Democrats MUST move forward on impeachment, even knowing Senate Republicans will likely acquit

[markpkessinger]

. . . because if they don't, the bar for presidential conduct will have been forever lowered, and House Democrats will have been just as responsible for that lowering as Trump himself.

[boston bean]

1. Nope.

We can investigate the shit out of him and hold public hearings for the public. We don't need to impeach him and give Mitch McConnell the opportunity to control the narrative and republican senators to declare him innocent in the summer of 2020. And on top of the have the media focused on that bullshit trial like a moth to a flame repeating all of their fucking lies.

[markpkessinger]

13. Nope to your nope...

We are so far beyond questions of political expediency at this point. At issue is both the health of the Republic and the viability of our democracy.

[boston bean]

14. And when trump is not convicted and we have handed them the ability to not convict

and the media focuses all election season long on a trial where trump is declared innocent, will do what for the health of our republic?

[Andy823]

23. Exactly!

Investigate him until the majority of the public agree it's time to impeach him. Then put it before the senate, and see if Mitch is willing to go against a a majority of Americans who want to see trump removed from office.

[Demsrule86]

22. Losing we is way more dangerous than any benefit impeachment might give usl

[manor321]

2. AND Congress will have severely weakened its power relative to the Executive

Impeachment is the ONLY option.

[boston bean]

4. Really, does impeachment go away if they don't impeach?

I would like to know.

[BeyondGeography]

6. Not for Republicans

We know what they would do in this situation. And going forward.

As for Democrats, who knows what their red lines are if 10 documented attempts to obstruct, 140 contacts with Russia and WikiLeaks and violations of campaign finance laws aren’t enough to initiate impeachment proceedings. If you don’t think failure to proceed doesn’t have long-term implications for the concept of co-equality between a Republican executive and a Democratic House we disagree.

[boston bean]

8. Did you think a republican would appoint a special counsel against their own? I didn't.

Listen, I am not stating never impeach.

I am stating not right now. We need all evidence and grand jury testimony before ANYTHING else. We cannot proceed unless we have that. Impeachment or hearings from witnesses like Don McGhan. We have to have the transcripts in order to question properly.


Then hammer away at him and get the public to understand what has happened. We cannot have impeachment without the public support. If we have public support I don't give a shit what republicans in the senate would do.

We have to have it first.

[Funtatlaguy]

3. I'd like to see things proceed this way

The unredacted report goes to all or at least all leadership of Congress.
Mueller immediately comes before Congress, hopefully publically.
Congress then subpoenas the primary characters (excluding Trump but including all others).

Then, Impeachment proceedings should begin.

[Demsrule86]

20. I want a unicorn!

[zaj]

5. Problem is... Impeachment is a response, not a solution

I generally agree that impeachment matters a lot and is important. But the reason the GOP members won't convict is the real problem.

And impeachment makes that problem worse.

It's a catch 22.

Sometimes I think the problem must get worse before it gets better.

[global1]

7. IMHO - Saying "....even knowing Senate Repugs will likely acquit...."....

gives the Repugs the permission to actually acquit because we're saying we expect them to acquit.

We have to go into impeachment with the goal being - removing a criminal Trump from office. And that means that we have to believe that the Repugs will actually consider the evidence and vote accordingly. We have to believe that 'obstruction of justice' is 'obstruction of justice' and even the Repugs can see that Trump committed 'obstruction' and that he is unfit to be president.

But if we go into the process saying that no matter what - we know that the Repugs will acquit - we've just given them the excuse they need to vote 'no' on impeachment. In their minds they're thinking - well if the Dems think we're gonna do this - let's just do it.

I know that many feel that the Repugs will protect Trump no matter what he does - but if we go into the impeachment process with that attitude - than we're gonna get what we expect.

No - we need to go into the 'impeachment process' with the attitude that anyone can see that Trump is unfit to be president and that he needs to be removed from office. We need to develop a case and evidence so compelling that even the Repugs can't overlook his crimes. We need to put the pressure on the Repugs that if they acquit Trump - they are totally responsible for all the bad that will come after an acquittal.

We need to approach this with a positive attitude - not a defeatist attitude.

[boston bean]

9. The reality isn't just that the republicans won't convict.

The reality is that they will have a trial. One in which Mitch McConnell controls everything about.

They will lie, obsfucate, investigate the FBI and Hillary and do whatever they can do to claim it was rigged from the beginning and Trump is innocent and a victim. And the media will lap it up and republicans will benefit from it.

We don't fucking need that.

We need the public ready for impeachment before we declare it. We do that with hearings and open testimony which does not require opening a form impeachment inquiry. if the public is with us, we proceed with impeachment no matter what the fucking cons do.

[Demsrule86]

19. Waste of time. The GOP dont have better angels.

[markpkessinger]

27. It isn't about the GOP's "better angels"

It's about upholding some kind of standard for presidential conduct irrespective of what the GOP does.

[boston bean]

30. Hell be damned we give them the opportunity to declare innocence through a trial in the senate?

Sorry, but our republic deserves more consideration than let's impeach him and then help get him elected again.

[markpkessinger]

31. Trials, be they in the criminal courts or in the Senate, are never declarations of "innocence" . .

Will Republicans try to cast it as such? Of course, but they are doing that now.

[Demsrule86]

32. I don't give a shit about that because Republicans will never do that,

The only thing that matters is winning the presidency and the Senate in 20. We could lose the house if we impeach. Our 18 majority was provided by moderates who's states do not favor impeachment.

[ProudMNDemocrat]

10. Republicans will be on the record supporting CORRUPTION. .....

Democrats wil, hammer the words MORAL and CONSTITUTIONAL duty, CORRUPTION towards any Republican running for office who refuse to do the right thing.

Republicans will be labeled AIDERS and ABETORS to a CORRUPT man and his Anti-American activities. Being labeled Anti-American should be lobbed at Republicans.

[boston bean]

16. They will not be on the record supporting corruption. That is dream world.

Hell didn't we just live through the Kavanaugh hearings.

My goodness, I think people are living in a make believe land ignoring everything they have witnessed or know.

[markpkessinger]

21. Excuse me, but i have been a member here since 2009, and am a lifelong Democrat (I am 57)

... and I don't fucking appreciate even the vaguest suggestion that I am a Russian troll! What's more, I post here and everywhere else around the net under my real name, as I have always done, because I believe that eve it is important to stand up and be counted.

You want to disagree with me, fine. State your reasons for disagreeing. But to try to discount my point of view by resorting this such a despicable, McCarthyesque tactic is something for which any Democrat should be beyond the pale!

[SHRED]

12. The Democratic Party will be viewed as weak

If they don't.

IMPEACH

[boston bean]

15. Nope.

[Demsrule86]

18. No they wont. All those who just want to do something are wrong.

Investigate but don't impeachl

[dalton99a]

25. Start the hearings. Doing nothing is not acceptable.

[Demsrule86]

17. Why? Republicans wont care one bit. They will use it to beat us in 20,

It is madness to impeach with no hope of conviction in the senate,

[C_U_L8R]

24. Exhibit 26375:

"There's nothing wrong with taking information from Russians" - Rudy Giuiiani

[dalton99a]

26. +1. They're trying hard to normalize the criminal

[democratisphere]

28. STRONGLY disagree.

Must subpoena everyone involved and have televised hearings under oath. Impeachment will never get past the Senate. drumpf et al must be exposed for who and what they are; mob style criminals.

[G_j]

29. I Agree with Warren

"To ignore a President's repeated efforts to obstruct an investigation into his own disloyal behavior would inflict great and lasting damage on this country," Warren tweeted. "The severity of this misconduct demands that elected officials in both parties set aside political considerations and do their constitutional duty. That means the House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States."

[yuiyoshida]

33. NO! THIS is what I WANT!

[JHan]

34. These are impeachable offenses.

So yes.

The evidence is there- there are grounds for impeachment. There is evidence of obstruction of justice and while Mueller couldn't reach a legal conclusion about "collusion" , "collusion" *did* happen.

The arguments against impeachment:

- no conviction in the senate.
- it will rouse Trump's base.

The problem with these two perspectives are

1) One of the reasons Dems were given the house was to uphold the constitution and be a check against the President, since Republicans have decided not to do their jobs. We know they have no integrity. It's critical Democrats continue to drive home the facts of the report, which is gonna be a challenge because of the way information is now disseminated. During Watergate, consensus was possible. Now we have to contend with "bothsidism" and whataboutism ", the inane " People will believe what they want to believe" , and the deluge of disinformation designed to breed chaos has led to this ridiculous idea that solid conclusions cannot be arrived at after certain events. Other failures, like the capitulation to Barr's summary before the report , the reaction of certain media outlets to that summary.... before the actual report was even made public has us at this point where there's hedging and fudging over the obvious. This I think is the toughest challenge : How to get past this kind of noise. I think Senator Warren has admirably shown how to take the lead on this.

2) As for rousing Trump's base and McConnell using it as a political win - first off I doubt a Republican run senate would even allow a trial and this move could be a disaster for them. Also, Trump's base is already steady and evangelically devoted to their God. Who else would be attracted to Trump's flock if there's no conviction in the Senate? There's no one else to rally to Trump.

For some perspective: During Watergate, Nixon had maybe half of Republicans supporting him. Over the past few decades, the Republican base has shrunk, leaving behind the dregs consisting of the most radical and hardcore. Trump's overall political standing is poor - his numbers are consistently low compared to his recent predecessors. But when narratives which focus on his base, what they're thinking in diners and all this bullshit, their influence become amplified.

The question really should be how are Dems going to rouse the Dem base, as many expect Democrats to do their job. If Dems aren't resolute on this, or dismiss impeachment out of hand before even holding public hearings, it will depress turnout and feed every meme about "Weak democrats"

Impeachment isn't a quick thing either, I agree with Dems pushing for more and more public hearings.

And consider that even in a worst case scenario where Trump is re-elected, Democrats are projected to take the senate in 2020 and there will be enough votes then.

[GulfCoast66]

35. I respectfully disagree.

Does he deserve it? Yeah.

But impeachment with no conviction will cost us in 20.

We are going to have to run against him in 20. Impeachment or not. We should do what best increase our chances to win.

Focus on policy and let trump be trump. We will win on policy.