Hell, I wouldn't be shocked if Barr pulls strings and somehow Epstein (IF he is going to squeal on Rump) walks. It sounds absurd, but after 2 and a half years of Rump, anything is possible in terms of depravity and ever-deepening evil. I see NO bottom.

If we can win at The Ballot Box and actually get the piece of s*** out of office, the Democratic president can reset by putting actual professionals into these offices who can get these investigations and prosecution's going the way they should.

It best if they could impeach him which they can't, it would taste get him out of office. He wouldn't get prosecuted anyways with a Republican president.

I get why people want impeachment, if there's such a thing this clown needs to have it done to him. But again he's not getting impeached, at the very least send it isn't going to find him guilty.

It's all hands on deck for 2020, again to give us a chance that we can actually get him out of there, to give us one last shot it getting our democracy back.

confirm ANY nominees, inducing AG.

What can happen then? Can Biden just appoint them via Executive Order on a temp basis?

and his Senate cronies refuse to confirm judges, including SC justices.

Democrats best option is impeaching Trump and Barr.

Leadership for not doing his job for four years during a Dem's term?

I am well aware about SCOTUS.

I am 23yo, and I doubt I see a Rethug Senate confirm a Dem SCOTUS nominee until I am in my 40's, if then. Well, IF we nominate a RWNJ picked by the Federalist Society, then yes.

If not, shit is going to get BAD

like breakdown bad

..... "McConnell and his Senate cronies refuse" to convict. How does that solve the problem?

nm

you do understand that IF the House were to impeach either, the is literally ZERO chance the senate will convict them, and they will remain in their positions?

control of the narrative is? Do you know how important it is to get the truth out to the American people?
The American people did not read the redacted Mueller report. Congress did not get to see the grand jury information and an impeachment inquiry will give Congress that grand jury information. As bad as the redacted Mueller report was for Trump there is so much more dirt in the grand jury testimony.

Can you not envision televised hearings going on for months exposing all of the trump crime family corruption to the American people? Think about that. When impeachment hearings started against Nixon only 19% of the people favored having the hearings.

The end goal of impeachment hearings IMO isn't to remove Trump/Barr from office, it is to reveal to the American people the truth, it is to control the narrative. The M$M is not our friend, including msnbc, it will continue to push the pro-Trump reich wing agenda and the only thing that will change that narrative is impeachment hearings.

I heard a person say on cable news, I don't know if it is true, that Democrats have issued 80 subpoenas for people and documents and have gotten zero responses.

I think it is way past time for Democrats to fight back. There is no guarantee that Trump will accept the results of an election if he loses and who will stop him when he declares martial law? He is putting all of his people in positions of power. There is no mad dog Mattis in charge of the military. I believe that waiting for election results may be what Trump wants us to do, I know for a fact that he fears an impeachment inquiry.

Who knows how it would play if the House impeaches.

It VERY easily could, and likely would be spun, like everything else, as "feckless dems waste time impeaching him for nothing."

You want to believe it will have some kind of positive impact, but it won't "reveal" anything.

EVERYONE knows he is a scumbag POS already.

All I am saying, as a fact, it does nothing substantive.

He will still be in office, barr will still be in office.

The only way we MIGHT get him out of office is beating him in 2020.

Simple reality.

There will be polls prior to the election, but the media that is supposed to assist in monitoring the actual election through "exit polls" have stopped doing them. (THAT was the first real step in allowing fraudulent elections.)

What is going to clue us in to the fact that Putin has, once again, stole the election for turdface?

turdface is, himself, saying that he could lose the popular vote by 5 million, yet he could still win the EC. They managed to lose the 2016 popular vote by almost 3 million, yet win the 2016 EC by 70,000 votes in three strategically gerrymandered states. And that is apparently fine with the constitution, due to the sacred EC, until the Supreme Court introduces REAL fairness in the drawing of districts. Let's not hold our breath for THAT to happen.

The russians got into almost every state's election system, and into many county/district voter data bases. You don't think they can change things? Every step of the way we keep saying, NO, they can't POSSIBLY do that, only to find out months, or a year later, that is EXACTLY what they did. We are apparently WAY behind the russian counter intelligence agencies in our efforts to stop voter manipulation. Either because our intelligence agencies aren't as smart, or they aren't that concerned about it.

Many states are now moving to paper ballots that are scanned for the tally total. Scanning means possible manipulation. Ask any computer programmer if that is possible.

The only way we can be sure of the vote tallies is if in every district, every ballot is looked at by a democrat and republican representative from the district, with monitors from both sides, deriving a tally total that is then reported, with witnesses, to county and state election offices.

Yet we will throw up our hands and say that can't be done, when it was done for years before computers.

I am afraid that we don't have what it takes to make sure it is a fair fight.

I hope I am wrong.

... control the narrative. On the contrary, they would allow Trump and company a greater opportunity to spin the narrative further towards the "I'm the victim" story line than they have now. That would give them, in many American's perception, the moral high ground.

I think Speaker Pelosi knows a lot more about the actual facts of the case, and has much better political judgement, based on actual experience, than either you or I and probably anyone else on DU.

the first thing Joe, EW, Kamala, whoever does is fire Barr and anyone else in the line of succession there that would continue to hinder justice.

I do think/assume they can appoint interims or actings ...

could still appoint people as “acting” cabinet members if the Senate refuses to confirm.

the election but calls the results rigged, declares martial law to stay in power. I see that Dan Coats is going to be fired and be replaced by Bolton or Bolton's right hand man. Mattis is gone, will the military side with Trump?

Beating Trump at the ballot box may end up being a fool's errand.

The one recourse that Democrats have is impeaching Trump and Barr, we better hurry up.

It may convince some voters. If they see and hear about misdeeds outlined in a clear, cogent, and concise manner.

I read he could win with mid-40 approvals. If impeachment could shave 1-2 points off his current numbers it would help. It is better than doing nothing to stop this speeding train.

enquiry. They have the whip hand over Pelosi due to their making up half our caucus.

She will never call for a vote about impeachment that she knows she will lose.

We would lose the House for sure if that happened, and Rump would run riot.

Our only goal now is to keep the House. Nothing bad is sticking to him. And if we keep talking about new trillion dollar programs we will lose in a landslide.

All the other leaders, except for Pete and Joe are for doing away with private insurance. We go with MFA we guarantee Rump wins.

I REALLY can see him trying some CRAY CRAY shit and not leaving if it is a contested election.

All it takes is Marbury v Madison to be tossed by a ultra RWNJ SCOTUS, plus the Rethugs maintain the Senate and the country is set for a possible dictatorship.That increases by 2 or 3 fold if we also lose the House.

The rule of law is being eviscerated right before our eyes. Hell, TRUTH is being annihilated as an objective concept.

It is pure reflexive control and non-linear warfare, just like the Russians have refined to an art form of tyranny.

to win. One that is completely out of the box. Just to win. And suppress our inner policy leanings until we have restored sanity. Nothing seems to be hurting him. Only explanation could be that there's just TOO much. Take it down to a personal level people can relate to. For example, trump reversed President Obama's reg to stop cancer causing sludge being dumped into streams by coal companies. "This is the water your kids swim in. I want clean water for our kids"

that we won’t fall into a true dictatorship. Trump would be removed if he attempted to overstay his welcome. Ultimately, I still have faith in the Secret Service, US Marshalls, and the military to oversee his exit.

There are many important reasons to impeach, not removing Trump from power by the Senate is not consequential.

I think Speaker Pelosi knows a lot more about the actual facts of the case, and has much better political judgement, based on actual experience, than either you or I and probably anyone else on DU.

I think we need to listen to her on this.

"strategy". It sure hasn't been effective, at all. I believe, in this grave moment in our democracy, her judgment is wrong.

No one, even seasoned politicians, are right 100% of the time.

... always right. You are entitled to your judgement and opinion along with the 80 or so Democrats who also disagree with Pelosi.

PUBLICLY gone against Pelosi's repeated attempts to quash pro-impeachment in her caucus. There are more but Nancy has been effective in shutting them down.

Just like she did to Nadler, at least twice.

.... members may publicly support a position that they don't personally believe to be best if it helps them with their constituents and feel confident that it won't come to a vote.

So 80 / 155 is just an indication. We won't really know unless it comes to a vote, and that's what really counts.

x number of Democrats support it. Unless there's a vote, we really don't know that to be true.

But that vote isn't going to happen because our leader(s) are just running out the clock.

.... is uncovered or occurs. But the clock is ticking and the closer to the election, the less likely, I believe.

.... after losing an election, you would think he could get away with it after being impeached.

In any case, impeachment would not result in conviction and removal, unless there is something more than what we have now.

As it stands, impeachment is a dead end.

Things...

1. Educate the low infos who are bombarded with too much noise on what trump has done. In actuality, educate us all..since even we are overwhelmed and can't keep up.

2. Show our party stands up to what is right and follows the Constitution.

3. Energizes our base...the millions and millions who want impeachment now.

4. Forces Republicans to vote that the think trump is above the law.

5. Will put trump in the history books as only the third president to be impeached.

I think Speaker Pelosi knows a lot more about the actual facts of the case, and has much better political judgement, based on actual experience, than either you or I, and probably anyone else on DU.

I trust her judgement on what can and can't be accomplished through impeachment.

... and they have every right to their independent judgment and opinion. As do you.

The House impeaching him DEFINITELY does not get him out.

1) Impeaching him does not get him out of office.
2) Beating him in 2020 is literally the only chance to get him out of the whitehouse.

Look, you want to believe impeaching him will do what 1,000,000 other examples of how big of a POS he is haven't so be it.

But, it simply rejects reality to try to discount the absolutely need to beat him in 2020 in favor or impeaching him.

Nothing will be done to stop them.

This whole whatever is past the level of sickening.

Treason is still in the dictionary?

no law, no consequences, just OrangeHitler and his minions wrecking it all and congress letting them.

And we, the normal people, the ones without a whole lot of resources who have no where to go when it all goes bad, well, we're utterly fucked.

sure. All we needed was to hold our Dems and convince a small handful of republicans to have kept him out. How ludicrous was it to allow a person like trump get to handpick his protector??? Trump was smart to wait until there were a couple more republican senators.

where the southern crooked mayor owns the sheriff and the judge. Where's our Cousin Vinny?

the entire trump cabal appears above the law

In the DOJ? In the Republican party? I can't believe that every single republican is rotten and corrupt to the core. Forgetting politics and conservative legislation for a moment. Maybe that's an approach? To build some kind of coalition of these people - the ones who still believe in the rule of law? BTW, where's Jeff Sessions? No interviews? What about all the people who have left? The half decent ones? Is Anonymous still there?

cancel her out. Unless he was the 67th vote, he will vote NO. Maybe Romney.

Wild cards, Collins and Paul and Lee, Garddner (in a last ditch attempt to save his seat) Sasse, Alexander (due to retirement in 2020) and Cruz.

Lets say Manchin votes yes, as do all the ones listed. We are still 11 short of conviction and removal. Every one left is a pure RWNJ

If the US attorneys at SDNY are backing off, why can't the local and state courts take over?
Asking for a friend.

Alledged crimes against federal law?

It probably wouldn't matter anyway, the state of NY has offered chairman Neal Trump's state tax returns and Neal is refusing them. People here are arguing that Dems shouldn't take the state returns because it will in some mysterious way hamper the request for Trump's federal taxes. Last I checked receiving Trump's state taxes isn't going to change the meaning of the word "shall." Besides, getting Trump's federal taxes may take until after the election and that case is pretty clear, it shouldn't take that long.

... the request for Trump's federal returns serves a specific legislative purpose, which is to examine a specific IRS policy, the policy that requires the automatic audit of a president's tax return. As such, it is not an arbitrary, capricious or vindictive fishing expedition.

The state tax returns do not answer the legislative purpose, and accepting them would indicate an ulterior motive. It would allow Trump to argue, in court, that the request IS arbitrary, capricious, vindictive and retributive in purpose.

... I do believe he is a very careful investigator, understands the law, and is acting in the best interest of his committee's investigation. And that accepting or requesting the state returns would not be in the investigation's best interest for the reason given.

So I don't see this as anything of a mystery. What is a mystery to me is what you think he is up to.

Replying to your statement

"... the request for Trump's federal returns serves a specific legislative purpose, which is to examine a specific IRS policy, the policy that requires the automatic audit of a president's tax return. As such, it is not an arbitrary, capricious or vindictive fishing expedition."

If the legal basis for Neal asking for the returns was to examine the IRS policy of automatically auditing the returns of the president, that would imply that any returns prior to Trump being president were not applicable to that reason. I had thought Neal had also requested returns prior to 2016, so wondered if I had misunderstood his actions.

.... What I know from news articles and analysis is that he is very careful to craft investigative strategies that will withstand challenge in court and that he took a pass on the state returns because he believes it would open a viable challenge.

It is my assumption that he would narrowly tailor his request to meet legal standards and that if he requested returns previous to the election, he knows what he is doing.

If you find out anything more, I would appreciate an update!

law and the constitution behind us.

nt

That doesn't count? Maybe he paid them back, but hey!

I think the entire Republican bunch is made of Teflon. They are a bigger threat than we can fix.

Charged with stealing $103 at gunpoint. He claims innocence. Would not take a plea deal. Would not plead guilty (12 years offered) to a crime he claims he did not commit.

He is scheduled to be released from prison (at hard labor) in 2077.

Even if guilty of this serious crime, what purpose is served by a life sentence?

Yet, (white) men of privilege seldom see consequence for treasonous acts or major financial crimes. Young (white) men of privilege are excused from rape charges because "they are from a good family".

Is it any wonder that faith in the "Justice" system is so low. Legacy Democrats share responsibility for the 90s crime bill that capitulated to fear...Not the fear of street crime, but fear of wearing Newt Gingrich's label of "soft".

Other countries have implemented less punitive and more restorative systems to address crime. They cost ctive more up front, but they are successful at getting criminals re-integrated as productive parents and citizens. Recidivism rates are much lower in these countries, and much less expensive in the long run.

Our focus on revenge and punishment is wasteful and cruel. Accountability is important, but can be accomplished in smarter ways.

Meanwhile, the corporate criminals and polluters walk. We need to see the captains of corrupt industries and finance spending time in a reformed prison system.