General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Bottom Line
It is up to Nancy and the Democrats.
Otherwise, Donald Trump is going to walk. No one else can hold him accountable.
The Democrats must make a decision. Do they want to impeach or do they want this to be decided by the election in 2020?
If they do not wish to impeach, everything from here forward is just politics.
It will not be an honorable precedent if they choose politics over truth and justice.
And there is no guarantee that Donald Trump will not win re-election in 2020.
And there is no guarantee that the American people will have received all the information they needed to make an educated choice.
Bill Barr is not going to resolve this crisis. Neither is Bob Mueller. It is up to Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats. If they choose not to act, then we may as well reel in our lines and go home.
dameatball
(7,400 posts)kentuck
(111,110 posts)There is no guarantee the Democrats will win if they do not impeach.
A point could be made that Trump will be stronger from this point forward if he is not impeached.
It's a tough decision.
Democrats must choose principles or politics.
It is a very, very important decision.
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)Documents...everything will be fought in court.
TheRealNorth
(9,500 posts)Continue to work though the courts in the guise of rooting out Russian and other foreign influences in foreign politics, all the while maintaining it has nothing to do with impeachment. That will keep the dirt on Trump flowing through 2020.
Time to play dirty like the Republicans.
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)lastlib
(23,323 posts)It won't happen tomorrow, or this month, but it will happen. Yes, it will take a fight, but we can win it. I honestly have some faith that we can have the facts before the American people before the 2020 election. And I honestly believe that enough voters will be sufficiently sick of his criminal schtick that they will throw his ass out if he is not removed by impeachment or other legal process. This nightmare will end.
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)Wonder how many rethuglicons are willing to fall on their sword for drumpf.
tnlurker
(1,020 posts)Through impeachment hearings. Then the pressure on the Republicans to convict will be greater.
That is the point that Nixon resigned. The republican senators at the time were against conviction....until that point at which the public could see that Nixon was guilty. When that happened they (the republican senators) advised him (Nixon) to resign partly so they would not be voting to convict or not...thus effecting their re-election chances
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)drumpf has more than 1/3 of the population that will support him no matter what.
TwilightZone
(25,499 posts)And the Republicans who showed a conscience during the Nixon process no longer exist. There is no equivalent in the current party.
The chances of the Senate convicting, regardless of the outcome of the investigations, is zero.
bigbrother05
(5,995 posts)Don't rush the hearings and get as much evidence under oath.
The House will select the prosecutors that will bring the case before the Senate.
Even if they can't get 2/3 in the Senate, it will be clear to the public that partisan GOP politics swung the vote.
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)bigbrother05
(5,995 posts)In the next few months a ton of testimony will be given before the House committees. That will reinforce what's known from the report and is likely to reveal even more.
Those hearings could/should lead to the Judiciary committee initiating an Impeachment hearing with a House vote by the holidays (maybe sooner).
McConnell will waffle around about scheduling the Senate action (Garland redux) which will put the Senate GOP in a bind coming into the primary season.
All that action in the House will tend to leave the Dem candidate above the fray and they can honestly say the will let the process play out with the facts leading the way.
With a wounded and flailing incumbent, the GOP will be trying to stem losses.
Volaris
(10,275 posts)They WILL put him in prison to save their own asses.
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)Volaris
(10,275 posts)Keep their seats as a result of throwing him under the bus.
They don't give a fuck about him. They care about getting re elected, point blank end of sentence.
poli-junkie
(1,007 posts)approved the lifting of sanctions for Deripaska not too long ago. I think it was 49 Repukes that approved. Theres your roadmap as to which Senator is on the take.
FormerOstrich
(2,703 posts)He may not be but our country is!
SKKY
(11,826 posts)woodsprite
(11,931 posts)Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)flotsam
(3,268 posts)You Know what no one said at the Alamo "Boys-I took a whip count of the Mexicans and there's no use stirring up trouble...".
These people spent fortunes and made promises to get those jobs-but here is the thing-They swore to God they would protect and defend the constitution. That's the bottom line on their most important job and promise. And when you storm a beach you use all the powder you have, you don't screw around to keep it dry....
There-I'm out of war metaphors, but I truly believe they are on point.
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)20. I have no use for standing on principle if it means losing. What principle would satisfied if Trump wins in 20?
flotsam
(3,268 posts)And if we don't how do we differentiate ourselves from the GOP?
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)Losing would allow a 6/3 SCOTUS. You think giving him another term would be principled?
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)Trump can be prosecuted easily if he is out of office. We can't convict him in the Senate.
kentuck
(111,110 posts)Why can't the opposite be argued?
Why not educate the voters and let them know what they are voting for and what they are voting against?
With the evidence in this report, why would that not make Trump and the entire Republican Party weaker?
How do you reach your conclusion??
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)GOP will stop supporting him no matter what we do? If there was even chance than I would be on board but there isn't.
kentuck
(111,110 posts)Democrats should educate them. Information is power.
flotsam
(3,268 posts)But I don't care if it was 18 years or 18 days. You do the right thing because it's the right thing. You seem to figure doing the right thing will cost us votes but It's equally possible MORE people would vote for that.
kentuck
(111,110 posts)But I think it will be devastating for the Democratic Party if they do not impeach. Trump will win re-election.
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)kentuck
(111,110 posts)And how?
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)I hate Trump but we can't get him out. Better to try to win in 20.
The Democratic Party will become irrelevant if we do not impeach. This is no time for sunshine patriots!!!!
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)drag impeachment to the end...he will get some sympathy. We have a partisan divide no way we convince enough GOP to gain either votes or conviction in the Senate. I fo not see a point to this. Investigate yes impeach no.
flotsam
(3,268 posts)It may in fact be more likely he would choose to be the second to resign than the first removed from office. Don't conflate a continuing criminal enterprise with lying about sex....think Nixon, not Clinton. Clinton got sympathy because it WAS unfair.
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)IN 20.
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)kentuck
(111,110 posts)Look for his polls to start going up next week.
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)I_have_had_enough
(41 posts)I have replied to my congress people to push for impeachment, twice.
They Must act before this asshole becomes normalized.
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)Americans don't like impeachment in general.
BlueWI
(1,736 posts)and fire an FBI director to obstruct an investigation.
Your opposition to impeachment is noted, but your comparison to Walker is a fail.
MadDAsHell
(2,067 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 18, 2019, 07:21 PM - Edit history (1)
Now that people are finally waking up to the fact that he is a Rethuglican and is not and never was our savior, can we keep the party in line for the long haul?
The Cons are going to do everything in their power to get the DINOs over to the "move on" side.
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)Could be pre-impeachment. The information in the report is very damaging .
kentuck
(111,110 posts)If they are not going to impeach, in my opinion, they should subpoena everything and put it into the Courts and let the Courts decide.
Ignoring the situation is not a solution.
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)Is dangerous as hell. You can get documents in pre- impeachment hearings.
kentuck
(111,110 posts)What do you do then?
Demsrule86
(68,715 posts)Mueller did his job,the Gop Senate will not do their jobs.
disndat
(1,887 posts)will Pence pardon him? Then what will happen? Will the Democrats have a harder time defeating Pence or some other than beating Trump?
Baltimike
(4,148 posts)we have to stop pretending that truth and facts even MATTER to them and stop being fucking purists.
We are at WAR right now, and impeaching before we even get the whole report is silly. It lets the kGOPb acquit him AND frame the entire narrative successfully.
Cosmocat
(14,575 posts)The senate will not convict IF McConnell were even to bring it up.
Impeachment by the House would then be nothing more than a statement.
There already is something in place to do that - censure.
The House can do it, and that will be that.
No 45, the republicans, the conservative media, the liberal media, bashing the dems to going the impeachment route and not being able to finish it.
Also, more politically acceptable for members tight or R leaning districts to censure than to vote for impeachment.
prodigitalson
(2,441 posts)but the House must indict him if they are to do their duty to Constitution and Country. Im all for censure as a last resort. If we are left with symbolic acts let's make it the harshest one. An impeachment is akin to an indictment a censure is a strongly worded letter.
SunSeeker
(51,745 posts)Censure is just a statement. The House voting to commence impeachment is much more of a rubuke than any censure statement. He will become only the 3rd president in history to be impeached while in office.
Also, impeachment proceedings allow us to get Grand Jury info.
From the Washington Post:
In the face of Barrs decision not to disclose any of the Mueller report to the public or even to the House Judiciary Committee chaired by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D- N.Y.) until Barr and his team have scrubbed the report of grand jury information (and other material), Nadler and committee Democrats have authorized a subpoena for the full report, setting the stage for a court fight over the committees right to see grand jury information. Although the public need underlying the request for disclosure in McKeever was much less pressing, the decision in that case undermines the position of Nadlers committee, because the controlling federal rule contains no exception allowing congressional oversight committees to demand access to otherwise secret grand jury proceedings.
One of the exceptions to grand jury secrecy is disclosure preliminary to or in connection with a judicial proceeding. To authorize disclosure of the Watergate grand jury information, the special prosecutors office argued that the House had authorized its Judiciary Committee to conduct a formal impeachment inquiry and that such an inquiry could be fairly analogized to a grand jury investigation and thus a judicial proceeding. Both the district court and the court of appeals agreed, and the Judiciary Committee obtained both the report and the underlying evidence.
Significantly, the appeals court decision several days ago reaffirmed that exception. All three judges agreed that an impeachment inquiry falls within the exception for judicial proceedings and coheres with other rulings about the proper scope of grand jury secrecy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-full-mueller-report-could-be-released--if-the-house-opens-impeachment-hearings/2019/04/08/e47fff42-5a14-11e9-a00e-050dc7b82693_story.html
Cosmocat
(14,575 posts)there really is not much more that an impeachment hearing would bring to light that they aren't going to bring to light, and the committees are in fact covering a MUCH wider range of his crimes and fuckwitttery.
Do the hearings they had planned to have all all along, vet out the Mueller report through the summer, than censure him before the end of the year.
SunSeeker
(51,745 posts)Formal impeachment investigation hearings will draw national, indeed global, attention.
Also, those existing House investigations can't get the Grand Jury info we need. Only the impeachment process can get us that:
From the Washington Post:
In the face of Barrs decision not to disclose any of the Mueller report to the public or even to the House Judiciary Committee chaired by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D- N.Y.) until Barr and his team have scrubbed the report of grand jury information (and other material), Nadler and committee Democrats have authorized a subpoena for the full report, setting the stage for a court fight over the committees right to see grand jury information. Although the public need underlying the request for disclosure in McKeever was much less pressing, the decision in that case undermines the position of Nadlers committee, because the controlling federal rule contains no exception allowing congressional oversight committees to demand access to otherwise secret grand jury proceedings.
One of the exceptions to grand jury secrecy is disclosure preliminary to or in connection with a judicial proceeding. To authorize disclosure of the Watergate grand jury information, the special prosecutors office argued that the House had authorized its Judiciary Committee to conduct a formal impeachment inquiry and that such an inquiry could be fairly analogized to a grand jury investigation and thus a judicial proceeding. Both the district court and the court of appeals agreed, and the Judiciary Committee obtained both the report and the underlying evidence.
Significantly, the appeals court decision several days ago reaffirmed that exception. All three judges agreed that an impeachment inquiry falls within the exception for judicial proceedings and coheres with other rulings about the proper scope of grand jury secrecy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-full-mueller-report-could-be-released--if-the-house-opens-impeachment-hearings/2019/04/08/e47fff42-5a14-11e9-a00e-050dc7b82693_story.html
Trump welcomed a Russian attack on our country in order to gain office, then obstructed our Justice Department, sacking an AG and an FBI Director, in order to stop the investigation into that attack. This is horrifically worse than Watergate. A censure would be a laughable slap on the wrist for these grave crimes against our country.
NotHardly
(1,062 posts)NotHardly
(1,062 posts)Pobeka
(4,999 posts)Otherwise they not only look weak, they are weak.
If the senate convicts, then the SOB is out of there and faces consequences.
If the senate does not convict, then it will be crystal clear that the GOP senate does not care about this country, and the GOP will have a serious uphill battle for the senate in the 2020 election.
There is no significant legislation that will make it through the senate before 2020 anyway to change the lives of ordinary voters.
Impeachment in the house is the only play available...
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)The impeachment would be on paper, for historical and maybe future legal reasons. But it won't remove him from office.
They could file a secret indictment, maybe, for Trump to be indicted after he leaves office. But he's going to walk, for the time being. Mueller knew that.
kentuck
(111,110 posts)Is to try and inform the citizens of this country so they can be educated voters. All we can do is give them the facts and possible consequences. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
If people have the information and still vote against what is best for our country, there is not much more we can do.
But we have to try and get them the info they need to be an informed voter. The propaganda is very strong, almost cult-like, and will be very difficult to defeat.
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)... abilities impeachment brings congress.
SunSeeker
(51,745 posts)From the Washington Post:
In the face of Barrs decision not to disclose any of the Mueller report to the public or even to the House Judiciary Committee chaired by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D- N.Y.) until Barr and his team have scrubbed the report of grand jury information (and other material), Nadler and committee Democrats have authorized a subpoena for the full report, setting the stage for a court fight over the committees right to see grand jury information. Although the public need underlying the request for disclosure in McKeever was much less pressing, the decision in that case undermines the position of Nadlers committee, because the controlling federal rule contains no exception allowing congressional oversight committees to demand access to otherwise secret grand jury proceedings.
One of the exceptions to grand jury secrecy is disclosure preliminary to or in connection with a judicial proceeding. To authorize disclosure of the Watergate grand jury information, the special prosecutors office argued that the House had authorized its Judiciary Committee to conduct a formal impeachment inquiry and that such an inquiry could be fairly analogized to a grand jury investigation and thus a judicial proceeding. Both the district court and the court of appeals agreed, and the Judiciary Committee obtained both the report and the underlying evidence.
Significantly, the appeals court decision several days ago reaffirmed that exception. All three judges agreed that an impeachment inquiry falls within the exception for judicial proceedings and coheres with other rulings about the proper scope of grand jury secrecy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-full-mueller-report-could-be-released--if-the-house-opens-impeachment-hearings/2019/04/08/e47fff42-5a14-11e9-a00e-050dc7b82693_story.html
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)uponit7771
(90,367 posts)... again.
myohmy2
(3,182 posts)...IMO, the Constitution demands we impeach and let the process take it's course...
...in the long run, sweeping impeachment under the table will cause more problems and do more harm than not impeaching...
...if we put country over party, I don't believe we have a choice...
...