No. They are ALREADY saying those exact talking points!

Censure? LOL. That almost validates the Mueller report as a witch hunt! It's a slap on the wrist! And the Senate won't even take that up.

"Letting the voters decide" is bullshit because:

1) It downplays the importance of the Mueller report, and gives ammo to the claim it was a witch hunt
2) It encourages the Russians to continue interfering and colluding with Trump
3) It emboldens Trump to continue colluding with Russia
4) It emboldens Trump to continue all his other crimes
5) What the hell happens if Trump wins? Does that then validate everything he did?

There are no good arguments against impeachment. None. It is the only option.

The 7% of the vote we need to win over in 2020 will hear acquittal, and it will be the truth. The Trump gang's present talking point is an obvious lie and being called out as one. Those two situations are quite different.

Still waiting for the 20 names.

There's far more hay to be made through a lengthy investigation and hearing process than there is by starting impeachment proceedings now. Testimony from all the players in the Mueller investigation, including Mueller himself would be far more damaging, far more politically prudent and far more fruitful than proceeding straight to hammering out a gallows.

It would make Congressional Democrats look deliberative, contemplative, composed and serious. In short, they would look like adults. Don't go for broke. Let the trickle of testimony about Trump's behavior slowly fill the public's mind rather than drowning them in it. Let it dominate the news cycle for the rest of the year and into the 2020 primary process.

In turn, the reflexive tantrums from Republicans would paint them in the most unfavorable light.

Based on the same speculation that you have used to predict the doom that will come from an acquittal.

Trump’s approval has dropped and support for impeachment jumped since the redacted report was released. Imagine the shift if, following the opening of a formal impeachment inquiry, the American people are exposed daily, hourly to hearings that yes, will lead to a floor vote and trial. An impeachment inquiry eliminates the legal obstruction in obtaining the unredacted report- that is why it is an essential step.

While we hope the outcome of the trial would be conviction, it’s the power of the Impeachment inquiry that will do the most damage. You won’t get this power with regular hearings or censure motions (I’d be surprised if a censure motion got media coverage lasting more than a few cycles). Trump would likely laugh off a censure motion with a quick tweet, and whereas an impeachment inquiry would introduce facts and evidence to the public leading up to the election.

...what I said is that we are handing Trump a plausible talking point that's not a lie.

As far as the trial is concerned, we can accomplish the same thing (getting the info out to the public) with a censure inquiry and vote. We will get a gurenteed win and we then we have the truthful talking point.

Unlike many here, I like winning way the fuck more than losing.

Still waiting for those 20 names.

...and a majority of Americans still oppose impeachment. But, national polling doesn't mean shit in this instance. It's like the electoral college. What do you think the numbers are in Wyoming, Idaho, North and south Dakota, Louisiana, West Virginia, Mississippi and on and on. The Republican Senators are only afraid of their constituents. They couldn't give a fuck about the 90% of the people in New York and California who want to impeach and convict Trump. Impeachment without a conviction amounts to no more than a bucket of shit. It's similar to winning the popular vote and losing the electoral college.

With the support for impeachment growing, and Trump’s approval dropping since the release of the redacted report, that is evidence that an impeachment inquiry (which would get way more media attention- I just can’t see CNN creating a splashy “Censure Showdown!” Graphic) would move the needle in our favour.

Your assumption that impeachment without conviction amounting to no more than a bucket of shit is pure conjecture with no evidence to back it up.

To my knowledge, there is no such thing as a censure inquiry, only a motion made on the floor to vote on censure, with debate before the vote- no witnesses, no subpoenas for documents, etc.

As I’ve said before, a formal impeachment inquiry is a different beast, one with significantly more teeth and legal authority than a regular congressional committee investigation. It can be as methodical and relentless as a committee investigation, but is more likely to produce results, such as the unredacted Meuller report, and testimony that can’t be blocked by claims of executive privilege.

Some fights must be fought without being certain of the outcome before hand. This is one of those fights, and it will require substantial courage. Just as those whose misdeeds are exposed and examined will face consequences, so will those whose cowardice shrinks from this fight in this critical moment in history.

that's why it's just an opinion.

Have increased since the release of the report, and Trumps approval rating has dropped.

Nobody thinks Trump is innocent or shouldn't be removed from office. I'm just looking for the best way.

Winning in 2020 gives us a Democratic President. Impeachment and then acquittal gives Trump a talking point. Impeachment with conviction (very unlikely) gives us President Pence.

I like option A.

That's my opinion.

Well said.

My answer to your question is unknown...but what is 100% known is they won't have to take a vote, if we don't impeach. The immediate question we should be asking is how best to stop a tyrannical President?

Impeachment will make everyone on your list take a vote..on the record. Make them put some skin in the game. Nixon resigned after the price became to high.

If they don't convict....they will have to state in front of the American people...I trust Trump--I support the unindicted co-conspiractor who lied to the American people during the last elections.

...and beating Trump's brains in at the ballot box?

Yes, we do have the same goals in mind.

Those of us calling for impeachment are simply saying...Our founding fathers knew there would come day when a President would use the power of the Office in corrupt ways. They gave the House impeachment power and told us to "break this glass during an emergency".

For me, Impeachment includes hearings...Not an Impeachment Vote...just an official inquiry, an investigation, a fact finding mission. Use all of the authorities provided to the House by Article 1 of the Constitution to discover any high crimes and misdemeanors. Yes, the Senate and the Supreme Court have their own authorities, but neither one can take action until after the House has acted. The courts can strike down individual congressional actions, but, they do not sit in judgment over any internal House deliberations.

We can Vote after the evidence has been established...

Investigate, let the American people see the evidence on C-SPAN

Then impeach.

However your argument, which you seem to be posting over and over ad nauseam, is not a valid argument at all.

No one in their right mind thinks there are 20 GOP Senators willing to vote to convict Trump.

The debate is whether it makes sense to proceed with impeachment hearings in the House regardless of what the Senate does. I say yes for the following reasons:

-- Impeachment is the right thing to do. There has never been a person more deserving impeachment than Trump.
-- Impeachment will allow the House to dig deeper into Trumps crimes and misdemeanors.
-- Impeachment will generate a ton of news coverage and will likely be the lead story every evening during the process.
-- Impeachment will hang the noose of being impeached around Trumps neck and drive him crazy.

And not impeaching would give Trump a lovely campaign line:

"I cannot be impeached because I didn't commit any crimes. That's why the Democrats didn't impeach me. No crimes, no collusion, no impeachment!"