Right Now on MSNBC: Rep. Cohen says IMPEACHMENT is REQUIRED

[berni_mccoy]

There is no other way. House must hold Trp accountable regardless of what the Senate will do.

It is really that simple.

Get on board Nancy.

The Democratic leadership is starting to break ranks with The Speaker. Yesterday Nadler. Today Cohen.

[Hoyt]

1. If Cohen is going to be questioning Mueller, he needs to study up and get prepared.

[Poiuyt]

14. We don't need Mueller to impeach Trump

The impeachment conundrum is remarkably simple. As I’ve said before, every single day of his presidency, Donald Trump violates the emoluments clause in myriad ways, all of them eminently impeachable. We don't need to know how many angels can dance on the spine of the Mueller Report; we don't need to parse every utterance of that grim-jawed investigator as if it issued from the oracle at Delphi.

Again: Trump commits impeachable violations of the Constitution every day, and has done so since he was inaugurated. He could've easily avoided this by making different financial arrangements, but he chose not to. He chose to keep putting the profits of his businesses – with their innumerable foreign entanglements – directly into his own pocket. This is not lawful, not constitutional. And it happens in broad daylight, day in, day out. If you want to impeach Trump, you don't have to deal with Russian collusion or obstruction of justice or indeed any issue investigated by Robert Mueller.

I've said repeatedly that putting virtually the entire focus of opposition to Trump on a narrow probe into the murky world of espionage – where all is inference, indirection and plausible deniability – would end badly, and it has. The ‘Resistance’ struck the prince — but with a blunt, clumsy weapon. Trump is still standing, claiming victory and martyrdom, and he’s now using the power of the state to go after his political enemies.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/chris-floyd/85665/no-call-for-muellers-impeachment-made-easy

There are many crimes and abuses of power that could bring down trump. Here are some of them:

Violation of Constitution on Domestic Emoluments
Violation of Constitution on Foreign Emoluments
Incitement of Violence
Interference With Voting Rights
Discrimination Based On Religion
Illegal War
Illegal Threat of Nuclear War
Abuse of Pardon Power
Obstruction of Justice
Politicizing Prosecutions
Collusion Against the United States with a Foreign Government
Failure to Reasonably Prepare for or Respond to Hurricanes Harvey and Maria
Separating Children and Infants from Families
Illegally Attempting to Influence an Election
Tax Fraud and Public Misrepresentation
Assaulting Freedom of the Press
Supporting a Coup in Venezuela
Unconstitutional Declaration of Emergency
Instructing Border Patrol to Violate the Law
Refusal the Comply With Subpoenas
Declaration of Emergency Without Basis In Order to Violate the Will of Congress

https://rootsaction.org/trump-articles-of-impeachment

See link for details.

[jberryhill]

2. He needs to sign up to DU to be told how that's a bad idea

[berni_mccoy]

3. .

[rzemanfl]

4. Yep. n/t

[Crunchy Frog]

8. Yes. He needs to be given a good DU style scolding.

[BeyondGeography]

10. What is it about "pointless gesture" that he doesn't understand?

[Hermit-The-Prog]

13. sarcasm or serious?

It's hard to tell sometimes.

There are legitimate disagreements about the effects of impeachment. There are also somewhat tangential, and sometimes even silly, disagreements over what constitutes impeachment.

Those who oppose impeachment generally assume a trial in the Senate with a failure to convict are inevitable, foregone conclusions. This is not correct. The Senate cannot impeach and must wait for the House.

I can find no time limit on an impeachment in the Constitution. Neither can I find anything that requires the House to submit an impeachment to the Senate for trial and possible removal from office of the person impeached.

In my opinion, the House has sufficient evidence, now, from its own investigations and reporting in various media to justify opening an impeachment inquiry. This would surely get the attention of those citizens who have not been paying close attention, and even get the attention of broadcast networks. This can educate the electorate like no amount of speeches and press conferences could.

This administration is a target-rich environment. Investigations could last years. It is likely that pressure from constituents could change some Senatorial minds long before the election of 2020. If so, the House can submit the articles of impeachment. (I trust Speaker Pelosi's ability to count votes that we don't even know about in this matter). If not, the House can continue with hearings, investigations and reporting until every scrap of dirt is found under the rugs.

It is also my opinion that we cannot wait for the conservative Democrats in the House to lead in this matter. They simply won't. That's part of being a conservative. The fate of our democracy and the rule of law is more important than the perceived risk to some of the seats in the House. I think that taking action to halt the corruption and lawlessness will be rewarded by voters.

[PatrickforO]

23. LOL. Sometimes truth is in humor.

This time, yes.

[cwydro]

31. Lol, I posted essentially the same thing before I saw your post!

Yes indeed.

[HiloHatti]

5. Cohen Is Correct.

An Impeachment hearing is required to counter the Trump noise machine. It will take televised Impeachment hearings to get the public up to speed on how bad Trump has abused power. Start now, and the Democratic Party will get $millions in free campaign publicity. I don’t care if the Senate would remove him or not. The vast majority of the population aren’t paying attention. Daily televised hearings would change that immediately.

[Maraya1969]

9. Exactly. Impeachment will inform the country of what he is really about.

[Crunchy Frog]

6. I am glad to see some real leadership beginning to emerge from the House.

Hopefully it will end up prevailing over the foot draggers.

[kentuck]

7. The Constitution requires it.

There is much more legitimacy behind the Constitution than behind the words and deeds of Donald Trump and the Republicans. It is legitimate to impeach an illegitimate president. (If he had not violated campaign finance laws and had not paid off the porn star and playmate, just before the election, to be quiet, it is doubtful he would have won the Electoral College vote. A good argument can be made that he is not legitimate president.

[AncientGeezer]

24. The Constitution offers it as an option...not a requirement.

And Speaker Pelosi knows that.....part of the reason She is Speaker and Rep Cohen isn't

[Autumn]

11. They have to, no matter what the Senate does he has to be impeached. To not do so

is complicity.

[Wounded Bear]

12. Nancy is actually waiting for this...

She knows how to count votes, and the votes simply haven't been there yet, regardless of what random people want.

As more and more Reps speak up, she will be compelled to move.

If she initiates the impeachment actions, the RW will accuse her of attempting a coup and too many of the swing votes will fall for it.

She know what she's doing.

[LiberalLovinLug]

15. Its not about the votes in the House, its about the votes outside of the House

A good majority of Democrats and a sizable portion of Republicans want Impeachment.

And if a majority of Democrats in the House don't want it, and a majority of Democratic voters want it, then it should be her JOB to armtwist those resistant to the idea to support it, as that is what Democrats in America want. And I also think a majority DO want it, its just that many don't want to go against Nancy and Chuck. It is the old guard established Ds that are suppressing the vote in a catastrophically mistaken belief that Trump can't win again even if they do nothing....so why risk it. When they don't understand that its a greater risk to believe that they can win votes through cowardice.

[PatrickforO]

25. No, it is about the oath they all swore. They have sworn to protect

the constitution of the US from all enemies both foreign and domestic, without equivocation.

This is why it is said impeachment is on 'oath and affirmation.' What this means is that it is NOT and HAS NEVER BEEN a matter of political expediency.

It is a matter of honoring the oaths they all swore.

We should be having those hearings right now.

[hot2na]

18. She is patiently waiting for the right moment

Pelosi is not one to show what a strong hand she has. Now that Mueller's testimony is coming in (Remember what just a 9 minute press conference did) and with the confirmation about Individual 1's complicity in Election law felonies, the tipping point to launch an impeachment inquiry may be right around the corner. More and more details will come dribbling out. It will never end. It's important to launch it in a way that will be sustained up close to the general election so the Republicans will be forced to go down with the Trump ship, or walk the plank.

Buckle up!

[triron]

27. I don't believe that. But we will see.

[yaesu]

16. every Democrat should vote for the impeachment hearings. There should not be anyone on the

fence. If we can't have unity over this how can we expect voters to show up at the polls.

[NRaleighLiberal]

17. Ab. So. Fucking. Lutely!

[gopiscrap]

19. Totally agree

[CaptainTruth]

20. Let's get Mueller's testimony then vote to begin an impeachment inquiry.

This whole debate has revealed that some folks have a very different idea than I do about what it means to be "held accountable."

The House can impeach Trump, & I damn well hope they do, but the Senate won't convict so he gets to continue being an Fd up POTUS & doing crappy stuff. I don't consider that being "held accountable."

It's like if I was stealing stuff out of your house & the cops arrested me for it. Then the prosecutor let me off the hook & told me I was fine & since I'd been arrested once I couldn't be arrested again ... & then I just continued stealing your stuff. I don't consider that being "held accountable" for all the theft I've committed. Not at all. Not by a long shot.

IMHO impeachment is necessary but far far far from sufficient.

[triron]

26. Why? Democrats already have a thousand reasons.

[bucolic_frolic]

21. I think

Democrats are going to wander back and forth on impeachment as the months roll by, until at some point the polling blows sharply in favor of impeachment, and then they will pounce. If America doesn't fully awaken, I think Democrats are confident of Trump's rejection by voters in 2020, and if not, they can still impeach in 2021. Assuming they still have the House majority, which is highly likely.

[PBass]

22. Impeachment without conviction will be a permanent black mark on Trump's record,

the same way an asterisk is used by baseball statisticians, when a player who holds a league record is caught using steroids.

100 years from now, an impeachment by the House will still be remembered and will spark future generations to learn more about the abuses of the Trump presidency.

[stillcool]

28. it's up to 87..

impeach away!
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/31/us/politics/trump-impeachment-congress-list.html

[triron]

29. I think it's closer to 95 now.

[cwydro]

30. Well obviously, our DU experts need to educate him.

Silly congress critter!

[Skittles]

32. LOL, I'm sure Nancy and Chuck will get right on it