Article: 11 crucial things Nancy Pelosi gets wrong about impeachment

[bdamomma]

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.

[lark]

1. We need to at least start an Impeachment Inquiry to get to the facts.

If SCOTUS sides with ugly orange fatass and let's him withhold information, then we know for sure the fix is in and our constitution will have been trashed.

OTOH. maybe Roberts will side with the nation and against party and rule that drumpf has to produce information. What happens if drumpf refuses?

So more information should be part of the Impeachment hearings. But even without that, getting our the corruption outlined in the Mueller report would be serious and really help move Independents away from drumpf because they will realize they've been had. It will strengthen Dems, weaker Repugs and motivate Independents. I don't see a downside - except it could also motivate his base - but they are motivated anyway and I don't think this would make any difference to the KKK, Nazi, criminal, white separatists, racist base.

[CaptainTruth]

6. Which Nadler is now doing.

One of the goals of the Mueller report hearings is to explore "constitutional remedies" & there's only one of those available ... impeachment.

[comradebillyboy]

2. Nancy vs a writer from Salon, who should I believe?

[StarfishSaver]

3. Paul Rosenberg is a journalist untainted by either legal training or government/political experience

Therefore, he's in a perfect position to critique the legal and political strategy of the Speaker of the House.

Because, you know, he's not biased by learning or actual experience, which only gets in the way. Or something.

[comradebillyboy]

4. Yeah. I'm getting really tired of these pundits

who only want to stir the pot.

[GeorgeGist]

7. Yeah, politicians and lawyers have done a marvelous job ...

of fucking up.

[StarfishSaver]

8. Perhaps. But if that's the case, instead of sniping from the sidelines, journalists and pundits

should step into the ring and show everyone how it's supposed to be done.

[melman]

21. lol

[melman]

22. Well

we can't all be "in the room"

[StarfishSaver]

23. No, you can't

That's why I take the time and effort to tell you what actually happens in some of the rooms I've had the privilege of being in.

[empedocles]

26. As President Obama said, 'when you get on a jet plane, you like to feel confident that the

pilots know what they are doing'.

[Like well-trained, tested, experienced and able to handle many unexpected things that occur].

[Cuthbert Allgood]

12. How about Laurence Tribe?

He significantly disagrees with Pelosi and lays out what she should be doing.

[comradebillyboy]

15. I'm with her. Tribe can pontificate from his ivory tower

but Pelosi has to get the job done. And the majority of her caucus isn't there yet.

[StarfishSaver]

16. This

[Cuthbert Allgood]

17. I'm with the constitutional scholar

when he says what the constitution is about and what constitutional duties are.

[comradebillyboy]

18. That's nice.

[StarfishSaver]

19. ...

[Cuthbert Allgood]

20. As nice as your position that you stated

Mine was absent the anti-academic "ivory tower" dig, though. Probably should have added something like that.

[stopdiggin]

27. I'll be polite

OK. Then I'll give you the "polite" version. The constitutional scholar can give you what should happen. The ward boss (or Speaker) will then tell you what can happen.

[StarfishSaver]

29. Excellent!

[bdamomma]

30. He's

going to be on now on MSNBC.

[Bayard]

5. The biggest threat:

tRump continues to do more damage everyday, in this country and around the world. We can't wait another 2 years to get rid of him. One way or another, he has got to GO! We're out of time.

[wryter2000]

24. There is no way to remove him before 2021

None. That’s why beating him in the election is imperative. It’s all fine and good to talk about our duty under the Constitution, and I believe we will impeach him at the right time...next year when we have evidence of more crimes. And he’s running for re-election.

However, that won’t amount to much if he has four more years to put babies in cages.

[bdamomma]

35. or being aware of the Saudis having journalists

being chopped up into little pieces. Khashoggi

[calimary]

28. But the thing everybody forgets, about this (or maybe avoids?)

is that assuming we can just vote him out in 2020 is agonizingly naive.

1) The Russians are still here. They haven’t gone away, or been driven away, or locked out. And at this point, we can reasonably suspect China and Saudi Arabia and the UAE and other international oppositionals are joining the feeding frenzy if they’re not deep into it already. Hey, since the Russians proved it’s possible to get YOUR pick for POTUS who will be much more sympathetic to YOUR interests than even America’s own, then shit! Everybody into the pool!
And if the Russians were motivated to help trump because of how it would advantage THEM, then they’ll be even more highly motivated to move Heaven and Earth to keep trump in office. To keep that advantage in place - since he’s been exposed and could sing like Pavarotti if he fails to win and then becomes subject to prosecution as a private citizen. If they can keep their asset in office til 2024, that eases him safely past the expiration of the statute of limitations that expires in 2022 and into safe legal territory.

2) Democrats are really good, reliably good, infuriatingly good, at wilting. Becoming discouraged or disheartened and giving up. Deciding there’s no point, or “they’re all the same/both sides-both sides!” Throwing up their hands in disgust and staying home. And there goes our numerical advantage.
Or, my fear: the Dems will decide it’s smarter to shy away from serious political combat and fail to impeach because they think the Senate won’t convict (so why stir things up like that - oh dear! We might make somebody mad!). Or because they’re afraid they’ll alienate independents or wavering ex-GOP voters in 2020, so going REEEEEEALLY slow and sending a lot of those sternly-worded letters to this White House should be enough. I think we’d be apt to see tons of pissed-off Democratic activists who ask “why the hell did I work so hard to flip the House if they finally got the majority power needed to hold this monster accountable - and they wimped out? So why should I even bother?” And they’d stay home on Election Day and become next-to-impossible to woo back.
THAT’S what I fear most.

We HAVE TO get ON with it. We HAVE TO impeach.

[bdamomma]

32. Great post

I wish the American people would just wake the eff up, about this BS artist who sold us out. Russia/Putin is getting exactly what they wanted to truly put us on the brink of collapse and division. We got to fight hard.....and get our country back. tRump is a sick delusional POS.

[bdamomma]

31. I'm really afraid

of what the country is going to be like, now it doesn't look good. People out there have been brainwashed and don't believe in facts and truth. Sad but we will rise.

[Dorn]

9. 1999 Senate acquitted Clinton, in 2000 Republicans won Presidency & House, in 2002 they won Senate

Please explain the downside of impeaching DT!

Explain it to me as if I were a child.

[moonseller66]

10. butbutbubububbb...The Senate won't convict!

Someone's missing the point if they believe that's the only drawback. The Republican controlled Senate has NOT PASSED any House bills that the Drumpf opposed. They're not going to pass any for the next year and a half. Take that to your friendly neighborhood bookmaker.

What the Republican Congress didn't do for Americans from 2010 to 2016 will seem puny compared to the obstruction now through 2020! They won't pass anything that might hurt Drumpf so why the hell are those Democrats in the house worried impeachment hearings will upset the public? The public isn't getting anything from the Senate anyway.

Maybe if the Democrats started getting the message out to the same public, that all the decent bills they wrote are being stopped by the Senate, maybe, just maybe, a few affecteds will see the light.

By the way, the only thing that will make Drumpf take notice is to publicly humiliate him at every point. If he can act like a petulant child, start treating him like one in public and especially in the media. The media won't go along? Keep at it until they have no choice.

Time for elected Democrats to grow...something...and do what the people want.

[watoos]

14. The M$M is not our friend,

it is complicit with the right, with corporate America. Most of the public is unaware that House Democrats have passed over 100 bills that are gathering dust because of McConnell.

Want to humiliate Trump? Impeach him. An author of one of Trump's books stated that impeachment would devastate Trump.

[bdamomma]

33. Impeachment

would deflate him he feeds on praise and his total arrogance of narcissistic personality traits. He has no regard for the American people he hasn't done shit for us. Kick him to the curb.

[watoos]

11. There is a lot of bs going on about

whether or not to hold an impeachment hearing before it's too late.

I know this, we were lied to that regular hearings carry the same amount of clout as an impeachment hearing carries, that tale is bs. Regular hearings "should" carry as much weight as an impeachment hearing but Trump/Barr are obstructing regular hearings, are obstructing releasing documents, are obstructing subpoenas.

There is no guarantee that final court decisions will even happen before the election.

One thing I know, even though there are enough grounds out there to impeach Trump now, holding an impeachment hearing will give Congress the grand jury information. There will be plenty more dirt on Trump and his crime family in that grand jury testimony. Do I trust Bill Barr, fuck no, but he stated that he would release grand jury information to Congress under an impeachment hearing, that to me is reason enough to do it now, before it's Steve Kornacki time.

[dchill]

13. "...impeachment inquiries should begin."

There you go. Give the pendulum a starter push. Waiting takes too long.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

25. I'm not understanding the political calculations here

Unless they're taking the wrong lessons from the 1998 Clinton Impeachment, which is not analogous to the current situation in any meaningful way.

[Duppers]

34. K & R the O.P. and

thread.