It was so effective that four Republicans are backing the Democrats demand for witnesses.

I knew it as soon as I read the headline. This is Cillizza's idea of being "provocative" and "insightful". In reality it's "predictable"

tRump, he has a way over-inflated sense of self-esteem.

... wrong. She got people talking about witnesses and kept the topic going... Republicans and Moscow Mitch would have dismissed the whole thing, without much discussion - now, they have a light shining on them and their vote on witnesses. Nancy has played the entire impeachment very well. I believe she may have more cards to play, in the future.

Gives any credence to CNN s as stupid as Trumps groupies.

A lot of msnbc is equally putrid, the only way they allow Rachel is that she is a humongous cash cow and they worship money over all else......

Rachel!!

Sean Hannity in drag as a DU’er.........

Nope. A long-time DUer famous for his funny posts (could be anyone of a dozen or so ).

and yet, we got an extra month of impeachment press out of it, and now the timing of the trial will cast a pall over donnie's state of the union speech.


so, she didn't gamble, and she didn't lose. other than that, the headline is fine

They made something up to diminish the Speaker in the eyes of the public.

That's what one can suspect, otherwise, it makes no sense at all.

She did the right thing. CNN loves their contrary outspoken sorta journalists.

Props to Nancy!

to expose at her will. All cable news sucks. Print media does all the investigating and cable just reads it.

*she* knew full well that mcturtle was never going to just bow to her wishes. the *media*, probably including cnn, ran with that idea on their own. afaik, pelosi never talked about an indefinite delay, nor did she ever talk about bending the senate to her will.

the media blew her position out of proportion, and now is pretending she was the one who got her hopes up.

she had always said it was a temporary delay and her only goal was to focus attention on the need for witnesses.


her aims were realistic and modest, and she succeeded.

The byline tells you all you need to know to pay this opinion piece zero attention.

but didn't I see a headline yesterday/today that McConnell lacked the votes to outright dismiss and/or prevent witnesses?

If so, how is that a loss for Pelosi?

Nancy got EXACTLY what she wanted! Make people AWARE of Senate leaders BULLSHIT!!

Have they apologized to Hillary Clinton yet?

stupid fucks

Nancy, time to bring in just the 2nd article.

Was just about to post. What is up with this? #1 reason I have not watched any type of news since 2009 inauguration I watched them trash Obama for 2 yrs and then I watched them fawn over him in January . Couldn't do it anymore, it's all about ratings and money, not the news, not the truth. I glance every few days to "see" what's going on and glanced today to this headline. Really??

Really CNN? She didn't gamble and she didn't lose. She did what she could given the time constraints and it definitely helped in more ways than one.

Last night Cuomo started his show with the HUGE battle over something Bernie may or may not have said about a woman being elected President.
These 8 words spell big trouble for Bernie Sanders

Really CNN? Eight words that may actually be a misquote/misinterpretation?

Makes me wonder if CNN executives are getting nervous about Bernie or Elizabeth getting elected and making them pay taxes. THE HORROR!!!

Played a clip of Moscow Mitch saying Dems were playing games. He was speaking from the Senate well, notice they all play clips of him speaking but never where he is asked questions. Then cut to Nancy walking down the hall while a reporter asked a negative question.

The optics they pull are straight out fucking bullshit. Always aimed at making Dems be on the defense.

Now it just bounces off the walls jumping from one side of the aisle to another. I guess this is supposed to do whatever truth twisting is necessary to keep their MAGAT viewers.

This story is as far from the truth as it gets. So obviously to CNN the truth is fungible.

We have far to go with treating women fairly.

Enough said.

"Russians hack energy company that played major role in Trump Ukraine scandal"

It makes it sound like Burisma actively contributed, rather than being dredged up by bogus POTUS.

Whose side are they on?

Not sure if this is the correct link for this article, but you can let CNN know what you think of Cilizza's assessment.

https://www.cnn.com/feedback/politicsapp?nav-edition=on

keeps the masses tuned in even if you don't like it. You wanna follow the saga, and they got laundry detergent, Depends, Anti-Depressants, and Viagra to sell.

The Trial of the Century! Stay Tuned!

when pitted against a male. He paints the story against them.

He did it regularly to Clinton. Now Warren. And now Pelosi.

Looks like Nancy knows what she's doing after all.

The fact is that had the articles been passed before Christmas, the trial would already be underway -- if not dismissed. This ploy actually has had an effect on the public and thus on some swing state Senators. I think she played this "hand" incredibly well - as she had few cards to play. A fair view of expertise in bridge, is how well you play the hands compared to others with the same hand - CNN here is just looking at the results as if the hand did not matter.

What is clear is that, in the last several weeks, more has come out and some Republican Senators have cold feet with regards to either dismissing it or not allowing witnesses. It is far more likely that there will be at least some semblance of a trial.

I am suspicious of articles that claim this as a loss - as if it were not a foregone conclusion that McConnell will do what he can to try to prevent any tough votes of his people and any challenge to Bush. I was a consumer of abundant media when the Clinton impeachment was done. I do not recall anyone saying that Newt Gingrich (who actually was cheating on his second wife with his third wife as he led the Clinton impeachment) was less powerful because it was completely unlikely that the Senate would remove. Instead, the story was that impeachment itself would forever cloud Clinton's legacy.

The biggest loser in this so-called "delay" was Mitch McConnell. He was ready to dismiss the entire case. I doubt that he has the votes at this time.