Pelosi moves to muzzle Trump impeachment talk

[Jose Garcia]

Source: Politico

Nancy Pelosi offered a forced smile recently when asked on MSNBC about a Tom Steyer-sponsored ad calling for President Donald Trump’s impeachment.

“That’s a great ad,” Pelosi said twice, before rushing to plug the Democrats’ “Better Deal” economic agenda as the TV hit wrapped up.

Pelosi played it off, but privately she was peeved. She told lawmakers at a Democratic leadership meeting soon after that she had reached out to the Democratic megadonor to tell him that his $10 million ad campaign was a distraction. (A source close to Steyer says he hasn’t spoken with Pelosi since the ad launched.)

Pelosi is eager to show her party can govern — in contrast to the chaos surrounding Trump — and believes that a reputation as the “No Drama Democrats” is key to taking back the House in 2018 and whisking her backing into the speaker’s chair.

Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/01/trump-impeachment-talk-pelosi-244336?cid=apn

[SHRED]

1. Because this way has worked so well?

[lagomorph777]

12. Yeah, let's whip up the base with boredom - Dems love that stuff.

How about a powerful slogan like "Democrats: slightly less nuts?"

[7962]

21. todays winner!

[Hortensis]

25. We want 2018's wins. The types who are prone to imagine

they're qualified can blow gassy negatism and defeatism from 2015 to 2018, no one's going to stop them. But if they do, in 2018 they will again have responsibility not only for their own votes but a full share of the anti-Democrat contempt they've encouraged.

[pangaia]

27. Didn't the DNC come up with sonething pretty close to that?

Sonne brilliant creation like, .."A new way!"

Or "Striding into the future !" Wait, that was the Chinese.

[NBachers]

58. Remember when they tried to float the exhilarating "We can do better."

Almost as great as that Circle K-inspired Democrats symbol.

"When you think of Democrats, think of prunes and Maalox!"

[pangaia]

65. Better watch it. Posts have been hidden for less. Lol

We have all the right ideas, it's just that........

[NBachers]

69. What about training a brigade of mimes to go out and pantomime our message to the masses?

[pangaia]

96. Think they would get it?

BTW, many years ago I had a friend who was a mime with whom I worked, who had studied with Marcel Marceau. He was a genius and was like a rubber man.

[Demsrule86]

74. The right ideas are the ones that allow a win in 18 and impeachment isn't one of them.

[lagomorph777]

81. Timidity is not a winning idea. Impeachment is because it is necessary for national survival.

People respect bold leadership.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

87. /THIS

[Demsrule86]

110. Why is it a good idea to push something that has no chance of passing...we look like powerless

losers.

[Demsrule86]

111. I hope it is not necessary for survival because we have no mechanism for making it happen.

In case you didn't know, you need the House and a 2/3 majority in the Senate. We have neither. Perhaps we will win in 18 both the House and the Senate...we still don't have 2/3 majority in the Senate. It won't happen. The GOP are the only ones who can end Trumps reign of terror...and by carrying on about impeachment, we only rally their stupid base to vote in order to stop us from impeachment and that could cost us 18 and give the GOP more opportunity to screw the American people. This is the reality. I would be all for impeachment if it could realistically be achieved and end in conviction and removal of Trump from the presidency...but it won't happen.

[pangaia]

95. The right ideas are right. I agree.

Whether impeachment is one of the right ideas now, I do not know. If we could somehow get rig of fucking Moron, yes. If it would backfire, no, repukes gotta do it.
BUT, we still need to find a way to get as many people as possible who have NOT voted DEM to understand that our ideas are also their ideas, somehow get them the TRUTH about the present day world and what their lives really are like and what they COULD be like.

[Demsrule86]

109. You don't run on universal ideas...we have Democratic principles...all very good. Some will work

better in certain states than others so you tailor your message and choose your candidate based on the state...50 state strategy.

[lagomorph777]

120. get ...people ... who have NOT voted DEM to understand ...

Maybe we can get some non-voters to get off their butts.

Pretending we could ever win over a RePutin voter is a silly fantasy. Look at the polls; Turd's 35% is rock solid for well over a year. No matter what he does, and no matter what we do. We have to flush them down the toilet where they belong, and get our own side to act.

[whathehell]

126. Um..

if you're ',prunes and Maalox line' line is an ageist dig you should know that this Sixty Something is totally OUT of agreement with the Dems "We shall Oversleep' approach.

[NBachers]

128. I will be 69 in April - born April 10th, 1949.

[LanternWaste]

31. If the choice is between hysterical melodrama and boredom, I'll go with boredom every time.

If the choice is between hysterical melodrama and boredom, I'll go with boredom every time.

But, as the lack of hysterical melodrama is not in and of itself, boredom, you appear to be implying the fallacy of the false choice.

I get it though... an enjoyable, efficient and effective drive across the country is often perceived as "boring" by the kids in the car who'd rather challenge someone to a drag race to see who can out-stupid the other.

[lagomorph777]

36. Well, let's hope that cooler heads prevail

and Trump gets deposed.

This is no time for ignoring the desperate crisis Trump is putting the nation through. This situation is way too dangerous for complacency.

[Hekate]

60. Do we have the votes? Or are we still a minority in the House?

[Demsrule86]

73. Dems are whipped up...and if you whip up the GOP in red areas that we could win...

we might not win.

[KPN]

13. Right?!

[Demsrule86]

72. all you will do is give the GOP a way to fire up their base...vote for us or IMPEACHMENT.

And since we don't have the votes in the Senate and are unlikely to get the votes, it is just stupid to talk impeachment...no point without enough votes to convict in the Senate. In fact we would likely lose the next election. Even if we get the House...you have to have 2/3 of the Senators in order to convict.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

3. Remind me again why she is such a revered figure here on DU?

[Hekate]

61. Do we have the votes? Or are we still a minority in the House?

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

68. We are a minority in the House, but

her constant pandering to Republicans is not a good thing.

She's a prime example of what is wrong with the Democratic Leadership. Too many of them are too wound up in running for re-election that they've forgotten the foundations of our party. They don't support the little people. They don't support unions. They cheerfully pander to Republican bullshit. She is 77 years old, has been in office for some 30 years now, and I fear that her main accomplishment for some time has been to win re-election.

And even if she were a guiding star, she's 77 years old and should be thinking about who will succeed her. Dianne Feinstein at age 84 is in a similar position. Feinstein is planning to run again for the Senate. She will be 90 at the end of the next term. I'm sorry, but no one in their late 70's or 80's has the stamina needed to be a Senator or Representative. It's a game for a young person. And one huge problem with the Democratic leadership is that they are old, while the Republican leadership is a decade younger. Look it up.

The huge mistake Dems are making is that they are clinging to old leaders who haven't done a lot other than win re-election. It's a huge mistake.

[Demsrule86]

75. Because she has a brain. And if we listen to her we may win.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

98. Just like we've been winning for the past few election cycles, right?

[Demsrule86]

108. If some progressives had listened to Nancy Pelosi, Trump would not be president...they have only

themselves to blame. Nancy is not in charge of winning elections...not her job and she has done a fine job at her real job stopping Trump and keeping Democrats united. Impeachment without conviction can only hurt us at the moment...all this is just the same as voting to end the ACA over and over by the worthless Repugs...meaningless. We don't have the power to impeach and we don't have the power to convict... sending a 'message' as some have described impeachment could end in a real political cost for Democrats...losing in 18 and/or 20. Nancy has a brain, you should pay attention to what she says.

[Freethinker65]

4. Sucks, but impeachment proceedings would need Republicans in the current House.

If the Democrats take control of the house, or have enough Republican support, to make impeachment proceedings possible and she is still in a “keeping her powder dry” mode, then we have a major problem with Pelosi.

[brooklynite]

70. Focusing on issues that voters care about is "pandering"?

[Demsrule86]

76. What evidence is there that a majority of Americans want Trump impeached?

And there is evidence that the country has moved center left. I want to win not 'talk' about things that could impede that.

[brooklynite]

99. That's my point; talking about impeachment is pandering to the Democratic base, not actual voters.

[Girard442]

5. Maybe you didn't request the drama, Ms. Pelosi, but it's here.

Business as usual has left the building. Our governmental choices are now either all Trump or no Trump at all, with nothing in between.

[Hekate]

62. Do we have the votes?

[Demsrule86]

78. We don't have the votes...and we still have to get through trying to stop Trump. I fail to

understand how it is not evident that impeachment is a bad idea and could cost us 18 and 20...and impeachment won't help the progressive cause as Pence or Ryan will be president. I want Trump out regardless but realize it may not happen.

[Curtis]

6. I've said it before

If we win the House and Senate, she will not push to impeach Trump. Instead she will use him to attempt to solidify her position in the House. In other words, party over country. Just like she did with W. Bush

[SFnomad]

10. Where there is no chance of conviction in the Senate, why just go though the motions?

So we can look just as partisan and out of touch as Republicans were when they impeached President Clinton?

[lagomorph777]

15. Because look at the results: going through the motions works better than playing dead!

RePutins went through the motions for 9 years on Obamacare, and grabbed the entire government. Sometimes you have to lose a series of battles, in order to show vogters that you give a shit enough to fight for them.

[SFnomad]

22. There is a big difference between voting for a bill that had no chance of becoming law and

putting us through another partisan impeachment that will go nowhere. Impeachment isn't just another tool to be used in a battle. You're cheapening it if that's what you believe.

[lagomorph777]

24. Impeachment is a tool for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors"

Can you name ONE of those things that doesn't apply to Trump?

This is not a game; it's necessary for national survival.

[hatrack]

29. Yes, those pesky, pesky laws . . .

If we just pretend that Shitstain isn't wiping his ass on the Constitution, and that his minions aren't deliberately going out of their way to destroy trust in government as they labor mightily to destroy government itself, maybe it will all just go away.

Great game plan, Nancy.

[SFnomad]

40. If you go through with impeachment and know you don't have the votes to get

a conviction, then all you are doing is playing a game.

[lagomorph777]

41. Yeah, keep telling yourself that.

While the country goes down the tubes.

Just because it may take multiple tries, doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. We won't be deterred that easily. You'll need a stronger argument on your side.

[Hekate]

63. Show me where the votes are and I will enthusiastically support impeachment.

Send Nancy a House majority next year, and so will she.

[lagomorph777]

80. Votes don't magically appear. They have to be coaxed; there has to be something to vote for.

[Hekate]

105. Both Pelosi and Schumer hold the line against the GOP on vote after vote, so GOP gets nothing...

...from us. That is an important part of leadership in the current circumstances. In other words, when the Trumpists want to achieve something nasty, they have to do it without a single Dem vote to assist them.

What Pelosi and Schumer do not do is throw away votes on creating symbolic bills that have zero chance of success -- such as, for instance, impeachment. As long as Republicans vote as a bloc to sustain Trump, as long as Republicans fail to see the light, it is worse than a stalemate. A million tweets will be generated: "I am so great I survived impeachment!"

Our best hope is to peel Republicans away from the GOP bloc -- not "coax" Democrats. Dems are already with Pelosi and Schumer.

But how are they going to peel away GOPers? How do you think? By letting Mueller continue to do his job.

Watch Mueller's progress, and watch individual Repub politicians' reactions, and use that as a wedge.

Stop trying to get rid of Nancy Pelosi. She's the best weapon we have.

And send her a Democratic majority. She'll certainly know how to use it.

[lagomorph777]

119. 'peel Republicans away from the GOP bloc'

You're not serious, right? The time for that fantasy has loooong passed.

[Hekate]

122. So Articles of Impeachment have a chance without a single GOP vote? Talk about a fantasy.

Possibly you've noticed that several GOP Senators have broken ranks over the past months, enough to make a difference on the attempted repeal of Obamacare. Now two that are leaving and one that is dying are talking about Trump's crimes -- but still voting with their Party.

The House is a lot tougher because so many Repubs are actually radicals. And the Dems are in the MINORITY. The ONLY votes Nancy Pelosi commands are DEMS.

Wait for Mueller's case to continue to unfold, and public anger continue to mount. Pressure your local Republican Representative. GOTV next year and vote for Dems and against Repubs. Stop trying to get rid of Democrats who can't afford to give you a pony for Christmas.

[lagomorph777]

127. You are missing the timescale. This has to be pushed before, and then after, the mid-terms

No, obviously it won't pass on the first try. Giving up for that reason, as you want us to do, is exactly what the Reputins want us to do.

[Demsrule86]

82. That is nonsense. There is no evidence that will help us at all and may make Trump a sympathetic

figure to Republicans and some independents...the heavy lifting of fighting Trump is hard and people get bored but too bad. And what gets me as I see some on social media who vowed not to vote for Hillary (I remember them well) whining about impeachment...I just am forced to point out you had an opportunity to stop it all and blew it. No reason to give the GOP a rallying point in order to make a few folks happy because 'something' is being done.

[lagomorph777]

84. Are you implying that I didn't vote for HRC? I did, in the general.

And for the same reason I support impeachment now. Turd is too dangerous to be allowed to run our government.

[Demsrule86]

114. I never imply...I just come out and say it...so the answer is no...now

explain to me how we impeach Trump without the House and 2/3 of the Senate? It can't happen...so what is the point? Even if we win the house and by a miracle, we win the Senate, we won't have a 2/3 majority...it is numerically impossible...so how exactly can impeachment proceed to conviction and removal? The answer is it can't. All that is accomplished with empty impeachment threats is to rev up the GOP/Trump base and cause a potential electoral loss in 18 and possibly 20. If you have a realistic plan, please elaborate.

[lagomorph777]

121. Ok, I'll lay it out.

It's a long process; it will require many attempts. That doesn't mean we should never start; it means we need to start now because it will take a long time, time in which Turd and the RePutins are consolidating their power. We can't waste time.

So we have to start making the case for impeachment now. The need for it is pretty obvious to anybody who is paying attention. But many are not paying attention. They need to have it in their faces every time Turd tweets (as inevitably he will, a trait which we will make him sorely regret).

Explain the treason. Explain it over and over, every time Mueller presents more evidence. Make Turd fly off the handle in crazier and crazier rants. Make the case again. Every so often, announce a bill (yes, even though it will quickly sink). Every time, we can count on Turd to throw a tweeter tantrum. This will harm him further.

By the time mid-terms roll around, any voter with their own self-interest in mind (as opposed to Turd's loyal army of crazies) will see that there is a way out of the Trumpocalypse, and that way os to elect Democrats.

[Curtis]

43. Huge difference

Clinton was impeached for lying sexual relations

Trump will be impeached for conspiracy against the US, money laundering, possibly treason and other huge crimes. To keep him around because Nancy wants to further her political power is just sick.

Also, once the truth comes out the public tide on Trump will turn in a way it never did on Clinton because the public is smart enough to have seen the Clinton's impeachment was bogus while Trump's would not be bogus.

[bluecollar2]

46. silence by the democrats

Is akin to agreement that the behaviour is acceptable

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

90. Refuse to be silent... resist... impeach!!

[meadowlander]

51. Because when your country is attacked by a hostile foreign power,

you either speak out about it loudly and often, or you are part of the problem.

If there was ever a time in our nation's history when "drama" was called for, it's right now.

The majority of Americans when polled think Trump should be impeached.

The Republicans looked partisan and out of touch when they impeached Clinton because they *were* partisan and out of touch and Clinton's approval ratings actually rose the longer they tried to remove him from office.

[adigal]

42. If Pelosi doesn't start impeachment, we need to force our reps to remove her

I know she is good at moving legislation ahead, but unless we get rid of Trump, he will declare the Congress invalid, and believe he can do it.

[burrowowl]

53. We need to win the House and Senate first

and really clean up with through investigations to get rid of Pence, Ryan, etc. as well!

[Demsrule86]

83. You can't even introduce legislation unless you have the majority...and all you will do is help the

GOP.

[Bengus81]

7. Ahhh...more of the "If we're nice to them,they'll be nice to us" theory........

Hey Nancy,remember when Republicans wanted Impeachment over a BLOW JOB?!?!! So Trump has done NOTHING that would compare?!?!

Oh well...group hug everyone..............

[MyOwnPeace]

26. OK,,,,,

As I see it - THAT sums it up QUITE WELL!!!!

[LanternWaste]

35. You infer that, though she did not imply it.

You infer that, though she did not imply it. And your desire that the Dems to predicate their behavior on that of the GOP is simply and without a doubt, the most irrational thing I've read today.

I get it though... it's a fool's choice of either shrill hysterics or playing nice with far too many brains raised on three-minute songs and microwave dinners.

Patience though, truly is a virtue... regardless of a petulant desire for hugs.

[Demsrule86]

85. It is not about being nice. It is about being realistic. You can't remove him without the House

and 2/3 majority in the Senate...we have neither. Reality bites sometimes.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

89. I remember...

[BigmanPigman]

8. I am glad the ad runs on Fux News

and those viewers will get to hear unfamiliar words and phrases when describing the moron like obstructing justice, unstable, dangerous, etc.

[NRaleighLiberal]

9. "Off the table" Nancy. Still.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

91. NOTHING should be off the table!!

[NRaleighLiberal]

94. absolutely.

[MrsCoffee]

11. Article says that she says this publicly, but feels differently privately.

She is a politician. Maybe she just doesn't want to show or overplay her hand.

[elleng]

32. Thanks.

[Hekate]

64. Yes

[moda253]

14. Attacking democrats is not allowed on this site.

Just a reminder.

[7962]

23. He posted an article with her opinion. How is that an attack?

Although you may be right, because to some here, ANYTHING can be seen as an attack.

[radhika]

16. Pelosi: Impeachment is Off the Table!!

'Memba this? Famously said in regards to President George W Bush, for invading Iraq with false intelligence, plus other abuses of power

This was said during an interview, even while many states, cities and pressure groups were launching impeachment drives. And she stuck to it. Myriad impeachment resolutions were sent to the House (when she was Speaker) and they all died in committee. The only way Rep Dennis Kucinich could introduce his version was to read it into the Congressional Record.

This is why so many Progressives want her OUT!

[FiveGoodMen]

44. Protecting republicans seems to be her main function

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

56. I just don't get it.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

17. "No-Drama Democrats"?

Who was singing on the House floor when the health care vote went down?

Now we want to act dignified? Hell no!

It'll be "Na na na na, hey, hey, hey, goodbye" once again when Trump goes away.

[Nitram]

18. You don't want to fuck up Mueller's investigation by prematurely starting a campaign to

impeach Trump. Calm down children and give the man some time to build an airtight case around everyone on the Trump team, including Pence.

[Honeycombe8]

20. That's true. But his ads started before the indictments. But yes...we don't want to appear

to be the ones impeaching Trump or investigating him. We're not.

[Honeycombe8]

19. I don't know. I'm not a political strategist. But as a voter, I HATE the "better deal" meme.

It's old and trite and lackluster and meaningless...and implies a handout. As in, "We'll give you a better deal, kid. Stick with us."

They should have had some 20-somethings and 30-somethings collaborate and come up with something catchy and meaningful that actually appeals to people.

[samnsara]

28. i like Nancy.. I always have..shes measured and cautious and.. yep..

...boring.... but I am tired of reckless, off the wall crap. I'm so damned tired I just want someone who is cautious, steady, tried and true and maybe even a bit boring. I can see her view on the ad...I like the ad, but I'm not in the middle of the cess pool she has to deal with daily.

[elleng]

38. ditto

[LovingA2andMI]

30. WTH Nancy Pelosi....

There she goes again.....

[elmac]

33. why must we play nice?

if a dem pres was acting like tRump does she think the fascists would play nice? Lets do everything we can to get dumb donnie out of office ASAP.

[Javaman]

34. this reminds me of when pelosi kept saying, "we're keeping our power dry"

during george w. morons* reign of stupidity.

yup, she kept it dry. so dry in fact, it blew away.

[Rollo]

37. Pelosi does have a point...

Not so much the lack of drama, but...

An impeachment is nothing more than an indictment.

And an indictment doesn't put anyone away, it takes a conviction. In the case of Trump, it would take conviction in the Senate, and the votes are not there right now for that. Pelosi (and Schumer) are probably concerned that Trumpeters will try to rally voters for the 2018 midterms by telling them, if you vote for a Dem rep or sen, you are voting to impeach Trump. And the majority in states that matter still doesn't support impeaching Trump. By " matter" , I mean swing or red states where Dems are up for re-election and facing a tough battle, as well as states where we hope to replace the Republican with a Dem.

One thing at a time. IF we get majorities in the House and Senate, then the impeachment talk is more appropriate. Until then, it may well just backfire.

At least I think that's Pelosi's reasoning. And I have to say, it's sound, as much as I'd like to see Trump impeached right now.

[FakeNoose]

49. Yes, for sure things will change after next year

My guess is Nancy Pelosi doesn't want to tip her hand too soon. The press is always trying to get a scoop and she's being very careful right now. You know the Dem leaders are talking about it behind closed doors.

But Trump can start doing REALLY crazy things if he figures out what's up. Trump is the wild card in this.

[Paladin]

39. Uh-unh. Nope. Not this time, Ms. Pelosi.

Trying to take impeachment "off the table," like you did with Dubya? I won't stand for it, and I believe I have lots and lots of company in the Democratic ranks. trump needs to go, and just as soon as possible. If you want to show that Democrats can govern, I suggest that you refrain from chicken-shitting out on this---try leading the parade, instead of erecting barricades.

[SkatmanRoth]

45. I wish we would just move to muzzle Trump

[Oneironaut]

47. And that strategy will get us nowhere, just like now.

"Play nice! Don't make any waves! If we act like the calm, cool-headed ones, then the people will see and respect us for that, and in turn will vote for us!" - The worst strategy ever.

We need to be attacking Trump at every corner, calling for his impeachment, and tearing his agenda to shreds. We need passionate leaders who will go on cable news and explain why Trump's policies are hackish garbage. Instead, we get the doormat mentality that Trump will walk into his own trap by saying something stupid. He's already done that 1000 times over! According to proponents of this strategy, he never should have even won the election.

If the election showed us anything, it's that Trump left unchecked is able to spew an endless array of bull crap, and it is effective. Many continue to erroneously treat and see Trump as a normal politician who can be reasoned with and who respects the formalities of his office.

[GulfCoast66]

48. Agree with her. As will anyone who understands the House.

We have no power there. None. Calling for impeachment just empowers the republicans.

You attack when you can win. You negotiate when you can’t.

[marybourg]

50. Nothing wrong with her playing the good cop,

as long as there are others out there, like Tom Steyer, playing bad cop.

[still_one]

52. This is typical politico headline bullshit to divide Democrats. Pelosi is right, there is nothing

we should do until Mueller"s has finished the investigation, presented the evidence and facts for impeachment.

Of course, the Pelosi haters will use this as an excuse to bash Pelosi, ignoring the fact that the DEMOCRATS DO NOT HAVE THE MAJORITY IN THE HOUSE, where the impeachment process takes place. If it even reached the floor, it would go no where. However, if the Mueller investigation continues, and show evidence and facts of impeachable offenses, you will get some house republicans to join in the effort. The House investigation was a complete sham, but Mueller's is not.

In fact, jumping the gun on impeachment before Mueller has finished, might very well impede the impeachment effort. WAIT FOR MUELLER TO FINISH. This isn't rocket science.

[betsuni]

55. Thank you.

That headline is like throwing a big steak to a pack of dogs. The magic word, "Pelosi" paired with "muzzle" and off they go!

[still_one]

57. You are right. The reactionary headline has just that purpose

[emulatorloo]

102. It is Classic Politico. They are Pot Stirrers, Republicans funded

The site is not totally worthless but everything has to be read with a huge boulder of salt.

[still_one]

104. yup

[Hekate]

59. Thanks. My gods, they never learn, do they?

Christ on a trailer hitch.

[Docreed2003]

93. This! Thank you!

[Hekate]

66. Dumb kneejerk reactions feom the usual. SEND NANCY A HOUSE MAJORITY & SHE WILL IMPEACH...

...THE ORANGE BASTARD AS SOON AS MUELLER IS DONE WITH HIM.

What is so hard to understand about that? What is so satisfying about savaging our own in the face of irrefutable facts?

[Akoto]

67. The demands for Pelosi to impeach now are short sighted and dangerous.

It's a guaranteed loss, and yes, impeachment is a case where taking your time to do your due diligence is better than doing it for symbolic purposes (no, I don't care about Clinton; he was having an affair, Trump is a maniac). If you fail, you probably don't get a second try. The fact is, she could call for it right now, but we'll lose for two reasons:

1. Before we impeach, we need solid numbers on our side in the House and Senate. We don't have them.

2. Before we impeach, we need air tight evidence that he committed the severe crimes we'd be holding him responsible for. You can't just point at incident X and say, "Look there, that's where he's doing X!" It takes a much more thorough process of investigation, documentation, and recruitment of informed witnesses than that.


Once we lose the impeachment, then historically speaking, there's almost no chance that any further motions for one will succeed. This is the kind of thing you do cautiously and meticulously, so that every legal escape route is met with evidence to block it plus the votes to get it through Congress. Then, you move.

Right now, they're starting lower down the ladder, but those people have 'open' indictments, meaning more charges could be added. That could be viewed as a method of trying to flip them: you help us get the next highest fish up the ladder, hand us the dirt, and we won't throw everything in the book that we *could* at you.

Just my perspective on the matter.

[DonCoquixote]

71. Pelosi, this is why

people get frustrated with you. The GOP knows they can grind a cigar into your hand and that you will still want to be polite. I am not syaign we need to be like them, but they need to know that if they start a brawl, we can and will make them limp away.

[Botany]

77. She can not talk about that now .... this is the smart play

When the evidence is overwhelming then the rupugs will
have to start or get on board the impeachment train.

[NurseJackie]

79. She's a brilliant woman and she's doing a fantastic job. I trust her...

... to do the right thing. She knows politics. She understands how things work. She's can count.

Personally, I think it's very likely that Trump will be impeached. I think these calls for "impeach now" are premature and stupid. Those impatient souls who try to "blame" Pelosi for being prudent and wise need to grow up.

[Eyeball_Kid]

86. Remember that Pelosi took Bush/Cheney War Crimes "off the table".

Look at what it got the Dems: eight years of GOP harrassment and total opposition toward Obama. The GOP just resumed their political offensive, undeterred by their own party's criminal behavior. So I think I've had enough of Pelosi's recommendations.

[SHRED]

92. Looking back

I'm not sure we'd have the ACA had she gone there.
I wish we could have had both but I am not sure.
Maybe I'm way off base but yeah...I would have preferred both to take place and a public option in the ACA.

Our party definitely needs retooling.

[beachbum bob]

88. no need to feed the rightwing...democrats should run on taking back our country

from those who are determined to hand more of our future over to the wealthy.

Impeachment is not a campaign issue, taxes, healthcare and social contract are

[WoonTars]

97. Gotta keep that powder dry, ammirite?

Nancy, it would appear, has learned little from the past..

[brooklynite]

100. Explain how discussing Impeachment would be useful.

[WoonTars]

106. Because the people want to know that if they elect the Dems into a majority...

...they'll actually do their fucking job, and act as a counter-weight to the Orangutab in the Oval Office, rather than cheerfully ignore high crimes and misdemeanors as the republican majority currently has...

How's that for starters?

[brooklynite]

112. No, they don't....

A counterweight? Yes, on legislative policy. There's no evidence that the average voter thinks that impeachment is a necessary step at this point.

[WoonTars]

124. Uh huh....okay...

....let's just keep doing what we've been doing in the past because it's working out just great, right?

[brooklynite]

125. How about, let's do things that will prove to be effective?

Until the election changes things, there won't be the votes for impeachment or conviction. To GET the election to change things, we need to appeal to voters who, in part, turned away from us in 2016. They are not, by an large, fixated on impeachment.

[Binkie The Clown]

101. Hey! We're Democrats. Our job is to turn the other cheek and do nothing.

After all, that's worked so well for us in the past.

It's about time we start being the hammer and stop being the nail.

[WoonTars]

107. Abso-fucking-lutely!

[Demsrule86]

115. So how does it happen? Explain the House process (getting to floor) ...finding the needed votes.

Next, move to the Senate, Explain the process of getting it to the floor and getting the necessary 2/3 votes in order to convict and remove Trump from office...Let's hear your plan. I look at how it works and I don't see how it is possible...but please prove me wrong. I would be delighted.

[Binkie The Clown]

123. You're right. I might be hard, so let's just not even try. nt

[0rganism]

103. way to go! keep that powder dry!

now bring over that backhoe, we need to dig another storage cellar for our dry powder

we may never use it, but damn we have a whole lot of it and it is dry as a cold fuck

super dry

[sandensea]

113. She's right.

Impeachment would just leave us with Dense Pence - who's just as insane as Cheeto but worse, because he knows how to appear normal.

[Demsrule86]

116. It is not even that...you won't get rid of Trump without 2/3 of the senate voting for conviction.

[sandensea]

117. Sure.

I mean, if impeachment were actually feasible. Even then, I'm not sure I'd want it.

No, I'd prefer to have the orange oaf serve out his (one) term - but in complete and utter discredit.

[Blue_Tires]

118. That's fine... She doesn't want to overplay the hand

before all the pieces are set up on the board