Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Article: 11 crucial things Nancy Pelosi gets wrong about impeachment [View all]
https://www.alternet.org/2019/06/here-are-11-crucial-things-nancy-pelosi-gets-wrong-about-impeachment/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=307&recip_id=21760&list_id=2Snip of article:
At one point, House Speaker Nancy Pelosis reluctance to pursue impeachment could certainly be defended as both politically and constitutionally prudent, even if President Trump had clearly committed impeachable offenses. Waiting for Robert Muellers final report (even in redacted form) before moving forward was a defensible, deliberative position.
But that time is gone, and Pelosis position no longer makes any coherent sense. Trump deserves impeachment so lets defeat him at the ballot box is not a sound argument, especially from an institutionalist perspective. Theres also no guarantee it will work, as Adam Jentleson, former chief deputy to Sen. Harry Reid, points out at GQ: Remember how Democrats cleverly chose not to fight for Merrick Garlands Supreme Court nomination, relying on defeating Trump in 2016 instead?
More:
If one ignores the threat of democratic backsliding, then it could be rational, pragmatic and even principled to be guided by fears of a political downside to impeachment, and to view everything through that lens. But thats a threat one cannot ignore: Even if you view the argument in Pelosis terms, the political downside of refusing to impeach is potentially far greater than the downside of impeachment itself.
There are more immediate downside costs as well, as Jentlesons bluntly-titled GQ article, The Political Costs of Not Impeaching Trump reminds us. Being in the minority limited our options for overcoming McConnells blockade of the Garland nomination, Jentleson writes. But whenever we started to contemplate more aggressive tactics, they were dismissed on the theory that the upcoming election would sort everything out. Why rock the boat, we told ourselves.
I still think impeachment inquiries should begin. Why wait till Nov 2020 I feel that would not be a wise decision.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
35 replies, 2765 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (27)
ReplyReply to this post
35 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Article: 11 crucial things Nancy Pelosi gets wrong about impeachment [View all]
bdamomma
Jun 2019
OP
Paul Rosenberg is a journalist untainted by either legal training or government/political experience
StarfishSaver
Jun 2019
#3
Perhaps. But if that's the case, instead of sniping from the sidelines, journalists and pundits
StarfishSaver
Jun 2019
#8
As President Obama said, 'when you get on a jet plane, you like to feel confident that the
empedocles
Jun 2019
#26