General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFor those arguing against impeachment
You should go watch Joy Reid's show. She had Dalia Lithwick, Michael Beschloss to name a few. Very sober, knowledgeable, respected people. Michael Beschloss was on later in the show and said that Joy had had a very excellent program so far. And she really did. It is enlightening to see these educated experts and hear how they look at it.
I think the point that stood out for me was one that Dalia made. She said that the first rule of parenting is setting a boundary and then there are CONSEQUENCES to crossing it. If there are not consequences imposed, the rule means nothing. Both Dalia and Michael said that just having Trump lose the next election does not correct the error. It means that breach is left in place for the next president. And presidents don't give up power.
There were many strong points made. Very informative show.
J_William_Ryan
(1,756 posts)And the people rejecting a president by denying him a second term sends a clear message that such wrongdoing by a president wont be tolerated.
Impeachment is a political not legal process; and the politics are such that impeachment is simply not warranted.
Trueblue Texan
(2,440 posts)..."exonerated." If the House can make the investigations public and the public is able to see what really happened, it will make it more and more difficult to defend not throwing him out of office. I'm terrified by what I learned in Joy's coverage yesterday. We all should be and we should let our reps in House and Senate know what we know and how we feel about allowing the president to go unchecked in these obstructive and criminal actions he's taking. If enough is revealed and enough people are upset and communicate that, we have a chance of getting rid of this horrible traitor in the Oval Office.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)turn on trump.
You say, let's play with fire and see if we get burnt. Maybe we can convince the fire to not act like fire.
watoos
(7,142 posts)Trump will certainly claim that Democrats could find no wrongdoing.
Millennials may become discouraged and stay home in 2020.
Sometimes it is better to fight and lose then not to fight at all.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)senseless.
I have not heard a millennial opinion on impeachment but they have the ability to reason as anyone else does.
If they stay home it is their future they are fucking with.
watoos
(7,142 posts)wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)find ways to make them want to vote if they cant see the importance for themselves. I remember 2014 here at DU when everyone pledged to vote. Yet young people said there was nothing to vote for after our loss. You cant reason with stupidity
sop
(10,243 posts)Or he will have by the time Barr is finished declassifying intelligence. Trump is willing to bring down the entire government to save his sorry ass.
Response to Trueblue Texan (Reply #3)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)First, in the context of parenting, consequences on one child may not always serve as a warning to other children. Second, Trump is making a huge number of mistakes that invite impeachment. The next would be dictator will learn from Trump's mistakes to make themself unimpeachable, or at least unconvictable in the Senate. Trump may already have made himself unconvictable. Going back to the parenting thing, that's like threatening a punishment but not following through, the worst lesson of all.
Irishxs
(622 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Me.
(35,454 posts)It seems Joy can't talk about anything else lately. I wonder if she thinks she can force them to do what she wants since she knows so much better than our members of Congress
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Ratings
and they love a fight where they can kick Dems around
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)The Senate will not convict him and he will declare his exoneration and he will be reelected!
You act as if you have power to punish or expel him by impeachment. Get real!
The only power we have over trump is our vote!
The House committees should do their work as best they can while also passing legislation so that we look like the reasonable and best choice in 2020.
Qutzupalotl
(14,327 posts)Look at what he and Barr did with the Mueller report, which shows multiple examples of impeachable conduct and abuse of power. Hes willing to flat-out lie about whats in the report to try to save his political hide, the way he lies about everything else.
He can declare exoneration, but that doesnt mean most people believe him. Most people believe Mueller, especially as people are wading through the report and seeing the damning information for themselves. Trump has never been above 50% approval. So him claiming exoneration which he does constantly does not mean he will be reelected.
Link to tweet
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)Dems will look petty and impotent. Nothing will come of impeachment but the repubs in the Senate rubbing our noses in defeat.
Qutzupalotl
(14,327 posts)We dont know that Trump claiming exoneration will help him. So far it hasnt helped him get above 50%. A full airing of his crimes will only harm him.
We dont even know the outcome of the Senate vote. We just need the information to be well established and testimony televised before sending the impeachment to the Senate. Remember, McConnell does not lead the trial and only gets one vote. Each senator has to examine each article and go on record approving or opposing that conduct. A third of the Senate is up for reelection in 2020.
If the Senate fails to convict, that will further expose the Republican partys corruption, right before an election. At that point, Democrats will have lots of material to hammer them with, including riveting testimony. Thats in addition to the Helsinki surrender, the Oval Office breach, the call to hack Clinton, the insane tariffs, the sexual assaults, and all the other crimes committed in plain sight.
There has never been a president more deserving of impeachment. We must uphold our nations principles and not fear the consequences.
watoos
(7,142 posts)it isn't going to grow if Democrats impeach him. If Democrats fail to impeach Trump it could discourage Democrats from showing up to vote.
If Trump's base shows up and our base shows up, we win, impeaching Trump will only energize our base, I don't give a hoot what it does to Trump's base.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)own reproductive lives and affordable health care and affordable education and climate change and jobs will decide the turnnout
CrispyQ
(36,509 posts)If the House impeaches without a conviction in the Senate he will claim he's been exonerated. If the House doesn't impeach, he will claim that even the dems realize there isn't evidence to impeach.
watoos
(7,142 posts)Point of view.
I see impeachment invigorating our base.
crazytown
(7,277 posts)McConnell is not obliged to hold one.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212129950
KBlagburn
(567 posts)The Senate must hold a trial. McConnell has no choice. Its in the constitution!!!!!!!!!!!
crazytown
(7,277 posts)There is nothing in the Constitution that specifies timing, and, as SCOTUS said in Nixon v United States procedure is up to Senate with no role for judicial review or supervision whatsoever.
If the courts reviewed the actions of the Senate in order to determine whether that body tried an impeached official, it is difficult to see how the Senate would be functioning . . . independently and without assistance or interference ... Judicial involvement in impeachment proceedings, even if only for purposes of judicial review, is counterintuitive be- cause it would eviscerate the important constitutional check placed on the Judiciary by the Framers.
So McConnell refuses to hold a trial before the GE - 'let the people decide' - what is the House supposed to do - go to the Roberts Court?
There will not be a trial before Nov 2020.
crazytown
(7,277 posts)McConnell is not obliged to hold one
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212129950
grantcart
(53,061 posts)The discussion is about when to start and, more specifically what critical mass is necessary to have an effective impeachment.
I do see some arguing for immediate impeachment even though the investigation has only just begun.
I, for one, believe that his financial crimes (tax evasion, insurance fraud, money laundering) will do two things; initiate criminal proceedings against Trump ( a New York State Grand Jury can indict Trump and his family) and be easier to understand for the non Trump supporting guy in the middle.
The argument to rush impeachment before the optimum time is being dealt with by Speaker Pelosi.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)It needs to be repeated again and again in order to counter the lie being told about the Democrats' position and motivations.
Democrats are not saying he shouldn't be impeached. They are saying it should be done correctly.
Huge difference!
Andy823
(11,495 posts)CaptainTruth
(6,601 posts)The House could impeach, but at this point does anyone think there would be a 2/3 vote in the Senate to convict, followed by majority Senate vote to bar from office?
In other words, the House could impeach but the Senate won't convict, so Trump remains in office & brags he was "completely exonerated" by the Senate. Nothing changes.
To use Dalia's parenting analogy, it's like mom (the House) says you've been bad so go to your room & you're grounded for a week, then dad (the Senate) comes in & says nah, it's ok, you're fine, go play with your friends, & the kid skips out the door to have fun because in this process dad has the final say.
I know a lot of people don't like to look at it this way, but this is the reality we face.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)watoos
(7,142 posts)And being impeached will devastate Trump.
Trumps biographer claimed that.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)I don't think our base needs an impeachment to "invigorate" them to turn out to vote.
It's pretty odd to assume that our bass will be so angry that the Democrats didn't impeach Donald Trump that they will then Make sure that he stays in office another 4 years. That doesn't even make any sense.
If that's the only way they will turn out to vote Trump out, they can't be trusted to turn out even with an impeachment - and I have more faith in them than that.
But if you're right - and I don't think you are - then we have much bigger problems on our hands than whether we're impeaching or not.
watoos
(7,142 posts)one of the reasons that Hillary lost was because our turnout was low with millennials.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)But if millennials are going to refuse to vote Trump out because he wasn't impeached, why would you trust them to vote him out if he is impeached?
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)People only seem to be parroting their talking points. I think you should at least be open minded enough to go and listen to those people who have studied these things all their lives. Seems just like the GOP echo chamber bubble at times. These people are constitutional and historical experts, . . . oh, never mind. If you're not interested to hear what educated people think, I'm not going to waste my time. I thought some might be interested. . . .
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)WE are the electorate! What we think is what matters!
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)If so, you are not very educated at all. And Dalia Lithwick?
I couldn't live in a bubble that small.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)but I will not burn incense to their alters.
What matters is what we think and do on election day.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)That's called "getting informed". No one said to let anyone think for you. You are making that up all on your own. But, people who want to do the right thing, listen to experts. Of course there is the Trump way of not being able to listen to or accept anything from the outside, just rely on the gut . . . I guess that's the way "stable geniuses" do it. I prefer to listen to how smart people think about it and then incorporate that into my thought process. But if you have no process, just do it the Trump way. . . . whatever comes into your head at the time. Oh well.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)1) My personal summary isn't their whole argument
So your opening point is that these experts have really great points but you haven't actually presented their best points.
2) If your not interested to hear what educated people think . . .
Your the person who isn't interested in having a discussion with "educated people".
You have taken the erroneous assumption that because somebody doesn't agree with "A" that they are anti "A" and again this is a very two dimensional way at looking at a 3 dimensional situation.
Let's pretend that you are looking for an apartment and are showed an apartment on the first floor and refuse to the offer to lease. That doesn't mean that you are against renting a different apartment on the 15th floor but in your limited binary world it can only be one thing or the opposite.
The Greeks frequently have multiple words that define subtle permutations of an English word that has a single and less precise meaning. One of those words is ??ό??? or chronos which is translated as time but really has a much more subtle meaning as "the right timing of a thing" and becomes the foundation for the word chronology.
So, in Greek, if you are asked about impeachment you could answer that it is not the correct "chronos" and that would mean that certain things have to happen to make the timing right. Its not that you are against it but that the timing is essential to meet the existential crossroads that will fulfil the historic destiny of the moment.
Now we are facing a number of complex charges against the President. We haven't even received the full report on the very narrow question of Russian interference in the Presidential election of 2016. No investigation has been made yet of the Trump's financial involvement with the Russian and various economic crimes (including specific testimony by his attorney that he committed insurance fraud).
The question of whether or not Trump has been compromised and is a Russian asset and is cooperating with Putin is one that is very subtle and is not likely to have a "smoking gun" moment that is objectively defined like a camera that captures a speeder or a DNA match.
The economic crimes that the President has almost certainly committed, and has been committing for some time will have a much more black or white quality to it and even more importantly, will be more easily understood by the average Joe.
Last week I was in a convenience store in a deep red area that went 70% for Trump. When I got to the cashier I mentioned to the cashier that I couldn't wait to see what was in Trump's tax filings (the story on the TV above her at the time). She laughed and agreed and then every single of the 7 people in line, including guys who had NRA stickers on their trucks and who generally appeared to fit MAGA demographics, said that they agreed. I was floored.
You have framed the argument that the Democrats who want to be smart about the "chronos" of impeachment and are saying "not yet" are saying "never" and that is not is what is happening. We don't want to issue a speeding ticket because someone says they saw him speeding we want to get the picture from the camera.
But let's go back to your simplified binary two dimensional world:
Please advise which of these experts is saying that we should impeach the President before we get the data from the banks and the tax filings and want to initiate Articles of Impeachment now?
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)grantcart
(53,061 posts)criminal charges related to the Trump foundation.
This is another element that thinking people want taken before impeachment officially begins.
watoos
(7,142 posts)grantcart
(53,061 posts)that it alone could put him in a NY jail cell
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_J._Trump_Foundation
Given the violations alleged in the civil case, some experts believe a tax investigation could lead to state criminal charges filed against Trump
Trumpocalypse
(6,143 posts)Just want to see it done right. Follow the Watergate model. A year of investigation to turn public opinion and republicans. Then start impeachment proceedings.
spanone
(135,873 posts)we need to impeach and get it going. imho
The courts arent going to be making final decisions until next year, is my guess.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)that will mean the damage to our institutions and government will be the new normal because they didn't come out and officially call him out.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)Anyway, what I find is that I can follow and appreciate the points that all sides are making, but when I heard the people on Joy, especially Dalia and Michael, they pretty much convinced me. I thought I'd mention that reference for anyone who wanted to hear what those great minds thought about it. It's a good reference.
If people don't want to, that's OK, but I thought some would appreciate the reference.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Phony premise.
Btw, I've liked Joy Reid for some time and am severely disappointed in her. What everyone else needs to know is that Reid almost killed her career early on by reporting sensationalist, dishonest spin instead of responsible information people could make decisions on. She recovered by cleaning up her act before I starting watching her.
What I saw from her the other day, however, was a flashback to the bad Joy Reid who abused her viewers' trust, and I removed her program from my list to be recorded.
Two fails is now two too many. I don't care what a nice smile she has or how charming -- I won't be watching for a third. I also turned off Rachel's show last night when Reid subbed. She's probably adequately constrained by Rachel's requirements, but...no.
Kurt V.
(5,624 posts)Kurt V.
(5,624 posts)republicans and im on a tough nut right now.
Locutusofborg
(525 posts)Running for the presidency during his honeymoon period with the American people. I want Trump/Pence soundly defeated at the polls and then Trump prosecuted for his crimes. Electoral defeat and criminal prosecution are also setting boundaries on bad behavior.
Besides it would take TWENTY Republican Senators to vote guilty to remove Trump from office. I could see 4 or 5 Republican Senators voting him guilty but not twenty.
A not guilty verdict would make impeachment a symbolic act by the House of Representatives only.
crazytown
(7,277 posts)McConnell is not obliged to hold one
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212129950
watoos
(7,142 posts)the conviction trial in the Senate will not be presided by Mitch McConnell. John Roberts will conduct the trial.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)Locutusofborg
(525 posts)McConnells already established willingness to bend, break and subvert tradition and the law makes it anybodys guess as to whether McConnell would hold a trial if the House impeached Trump. The Constitution does not mandate a trial, it only says that the sole power to conduct a trial rests with the Senate.
Can the Senate Decline to Try an Impeachment Case?
https://www.lawfareblog.com/can-senate-decline-try-impeachment-case
watoos
(7,142 posts)voted to not hold the trial. McConnell would not preside over the trial, once it is scheduled, Chief Justice Roberts would.
Locutusofborg
(525 posts)Did he hold a vote on Merrick Garlands nomination to the Supreme Court? Did he invoke the nuclear option to take away the Democrats ability to filibuster court nominees?
Yes, the Chief Justice presides over an impeachment trial but the Majority leader can slow walk when that trial is held. McConnell could schedule a trial for after election day in 2020.