General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsYES, Pelosi just said this.
Not having enough votes in the Senate to convict Trump is not the reason she would not impeach Trump. She said she wants to build the case and if there is enough evidence to impeach she will do it and force the Republicans to make a decision.
This is what I have been saying all along. You cannot worry about the Republicans. If there is enough evidence to impeach, you impeach period.
calimary
(80,700 posts)Not with the Russians still deeply involved and more motivated than ever to protect their asset.
Its just plain NAIVE to assume that we can just vote him out in 2020. I wouldnt bet on that. Even as hard as I still plan to work, to ensure that we do.
alwaysinasnit
(5,038 posts)Seriously, we need to work our butts off, but it still might not be enough.
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,041 posts)CTyankee
(63,771 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)For the last 6 months.
CTyankee
(63,771 posts)sprinkleeninow
(20,136 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)controls the sick narrative. Status quo doesn't cut it.
I am still stunned he is being allowed to get away with felonies
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)POTUS, because Barr says he can't be.
That was sort of a huge part of what was discussed.... The OLC memo that prevented Mueller from indicting.
We know that impeachment won't remove him, and he's sure as hell not going to resign because anyone who watched the testimony heard this:
Mueller: "Yes."
Buck: "You believe that you could charge the president of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office?"
Mueller: "Yes."
So if you feel an overwhelming need to trash somebody for "allowing him to get away with felonies" Barr is your logical target, not Speaker Pelosi, because that makes some sense when you look at the facts. But do go on using her as a pinata if that makes you happy.
See, I'm an analyst, so facts and data are sort of important to me.
NewEnglandAutumn
(184 posts)Long enough to hold hearings closer tp the election to keep his crimes fresh in peoples memories when they go to vote!
Duppers
(28,094 posts)Get the movement and protections into place to stop the hacking. Mueller said it's still going on.
Pelosi is not doing the right thing.
NewJeffCT
(56,827 posts)that Pelosi and the House passed a sweeping bill to greatly increase election security and that Mitch McConnell has not allowed it a vote or even a committee hearing? How is that Pelosi's fault? Sounds like she did exactly the right thing.
And, there are a ton of investigations progressing through the courts, but Team Trump is stonewalling them at every turn. There are at least two emoluments lawsuits ongoing, as well as lawsuits to obtain tax returns, and lawsuits to obtain witness testimony and more.
warmfeet
(3,321 posts)as I think it can be said.
INdemo
(6,994 posts)in the House was because they didn't have a backbone to defend the ACA and come right out and defend the huge deficit and explain that was caused by Bush jr.
The Democratic voters were pissed and they stayed home and Walla ..the T-Party took over
Don't think that wont happen in 2020 if nothing is done.
Here is what I think will happen...I believe that if the articles of Impeachment are passed and goes to the Senate there will be a sea of protesters in front of the Senate building demanding they vote to accuse Trump
mitch96
(13,821 posts)The only thing I can thing of is she is gonna start the inquiry during the run up to the election. Every day news about the orange shitstain "high crimes and misdemeanors" so the voting public hear it 24/7... I guess timing is everything.. I want the fucker out now...
m
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Thomas Hurt
(13,903 posts)happy feet
(856 posts)Nancy did NOT say wait until 2020 to vote him out.
JI7
(89,182 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)SouthernProgressive
(1,810 posts)I think that right before the inquiry we will see committees subpoena a couple of people they know will refuse to show. After that dust up the inquiry will start.
standingtall
(2,785 posts)doing so isn't because of the republican senate. Hope I'm wrong,but I get the feeling she is trying slow walk this so she can switch it to let's just focus on 2020.
leftieNanner
(14,998 posts)That Speaker Pelosi is timing it to inflict maximum damage close to the election.
standingtall
(2,785 posts)nt
dawg day
(7,947 posts)Hearings all year. William Weld (I hope) banging on this through the primary season.
Some important revelation happening right at convention time.
Drip drip drip, all through 2020.
Everyone getting tired of it all, including the Republicans.
(Maybe during this time, the long-expected recession starts.)
(Maybe Trump makes a few more warlike moves that go nowhere -- I hope nowhere, as I a nephew in the military.)
Then in September or October, Vote. Maybe every Rep votes against... maybe a few peel off, like Susan Brooks who is retiring. Too late for the Senate to have a trial, it goes to the senate.
McConnell does his brick wall thing.
The populace, exhausted, disgusted, goes to vote. Many GOPers choose not to vote for president. Democrats are super=energized and come out like in 2008.
Even Putin can't help Trump enough, and he goes down to defeat... along with Pence, and maybe a few extra senators.
I think it's... not a bad plan.
leftieNanner
(14,998 posts)I approve.
standingtall
(2,785 posts)and stretch it into 2020 if that were the case. I'm becoming more and more convinced that Democrats think they can take their base for granted and therefore their priorities are to not offend soft republican voters.
Catch2.2
(629 posts)stopdiggin
(11,095 posts)that Democrats will stay home (take their base for granted) if they don't get an impeachment? I don't think I know a single Democrat that would fall into this category. Hoping I misunderstood.
MarcA
(2,195 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)proud patriot
(100,700 posts)Impeachment is Imminent .. IMO
onetexan
(12,994 posts)marble falls
(56,359 posts)Fullduplexxx
(7,818 posts)GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)And like the great speaker she understands the opinion of her caucus on these types of issues is not to be ignored. You dont Whip your caucus on issues this important.
One thing Nancy know and we should all keep in mind. We did not win in 2018 to impeach but to protect government programs people care about, mainly the ACA. This is our route to victory in 2020.
That may change and today may lead to that change. But not at this time.
choie
(4,102 posts)Last edited Wed Jul 24, 2019, 07:09 PM - Edit history (1)
jesus christ, they are cowards.
Captain Stern
(2,197 posts)If she doesn't care how the Senate is going to vote, and is only concerned with having a good case, and enough evidence to impeach......then, the only reason possible for not impeaching already is that she doesn't have those things, right?
As things stand, impeachment is not going to happen. Not today. Not tomorrow. Not next week. Not next month. Not next year. It's not even close to happening.
Unless some new evidence comes out that's strong enough to convince a lot of republicans in the Senate to vote to convict, impeachment is going nowhere.
shockey80
(4,379 posts)Yes they have a lot of evidence. However they waiting to get Trumps financial records and tax returns. There is lot more evidence to gather to build the best case possible for impeachment. Mueller did not investigate Trumps financial crimes. The House has to do that.
standingtall
(2,785 posts)especially without launching an impeachment inquiry.
shockey80
(4,379 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Captain Stern
(2,197 posts)We've been trying to get his tax returns for years. What makes you think it's going to happen in the next few months?
trump isn't getting impeached before the election. It just isn't going to happen. There is just no serious political will to do it, and as things stand, there shouldn't be. There just isn't a big public demand for impeachment.
proActivist
(75 posts)requested the returns In April, this year. They sued at the begging of this month.
Before the midterms we didn't have the "ways and means" to go after them.
(But I agree with your assessment regarding impeachment.)
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)What you say is true...but incredibly sad to the core of my being. That my party won't stand up regardless of consequences and hold a felon president accountable just makes me want to cry today. It would be one thing if his poll numbers were slumping or we had been successful in enacting election protection..but that had not happened.
onenote
(42,383 posts)All it takes to prevent a resolution to commence an impeachment inquiry from passing would be the defection of around 10 percent of the Democrats in the House. Or put another way, even if 90 percent of the House Democrats support such an inquiry, that's not good enough to pass the resolution.
Nancy doesn't bring matters to a vote unless she's got the support needed to succeed. She's not going to put something up for a vote that won't pass.
stopdiggin
(11,095 posts)but it seems like we have to keep repeating it. Over, and over, and over.
(are we all happy about it? NO. Does that make any difference? NO!)
Captain Stern
(2,197 posts)She's not just saying she doesn't have enough evidence to get the Republicans in the Senate to convict.
She's saying that she doesn't even have enough evidence to get our Democratic House members to start impeachment proceedings.
Gothmog
(144,005 posts)Speaker Nancy Pelosi is still not ready to impeach: 'We still have some outstanding matters in the courts'
Link to tweet
LiberalFighter
(50,504 posts)riversedge
(69,727 posts)she did say there were matters in the courts yet.
barbtries
(28,702 posts)collect information regarding emoluments, obstruction, corruption.
as far as i can tell he's been committing impeachable actions since day 1 of his administration. sigh.
spanone
(135,636 posts)Not with this Senate.
OnDoutside
(19,908 posts)Impeachment Inquiry. Democrats need to have their ducks in a row before aimlessly wandering down this road.
spanone
(135,636 posts)If democrats don't have their ducks in a row by now, we've already lost.
OnDoutside
(19,908 posts)look like a bunch of eejits if they started an impeachment inquiry and Trump's obstruction (which he has said he would do) even then blocked the likes of McGahn. There are ongoing cases that need to be won first in the courts. It's frustrating for all of us but patience is required.
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)Just recently when Al Green called for impeachment, only 95 of our house members voted against blocking the articles of impeachment.
Nancy Pelosi is a BRILLIANT politician and incredibly savvy. Personally, Ive got 100% confidence that every move she makes with regards to this is 100% in the Democratic Party and the United States best interest.
How many votes will she have?
How many of those votes will suffer losses in 2020 as a result?
If we go for it and the measure passes, what are all the ramifications for 2020?
Worse, if we go for it, and the measure fails, what are all the ramifications for 2020?
How will such a resolution weigh on our 2020 POtUS bid?
How will such a resolution weigh on the Senate runs of 2020?
I trust Nancy Pelosi, and I trust our Democratic Party House membership.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)Thats what she is saying. She will not whip her house members on this issue. They would defy her and she knows it.
Our house caucus knows that a failed impeachment or even a lack of conviction might cost us the house.
A Pyrrhic Victory is a loss!
LiberalFighter
(50,504 posts)It will force Republicans to go on the record when they vote. There is a point when voters will see the light. Not everyone. But should be enough to make a difference and scare the shit out of the Republicans.
OnDoutside
(19,908 posts)here, who haven't taken the time to see the bigger picture.
Poiuyt
(18,087 posts)violations as evidence presents itself? Surely there must be enough evidence to begin with at least some of trump's crimes.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)knew Russia interfered in 2006 and are not protecting our country for 2020. And 2) trump reversed an Obama reg that stopped coal companies from dumping cancer causing sludge into the streams our kids play in.
riversedge
(69,727 posts)I hope some committee members are working on this. I should say the HOUSE is in recess---not on vacation.
CatWoman
(79,283 posts)Tertullian
(46 posts)Exactly. And clearly, there are now strong grounds for Impeachment of Trump.
Trump was involved in a sweeping effort to collude with Russia to undermine the election AND
to obstruct justice.
NO one is above the law.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)ALL republicans are above the law until such time as someone decides to hold them accountable.
watoos
(7,142 posts)Her former statements were; Trump isn't worth impeaching, we need bipartisan support to impeach.
Dems are wasting their time if they don't impeach, court cases will not be decided for years.
JCMach1
(27,544 posts)For maximum damage
Takket
(21,425 posts)by which i think she meant the drumpf "stall by suing if they subpoena a clock to find out what time it is" cases of McGahn testifying, his taxes, etc.......... I'm not even sure how many cases there are because the Democrats have had to fight for every inch in court. It really is absurd that we have to play this ridiculous game to get any facts.
Cetacea
(7,367 posts)Nobody is going to cooperate. Only an inquiry will expedite the courts.
DallasNE
(7,392 posts)I read a report saying "sources" are telling them that an impeachment inquiry will begin right after Congress returns from their August recess. I'm sure that timing was in part to make it after Mueller testifies and adds more cover to start the inquiry. While it seems like it has taken forever we have had 2 recent developments that help make the case for impeachment with the public. It takes public support, after all. Those events were the release of the court document in the hush money case and Mueller's testimony.
Cetacea
(7,367 posts)And I would agree that no impeachment inquiry should have started without the public hearing from Mueller first. Mueller countered Trump and Barr in the first five minutes of the hearing. I hope that your source is right!
Response to shockey80 (Original post)
Skittles This message was self-deleted by its author.
empedocles
(15,751 posts)trump wins re-election - the statutes of limitation plus the Oval Office, will free trump from prosecution!!!
The Speaker is aware of the high risk of the premature Hail Mary go for it mentality.
It's not all about trump's problems, Dems have some aspects that lack broad support - plus the Dem proclivity to screw up.
standingtall
(2,785 posts)he will get off completely scot-free not even the blemish of impeachment on his record. Highly unlikely he will be indicted regardless.
DallasNE
(7,392 posts)Such corruption is beyond the pale.
Celerity
(42,666 posts)Impeachment, Senate trial, and removal (the only available remedy to a rogue POTUS) simply cannot work when you have that POTUS's party willing to overlook most all illegal acts in a blind, raw pursuit and maintenance of their power.
The systemic flaws of the Constitution are becoming more and more manifest as the decades roll by. The fact 30% of the population will control 70% of the Senate seats in 15 years or so is yet another ticking Constitutional time bomb, as are the systemic voter suppression by the RW, SCOTUS capture via Senatorial gamesmanship (perhaps to a 7-2 or even 8-1 hard RW degree), brazen political gerrymandering, potential census manipulation, and the 50 plus year rise of the imperial presidency.
The system is broken and will continue to yield an increasing amount of poisoned fruit.
DallasNE
(7,392 posts)The point on not indicting a sitting President is an example of a 2 tier system of justice but that disappears once he is out of office.
On the Constitutional side of things you are absolutely correct. The Senate is a relic of the past. Get rid of that and the Electoral Collage and that opens us up to federal elections where, for instance, one House member would represent North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming combined. They may even need to include the panhandle of Nebraska to get enough people. There needs to be a commission, using a set of guidelines, that draws the House boundaries fairly based solely on the guidelines. Someone would need to verify the guidelines are strictly followed with changes made as necessary.
But I am not holding my breath that a single one of these things will happen in my lifetime.
empedocles
(15,751 posts)plurality, lowest risk, longest coattails, - as possible.
ihaveaquestion
(2,420 posts)I have confidence that there will be other crimes commited which can be charged. He and his cohorts just can't help thenselves.
Kurt V.
(5,624 posts)over to create the blue wave. big mistake.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)They support him by over 90%. Independents switched but more importantly democrats got off their asses and voted.
This is not about winning republicans.
All this talk about the Senate is just noise. There are not the votes in the House to impeach. That what she is saying.
Kurt V.
(5,624 posts)Participation just as the left in 2018.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)What would your reaction be if the house failed?
Kurt V.
(5,624 posts)it would be devastating of course. but i don't believe it would fail in the house
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)DU is not America or even the Democratic Party. There is no appetite outside of sites like this for impeachment.
Response to Kurt V. (Reply #45)
Amimnoch This message was self-deleted by its author.
warmfeet
(3,321 posts)no White House, no senate majority.
Draw your own conclusions.
stopdiggin
(11,095 posts)Impeachment -- IF (and when) we have the evidence and the votes. (public sentiment would also be encouraging)
Democratic White House 2020
possible gains in the Senate 2020 (majority is still outside shot)
retain control Democratic House 2020 (although this requires working our butts off too)
DonaldsRump
(7,715 posts)If I recall during the Clinton impeachment, House discussions started in earnest in September 1998 and the House voted to impeach just before Christmas that year (a truly horrific time, and I remember it well).
While I wasn't really around for Watergate, the House Judiciary Committee started its impeachment inquiry in June 1974 and the House was scheduled to vote on impeachment around August 20, 1974. The House Judiciary Committee passed three articles of impeachment against Nixon in late July 1974, but the full House vote was aborted by Nixon's resignation on August 9, 1974. Even Nixon himself knew he would lose for sure in the House and very, very likely in the Senate if the process had gone all the way through.
Folks, there's PLENTY of time.
SHRED
(28,136 posts)How much does she need FFS?
George II
(67,782 posts)she knows what she's doing.
I trust her to pull the cord when the time is right. From what she, Nadler, and Schiff said at the press conference tonight, I think it might be in the fall.
She's just setting the trap, and today was perfect for lining things up.
erlewyne
(1,115 posts)Being patient is the key. Just give them rope (to hang themselves)
When posters demand impeachment I suspect they are bots (or
republicans).
Nancy is doing a great job. We should applaud. In cards you want
to get your opponent in the lead and then lay down your hand as a
checkmate. Trump and the boys know they have a losing hand and
want Nancy to play out of sequence so they can call a misdeal.
You just sit back and wait ... tick tick tick. The senate begs for
an impeachment and Nancy knows.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)They are bots? WTH?
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Probably has gone down because we haven't done anything..
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)public opinion about impeachment?
Response to shockey80 (Original post)
Post removed
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)Just pour me a drink, will ya?
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)where do you go? We have now had three golden opportunities to do what is right-- all squandered away.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)One cannot help but remember the quote about Nero. Sigh.
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)So we have to ask why has she not released the Kraken on trump or his officials who have given her and the democrats the finger????????????
ElementaryPenguin
(7,800 posts)We have the public's attention!!
Force Trump to resign!!!!!
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Think about it.
Timmygoat
(779 posts)No-one asked Nunes if he is still in the habit of lurking in bushes.
wryter2000
(46,016 posts)No matter what some here insist
Botany
(70,291 posts)Sneederbunk
(14,208 posts)The only thing we know for sure is that he would not be impeached.
KPN
(15,587 posts)radical noodle
(7,990 posts)Catch2.2
(629 posts)Pelosi is just delaying until the elections in hopes a Democrat will win. The she will say there is no reason to go after Trump and his cronies and that it's time to move on. This will set a precedent and future Republicans will continue to blatantly break the law, knowing there are no consequences for their actions.
Nitram
(22,671 posts)But if the courts find against the House on subpoenas, it probably won't work out.
Gothmog
(144,005 posts)Link to tweet
Close Pelosi allies insist she couldnt gain majority support for impeachment even if she tried, not to mention the two-thirds of a Republican-run Senate needed for conviction and removal from office. There will never be 218 in the House, a leadership aide told me.....
The votes arent there. The 31 Democrats who represent districts that Donald Trump won in 2016 can see that impeachment is not popular with voters in general. If these nearly three dozen Democrats want to win second terms and keep the House in Democratic hands, they feel the need to stay far away from impeachment.
Blaming Pelosi is both easy, and it displays a fundamental ignorance of the dynamics of this Democratic House majority.
Robert Muellers testimony was an important step, but unless public opinion changes and a whole bunch of House Democrats change their minds, impeachment wont happen in the House before the 2020 election.
onenote
(42,383 posts)marieo1
(1,402 posts)He will NOT resign - the only way DJT is leaving the WH is in handcuffs!!! The laws need to be changed so a sitting criminal president can be charged. Then he needs to be handcuffed and led out!!!
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)just ignored the Philadelphia Eagles and planned their strategy to victory as if they were alone on the field. Or that Napoleon would have conquered Europe if he'd just ignored Wellington and/or Russia's Kutusov and just bulled ahead. Wait? Isn't that basically what he did?
That's NOT what Nancy said or means. Please don't inadvertently portray her as stupid by suggesting it was.
Mr.Bill
(24,104 posts)want to take this recess to work on seeing how their constituents feel about it. Town hall meetings, office time, etc.