"I can understand the Democratic leadership's caution about impeaching Trump."

[Different Drummer]

Link to tweet

[SHRED]

1. And if we don't

And spend these 19 months wringing our hands and lamenting then we will actually lose voters I believe.

They will stay home pissed at "weak Democrats".

[Different Drummer]

2. You are correct. n/t

[jrthin]

3. I agree. At this moment I am pissing angry

at their seemingly inaction of screaming impeachment. Their handwringing is making me nuts.

[dalton99a]

12. +1

[Blecht]

4. That's it in a nutshell

[themaguffin]

5. We here as DU, sure know more than Nancy, don't we?

[TwilightZone]

7. Especially the ones who think that we can convince the Rs to convict.

If only the information that most of them already know about is made public...again.

[ProfessorPlum]

8. Right....

We can only impeach Trump if the Republicans give us permission. That's strong.

[TwilightZone]

9. No, we can only remove Trump if the Rs agree.

Ignoring that fact isn't going to make it go away.

[ProfessorPlum]

11. We can only remove him if we impeach him first

so why not do that? And then make the GOP PAY for not doing their duty?

https://www.facebook.com/ginandtacos/posts/10156811256891677

[dalton99a]

13. Great post

Here's the take-home point.

What we confirmed today is that Democrats can never wait for bipartisan buy-in to act against Trump. The GOP has made its deal with the devil and is willing to turn a blind eye to this nakedly corrupt authoritarian clown show in exchange for long-term control of the federal courts.

Either the House Democrats act now, or they just give up and we turn into Putin-era Russia, where the truth becomes so obviously irrelevant and the game so obviously rigged that the public checks out of politics altogether. This really is an important point. What happens next matters. If this isn't impeachable, nothing is impeachable. "But he won't be convicted in the Senate" is a terrible argument, a legacy of the "Let me explain why we can't win and shouldn't try" mindset the Reid-Pelosi-Schumer years have baked into Democratic DNA.

If the current status of our political system is that one party openly abets a corrupt wannabe-dictator and the other party is afraid to challenge him because they think it will make voters mad, then we might as well throw in the towel right now. If not impeachment, then what is the right thing to do? Act "disappointed"? Give pretty speeches?

What if - just maybe - it actually *improved* the party's standing to demonstrate it has basic principles that can't be swayed by amateur theorizing about how it might impact the next election. "We are for the rule of law...unless we worry that White Working Class Diner Customers won't like it" is exactly the kind of spinelessness that those voters detest.

[uponit7771]

6. THIS !!! The case against impeachment is weak at best (https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212)

[anarch]

10. I also understand the reluctancy--there's no "good" option here

and yes, impeachment is a political process, not a criminal one, etc., so political consequences have to be taken into account...and moreover, I wouldn't expect impeachment to go anywhere in the senate, etc.

but goddammit, it's the right thing to do. Beyond politics. Someone needs to stand up and clearly say, "this is wrong!" and do it in a public forum that will get the attention of the huge segment of our population that can't be bothered to care about their nation's governance; who think politics is "boring" and that "none of this has anything to do with me" and so on.

And yes of course we need to open investigations first, before initiating the actual articles of impeachment, but the word should be out there, as in "we're looking into these very serious matters identified in the report, to determine if impeachment might be merited here" and make the bastard squirm--these fuckers wanted a reality TV president; let's give them "season 3: a monster exposed", and put their malfeasance on display in a way that can't be hidden from the public.