Pelosi is NOT complicit.

[Soph0571]

Across the interwebs a line up of commentators make pot shots at Pelosi about her management of all things Trump. This not only more than unhelpful it is an example of distraction narratives that have seemingly overtaken reasoned discourse and fact-based politics.

Pelosi is of course doing everything in HER power (why would anyone assume any different), but there is a limit to what she can achieve without the will of the other branches of government to support change. If she is choosing not to use the tool of impeachment against Trump or anyone within his administration now, she has her reasons. For some on the left to suggest she is complicit in the horror that is the Trump regime because she has yet to press the impeachment button, is, in my opinion, outrageous.

Blame should be placed squarely where it belongs when it comes to the nightmare that is the Trump Tyranny.…

TRUMP
HIS HIRES
EVERYONE WHO VOTED FOR HIM
EVERYONE WHO DEFENDS AND ENABLES HIM
EVERYONE WHO VOTED 3RD PARTY INSTEAD OF CLINTON
EVERYONE WHO LIES AND DISTORTS THE TRUTH TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ON HIS BEHALF
EVERYONE WHO SPREADS THE GAS LIGHTING AND DISTRACTION TACTICS OF THIS ADMINISTRATION.

You know who's not at all responsible for Trump being able TO CONTINUE HIS HORRORS…

….Pelosi and the Democrats.

Just sayin’

P.S. Personally I would like to see the whole bloody lot of them impeached, but that does not mean Pelosi is complicit – it just means she understands the ‘game’ better than I ever could.

[beachbum bob]

1. pelosi controls her caucus and directs the committee chairs, and she is complicit with not letting

the gloves to come off and start taking the real fight to this admin. NO excuse why Bill Barr is not being impeached. If Pelosi finds lying to congress to be acceptable by a AG with NO repercussions, she needs to go before we have 2020 election that democrats are annihilated in.

I don;t care if McConnell would hold a trial or not. Barr needs to have his reputation set in history. Pelosi is at this time is not making the democrats look or act strong with the mandate we gave her in 2018. What a wasted effort that was if she does not stand up now

[Soph0571]

2. Maybe - but there is a difference in disagreeing with her strategy and accusing her of being

complicit!

[el_bryanto]

3. But is that an error in intent or an error in calculation?

Assuming, for the moment, that it is an error. Do you think she believes she is following the best path to getting what is best for the nation? Or do you believe that she doesn't care?

Perhaps it doesn't matter.

[trc]

12. Heres the thing

If the House impeaches, and they would, the case goes to the Senate where there is no chance of a conviction under rethug control. So the result would be what amounts to an acquittal of the charges and the rethugs claim victory with chants of "wrongful prosecution." You may think this does not matter and that once all info is out the rethugs can't help but convict but they give no shits about the rule of law in the new republican party. Further, they have control over the Supreme Court and many lessor courts...Pelosi understands it is better to let this play out and leave in place the guilty but not proven stance rather than an impeached but found not guilty stance that would impact the 2020 election with down ballot talking points about a democratic party that is out of control. The dems cannot win a conviction in the senate. So why give the rethugs more ammo?

[Everyman Jackal]

22. Under the Articles of Impeachment

the House can hold hearings until Jan 20, 2021. Don't take a vote on impeachment just bring up everything he has done that is illegal. Don't let the Senate vote that way he is never acquitted. Without Articles of Impeachment Trump will run and he will keep saying he is innocent and the Democrats have proved that by not impeaching him.

[CaptainTruth]

14. Did you miss the criminal contempt part?

Vote next week, I think. That sets the biggest possible conflict of interest trap for Barr & the DOJ, exactly the kind of thing you want (& need) to support more forceful action.

[watoos]

4. I voted in 2018 to hold Trump accountable,

so far I am disappointed but what I have done is keep contributing to the ACLU which is fighting Trump tooth and nail, especially at the border.

[GeorgeGist]

5. History may conclude otherwise.

[pazzyanne]

6. Agree totally!

[yaesu]

7. how about the 90 million who were eligible to vote but never bothered? I blame them the most. nt

[ananda]

8. Part of an abuse syndrome is magical thinking.

If I/we/they (Pelosi and the Democrats)
could just act right, this wouldn't be
happening... because the one/ones who hold
the power can't be just plain wrong and
stupid. They get normalized or defended
and the victims get blamed.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

[CaptainTruth]

18. Bingo.

A HUGE part of that magical thinking is thinking impeachment will change anything. Some people actually seem convinced that impeachment will somehow "stop" Trump. The Senate won't convict him, McConnell has made that clear, so Trump will get off scot-free, nothing will change, & he'll brag about how he was "completely exonerated" by the Senate.

Don't get me wrong, I want to see the bastard impeached, I'm just saying that we have to be realistic & understand it won't get rid of Trump & it won't stop any of his behavior. Nothing will change.

Meanwhile, just last month Pelosi said "I want to see him in prison."

So yea, let's bash Pelosi for wanting to do something that actually does something, instead of doing something that does nothing.

[JoeOtterbein]

9. Inaction speaks much louder than her words, and is demoralizing the base quickly.

If Nancy is as "smart" as you claim, she would know this.

[trc]

13. Once she acted, and the House impeached, then what?

Then the rethugs in the Senate fail to convict. There is no point to impeaching where no conviction is possible. All that does is give the rethugs the talking point that trump is not guilty and the democrats are out of control. Let me be clear, the Democrats cannot win a conviction of trump in the Senate. If you don't believe that then you have not been paying attention to this new republican party...this is not the same party that would have convicted Nixon in the Senate. This rethug party gives not shits about the law, or the nation, just power.

[JoeOtterbein]

16. You bring Trump down to size in the polls well before 2020.

Just like impeaching Clinton hurt Gore later in the general.

[mcar]

11. +1000!

[OliverQ]

15. She is complicit in not calling for impeachment

proceedings against the most dangerous man to ever occupy the White House.

[brandnewday2009]

17. The media machine loves their filthy Rump.

The will do everything they can to make sure he remains in power so they can continue to profit from their yellow "journalism."

[CaptainTruth]

19. Thanks for posting this.

I've gotten so tired of the Pelosi-bashers on Twitter, & now I'm seeing new troll accounts that pretend to be Democrats yet they do nothing but bash Pelosi & Dems. They're using the issue to try & discourage & divide us.

[Poiuyt]

20. Pelosi is NOT complicit

She is, however, a weak leader who's afraid of a fight because she wants to hold onto her own power.

[Hotler]

21. Impeachment doesn't have to be about removing the man from office.

Hearings and investigations exposing this shit stain for what he truly is and humiliating him before all of the American people and the rest of the world (TV) could crush this man (ego). It may even do some damage to the GOP. Sunshine is a good disinfectant, so I've heard.

[Everyman Jackal]

23. Stop saying that the Senate will find him not guilty.

The House can have Articles of Impeachment and keep calling witnesses until Jan. 20, 2021. They never have to vote for impeachment so the Senate can never find him not guilty.

[Duncan Grant]

24. "She has her reasons" -- is advocacy (cheerleading), not reasoned discourse and fact-based politics.

While she's not complicit in Trump's crimes, she's not offering an effective opposition. Any other conclusion is naive, imho. I've voted for her for decades and I know just how reluctant she is to put her neck on the line (until she's certain it's worth the risk). She's not alone in this regard. It's a pandemic among politicians.

When the lawless are ruling (not governing) and kids are dying on the border, I want her to stick her neck out -- on principle. "She has her reasons" doesn't cut it for me anymore. At the very least, she should be articulating that vision (reasons) 24/7, while building the Democratic party.

If the argument is that her hands are tied by the Senate or Judiciary - what have you - then why is she even bothering to do anything? To my way of thinking, if she's willing to fight for doomed legislation she should be willing to fight for impeachment. There has never been a more compelling moment for a Speaker to execute their constitutional duty. If not now, when?

I hope I'm wrong and that she's three steps ahead of the rest of us. The reality is she isn't. And won't be.