General Discussion

empedocles

(15,751 posts)

73. Just as we would not want to see a Dem impeached on a straight, or near straight, Party line

Thu Sep 12, 2019, 12:35 PM

Sep 2019

vote - there's something not right, there, and may not be workable; short or long term.

Trying to pressure or browbeat vulnerable Dems into voting impeachment seems very short-sighted.

Broad support is needed for a war.

Better strategy is to have 'con votes, which will require 'con voters to step up.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

88 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Just a thought: Calling & losing a House vote for impeachment would be catastrophic [View all] ehrnst Sep 2019 OP

It's not about voting to impeach now PJMcK Sep 2019 #1

There are many here on DU exclaiming "IMPEACH NOW" ehrnst Sep 2019 #2

For me, IMPEACH NOW! means get the official inquiry ecstatic Sep 2019 #7

They've been trying to get hearings started all year NewJeffCT Sep 2019 #11

EVERYONE should read your post. That's the backstory that many hotheads don't get. Democrats OnDoutside Sep 2019 #14

People don't get the time frames with this Cosmocat Sep 2019 #18

Team Trump is following the Iran Contra playbook NewJeffCT Sep 2019 #20

YYEEPP Cosmocat Sep 2019 #51

"...and they have suffered less." CrispyQ Sep 2019 #72

absolutely Cosmocat Sep 2019 #82

It's like the dems don't even know what marketing is. CrispyQ Sep 2019 #85

Yep Cosmocat Sep 2019 #86

This is so important for people to understand. StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #24

Yep, and this SCOTUS sure as HELL isn't going to invalidate executive privilege. (nt) ehrnst Sep 2019 #64

I bet they will invalidate most of the Executive Privilege claims NewJeffCT Sep 2019 #76

Dunno about SCOTUS, but yes, Trump witnesses will take the 5th. ehrnst Sep 2019 #78

Agree. Begin the inquiry -- yesterday! The rest will follow. nt in2herbs Sep 2019 #15

"Super frustrated" isn't reason enough to possibly end our chances of taking back the Senate in 2020 ehrnst Sep 2019 #67

No we don't edhopper Sep 2019 #8

Well, then saying "Hearings NOW" would be a bit clearer, wouldn't it? (nt) ehrnst Sep 2019 #36

I suppose edhopper Sep 2019 #43

People remember Clinton's impeachment, and I think that's what they are thinking of. (nt) ehrnst Sep 2019 #58

Perhaps you are right edhopper Sep 2019 #65

The idea that if the opposing party can do damage to a POTUS for lying about a blow job ehrnst Sep 2019 #71

Thank you! H2O Man Sep 2019 #69

I totally agree. abqtommy Sep 2019 #9

"I don't think there's any way that tRUMP and his minions will survive investigations utilizing ehrnst Sep 2019 #74

You may be right, but then again so may I. abqtommy Sep 2019 #83

Not if they cancel each other out.... (nt) ehrnst Sep 2019 #84

Impeachment hearings, done right, take a great deal of preparation StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #10

SS - cilla4progress Sep 2019 #54

"If you come for the king, you best not miss." ehrnst Sep 2019 #77

The House can't "televise the hearings" brooklynite Sep 2019 #46

Of course the House isn't a network PJMcK Sep 2019 #50

Yes and no... brooklynite Sep 2019 #52

You make a very good point StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #62

I agree. Impeachment doesn't have to be about removing the man. Hotler Sep 2019 #60

right. Impeachment is a potential solution at the end of a process. We need to enter and/or wiggs Sep 2019 #87

I like seth's points on dems' current stands wiggs Sep 2019 #88

Failure to respond to trump's crimes would be inexcusable. ecstatic Sep 2019 #3

Do you think holding a losing vote for impeachment would be an effective way to ehrnst Sep 2019 #5

Again, the vote can be delayed, but start the ecstatic Sep 2019 #12

You mean like Nadler's doing? ehrnst Sep 2019 #21

The vote can't be delayed indefinitely StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #26

I don't think the House vote would fail. I think it would pass. ecstatic Sep 2019 #33

You may not think it will fail, but Pelosi does and I gotta go with her on this one StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #34

Do you have information that Pelosi and Nadler don't? ehrnst Sep 2019 #38

Well the negative consequences must be considered. ehrnst Sep 2019 #63

Doubt it. Blues Heron Sep 2019 #4

So there's nothing to be done other than holding a losing vote on impeachment and ehrnst Sep 2019 #17

This is true. sharedvalues Sep 2019 #6

Investigate now. Televised hearings now. Basically what Nadler et al are gearing up to do. Hekate Sep 2019 #13

Yes, I think that we forget that those in congress, even in swing districts must be responsive ehrnst Sep 2019 #19

There have been a couple of impeachment votes already? kentuck Sep 2019 #16

He has not been able to since Democrats have taken back the house. ehrnst Sep 2019 #23

The latest was after the attack on the "Squad".. kentuck Sep 2019 #25

His proposal in July didn't go to the floor. (nt) ehrnst Sep 2019 #37

It got about 80 votes. kentuck Sep 2019 #39

Mea culpa. ehrnst Sep 2019 #49

It was not a truly serious vote. kentuck Sep 2019 #56

That's important. Specific charges and hard evidence to back them up must ehrnst Sep 2019 #57

They need to do their job. Cuthbert Allgood Sep 2019 #22

The Nixon impeachment hearings weren't televised, so they didn't affect public opinion StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #27

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2019 #30

You're probably thinking of the Senate hearings held in the summer of 1973 StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #31

Nope. TwilightZone Sep 2019 #32

Barbara Jordan's Articles of Impeachment speech was televised. Cuthbert Allgood Sep 2019 #40

That wasn't the hearing. StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #48

Dayum, SS... cilla4progress Sep 2019 #59

Those pesky facts again, getting in the way of a righteous rant... ehrnst Sep 2019 #79

They certainly did... brooklynite Sep 2019 #66

As I've said repeatedly, the first 20 minutes of the first impeachment hearing was televised. StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #70

Their job is to impeach when there is a majority that votes for it, as per the constitution. ehrnst Sep 2019 #35

History does not support you in the claim that Republicans were willing to remove. Cuthbert Allgood Sep 2019 #41

Actually history does support my claim that there were republicans willing to impeach ehrnst Sep 2019 #47

The power of impeachment is in the hearings, not the vote Mike 03 Sep 2019 #28

Well, that's not something that a lot of the public, even here on DU understands. ehrnst Sep 2019 #44

218 is enough to impeach. GeorgeGist Sep 2019 #29

There is enough to vote on a resolution outlining rules for inquiry, and that's scheduled for this ehrnst Sep 2019 #42

I trust Speaker Pelosi. Amimnoch Sep 2019 #45

Not going to happen. ooky Sep 2019 #53

of course but it didn't have to be that way. Kurt V. Sep 2019 #55

Great thread and discussion cilla4progress Sep 2019 #61

It's up to the House whip to make sure the party has enough votes Poiuyt Sep 2019 #68

Geez, from what I've read here, that's Pelosi's job, along with ehrnst Sep 2019 #75

Best post of the day StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #80

Just as we would not want to see a Dem impeached on a straight, or near straight, Party line empedocles Sep 2019 #73

True StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #81