Rachel makes 7 million a year she can ride out anything, we can’t. We need to get on with making a better world for ourselves and those that come after. If it takes letting trump off the hook so be it.

And saying that is political misses the point. It is about what our lives will be like. We can pass progressive legislation if we control government.

Impeachment will not get rid of trump. Only we can do that with our votes

and had a very ambitious agenda supported by solid plans that would have benefited everyone in America. How'd that work out. And why?

Everything they did to her could be done to us, and without popular support to begin with we would be easy targets for a massive smear depicting us as just as unprincipled as the Republicans but without their strength. Nothing succeeds like success, but success would go to the Republicans. Just like Kavanaugh's hearing, without the power to succeed we'd be the failures, weak, sickeningly disappointing to those who care, unable to do anything right. We're surrounded here with people already wallowing determinedly in their peculiar enjoyment.

Speaking of Kavanaugh, how'd that work out? Did we get a big bump in approval for trying to do what was only very right?

China, Iran, and other hostile states who've taken the big lesson in how to bring us down. I believe this entire subject is being augmented and spread by them. Encourage us to impeach now, before our case is too strong for them to defeat.

I trust our pros in congress who are carrying the future of our nation on their shoulders. We MUST win this next election.

I live in Georgia. The entire world watched as the governor's election was stolen here. Of course it was massively illegal in many ways, but with Republicans in power we were unable to use legal means to stop him from taking office. Republicans in other states also took a lesson -- that they can do it there also.

As for the federal government, we're just one more hard-right "originalist" justice and a handful of years away from the America we grew up in being a thing of the past, of putting citizens they don't like in detention camps, and of course, our ability to talk about what they're doing risk and fear.

We need to educate the American public to the true nature of Trump.
Impeachment may not lead to conviction, but it will bring all the truth out into the open.
I don't believe this process will hurt the Democrats.
Truth is always the best path, and following the rule of law shows strength, not weakness.
I have observed the American political process for over 50 years, including the Nixon impeachment hearings.
Letting Trump off the hook is a violation of the Congressmen's oath of office.
It will go a long way toward handing Trump a second term.

This is about doing what's right, not what's expedient.

Patrick Phillips

take lessons from us. How fucking arrogant to think we need to teach the American people.

Over half know trump is evil and the rest don't care. We are not going to teach the American people anything.

Also cutting off your nose to spite your face makes no sense either. If doing the "right thing" gets you more years in the wilderness it isn't the right thing.

I totally don't get that.

one of the guys who wrote one of Trump's books stated that impeachment would devastate Trump. Trump is not a strong person, he constantly needs praise and reassurances, that's why he brought his family into the White House.

Daily televised impeachment hearings will give Trump a nervous breakdown.

will be daily televised hearings. We have no documents, no factual witnesses, we do not control the media.

Too much of these opinions are based on Watergate. This is 2019 not 1974. People need their phony reality shows and Fox is not going to help educate the American people.

It would be comical if it were a Mel Brooks movie, you know, two dumb shits are fighting when one says to the other "hey, let's turn this around and use reverse psychology", but it isn't a movie and the tactics are real. I say bring them what they are asking for.

even if we take back the White House and none of our legislation especially progressive legislation will get through the republican senate. We will then lose the house in 2022 and another republican will be President come 2024 without us making a lick of progress. Time to stop playing it by what we think is safe and take some risk if we are ever going to bring about meaningful reforms.

how did that work out?

She says we should ignore the political consequences and impeach because politically we are more likely convince people we didn't do it for political reasons.

She didn't say to do it "because we are more likely convince people we didn't do it for political reasons." That just a side benefit of impeaching for the right reasons.

It's not a "side benefit," it's a way of fooling
people into believing it isn't political. If you really want to prove it isn't political, you should be for impeachment even if we knew for certain that it means we won't get a conviction and Trump will be re-elected.

Ask yourself that question. It's a hypothetical to test your moral resolve, not something we can really know. If you knew for certain that impeachment would guarantee a Trump re-election would you still do it?

Here are the exact quotes:

The future is unknowable - Of course it is! This is just a part of life. We make our best guess about the future then decide accordingly. There is no other way to do anything. An unknowable future is no reason to do or not do anything.

Then she adds, here's a side benefit - we'll vote Trump out. Isn't that our REAL goal anyway. To get Trump out. Why is the "side benefit" the very thing we've been obsessed with for the last 3 years?

If you want to be a moral hero, give yourself the test. To take a true moral stand, you must take it when the consequences may be negative. Would you jump on a hand grenade to save others? That person is a hero.

So do you want to be a hero? Would you impeach Trump even if you knew it would mean his re-election? That is, would impeach, even if it was very detrimental to your side?

If you say yes, congratulations, you are moral hero. If you say no or unsure, congratulations, you are normal person. You are taking politics into consideration. As I am.

She is saying exactly what many are saying and it makes total sense to me. It is simply the right thing to do and to include baseless speculation regarding the political effects in the decision making process is foolish.

But she didn't say we should impeach no matter what, and neither will you. That tells me all I need to know.

I don't want to impeach because I believe it will hurt our chance of voting Trump. Just like I'm voting in the primaries for the person who I think can best be Trump, without knowing if I am right or not.

Would you personally favor impeachment if you had a crystal ball and knew for certain that impeachment would cause his re-election?

I know your point but its irrelevant since it will never happen.

Furthermore, the argument of whether it helps or hurts Trump is futile. One can argue both sides and they both are legitimate reasonable possibilities. It would make a good debate competition question as there are so many ways to argue it.

I am done with this thread. Ciao.

she said if a president commits high crimes and misdemeanors it is the Constitutional duty of the House to open up an impeachment inquiry. That inquiry will certainly have political ramifications but politics would not be the defining factor into whether or not to begin the inquiry.

Johnson pushed for the Civil Rights Act because it was the right thing knowing that it would cost the Democrats many votes. That's taking a moral stand.

Soldiers do their duty even in the face of certain death. That's taking a moral stand.

Let's signal our virtue through impeachment, and oh, by the way, it might help us win the election, is playing politics.

She's saying do it because it's the right thing to do, and because it's the right thing, it's less likely to hurt you politically. That's neither hard to understand, nor bad advice.

if they knew for certain we would lose the House. Most everyone refused to answer that question on various grounds. It's hypothetical though, meant to test your moral resolve.

Morality is easy when you think you'll get a side benefit. But what if you think you'll be punished severely in the polls? Would you still do it? Ask yourself that question. You don't have to tell me your answer.

My answer is that I would not impeach if I knew or even suspected it might cost us the House or the Presidency. you may think think I'm putting politics above morality or that I don't trust the American people. You'd be right on both counts.

but I think that showing strength by impeaching is a much more politically palatable choice than showing weakness (and moral laxity) by not impeaching.

Your mileage may vary.

Speaker Pelosi is making an assumption that an impeachment hearing will hurt Democrats in swing districts when in fact the opposite may occur. Not holding an impeachment hearing will make Democrats look weak to many voters.

The Maga Morans aren't ever going to vote for a Democrat anyway. Not for the Senate, not for the House, not for President and their numbers definitely will not increase due to Impeachment. Hell, Trump actually lost the popular vote and barely eked out an EC win in the last election and he sure as fuck hasn't gotten more popular since.

Impeach and then let those Red state Senators say they're just fine with the crimes that will be revealed. Ignominious immortality awaits.

Trump's base is what it is, it is not going to grow any bigger. If Trump turns out his base and we turn out our base, we win, even with rigged voting machines.

The decision to impeach should not be based on who benefits.

... including "constitutional remedies" for his conduct. There's only one "constitutional remedy" available, impeachment.

Yet some folks criticize because they haven't used the "I" word ... Yet.

That's one of the problems with impeachment if the president is removed. The one who takes over could be even more of an ass.

She is stating a fact. Whether you agree or not does not change the fact.

if you’re not committed to fighting for it. That’s where leadership comes in and there we have been sadly lacking on this issue.

If Speaker Pelosi were to call a 9PM news conference and list the reasons for starting an impeachment hearing, she would get 100% of her caucus to agree. Speaker Pelosi can unite the Democratic party by calling for impeachment.

Democrats chose not to investigate Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitch for war crimes, for misleading the American people into an unnecessary war. What the fuck happened because we didn't want to divide the country?
In 2010 Republicans flipped 64 House seats. Remember Speaker Pelosi handing that oversized gavel to John Boehner? I remember, too bad more people don't remember that.

So much winning! No wonder we keep doubling down.

The only problem with your scenario is it would be almost a 180 for Pelosi. She hasn’t poisoned the well on impeachment but her appetite for it appears to be next to non-existent, and not just this time around as you note.

100% of Dems is not enough

for once dems are acting strategic instead of ‘righteous’. Maddow’s idealistic bs no longer applies, but good for ratings though (highest ever under trump?).

not to her overall programming. But, yes, she is an entertainer, not a lawmaker.

... and she was awesome on Seth Myer's show last night.

However I never forget that she is a journalist and she (as well as her network) stands to gain by the Dems going to impeachment. The media is salivating over the prospect of impeachment hearings that will of course be 100% televised 24/7 for however long. It's their bread and butter, and it's certainly Rachel's goal to see it happen.

We need to step back from this and look around a little bit. Who is pulling strings on this? Who stands to gain/lose the most? We Democrats and especially Speaker Pelosi own the catbird seat right now. Why be in such a hurry to give it up? Chump will see eventually justice, of that we can be sure.

the American public in the do/don't Impeachment debate by being patient........ it raises awareness and causes many of the uninformed to become aware of something they had little to no knowledge of.

First of all I don't trust polls, none of them, they can be used as propaganda tools to sway public opinion. Speaker Pelosi and her caucus work for us, we pay them to make tough decisions.

lines overwhelmed with calls for Impeachment we will know the "polls" are in favor of ousting the Orange Menace. Until many Congresscritters feel constituent pressure I just dont see it happening, so yeah, I think poll numbers have to grow.

and Maddow is no different.

Talking heads are not above criticism. Their political commentary is not the word of god. If my gentle criticism is 'bashing Ds' so be it. I have been on DU since the Bush days and I really don't need to be lectured by you.

you made it personal. Refute Maddow's analysis. She basically only had 1 main point, that if Democrats choose to impeach, because of Trump's numerous high crimes and misdemeanors (individual 1) that Democrats shouldn't be accused of impeaching simply for political reasons. I agree with her viewpoint, you?

She could be a Dem. She could be an independent. I have no way of knowing and neither do you.

You make an ass out of u and me.

..and how annoying when she says "bull pucky?"

By the likes of those many typically hold in high esteem? You may not agree with all but...here's just a few..

Lawrence Tribe
Rachel Maddow
Joyce Vance
Maxine Waters
Elizabeth Warren
Beto O'Rourke

.....and, too, if Pelosi is claiming her instincts in dealing with Trump are honed by tending to six grandchildren, I wonder how she would deal with a grandchild who behaves as badly as Trump does? I believe she would STOP the grandchild and CORRECT the grandchild and put him in a space where he could no longer break rules and norms and damage other people. Not by clapping, not by ignoring and hoping it will stop. She would DO THE RIGHT THING.

Forward who has no vested interest. If a person can lose their job, they will look at things differently than those who can see all sides. We don’t have a leader now, a big picture one. Maybe Clinton and Obama and Jimmy could step in behind the scenes.

T would be out by now.

But they're politicians. For many of them the political outcome seems to be more important than their oath of office.

The supine Republicans.

Do your job and start an Impeachment inquiry! Stop wondering if it will hurt or help your chances in 2020. I will tell you right now, if you fail to hold oversight on this con man, it will hurt your chances in 2020!

I want to see this go to the Senate and blow up in McConnell's face, and the rest of Republicans then we can say loudly they choose party over country.

Impeach!!

Tribe, now Maddow, for instance. I really don't understand why some Democrats here can't accept that any Democrat, constitutional legal scholar, etc. etc. etc. has a different point of view than themselves and Speaker Pelosi about impeachment proceedings.

It gets so old when we are repeatedly lectured, told "No", told only one person in the United States has the experience, knowledge, etc. to make this decision (Pelosi), accused of not doing our homework, and not to mention accused of being trolls!! LOL



Of course, I agree with Rachel.

that impeachment is a judicial and ethical process but not a political one.

Except it's absolutely a political process, and thus political considerations are important.

And no, in this environment you are not convincing anyone that isn't already in favor of impeachment that you are "doing it for the right reasons" by going quickly vice waiting until investigations are complete...and to be honest, you aren't convincing them even then.

So, no, if someone wants to argue that the moral/ethical considerations outweigh the political considerations, that's one thing...to argue that political considerations are beside the point and shouldn't be considered at all is at best naive, and at worst disingenuous.

Yes, an impeachment hearing is a judicial process, and because of this it carries more clout with the courts than a regular legislative hearing carries. At the very least Democrats under an impeachment hearing should be given the grand jury information.

The Trump/Barr game plan is to delay everything until after the elections, they are ignoring requests for documents, ignoring subpoenas. Adam Schiff is one smart guy, when was his last committee hearing? Under an impeachment hearing Democrats have more clout with the courts to expedite rulings on subpoenas, etc.

Holding impeachment hearings is a "practical" decision. Daily hearings will control the narrative which is critical. Without the hearings the narrative is going to be about how the crooked FBI and how Hillary paid Christopher Steele to write a fake dossier to carry on a witch hunt against Trump. You can bank on that happening if you watched the performances of Jordan and Gaetz at the last hearing. Trump plans to put Hillary on the 2020 ballot.

There won't be many hearings or witnesses or documents or subpoenas adhered to unless we start an impeachment hearing. That is beside the point anyway with me. IMO we should have started impeachment a year before the Mueller report came out. What do I know? Individual 1 - Pence 2020.

From the arrogance and bravado of Republican leadership and Team Trump, we must conclude that they have gamed out the election and are sure of themselves. This election could likely be a real SNAFU. FUBAR. A shock and awe operation with multi-faceted criminal operations changing votes.

It is supremely stupid to wait until 2020 to see how things play out for America.

if folks want to make practical and political arguments for holding impeachment hearings, that's quite fine and reasonable.
My point is to not make an argument that there are no practical or political considerations at all, which is what Rachel Maddow seems to be making.

I agree wholeheartedly.

There is no constitutional duty. There's a process that they may select if they decide to.

This is just a way to try and shame them by declaring it some ethical must do.

Show the American people that the entire GOP, as well as Trump, are career criminals who believe they're above the rule of law. Expose them for the filth they are.

let's fucking use it please. Even Mueller said it the CONGRESS to get this done.

As in today!