This is what happened in Watergate

[mcar]

Link to tweet

?s=19


Zac Petkanas
✔
@Zac_Petkanas
I've read a lot of books about Watergate in the last 2 years.

One relevant point: the Senate Watergate Committee held nationally televised public hearings educating the public about Richard Nixon's wrongdoing before the House Judiciary Committee began impeachment proceedings

Link to tweet

?s=19

Setting aside a few initial misfires, this is essentially where House Democratic leadership has clearly landed if you listen to what Schiff, Nadler and Cummings said over the weekend -- and if you read Pelosi's letter.

Stop picking fights.

There is consensus.

[Andy823]

1. I agree

Start the investigations now, and start letting the public see just how corrupt trump is. From what I hear the Democrats have NOT taken impeachment complete off the table, and several Democrats have said impeach when the time is right, just like happens with Nixon.

Thanks for the thread.

[mcar]

3. That's right, Andy

It's making me crazy how the MSM is ginning up the "Dems in Disarray" nonsense over this...and rarely asking where are the Republicans.

[Bettie]

5. It looks like disarray to them

because Republicans just do as they are told, with one or two given permission to mildly disagree.

We're not the party that just listens to an authoritarian father figure, we're the loud family down the street, who are passionate about everything, but will generally come together to defend what's right.

[mcar]

6. Good analogy

[FakeNoose]

2. I remember those Watergate hearings and I saw most of them live

We need to remind ourselves that those Watergate hearings were not the result of impeachment charges.

Those hearings were part of an investigation and nothing more. There were tough questions from both Democratic and Republican senators, and the hearings were overseen by an impartial judge. Watergate was not a trial, but if we call for impeachment of Chump now, that's exactly what it becomes - a trial.

The country isn't ready for a trial yet, we need to have hearings just like Watergate 35 years ago.

[mcar]

4. And the Democrats are moving along with that

With the McGahn subpoena.

[ehrnst]

7. Yep. I trusts Democratic leaders. They have no reason to keep him in office.(nt)

[mcar]

13. They read the polls

and know most Americans are against impeachment. Now.

[Fiendish Thingy]

18. However, hearings that aren't part of an Impeachment inquiry play into Trump's hands

An impeachment inquiry has more power than a regular congressional hearing, in that it is considered a judicial proceeding, thereby circumventing Barr's court delays on releasing the un redacted report.

To avoid letting Trump run out the clock with court delays, congress must convene an impeachment inquiry, which can serve the same purpose of educating the public that the Watergate hearings did.

An impeachment inquiry doesn't lead to a formal impeachment until congress, the American people, and hopefully the Senate are ready.

[at140]

26. Nailed it, by the time investigations get some place...

it will be year 2020 and the primaries will eclipse all other news.

[Trumpocalypse]

36. I remember those hearings too

Was really pissed off that they pre-empted Match Game.

[lapucelle]

37. Remember when there were only seven channels?

[Trumpocalypse]

38. We were so deprived!

[lapucelle]

39. And one of the channels was the dreaded educational channel.

I guess this is our version of having to walk 5 miles through a foot of snow to get to school.

[NurseJackie]

8. Excellent information. Thanks for the reminder. I think...

... we're on the right track.

[mcar]

14. I do too

If the media could shut up with their divided Dems crap,meet might get somewhere.

[BigmanPigman]

9. I think the public support of impeachment probes

over the weekend helped push the Dems in Congress to see that this is the direction we want them to move forward on and begin televised hearings. I know I have called and written a lot of reps on Fri and other voters did the same. Hit the phones...it works! RESIST!

[Politicub]

10. Thank you for posting this!

Impeachment proceedings are coming. The dems are taking the (highly effective) Obama slow jam approach. A lot of figures from the report are about to find out what it’s like to be laid bare by the House’s oversight powers.

[Honeycombe8]

11. I think so, too. The public knows little about the Mueller Report, except "No collusion...

and no obstruction."

People go to work, come home tired, make dinner, watch the evening news and some sitcoms, go to bed or put the kids to bed, and go through their routines. They don't endlessly watch the political talk shows (for both Republicans & Democrats...and the bipartisan ones), like we political junkies do.

It's important to have some key moments at hearings, with testimony under oath, hitting the news, so the public will learn SOMETHING about the behavior that has gone on. That way, they will be more likely to support impeachment (or a later indictment), or at least understand it.

[mcar]

15. They care about healthcare, jobs, education

And corruption. We can address them all, but an immediate impeachment filing would shut everything down.

[kimbutgar]

12. I remember being at home and seeing them during the day.

And at night on the eveningnews they played excepts. I hope Cspan runs them on a loop 24/7. Since Speaker Pelosi controls what is broadcast hopefully she will pls them continuously.

[mcar]

16. I was 15

I remember watching it too.

[SunSeeker]

17. No, that's not what we are doing right now.

We have not passed a resolution starting the formal impeachment investigation hearings that tweet is referring to (and they were in the HOUSE, not Senate--not sure what Zac is talking about, might be a tweet typo).

We need to do that.

Saying we need to do that is not picking a fight. It is giving our leadership the groundswell from our base they need to pursue that.

[mcar]

19. The point is the same

The Senate committee did the preliminary investigating, which led to the House initiating impeachment. Today, it all comes from the house for obvious reasons.

[SunSeeker]

21. My point still stands. We need to start formal impeachment investigation hearings.

Mueller did the preliminary investigating.

[benld74]

20. GOP had souls back then

[former9thward]

22. "I've read a lot of books about Watergate in the last 2 years."

Well Zac, I think you missed one big thing in those books. In 1974 the Democrats had a 57 seat majority in the Senate and thus only needed 10 Republicans to cross over. Also since the Senate was in Democratic hands they could control the process in the Senate. A big difference of what exists in 2019.

[Hortensis]

31. Maybe just more detail on what and why?

I'm not actually sure where disagreement is.

Even with a Democratic majority in the senate they still had to deal with a public who'd elected this president, something those who rush to insist democracy is dead should note. Remembering that in office Nixon wasn't popular with even his Republican voters, but when they saw him as under attack they rallied strongly to him. In the middle of the two years Democrats worked at investigating and then at removing him, the electorate reelected him by very high numbers.

[patphil]

23. Oh Yes!

Hearings are the correct starting point.
It's all about truth.
Mueller took it as far as he could; constrained by the stupid DOJ directive that a sitting president can't be indited.
Humm...Perhaps they should ask Trump to stand up, and then they can indite him.
Ok, bad pun.
But, the truth will take time, and it will be agonizingly painful for us to sit and watch justice slowly grind on.
And, it will be even more painful for the guilty parties to watch as their guilt is exposed.
This will come to a head some time late this year.
I do expect it will lead to impeachment.
It has to be done.
No if's, and's, or butts.
The Republic must be defended, and those who would tear it down exposed for the rats that they are.

Patrick Phillips

[BlueFlorida]

24. We have elected those leaders

we should trust them to do the right thing. They have a lot more experience and have a much closer view of things.

Do we not respect Schiff, Cummings and Nadler? Why not let them do their job?

[jalan48]

25. Plus, do we have the votes to impeach?

[Me.]

27. Right Now, Joy, In For Chris, Is Beating The Drum

for immediate impeachment. She has the guests lined up to back her up and disagrees with anything contrary. She even allowed Kurt Bardelo to insult the Dems. Rep. Talib was given a good segment to go on and on and why it MUST BE DONE NOW. It's the first time, but maybe not the last, that I turned the channel on JOY.

I think the case needs to be made to the American people. Right now nearly 50% of Cons think he didn't do anything wrong and quite a number of Dems don't know. Televise every aspect of it and make the case, deliberately and with witnesses and facts. Those trying to push this matter have an agenda of their own and due respect to a person who managed to get elected, but Talib has been in Congress for a matter of a few months. Maybe the people who helped get her elected and have more experience are owed a hearing and some trust to know what they are doing.

Our Dems are dealing with crooks and corruption and need to be surefooted in this effort. It is too important to be done in a rushed and half-formed way.

[mcar]

28. Love Joy, but I disagree here

[brer cat]

29. K&R

[lapucelle]

30. Very often the folks who insist it must be NOW, NOW, NOW

do not have our best interests at heart. I trust our leadership on this.

[brooklynite]

32. Something important to remember: cable TV didn't exist.

Most cities had only the three broadcast networks, one of which would cover the hearings each day. As a result, people have fewer choices of what to watch. In todays world there are far more options, and the audience is likely to be far smaller. Additional, network news shows have far less clout than they did in the Cronkite era.

[George II]

33. If I remember correctly, the talk of impeachment came after exhaustive hearings in the House...

....and ultimately, after all the evidence was laid out, even some republicans on the Judiciary Committee voted for the Articles of Impeachment.

The House should thoroughly investigate any crimes and impeachable offenses committed by the president before moving on to Articles of Impeachment.

The problem I see, however, is that the US wasn't as polarized in the 1970s as today. The way things are today, if trump were to go into the Senate Chamber, shoot a Democratic Senator, there still would be republicans voting against Articles of Impeachment.

The bottom line is, investigate and lay the ground work for impeachment, not the other way around.

[mcar]

35. +1000!

[ehrnst]

34. Thank you for this! (nt)