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)

bdamomma

(63,868 posts)
Mon Jun 10, 2019, 09:00 AM Jun 2019

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=2

Snip of article:

At one point, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s 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 Mueller’s final report (even in redacted form) before moving forward was a defensible, deliberative position.

But that time is gone, and Pelosi’s position no longer makes any coherent sense. “Trump deserves impeachment — so let’s defeat him at the ballot box” is not a sound argument, especially from an institutionalist perspective. There’s 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 Garland’s 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 that’s a threat one cannot ignore: Even if you view the argument in Pelosi’s 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 Jentleson’s bluntly-titled GQ article, “The Political Costs of Not Impeaching Trump” reminds us. “Being in the minority limited our options for overcoming McConnell’s 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.
35 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
We need to at least start an Impeachment Inquiry to get to the facts. lark Jun 2019 #1
Which Nadler is now doing. CaptainTruth Jun 2019 #6
Nancy vs a writer from Salon, who should I believe? comradebillyboy Jun 2019 #2
Paul Rosenberg is a journalist untainted by either legal training or government/political experience StarfishSaver Jun 2019 #3
Yeah. I'm getting really tired of these pundits comradebillyboy Jun 2019 #4
Yeah, politicians and lawyers have done a marvelous job ... GeorgeGist Jun 2019 #7
Perhaps. But if that's the case, instead of sniping from the sidelines, journalists and pundits StarfishSaver Jun 2019 #8
lol melman Jun 2019 #21
Well melman Jun 2019 #22
No, you can't StarfishSaver Jun 2019 #23
As President Obama said, 'when you get on a jet plane, you like to feel confident that the empedocles Jun 2019 #26
How about Laurence Tribe? Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2019 #12
I'm with her. Tribe can pontificate from his ivory tower comradebillyboy Jun 2019 #15
This StarfishSaver Jun 2019 #16
I'm with the constitutional scholar Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2019 #17
That's nice. comradebillyboy Jun 2019 #18
... StarfishSaver Jun 2019 #19
As nice as your position that you stated Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2019 #20
I'll be polite stopdiggin Jun 2019 #27
Excellent! StarfishSaver Jun 2019 #29
He's bdamomma Jun 2019 #30
The biggest threat: Bayard Jun 2019 #5
There is no way to remove him before 2021 wryter2000 Jun 2019 #24
or being aware of the Saudis having journalists bdamomma Jun 2019 #35
But the thing everybody forgets, about this (or maybe avoids?) calimary Jun 2019 #28
Great post bdamomma Jun 2019 #32
I'm really afraid bdamomma Jun 2019 #31
1999 Senate acquitted Clinton, in 2000 Republicans won Presidency & House, in 2002 they won Senate Dorn Jun 2019 #9
butbutbubububbb...The Senate won't convict! moonseller66 Jun 2019 #10
The M$M is not our friend, watoos Jun 2019 #14
Impeachment bdamomma Jun 2019 #33
There is a lot of bs going on about watoos Jun 2019 #11
"...impeachment inquiries should begin." dchill Jun 2019 #13
I'm not understanding the political calculations here Proud Liberal Dem Jun 2019 #25
K & R the O.P. and Duppers Jun 2019 #34
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Article: 11 crucial thin...