Rick Wilson just said the greatest line on the Joy Reid Show.

[brush]

"Three things one should never rush in life: SEX, COOKING RIBS AND IMPEACHMENT."

He advocates impeachment by 1000 cuts—investigations, hearings, testimony, subpoenas, court rulings giving access to documents and so on.

Also the panel are discussing that what's happening now with the above mentioned things going on already, is essentially an impeachment inquiry without it officially being called that.

IMO we should call it that which would therefore require all newscasts, cable shows, social media and newspapers to call it that as well. And if necessary proceed to official impeachment hearings and send it to the Senate. If the repugs don't convict it will be at their own risk as trump desperately doesn't want that stain on his name. I say we will be in a stronger position for 2020 with trump being branded as being impeached.

I say let's go for it as we'll be in a stronger position for gaining the WH than an impeached crook will be in retaining it. The polls already show that a majority say they won't vote for trump in 2020.

[smirkymonkey]

1. K&R

[underpants]

2. I'm going to disagree on sex

Not a fan of ribs either

[brush]

3. Well that's on you, isn't it?

[Rural_Progressive]

22. You have my sympathies

to not love slow cooked ribs and slow, sensual sex is to have missed out on two of the great joys in life.

Hopefully you make up for those loses in other ways.

[underpants]

28. I'm not say all sex

just sometimes

[Me.]

4. I'm Surprised She Had Someone On Who Isn't Gung Ho Impeachment

since she keeps pounding that drum

[empedocles]

5. Pounding a drum, is the nature of the 24 hour cable news cycle.

[brush]

6. Huh? Wilson is gung ho impeachment too. He wants to get all the evidence...

out to the public first as most people haven't read Mueller's report which lays out all the ways trump obstructed justice, which is grounds for impeachment.

Btw, if Congress doesn't perform it's Constitutional duty to conduct oversignt of the executive branch and impeach this obviously criminal president, we will have surrendered our democracy to essentially a dictator who will be able to continue to trample on and defy the Constitution.

[Me.]

9. There-In Is The Difference

"He wants to get all the evidence out to the public first" His is a measured approach, Joy wants it done yesterday, now, immediately.

[radical noodle]

15. There were a few today who didn't

advocate for immediate impeachment. I think it's not impeaching/not impeaching but instead impeaching now or work up to impeachment. She's sure beating the drum though.

[Me.]

17. You're Quite Right

it isn't an either or but when. However, IMHO, hers and Larry O'D's insistence on now, right away, is tiresome.

[hlthe2b]

7. That female defense attorney that came in at about the 3/4 mark of the show had me spitting nails

Her name is apparently Seema Iyer and she was on a panel with Paul Butler. ''Strident doesn't begin to cover it. She came off very much like a Trumpster attacking the Dems, even though I did not disagree with everything she said and she doesn't appear to be a Rebublican. Obnoxious though and this is gender neutral. Had Paul retorted similarly, I'd be calling for his head too. (but as usual, he was calm, measured, yet inciteful).

[brush]

10. Yeah, she's annoying as hell and not that well informed.

I'm watching it now and she just erroneously stated that the Mueller report found no obstruction of justice.

WRONG! And Paul Butler and Joy just called her on it.

I can't believe she didn't know that. She came on so strong with her annoying voice and statements against the House moving towards impeachment and then she was so wrong on such a significant matter.

[csziggy]

25. She reminded me so much of Judge Jeanine Pirro I couldn't watch

And changed over to other programming.

[demmiblue]

13. I didn't catch it today, but I have seen her on Joy before.

I agree with your assessment. Poor Paul!

Another person I find hard listening to sometimes is Elie Mystal. He turns it up to eleven quite a bit.

[maddiemom]

19. "Strident!"

A MUCH better term than "shrill," Thank You.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

8. I think he makes a good point. I'd like to see a slow drip

of investigations, subpoenas, document production (there's gotta be some serious dirt in the financial records), witness testimony and so forth for months, and don't call it an impeachment investigation. Do it like Watergate; the public hearings in 1973 were not impeachment hearings as such; they were held to investigate who was behind the break-in. Actual impeachment hearings in the HJC didn't take place until the following summer, and were not televised except for opening statements and the final vote.

The ongoing Watergate investigation soured everybody but the most hard-core GOPers on Nixon.

[pdsimdars]

11. Great show. And that is what all those experts said. . . they need to do it. It's what the founders

left for them to do. It was one of their greatest fears.

[Me.]

20. And Yet

Only 38 members of the HOuse think we should proceed with it RIGHT NOw. The push for rush is being driven for the pundits for their own sake, certainly not for that of the Dems. And if it fails they will be the first to point fingers.

[brush]

23. Actually impeahment won't even if done now. Conviction in the Sanate might.

I'm for thoroughly laying out the facts for the American people before moving to impeach but even if done now trump will still have that stain on him. And with a majority already saying they won't vote for him, we'll be ok.

[Me.]

26. I Agree

Make the case with investigation and witnesses and then see where we are

[StarfishSaver]

12. I love it!

And I am so going to steal it!

[sheshe2]

27. Love the list.

However I have to add one more to it, grits.

Scene from My Cousin Vinny:

[PatrickforO]

14. I tend to agree - we need to educate more Americans about what a dirt-bag

Trump really is. Televised impeachment hearings will serve that purpose, because every little nuance will be reported day after day after day.

Right wing local news (Sinclair group) and AM hate-talk may not even be able to ignore it.

[brush]

24. I'm with you.

[hughee99]

16. I think we are right on pace to see Trump get impeached around 2026.

But oh man, is he going to get it then!

[earthshine]

18. I was for impeachment until I was against it.

Not impeaching -- with the everpresent threat of it -- is proving to be more effective than impeaching.

Trump wants to be impeached to further solidify his base and cause an eventual confrontation in the Supreme Court.

It's making him nuts that this is not playing out as he expected.

I say enjoy the shit show, while he dies from a 1000 self-inflicted cuts.

[cilla4progress]

21. I agree.

Impeaching before the public is convinced plays into his victim drama.