Ok Nancy... get with the damn program.. unequivocally state

[TheSocialDem]

This is an impeachment inquiry. Enough games. It’s past time. I’m have no patients left, get this criminal and his enablers on the record for the American people so we can say we did our constitutional job.

So tired of this. We gave you the majority for this reason

[Bettie]

1. Makes you wonder

how much corruption is too much?

Will there ever come a time when she'll say "ENOUGH"?

[mysteryowl]

43. +1

[LexVegas]

2. Attacks on Pelosi...that's novel.

[Newest Reality]

3. I didn't

interpret the OP as an attack. It seems more like a statement or inducement to act.

[LanternWaste]

8. A "a statement or inducement to act" doesn't deny the inherent potential of an attack as well.

The one does not deny the other.

[Newest Reality]

10. I see.

So, how is it then an attack?

[Hortensis]

18. I'm just gobsmacked at anyone imagining ordering the current

head of the Democratic Party, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, to "get with the game."

Yes, I know this one's a woman, but... ! All I can do is wonder what on earth goes on in peoples' heads.

SocialDem, if I could, I would gift you with the fabulous opportunity to wear Speaker Pelosi's 4-inch heels all day for one day. No power or duties, of course. Just follow her around all day or until you dropped, whichever came first. She always moves forward, so there's no worry you'd have to learn to dance backwards.

[Magoo48]

60. Yes, get with the fucking game. This slow-walk, demure, tentative, weak shuffle is an ugly,

weak look for Democrats at this juncture. If the Orange Menace is in fact responsible for the offenses he’s been accused of on this forum for years, and if he is all the things democratic politicians have called him for years, and if his crimes are in fact what we now expect them to be—we are obliged to act following the protocols laid out by our laws. It’s time to act.

[gldstwmn]

88. I have been waiting for the intelligence

community to tire of Trump. We finally have a whistleblower. Is she just going to let that one slide too? She has handled this horribly.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

111. Yikes this has zero to do with all she does and that she is

A female. Zero. It is the fact that we are not really writing and recommending articles of impeachment (not a priority)and we have not protected the 2020 election. And presumably we won't even slap Lew in the wrist with a contempt.

You could be a man with purple hair and green skin...and it doesn't matter. If you are not representing the views and very strong beliefs of most of our party...we aren't being led right.

Hopefully things will change soon when we have a nominee. It should be very interesting since all our candidates are for Impeachment and it was said today that Medicare for all was not her first choice.

[mcar]

64. +1000!

[JustAnotherGen]

79. No words

[NurseJackie]

20. The imperative "get with the program" implies that she's out of sync or unaware...

The imperative "get with the program" implies that she's out of sync or unaware, or that she's lost-the-plot, or that she's aimless, or that she's confused. It's a not-so-clever way to smear and demean Nancy Pelosi with the suggestion that she's out-of-touch and incompetent.

So, how is it then an attack?

I hope this clears things up.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

47. you got that right, Nurse! And the OP had spelling errors

Are you running out of "patients" or patience with this kind of OP?"

[TheSocialDem]

50. Yea you're late to the correction party

[TheSocialDem]

4. Your cool just being obstructed at every turn?

Letting this continue until... idk when? When will she draw a line? We need that statement to get the information

[Poiuyt]

30. One of the articles of impeachment against Nixon was for contempt of Congress

Article III alleged in part that Nixon:

failed without lawful cause or excuse to produce papers and things as directed by duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives on April 11, 1974, May 15, 1974, May 30, 1974, and June 24, 1974, and willfully disobeyed such subpoenas

[ehrnst]

100. What magic words will open these floodgates of information?

You seem to bestow Madame Speaker with powers not attributed to other speakers.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

6. We can provide constructive criticism. This meme

that every statement is "an attack" on the majority leader seems so hollow and evasive now. It is the reality that she is the ultimate decider - so how can you possibly discuss anything without pointing to her? It always seems to me to be thrown out there to squelch debate. In my mind, it would be better to offer opposing opinions.

[H2O Man]

31. I agree.

The majority of Democrats in the House favor impeachment. It would be a stretch to say that they are threatening the Speaker. Individual citizens certainly have the exact same right to strongly favor impeachment.

[Perseus]

44. The Biden and Pelosi supporters don't want to hear anything negative, even if its true

I am starting to worry, symptoms of a cult, almost.

We need to be objective otherwise we end up like the MAGATs who don't want to see or hear anything negative about their leader, no matter how true it is.

The truth is that Pelosi needs to come forward and support impeachment inquiries, if the creature gets away with no punishment then why he, or anyone in his circle, should stop breaking the law? He has been trying and upping the corruption because nothing happens to him, why should a crook stop when he can walk into the store, rob and no one says anything to him, no one stops him, the police is never called, I mean...

I understand that many people in DU have not followed what happened in Venezuela, but the parallels are the same, it is the same methodology. The republicans have filled the supreme court with their cronies, the AG Barr is corrupt like the creature, the military is now giving money to the creature, the creature is in total submission with Putin and MBS, he and his cronies don't care at all about the country, to them only them exist, everything else is just real estate occupied by undesirables who will in time be taken care of. This is real, this is really bad, and if Pelosi and Shumer don't support impeachment inquiries, if Democrats don't start putting in jail people who do not respond to the subpoenas then the USA will become another Venezuela where people are now eating from the garbage, where industries have been taken by the crooks in the government, dismantled and all the money put in their pockets, the industries they take on die, no jobs, hunger, crime, illnesses...You don't believe it can happen here? well, neither did the Venezuelans, but it did.

[StarfishSaver]

54. I notice you keep lumping the Biden and Pelosi supporters together.

Two different people, two different issues of opposition and two different bases of defense for them.

The two are not the same.

[calimary]

63. Um, Pelosi supporter here.

Certainly during the early days before the newly bright blue House of Reps voted. And there were all these other contenders with no leadership experience but lots of ego-plumping and designs on running the joint. And I argued forcefully for her wisdom, judgment, and experience.

And MAN do I feel let down. By her.

[Nevermypresident]

69. Thank you. Frankly, I am sick and tired of being lectured here for months re "attacking" Pelosi

regarding her position on impeaching donald trump.

When did she or any other elected Democrat become all knowing, perfect, if you will? Heads up: No.one.is.

Myself and other D.U. Democrats here have our own point of view and we're entitled to express it.

Regardless of the attempts at intimidation (and yes I've seen it done with other posters as well) , we will persist.

[brutus smith]

46. I Agree

People on here don't want to see opinions they don't like.

[gldstwmn]

86. I see. We should just blindly, unquestionably

follow. That's how it is now?

[lindysalsagal]

104. On DU, at least.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

112. Yup

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

97. I smell borscht. nt

[Laura PourMeADrink]

113. Yup. 2020

[triron]

5. 2nd that.

I am weary of silence.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

7. Already the seeds being sown that holding Lew

in contempt is not a good idea.

[gldstwmn]

92. I hope he winds up in prison over

yesterday's performance alone. God knows there are plenty of other things they could throw him in there for.

[uponit7771]

9. For what?!?! What would that do that's not just topical? thx in advance

[TheSocialDem]

11. It carries legal implications that

Would allow us to enforce subpoena’s, jail people who don’t comply etc.. it has real implications, and what the hell are we waiting for anyway?? To START and official impeachment inquiry? Makes no sense to play these games and be ambiguous about it

[triron]

12. And the republicans know it and aren't afraid to flaunt it.

[uponit7771]

13. Like what legal implications? BTW ...

... we've gone over this before here.

Since the constitution didn't outline steps before impeachment vote then the impeachment process is anything congress decides on at the time including investigations up to the certification of articles of impeachment and the impeachment vote itself.

As long as a request to court has something regarding impeachment in it then the power of impeachment carries in that request no matter what title of the process congress gives it.

So congress calls it an impeachment inquiry then there's nothing stopping the Kremlin KKKlan from CONTINUING acting like jerks in hearings ... NOTHING except congress's power of inherent contempt.

Then things get thick

[TheSocialDem]

14. Why not go there though? Why not make the official statement

[uponit7771]

16. They did go there, in the official subpoana they say its also for the sake of impeachment ...

... done for the sake of the courts.

Outside of that the titles etc don't mean anything, it doesn't force testimony ... it doesn't force appearance ... it doesn't give congress more rights ... nothing.

There has been great misinformation on what "impeachment process" means and the power it has for a whille

[qazplm135]

24. because there are clearly

enough members of her caucus who don't want to.

If everyone or nearly everyone wanted to do it, we'd be doing it.

[gldstwmn]

93. Frankly I'm not certain of that at this point.

[qazplm135]

98. well I am

if there were enough, we'd be doing it, and she wouldn't have a choice.

[TheSocialDem]

15. The judiciary is using the fuzziness of our official

Position to delay delay delay.. why give them
That excuse?

[uponit7771]

17. No they're not, there's nothing about the impeachment process that says the judiciary has to hurry u

... up on anything either.

[grantcart]

37. Jail people gor contempt of Congress? Lol

1) what jail? For the last 50 years contempt of Congress actions have been referred to DOJ.

Don't think appropriations bill for a Congressional jail is going to get passed and signed?

2) Do you want Congress to have the power of sending people to jail because they are angry WITHOUT due process? Congress found Eric Holder in contempt. Once you establish the right and precedent then you can be sure it will be abused by Republicans later

3) The key factor is not what but when. In this instance we need an overwhelming denouement at the polls so that it's not just Trump but the America first, anti immigration, racist nativist becomes politically toxic, which happened when the "Know Nothing" party pursued a very Trumpian like agenda.

There isn't a politician I trust more to get the real job done than Pelosi.

[brutus smith]

48. So why are we holding hearings if we can't do anything?

[grantcart]

51. Holdingn hearings is doing something

We can prosecute on perjury

And we can enforce a subpoena through the courts. You would then prosecute anyone not appearing with contempt of Court, not contempt of Congress.and serve jail time until you complied with the court with no involvement with the DOJ

There was a friend of Clinton who refused to cooperate and spend a year in jail for contempt charges.

150 years ago Congress had its own jail and the Sgt of Arms would arrest and jail people in contempt of Congress but those days are over.

[not_the_one]

68. lewie admitted yesterday that he lied under oath

He committed perjury, punishable by arrest, so why wasn't he arrested?

The answer is NOTHING will be done.

And who is in charge of the democrats that is allowing this to happen?

Hmmmm?

[grantcart]

107. Lying under oath is not the same as perjury

It has to be intentional and material to a crime

[StarfishSaver]

116. Congress doesn't have the authority to charge and arrest people for perjury

That's an executive branch function.

[gldstwmn]

96. Who prosecutes on perjury?

Would that be DOJ? We need to figure this shit out. It should have been figured out already.

[StarfishSaver]

103. The fact that YOU don't know it doesn't mean it hasn't already been figured out by the people

responsible for devising and implementing the strategy.

[grantcart]

108. Federal grand jury would indict but lying under oath isn't inherently perjury

[FBaggins]

99. Perjury before Congress is a federal offence

It has to be prosecuted by the DOJ. Congress has no prosecutorial powers (except the extent that the impeachment managers from the House during a Senate trial are essentially the prosecution.

[meadowlander]

85. Her argument is that "we need to bring the American people along with us".

The American people can't come along unless they are paying attention and most of them won't pay attention until they hear the word "impeachment".

[uponit7771]

95. The word impeachment has been thrown around ad nausea, local ... network and cable. Damn

... near everyday, impeachment process is anything congress defines it to be outside of votes on article of impeachment and impeachment vote itself.

[StarfishSaver]

117. But Pelosi hasn't said it

But the minute she does, the seas will part ...

[Wednesdays]

19. Patience

Instead of "patients," unless you're a doctor, dentist, or nurse.

[pangaia]

23. thanks,, i was going to say that,, but then...

[usaf-vet]

33. A medical practitioner including all the support staff right down to the janitors call them patients

With respect not just doctors, dentist, and nurses.

[H2O Man]

21. Recommended.

[dlk]

22. Nancy is Moving in the Right Direction

As the savviest politician in Washington, Pelosi plays the long game. I trust how she is moving forward and maybe you should too. She is keeping in mind the 2020 election, while also focusing on the Trump administration’s many crimes Remember, she is up against a compromised and corrupt DOJ, a halfway corrupt judiciary, the devious and treasonous Republicans in Congress and a conservative media that ignores or minimizes most Republican dirty tricks and obstruction. We are all sick and tired of Trump & his swamp-drenched cronies and can’t see them behind bars soon enough. Just don’t underestimate Pelosi’s extreme uphill battle. She needs every bit of our support.

[bucolic_frolic]

27. Bravo!

[dlk]

28. :)

[Auggie]

40. THIS

Worst action Pelosi could take is to rush the inquiry.

Every day more shit surfaces on Trump.

Everyday we get closer to the election.

I'm with Madam Speaker 100%.

[dlk]

52. Yes, We Can't Let Our Eagerness to be Rid of Trump and all of His Corrupted Cronies Force Any Errors

Far too much is at stake.

[TheSocialDem]

61. Just because he does more impeachable stuff

Every day means we should just wait and let it all rack up? At what cost?

[TheSocialDem]

55. This

God forbid that happens. We had better be in an official inquiry at that moment

[dlk]

59. What are You Proposing?

Other than massive GOTV efforts, of course. Granted, there much to be concerned about. Corruption, that has been building up for decades, is now at epidemic proportions. We must stay united and focused on solutions.

[Nevermypresident]

70. +1000

[Laura PourMeADrink]

110. So hard to even imagine doing all that again when

we won't impeach (real Impeachment with Articles) per our constitution and stand up and hold the MF accountable. Our leadership is saying today it's just not the number one priority. And we failed at getting any kind of protection for the next TRussian election. So we have to work triple hard to get double digit leads to HOPE it's enough to offset rigging?

If anyone spends time on Twitter you will read hundreds if not thousands of good Democrats voicing utter dismay that we are not standing up against Trump.

Got nothin good Chin, sorry

[Grasswire2]

119. We the People hold the ultimate power yet.

And there are avenues with which to express our collective will that have not yet been deployed. We cannot rely solely on elected government to stop this because the GOP is now lawless and gone rogue.

But when the people will stand together (and there are more of us than there are of his base) and make their will known, there is nothing we can't accomplish.

Maybe we need to move on and act in ways that provide cover for hesitant Dem leadership.

[FBaggins]

71. How is that related? nt

[TheSocialDem]

73. He won't be able to put up a nominee if

He’s under a formal impeachment investigation

[StarfishSaver]

74. That's not true.

A president under an impeachment investigation still has all of his powers and authority. An impeachment investigation has no bearing on that at all.

Even after a president's impeached, he can nominate people and fill positions and can continue to do so unless until the Senate removes him from office.

[TheSocialDem]

78. Oh, well, not sure where I heard that but I could be wrong.

That sucks

[StarfishSaver]

80. It's a common misconception floating around the internet

Richard Nixon continued making appointments right up until his resignation. And Bill Clinton made numerous appointments - and issued a slew of year-end pardons - in the month after he was impeached and before he was acquitted.

This makes sense. Otherwise, the House could virtually shut down an administration simply by opening an impeachment investigation.

[FBaggins]

75. Um... sure he will

Unless and until 67 senators vote to remove him... he retains all of the powers of the presidency.

[gordianot]

25. Exhausting to say the least.

No longer a swamp but a cesspool.

[bucolic_frolic]

26. What program?

There is no program. This is an inquiry, an investigation. It may uncover more, it may lay out a grand case over several months or many months. Impeachment is a power derived from the people, and unless they are following your lead, it won't be successful. The inquiry can educate the people, sway public opinion, that is the point, but one leads the other and vice versa. At some critical point the evidence may become massive and lead to impeachment. But until the opportunity is prime, there's little wisdom in rushing to judgment.

[TheSocialDem]

32. Not judgement. Just official impeachment inquiry

So we can get the witnesses on the stand and get the info to lay out for the public. You say this is what we are doing all you want, but it’s not clear at all, and that’s allowing the trumpets to say exactly that, and continue to obstruct

[Bettie]

81. Right? I know exactly two people

who weren't ready for impeachment months ago.

It is all anyone talks about at our county party meetings.

Apparently, somewhere there are large numbers of Democrats who just love Trump and think he's doing a great job and is in no way corrupt or doing anything wrong. I've never met them, but apparently they have a lot of access to the decision makers.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

114. Exactly!

[gay texan]

29. I have to disagree with this

As much as I want trump to go down by impeachment, I honestly wouldn't want Pelosi's job right now.

She, in my opinion, is having to be absolutely pragmatic about this because one minor mistake will cost us everything.

[dlk]

34. Exactly, Pelosi has All of the Responsibility but Not All of the Authority

She deserves every bit of our support.

[SunSeeker]

35. If Hillary had acted like Corey, the GOP would have the Sergeant-at-arms arrest her on the spot.

We let Corey Lewandowski, and so many other witnesses, thumb their nose at the Constitution and refuse to answer questions. We can't do a half-hearted impeachment inquiry, where the Speaker is reluctant to even call it an impeachment proceeding. We need to get tough and the hearings need to be better managed. Right now, the stage craft and optics are awful. We look weak and disorganized.

[obamanut2012]

36. yawn

[CaptainTruth]

38. I would also like a clear unequivocal statement because then a bunch of folks might stop...

...obsessing over the words being used & pay attention to what's actually happening.

[StarfishSaver]

45. But they wouldn't

They'd just find something else to bitch about, just as they did when they demanded the Judiciary Committee to open an impeachment inquiry but when they did, pivot to complain that Nancy didn't say just the right magic words.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

115. +1,000,000

[Jose Garcia]

39. There isn't a majority in the House that supports impeachment

[uponit7771]

77. +1, not only that but it'd be best to go through the drawn out process during election. Take away

... any of trumps narratives

[dansolo]

41. Who is this "we" that you are speaking of

We have the majority because of moderate Dems, who are still unsure of the path to impeachment. Are you suggesting that Nancy should be ignoring those Dems?

[TheSocialDem]

42. You don't know if he's committed impeachable offenses?

[brutus smith]

49. What?

[TheSocialDem]

65. I'm saying we all know he has.. and the path to impeachment

Is to open a formal f’n impeachment investigation

[StarfishSaver]

76. We don't actually all know this

If we all knew it, there's be more than enough votes in the House to impeach him.

[Nevermypresident]

89. Oh please.... those no votes re impeachment are from red/purple districts.

[FBaggins]

94. So?

Last edited Wed Sep 18, 2019, 04:34 PM - Edit history (1)

Let's clear something up that has not changed. Impeachment is a political process. Not a criminal process.

The classic quote is "The only honest answer is that an impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history"

By extension... it isn't an impeachable offense if the majority of members in the House can't agree that it is.

[StarfishSaver]

102. THAT'S your response?

[standingtall]

66. No we have the majority because Trump is a Toxic douchebag

What is it with moderates and their Joe Lieberman complex? They win a few seats in a wave election and all of the sudden they think their savors of the party. No Nancy shouldn't be ignoring them. She should be putting her foot down and telling them to get with the program.

[Bettie]

83. Yes. She should

be doing just that.

But hey, we're just the unwashed masses, the peasants. We only matter on election day.

[JI7]

91. we always required moderates or even conservatives in order to have a majority

she can't ignore them because they are needed to vote on issues also.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

56. K & R!

[brooklynite]

72. I'm sure anonymous bloggers know best

[stopdiggin]

82. any interest at all in holding the House? (nt)

[gldstwmn]

84. Agreed. Respectfully I do not want Pelosi

to serve as speaker again. This whole thing is FUBAR. Asking people to wait and vote out the corrupt scum of Trump and his administration is a lot. There is a whole lot that can happen in 16 months.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

118. Plus we haven't protected the 2020 vote so asking

our nominee to probably double their lead to stave off rigging and people to work triple hard on campaign is asking a lot.

[democrank]

87. Recommended

[Skittles]

101. she won't

[Baked Potato]

105. Speaker Pelosi is providing interference and time

... while the counterintelligence investigation proceeds. The majority we gave her is the reason anything is being done at all. Remember all the top notch staff attorneys Adam Schiff hired awhile back. I wonder what they have been doing?

[tymorial]

106. I am sick of it too

She took an oath and it's time she honored it. I watched her on Kimmel where she put her left hand over her heart, raised her right hand and repeated her oath of office. This was months ago but it gave me hope that she was going to honor her duty. She may represent her constituency but she has a primary duty to defend the constitution and to hold the executive to account.

Based upon the news articles posted today regarding Pelosi's complaints about Nadler, I am not buying the argument that she has a grand plan for impeachment. Her plan begins and ends at the general election.

Quite frankly, the inaction by congress is a statement of no confidence in separation of powers and checks and balances.

[Duppers]

109. K & R

+100