HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » BTRTN: What Is Pelosi Up ...

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 09:55 AM

BTRTN: What Is Pelosi Up To With Her Impeachment Stall?

Born To Run The Numbers provides its monthly review of December, 2019, focusing on how Nancy Pelosi is handling the impeachment Tom's take provides an interesting "point/counterpoint" to the piece posted by Steve on December 31 on the impeachment process:

http://www.borntorunthenumbers.com/2020/01/btrtn-what-is-pelosi-up-to-with-her.html

Excerpts: "Nancy Pelosi is a master of three-dimensional chess. Her decision to hold off on transmitting the articles of impeachment to the Senate is a classic case. Pelosi sized up the state of the Senate trial and saw that it was a sham. Mitch McConnell was cool to Chuck Schumerís call for witnesses, and publicly cozied up to Trump team to organize the rules of the trial. Pelosiís quick calculus was that McConnell had erred. He clearly should have taken greater pains to give the appearance of taking the high road in conducting a fair trial, and not been so public in his White House partnership. And the truth is, a trial without witnesses is not a good look. Americans Ė even a plurality of Republicans -- clearly want to see witnesses...
"There are any number of GOP Senators to whom the notion of witnesses may appeal, with varying motives. Mitt Romney has been a thorn in Trumpís side and is virtually untouchable in Utah. Susan Collins of Maine is in a daunting re-election battle, as is Cory Gardner of Colorado and Thom Tillis of North Carolina. Ben Sasse of Nebraska can be a gadfly, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska has already expressed discomfort with the McConnell approach...
"Might Pelosi simply hold on to the articles, perhaps forever? That seems far-fetched, but she clearly is a better chess player than Trump. But even if she gives in relatively soon, she has accomplished a few important objectives, casting doubt on McConnellís trial and calling attention to the latest Ukraine revelations. But the pressure will ratchet up next week. A low-risk move in December becomes a high-stakes gamble in January."

15 replies, 1079 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 15 replies Author Time Post
Reply BTRTN: What Is Pelosi Up To With Her Impeachment Stall? (Original post)
reggieandlee Jan 2020 OP
gratuitous Jan 2020 #1
apcalc Jan 2020 #2
Proud Liberal Dem Jan 2020 #3
gratuitous Jan 2020 #5
StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #15
CrispyQ Jan 2020 #4
Proud Liberal Dem Jan 2020 #6
CrispyQ Jan 2020 #7
Proud Liberal Dem Jan 2020 #14
tgards79 Jan 2020 #8
maxsolomon Jan 2020 #11
tgards79 Jan 2020 #9
maxsolomon Jan 2020 #10
tgards79 Jan 2020 #12
maxsolomon Jan 2020 #13

Response to reggieandlee (Original post)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 09:59 AM

1. "Stall"?

The House passed the articles of impeachment, then went on their end of the year recess. There's been no "stall." But this little interruption has slowed down the news cycle in a most salutary way, as the public has had a rare opportunity to analyze and digest the president's impeachment, rather than rushing to the next step before the ramifications and implications have been discussed and debated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reggieandlee (Original post)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 10:02 AM

2. Some items cook best when done slowly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reggieandlee (Original post)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 10:27 AM

3. It's sort of wild

that there should be a "debate" about whether or not there should be witnesses in a trial (of course there should be!) or that the person in charge of the trial should literally be partnering with the defendant (of course they shouldn't!) It's crazy that we are having to discuss these things, but here we are through the looking glass w/Trump, McConnell, Republicans, et. al.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Liberal Dem (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 12:30 PM

5. That's part of the value of this time out

When McConnell and Trump were working to get all this unpleasantness behind them as soon as possible, they cooked up all this fantastic nonsense about witnesses and evidence, and just going directly to a vote. Give them credit, this scheme would have accomplished just what the administration wanted and that right quickly. But in the intervening two weeks, some serious discussion was had about procedure and the mechanics of the Senate trial.

Turns out not every Republican everywhere is quite as comfortable with a railroad job of a trial in which the verdict is established and witnesses and evidence will be considered "later" (read "never" ). One or two media outlets have similarly jolted their consciences, indulging the heresy that just maybe what's most expedient for Trump is necessarily the best course for the country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gratuitous (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 10:22 PM

15. This was the genius of Pelosi's move

 


One reason Pelosi's "hold back" tactic is brilliant


Had Pelosi just held off sending the Articles, her refusal to move the process forward would have been THE story. The Republicans would have been all over her with a full and enthusiastic assist from the media, who would have spent 24/7 jumping up and down demanding to know when Pelosi would send the Articles to the Senate. Pelosi's "recalcitrance" would have been the ONLY story. In the meantime, Republicans would continue their plan to screw up the process once they got the Articles - and they would have done so with barely any attention because the focus would have been all on Pelosi.

But she was too smart for this. She didn't just hold on to the Articles. She tied her action tight as a knot to the Republican plans to screw up the process, making release of the Articles completely contingent upon the Republicans showing their hand. In the law, we call that a "condition precedent": an event that must occur before a party is required to perform. In this instance, Pelosi made the Republicans revealing the process they plan to use for the trial the condition precedent to her releasing the Articles because, she's explained, she can't refer the Articles until she appoints managers and she can't appoint managers until she knows how the trial will proceed.

By doing it this way, Pelosi ensured that, not only is she not "the bad guy" in this transaction and is not derelict in her duty - since she wants to do her duty but can't do it until the Republicans do theirs - but she also guaranteed that the Republicans can't do their dirt in the dark as they usually do. Every time anyone talks about Pelosi refusing to refer the Articles, they MUST talk about why she's refusing, report on the Republicans refusal to reveal the process they plan to use, and discuss the Republicans' efforts to rig the trial.

As a result, the story is not just about Pelosi holding the Articles, but - and probably moreso - about the Republicans trying to conduct a sham trial.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212822243

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reggieandlee (Original post)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 11:09 AM

4. She should announce that an impeachment trail during an election year is too partisan,

and that the House will continue to investigate Trump and hold off giving the articles to the Senate until the new Senate is sworn in. There you go, Moscow Mitch, you traitorous scum. ~insert flip-the-bird smilie here

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrispyQ (Reply #4)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 12:55 PM

6. Would that assume that Trump is re-elected then?

I'm not sure that strategy accomplishes anything. Trump/GOP will be able to claim, with some justification, that Democrats are not really serious about the rule of law and that it was all just a partisan sham (It's not, of course, but what does this do for anything)?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Liberal Dem (Reply #6)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 01:12 PM

7. Sorry. I was being sarcastic.

Should have put the in there.

It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. Our side is the underdog.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrispyQ (Reply #7)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 10:16 PM

14. Oh

I didn't get that it was sarcasm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Liberal Dem (Reply #6)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 03:48 PM

8. Also...

...that the Dems case was so weak they were afraid to bring it to the Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tgards79 (Reply #8)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 04:48 PM

11. this one's funny too.

although it's harder to follow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrispyQ (Reply #4)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 04:21 PM

9. Man we have to get away from impeachment.

And focus on health care. Nominating a great candidate. Working our butts off, united behind that person. Impeachment is a political loser.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tgards79 (Reply #9)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 04:47 PM

10. LOL, good one.

Unless you weren't ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxsolomon (Reply #10)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 08:43 PM

12. I'm not being funny

Impeachment is a loser. Since the public testimony started, Trump has gone from -3 to +4 in swing state head-to-head polling versus Bernie/Biden/Warren on average.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tgards79 (Reply #12)

Thu Jan 2, 2020, 08:56 PM

13. You should have let the Dems know before they pursued it.

That was

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread