year ploy) to simply open an enquiry, the narrative is going to be ruled and cemented in by Trump and his Rethug minions, as he is going to do nothing but stonewall. Mueller may not even testify without the added weight of an enquiry.

I am not saying open an enquiry this coming Monday, but surely it has to happen in the next 2, 3 months max. Our base is going to continue to peel off if we simply take a stance (at the end of the day) that we will just let it all ride on the 2020 POTUS elections, (minus some non-enquiry based assorted hearings that as of now have a pretty ineffectual outcome so far, as Rump is just blocking most all things in that regard, and the whole game atm is rigged by the traitorous Barr.)

That is not a safe path at all, that is really rolling the dice from a multiplicity of angles.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

289 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Pelosi on impeachment: if the Senate exonerates Trump [View all] live love laugh May 2019 OP

Surely the criminals in the Senate will have an epiphany when they see the ironclad case dalton99a May 2019 #1

I highly doubt it. nt live love laugh May 2019 #2

Reading of the evidence and arguments by Chief Justice John Roberts might just create that epiphany. ancianita May 2019 #7

They want to stack the courts with conservatives. They do not care what trump did. wasupaloopa May 2019 #11

But the American public will see the Truth of Justice Roberts's SENATE trial and vote accordingly. ancianita May 2019 #14

Nearly half of the American people do not care what trump did or does. He was right when wasupaloopa May 2019 #15

Impeachment is the hill I'm willing to die on, and America should see that about House Democrats. ancianita May 2019 #17

The question is HOW to meet our duty successfully, Hortensis May 2019 #191

I'll feel miserable if we die on that hill,but it'll be a good miserable in that when we later die, ancianita May 2019 #197

Okay. Immortal we are. Hortensis May 2019 #206

Absolutely true.So we fight scared.Together. Their darkness will only recede by our beating it back. ancianita May 2019 #209

They might crow but everybody knows that it will be a totally partisan vote that "exonerates" him Proud Liberal Dem May 2019 #215

My hill too. Party should be about more than votes. notdarkyet May 2019 #192

Thank you! I welcome any and all company. Otherwise, why do we bother with "we're all in this ancianita May 2019 #199

I'm on that hill with you. Nevermypresident May 2019 #250

... ancianita May 2019 #260

More like 40%. n/t pnwmom May 2019 #30

Whre are you getting your half figures? The gop is about 30-35%, thats not half. Chin music May 2019 #120

RIGHT?? ancianita May 2019 #201

+1+1 Chin music May 2019 #202

I'm 64. SCVDem May 2019 #24

Same feelings here. MythosMaster May 2019 #66

See post #121. Chin music May 2019 #142

Come on Big Daddy. Don't let these people bring you down like that. Chin music May 2019 #121

Right there with you!! InAbLuEsTaTe May 2019 #163

FUCK them do NOT go quietly AT ALL, we can do this together but not alone Eliot Rosewater May 2019 #184

I'm 64 too. Have no more tolerance for this. notdarkyet May 2019 #193

I'm 71 and I'm joining all the fighters on your behalf. Hang tough and keep the faith. ancianita May 2019 #204

You are correct JustAnotherGen May 2019 #48

Where are tapes when we need them? Slimy folks like trump et al know Laura PourMeADrink May 2019 #73

No. But don't give McConnell the chance to acquit. Send it over on the last day of the session. lagomorph777 May 2019 #225

Hasn't swayed them so far? Brainfodder May 2019 #228

They have already seen it fescuerescue May 2019 #233

he has commited so many fucking crimes. hopefully the state of New York JI7 May 2019 #3

That's her point. New York probably won't be able to live love laugh May 2019 #5

I believe New York state is looking at STATE charges around money deals. dixiegrrrrl May 2019 #8

Why? empedocles May 2019 #52

"The State won't be pressing any charges until after he is no longer in the WH." former9thward May 2019 #107

Obviously not. LanternWaste May 2019 #178

The statute of limitations for Federal tax evasion would not be over dixiegrrrrl May 2019 #198

No, it is not possible he was "charged" and it was "settled quietly". former9thward May 2019 #232

Sorry but that argument makes no legal sense. Impeachment has nothing to do with crimimal charges. PoliticAverse May 2019 #10

The Senate trial will exhonerate him. tymorial May 2019 #57

They won't exonerate him. They will fall short of removing him but he will be badly weakened. hedda_foil May 2019 #170

Yeah, I think you're right about this. Tertullian May 2019 #229

A Senate trial isn't a criminal trial, so that wouldn't matter. pnwmom May 2019 #31

It's a good point malaise May 2019 #42

State Criminal charges have nothing to do with obstruction charges thru the Impeachment Process. Nevermypresident May 2019 #249

When in history larwdem May 2019 #4

When in history has any president broken more laws? live love laugh May 2019 #6

Never... start the impeachment process NOW!! InAbLuEsTaTe May 2019 #165

Clinton plead to lying under oath after leaving IINM uponit7771 May 2019 #54

Reagan was clearly guilty in Iran-Contra at140 May 2019 #180

bologna the Senate acquitting him will not forbid criminal prosecuction when he is no longer standingtall May 2019 #9

What will impeachment get us? wasupaloopa May 2019 #12

What will not impeaching get us? standingtall May 2019 #13

I asked first wasupaloopa May 2019 #16

Respect, not impeaching Trump will hand the House back to the GOP Snake Plissken May 2019 #22

Bull Trumpocalypse May 2019 #28

Good luck with that. Snake Plissken May 2019 #32

Thanks Trumpocalypse May 2019 #33

Now you just need to start praying for the economy to tank so your 2008 scenario can play out. Snake Plissken May 2019 #35

Wow Trumpocalypse May 2019 #50

The economy was a key for Dumya and tricky dick's downfalls empedocles May 2019 #51

This is why impeachment is risky... Drunken Irishman May 2019 #155

Excellent point. I've never seen that mentioned in the impeachment debate. empedocles May 2019 #162

Or may it makes the Dems look smart and strategic Trumpocalypse May 2019 #29

Most Americans don't think that way at all. They see inaction after a 2-yr investigation as WEAK. ancianita May 2019 #208

Don't presume you know how others think You just know how you and the friends Trumpocalypse May 2019 #227

I don't have to presume. Americans voted forty new Democratic House seats last year. ancianita May 2019 #253

And most of those House wins were in moderate swing districts Trumpocalypse May 2019 #259

Voters that put them there show the "moderate" characterization is over. The polls that year show it ancianita May 2019 #261

Show a poll that proves your argument Trumpocalypse May 2019 #262

No polls on Democrats' being WEAK exist. There are articles on weak public support for impeachment. ancianita May 2019 #268

Thanks for admitting you don't have any proof Trumpocalypse May 2019 #270

I admit Pew's, Reuters, NBC/WSJ polls back my claim. "Most" is still unproven unless Gallup backs it ancianita Jun 2019 #276

No they don't Trumpocalypse Jun 2019 #277

Evidence isn't total lack of proof, it's just not enough to prove a majority attitude YET, but trend ancianita Jun 2019 #278

We'll see nt Trumpocalypse Jun 2019 #279

Why do you think Pelosi doesn't know what she's doing as far as timing is concerned? (nt) ehrnst May 2019 #93

Because I don't think she is infallible standingtall May 2019 #214

You're avoiding the question... again. ehrnst May 2019 #217

Not knowing what she is doing were your words not mine standingtall May 2019 #218

So you think that she's qualified and knows what she's doing then? Your posts indicate otherwise. ehrnst May 2019 #220

Did it ever occur to you that remark was directed at what the OP wrote? standingtall May 2019 #222

The OP is titled "Pelosi on impeachment: " ehrnst May 2019 #224

This is what the OP wrote standingtall May 2019 #231

You described the statement ascribed to her as "bologna" ehrnst May 2019 #235

No votes from the pro-impeachment base, and the loss of party membership. Pretty simple. ancianita May 2019 #207

You avoided the question. ehrnst May 2019 #219

I can have my opinion and my opinion can opinion can be right and it can be wrong too standingtall May 2019 #221

Yet another strawman... ehrnst May 2019 #223

You don't know what I thought she said or that I even cared standingtall May 2019 #236

You responded to the OP - you just said that. I don't have to 'read your mind' to know that.... ehrnst May 2019 #239

Again you are trying to read my mind standingtall May 2019 #241

More evasion via red herring. ehrnst May 2019 #243

This message was self-deleted by its author standingtall May 2019 #245

Three things: once proceedings began he couldn't pardon Roger Stone or anyone else pnwmom May 2019 #34

OP Worthy uponit7771 May 2019 #44

Another impeachment count... fine!! InAbLuEsTaTe May 2019 #59

Been trying to tell people this... some just refuse to acknowledge what is so obvious. InAbLuEsTaTe May 2019 #166

The party of the impeached has never fared well in elections post impeachment process ... uponit7771 May 2019 #43

That election was pre-impeachment, not post whopis01 May 2019 #62

Does not matter, it didn't help Democrats one way or the other uponit7771 May 2019 #152

Votes! That simple. ancianita May 2019 #205

esp after it bombs in the senate.. then what do we have to threaten trump with? samnsara Jun 2019 #288

Until there is a link, we don't know for sure that's what she said. ehrnst May 2019 #88

No one cares what happens to ex-President Trump n/t leftstreet May 2019 #18

It IS tricky. madamesilverspurs May 2019 #19

If he gets acquitted he gets re-elected, is the problem (nt) Recursion May 2019 #20

Then we have a much bigger problem rufus dog May 2019 #23

BINGO!!! InAbLuEsTaTe May 2019 #168

:) This whole thread's an argument against democracy, Hortensis May 2019 #64

That's a big leap, with very little evidence to back it up Downtown Hound May 2019 #186

So, your assumption is Chin music May 2019 #230

Clinton's numbers went up after his acquittal; Trump's would too Recursion Jun 2019 #271

Clinton created 22 million jobs. He was beloved by the world. And, he and VP Gore gave Chin music Jun 2019 #272

And Trump's economic numbers are almost as good Recursion Jun 2019 #273

If the numbers are correct. Those numbers don't pan out where I live. Chin music Jun 2019 #280

Post removed Post removed May 2019 #21

No stalling, foot dragging, or wimping out. Not enough VOTES to pass the resolution to start emmaverybo May 2019 #25

Heard this same argument in 07 Trumpocalypse May 2019 #27

Does anyone else feel SCVDem May 2019 #26

I don't know about a war, but I will lay out some dominoes that could fall in a chain that will lead Celerity May 2019 #38

No. bearsfootball516 May 2019 #139

I think that the Republicans' reaction gets worse and worse each time they lose power again. StevieM May 2019 #173

isn't he facing countless indictments in NYC? SleeplessinSoCal May 2019 #36

Yes, even if he's exonerated of all federal crimes that doesn't stop the state ones unless there's uponit7771 May 2019 #56

Plus, it isn't a criminal trial Bettie May 2019 #102

and the GOP is no longer concerned with precedent. SleeplessinSoCal May 2019 #190

There's that too Bettie May 2019 #194

There are plenty of crimes to charge Trump, especially at the state level. Start the proceedings. airmid May 2019 #37

+1, they can make the impeachment mandate very narrow they don't have to include the kitchen sink uponit7771 May 2019 #41

Here's the video for those who missed it! Rhiannon12866 May 2019 #39

thank you for posting that Celerity May 2019 #45

That's an excellent point, that jumped out at me too Rhiannon12866 May 2019 #53

Not in cases that aren't related to the impeachment. uponit7771 May 2019 #40

Not going to happen, but my ideal scenario is Trump being taken into custody no_hypocrisy May 2019 #46

It won't free him from NY charges down the road. sarabelle May 2019 #47

That's not true. W_HAMILTON May 2019 #49

The goalposts get moved, the bar gets raised BeyondGeography May 2019 #55

Sounds good to me! InAbLuEsTaTe May 2019 #60

What "excuses?" (nt) ehrnst May 2019 #67

Not to act BeyondGeography May 2019 #68

Again... what excuses are being given? ehrnst May 2019 #72

👍🏾 live love laugh May 2019 #240

Yes, all I am asking for (and I think most are here) is open a simple enquiry, I do NOT want to Celerity May 2019 #118

+1 BeyondGeography May 2019 #123

And an enquiry really raises the chances he will come and testify in public, before the House Celerity May 2019 #129

We seem to be in a minority around DU. (nt) ehrnst May 2019 #160

I'm totally with this. ancianita May 2019 #255

I'd allege that as well... if I too had no objective evidence to support it. LanternWaste May 2019 #183

My evidence is ironclad BeyondGeography May 2019 #187

I trust Pelosi's judgement. She's got the track record that makes me trust it. RelativelyJones May 2019 #58

except if you consider that she let Bush off the hook. Blues Heron May 2019 #61

So the ACA was worth nothing, and being chosen again and again and again ehrnst May 2019 #80

her track record on impeaching Bush speaks for itself Blues Heron May 2019 #128

You could say the ame for the Obama Adminsitration Kaleva May 2019 #81

I know. I never understood the deferrence given to Bush. Blues Heron May 2019 #127

It is not her judgement many of us are taking issue with. She said that a Senate acquittal Celerity May 2019 #70

When did Pelosi say that a Senate acquittal precludes DT from future legal prosecution? ehrnst May 2019 #83

She didn't say that. She said "there is a school of thought" in the Kimmel interview. RelativelyJones May 2019 #86

yes BUT she is basing her conclusion/rationale off that school of thought in her answer Celerity May 2019 #114

Not what I took away from it. ehrnst May 2019 #132

well, without opening an official enquiry (which is all I am asking for) we are never going to get Celerity May 2019 #135

I don't think that she was saying that it was an iron clad truism, etched in stone. ehrnst May 2019 #143

that is the entire subject of this OP thread we are in Celerity May 2019 #103

Not what she said... ehrnst May 2019 #125

I already addressed that in another comment. Celerity May 2019 #131

I just addressed that post. ehrnst May 2019 #136

I do not want impeachment now, but if we wait 5, 6 months or even until early or mid-2020 Celerity May 2019 #140

Like I said ehrnst May 2019 #146

here, both the video and then the NYT article, plus numerous commentators Celerity May 2019 #159

Is this where you heard that the base is "peeling off?" (nt) ehrnst May 2019 #161

like I said, there have been numerous people talking about the inherent risks of not doing enough Celerity May 2019 #164

I was specifically addressing your claim that "the base is peeling off," which is something that can ehrnst May 2019 #172

i would say not a single American has a track record for the current situation. Kurt V. May 2019 #134

She has a fantastic track record as a Speaker and legislator, which is what ehrnst May 2019 #174

no. but that's bc she's already the Speaker. this is so unique I'm not sure anyone inside of Kurt V. May 2019 #179

"Accessing" or Assessing? ehrnst May 2019 #182

Assessing. lol. agree there isn't anyone more qualified in a normal situation. all the house Kurt V. May 2019 #188

In order to think outside the box effectively, one must know the box one is trying to fix ehrnst May 2019 #189

lots of good points . as a straight white man, my straight white friends don't like it when i Kurt V. May 2019 #213

to get back to our main discussion, this is what i think the Speaker is missing : Kurt V. May 2019 #257

Not clear on what the Speaker is missing with this link.(nt) ehrnst May 2019 #267

i read trump has made 15 million off the taxpayer thru his propertys. she should pursue Kurt V. Jun 2019 #275

I don't know if that is criminal, and we have limited resources. ehrnst Jun 2019 #284

So do I. Irishxs May 2019 #203

I do too--she cannot and should not reveal their entire "hand". nt live love laugh May 2019 #251

Yeah, she's way overthinking this. It's rationalization. nt coti May 2019 #63

What makes your judgement on this better than hers? ehrnst May 2019 #76

I'm not compromised by power like she is. It's easy for me to be right. coti May 2019 #78

In what way is she "compromised by power?" ehrnst May 2019 #79

Yes, the pressures of responsibility and power can skew people's judgment coti May 2019 #97

So now you're saying she's 'frightened?" ehrnst May 2019 #100

Nothing? (nt) ehrnst May 2019 #89

"Compromised by power"? You've got to be kidding me. RelativelyJones May 2019 #92

No, she wasn't- in fact, some would say we won despite her. coti May 2019 #95

And who are those who would say that? Justice Democrats? Young Turks? RelativelyJones May 2019 #96

Candidates in swing districts who said they wouldn't support her for Speaker? BeyondGeography May 2019 #98

Why does that mean we won "in spite of her?" ehrnst May 2019 #105

You again? BeyondGeography May 2019 #112

Too much time on your hands as well, I see... ehrnst May 2019 #153

Who is the "some" other than you? ehrnst May 2019 #104

It's flat out Pelosi bashing RelativelyJones May 2019 #106

*clutches pearls*....Actually, no it isn't. coti May 2019 #111

When you accuse her of being "compromised" without evidence you are bashing. Have the guts to own it RelativelyJones May 2019 #116

I was ASKED what makes my judgment better than hers, and I told you. coti May 2019 #117

"Compromised" a strong accusation without a shred of support but your personal opinion. RelativelyJones May 2019 #119

It doesn't sound like you understand what I mean re being compromised by power. coti May 2019 #126

"Compromised" is what Trump likely was by the Russians and I find it insidious that you apply the RelativelyJones May 2019 #130

So... ehrnst May 2019 #147

It doesn't sound like you understand that you have been called out ehrnst May 2019 #151

Got it. You don't have any real evidence for calling her compromised. RelativelyJones May 2019 #122

Nope. Just insults for anyone who dares to point out the inconsistencies ehrnst May 2019 #148

So you don't think that she doesn't get ehrnst May 2019 #145

+1000 RelativelyJones May 2019 #149

Between 2 and 7.52 billion other people of the 7.53 billion on the planet coti May 2019 #108

All of them "say" that we won in 2018 "despite" Pelosi? ehrnst May 2019 #154

Yep mcar May 2019 #157

She raised gobs of money for those campaigns mcar May 2019 #156

But that just can't be!! She "takes the path of least resistance" ehrnst May 2019 #158

Makes me so angry, ehrnst mcar May 2019 #252

And she's SO concerned that he won't go to jail shanny May 2019 #65

"she doesn't want to use the only tools available to her to save American democracy?" ehrnst May 2019 #109

I agree with you. live love laugh May 2019 #242

senate exoneration has NOTHING to do with any charges later, ask Bill Clinton beachbum bob May 2019 #69

The OP doesn't provide a link, so we don't really know if that's a valid ehrnst May 2019 #90

Coming up with reasons after deciding on the path of least resistance nt coti May 2019 #71

When did Pelosi say that she is choosing "the path of least resistance?" (nt) ehrnst May 2019 #74

She didn't say that, I said that. Obviously. coti May 2019 #75

I would love to be able to read minds. ehrnst May 2019 #77

You could try just reading posts coti May 2019 #82

Let's unpack this. ehrnst May 2019 #85

Does Trump say "I am acting with corrupt intent" when he obstructs justice? coti May 2019 #94

So you rely on mind reading. ehrnst May 2019 #113

"You need to work on your critical thinking skills"? George II May 2019 #167

Somebody is very, very, very put out ehrnst May 2019 #175

ooh...ooh....tell me.. stillcool May 2019 #211

Fallacy of false alternative, "bases"[sic] instead of "basis", AND the fallacy of alleged certainty. lapucelle May 2019 #256

Small correction. Bases, in this context... TCJ70 Jun 2019 #281

Your point is well taken, so let me amend. lapucelle Jun 2019 #282

.... ehrnst Jun 2019 #287

heh RoadMan May 2019 #124

... ehrnst May 2019 #144

As long as you have your coffee at hand, might as well partake of some doughnuts: George II May 2019 #269

Pelosi knows what she is doing. She will open an impreachment inquiry when more Reps in RelativelyJones May 2019 #84

Yes, Pelosi sees the momentum building... it's just a matter of time now!! InAbLuEsTaTe May 2019 #169

Can you post a link - because I think you misunderstood what she said. (nt) ehrnst May 2019 #87

Post #196 has the quote. live love laugh May 2019 #246

and if we don't impeach...that will basically free him from further prosecution down the road. spanone May 2019 #91

Huh? Impeachment is a political process, I thought. ego_nation May 2019 #99

impeachment on a particular set of impeachable charges doesn't negated crimianl charges later OR beachbum bob May 2019 #110

Video: See about 7:09 or so CousinIT May 2019 #101

it is best to start it at around 6:40 to get the full context Celerity May 2019 #115

We also don't want pence to have a clear path to the presidency in 2020. dubyadiprecession May 2019 #133

The only ironclad case that will get the GOP Senate's attention is one where the base turns on them. Thomas Hurt May 2019 #137

As it is now, it's hard to imagine a jury that will convict trump. Add failure in Senate, Hoyt May 2019 #138

False, defeatist statement from Dems leader- now is the time for courage! Fiendish Thingy May 2019 #141

I think Pelosi will come through... momentum for impeachment is building, just a matter of time now. InAbLuEsTaTe May 2019 #171

She's been coming through for years, and continues to. (nt) ehrnst May 2019 #177

they need to get dirt on McConnell bdamomma May 2019 #150

Even an ironclad case would not change @GOP minds-they will stick with bigot Trump. IMHO riversedge May 2019 #176

And you can only get that ironclad case now via Congress performing impeachment investigations! KPN May 2019 #181

So how do we determine when the time is right?? Mitch will whisper in Nancy's ear? honest.abe May 2019 #185

Nancy is slowly inching towards starting impeachment proceedings... InAbLuEsTaTe May 2019 #216

IANAL, but the Constitution explicitly authorizes prosecution even if impeached. Tactical Peek May 2019 #195

I am disappointed in these statements from Pelosi Blecht May 2019 #196

Impeachment is not a criminal proceeding and double jeopardy isn't applicable (n/t) Spider Jerusalem May 2019 #200

Huh? Proud Liberal Dem May 2019 #210

No it won't. Was she suggesting the Senate vote would be res judicata?? SunSeeker May 2019 #212

There is none. Snackshack May 2019 #234

I totally agree. But why do you think there will be a failure to impeach? SunSeeker May 2019 #247

Yes... Snackshack May 2019 #258

There's plenty of evidence. Lunabell May 2019 #226

i agree.. i want a paper trail..phone calls..emails..linking him to high crimes... samnsara May 2019 #237

This is 100% incorrect NewJeffCT May 2019 #238

Link? FiveGoodMen May 2019 #254

Here's one - Obama US attorney Joyce Vance NewJeffCT May 2019 #263

Here is Ross Garber, a leading expert on Impeachment NewJeffCT May 2019 #264

Ian Millhiser NewJeffCT May 2019 #265

another link NewJeffCT May 2019 #266

A thorough debunking BeyondGeography Jun 2019 #274

That doesn't seem like a true statement in the least. Gore1FL May 2019 #244

Um I'm pretty sure that impeachment is not Voltaire2 May 2019 #248

That's not quite what she said StarfishSaver Jun 2019 #283

Does what those dirty assholes in the Senate do REALLY carry any weight with anyone? BlueStater Jun 2019 #285

Her name should be Nancy Sinatra because she's gonna do it her way gldstwmn Jun 2019 #286

She didn't say that StarfishSaver Jun 2019 #289