NO Mr. Carter NO! Has Jimmy lost his mind?

[BigOleDummy]

..... I worked a phone bank in Colorado as a volunteer to help him get elected President. I've admired him ever since for the work he does for Habitat for Humanity. I've always had his back when talking about him and his Presidency. But this........ this I cannot stomach. I can only surmise that the Chemo has taken a toll. I am most disillusioned to say the least. NO, Mr. Carter NO! NO the pretender who sits in the oval office does NOT deserve to finish his term. He DOES need to be impeached. He DOES NOT "deserve the benefit of the doubt"!!!!! A sad day for me, especially after the uplifting I got from the MFOL rally yesterday.

"But my own preference would be that he not be impeached, but that he be able to serve out his term, because I think he wants to do a good job. And I'm willing to help him, if I can help him, and give him the benefit of the doubt." From his interview on CBS Sunday Morning. SMH

[link:https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/jimmy-carter-my-preference-would-be-that-trump-not-be-impeached/ar-BBKG9OZ?ocid=spartanntp|

[dameatball]

1. sigh....the first person I voted for for president.

[MaryMagdaline]

5. Me, too

He's too forgiving and quite frankly, Donald Trump's racism and misogyny are not Jimmy's to forgive

[Different Drummer]

6. Same here. I was 18--almost 19--when the November 1980 election cane around, and...

I voted for him. We all know how *that* went!

[MaryMagdaline]

16. I was 21 in 1980 - 1st presidential election

Voted for Jimmy. Never regretted it. Didn't catch a winner until Clinton 1992.

[ProfessorGAC]

56. 1976 For Me

Him or Ford. Ford was a decent man, but the stench of Nixon was all over him, the pardon, and the stupid Whip Inflation Now (W.I.N.) buttons made me wretch.

Carter was the only choice, even though, as an 18 year old, the idea of an independent (Anderson) had some momentary appeal.

[PJMcK]

104. Same for me

I turned 18 in 1976 and couldn't wait to vote for Jimmy Carter. I had followed the Watergate story for a couple of years and my hatred for Republicans was seared into my soul by those events.

Since then, I've always voted for Democrats at every level of government with one local exception. When I lived on Long Island, the local judge, a Republican, went unchallenged for years because he was a good judge, a good man and a big contributor to the community.

[ProfessorGAC]

106. Very Close To My History

Every 4 years since 2000 i've voted for a guy for County Board who is a republican. However, he was a former director of ESDA and WCEMA (county EMA), i've known him through the credit union movement since the early 90's, is NOT an RWNJ, but more an Eisenhower, Rockefeller, Percy type R, and is a very nice, thoughtful and generous guy.

Yeah, he's got an R by his name but if they primaried country board members, some RWNJ would run against him. Well, he'd still win because he's very well liked.

Only R ever.

[dameatball]

11. Agreed. Let's not play "what if" when the guy is a disaster. Get him out.

[chuckstevens]

2. Not impeaching Trump will just embolden the GOP again:

Iran/Contra
Lying the US into the Iraq War
Colluding with Russia to treasonously steal 2016

FOR GOD'S SAKES: ENOUGH!

[TexasBushwhacker]

3. Carter is a very forgiving Christian man

You can pound the table all you want, but Trump has ZERO chance of impeachment with the current make up of Congress. Even if we flipped both houses in November, a successful impeachment is unlikely because of the 2/3 majority needed in the Senate. And remember, if Trump gets impeached or resigns, we get Pence. If they both go down, we get Ryan.

[quartz007]

4. Great great point!

I did not even think of that! Pence, to whom Jesus talks to, is 90 degrees to the right of Donnie the playboy.

[BigOleDummy]

10. Ryan's neck deep in this too.......

......... I think they ALL need to go, no matter the horror that we as a Nation would go through because of it. Our Nation has been sold down the river to Russians and to Big Money. Impeachment and retribution for the fellow travelers should be swift and out in the open for all to see. Our Country has been stolen and prostituted and there MUST be consequences for those actions!!!!

[MichMary]

64. Even if you're right

There will never be a threefer impeachment. Or even a twofer. What will happen is if Trump is impeached (numerically impossible, btw) Pence will become President and nominate a new VP, who will be an R. If Pence is impeached first, Trump will nominate a new VP, who will be an R.

[dameatball]

8. Some of us think that the Mueller investigation will extend way beyond just Trump.

So I welcome his impeachment. As much as I did like Jimmy, the small fish, Pence, McConnell, Ryan, etc, will be dealt with in time.

[stevenleser]

21. There will be zero impeachment unless the Dems retake congress. Then Ryan is not an issue

he would no longer be speaker of the House.

Thank being said, impeachment, even with multiple crimes like we have with Trump, isnt an easy thing to make happen.

[Ferrets are Cool]

61. A real question...not a trap...

Do christian's forgive every transgression or "only" those who ask for forgiveness. The PGIC will never ask for forgiveness.

[TexasBushwhacker]

70. I suppose it depends on the person

I am not a Christian, but Jimmy Carter is a Christian who walks the walk. I'm pretty sure that Jesus preached that you should forgive all people of their sins, whether they ask for forgiveness or not. That being said, some of the most judgemental, unforgiving people I've known in my life were Christians, including my brother.

[hueymahl]

80. If both go down and we regain the house this fall

Which is looking more likely (knock on wood), then it is Pelosi.

Talk about deplorable heads exploding!

[EffieBlack]

93. THANK YOU! This is why I haven't jumped on the Impeachment Train

While it may make us feel good to exact what feels like revenge - and I would enjoy nothing more than watching him humiliated and thrown out of office - in reality, the result would not be good for us.

As you said, we'd get Pence. And many people who wouldn't think of voting for Trump again but would be thrilled to vote for Pence who, after this trainwreck of a president, would seem sane and reasonable. We'd be only a year away from the election, not enough time for the Pence honeymoon to end up but more than enough time for him to cement his position.

In other words, a Trump impeachment could very likely give us 7+ years of Pence.

I don't think it's worth it. I'd rather focus on getting a Congress that will box Trump in and put him in check and then turn our sights into electing a Democratic president in 2020 and shutting down this nightmare for good.

[LWolf]

105. Yes. This is in character.

And your point about impeachment is well taken. I'm not sure who does the most damage: the dangerous cognitively challenged psychopathic narcissist or the (relatively) smarter people in the wings.

[standingtall]

7. If Democrats take back the congress they need to impeach Trump period

Or the don't deserve the congress. I don't care if there isn't enough votes in the Senate to convict. Nor do I care if Pence were to replace Trump he wouldn't be able to do much anyway with his party in the minority and his chances of winning in 2020 would be slim.

[brooklynite]

40. So, you want Trump acquitted?

Democrats will never have 2/3 of the Senate, so whatever charges you Impeach Trump on, you won't convict him, and he'll claim he was exonerated. Is that really what you want to do going into his re-election campaign.

[standingtall]

41. Demorats should make republicans walk the plank and force a vote in the Senate

Refusing to attempt to impeach is the same as him being acquitted so I don't know what your point is. Trump can say all kinds of crazy things that doesn't make it true. After the evidence is presented and republicans refuse to do their constitutional duty than Democrats should make them pay a price for it politically. The wont be able to if their to cowardly to do their constitutional duty too.

[brooklynite]

48. Refusing to impeach is the equivalent to refusing to indict until you have a solid case...

The goal is to actually accomplish something, not just make the Democratic base feel good.

[standingtall]

49. No it is not impeachment is a political tool

and indictment is a legal tool. Congress does not have the authority to indict. Does not matter how strong your case in congress if a bunch of partisans are dead set in protecting a president who is a member of their party whatever the cost. Totally different in court of law.

[brooklynite]

52. In which case, what is the political benefit of NOT convicting Trump after he's impeached?

[ProfessorGAC]

62. Something Like The 2000 Election?

No way the electorate votes for Silverspoon over Gore if Clinton is not tainted by impeachment. And, Gore would not have had to distance himself from a successful, economically and geopolitically, two term president.

[brooklynite]

63. Clinton was probably MORE popular after the impeachment fiasco than before...

Gore lost the 2000 election (losing TEN states that Clinton won twice) because he decided (incorrectly) that Clinton would be a drag on his campaign.

[ProfessorGAC]

67. That's What I Said

But, Gore felt he needed to run away from him over impeachment. I agree with you that he was wrong about that. But, we're agreeing that this is what happened.

[brooklynite]

69. But we're NOT agreeing that this would be a rational reason to impeach Trump

[standingtall]

78. There has never been a succesful conviction of an impeached President in our history

The only President seek to reelection after impeachment was Andrew Johnson and he lost in the primary badly. So much for failed impeachments costing the opposition party in Presidential elections. The benefit would be Democrats show they are willing to fight for justice.

[Demsrule86]

86. There is not benefit. And it will surely bring out Republicans in droves. I think Pres. Carter's

statement was unwise. But I don't think we impeach unless we can convict. I agree completely with you.

[ProudLib72]

9. I'm giving Carter the benefit of the doubt

What he says about the Mueller investigation is spot on. My take away from the article is that he seems to me more interested in trying to preserve the integrity of our government and public trust in democratic instutions.

[standingtall]

12. To late for that

The integrity of the Government and public trust in institutions have already been damaged by Trump and his cronies and trust cannot be rebuilt unless Trump is impeached.

[BigOleDummy]

14. But just how much ....

...... "trust" do you have for the integrity of our government now? Chump and his enablers have shat on our democratic institutions from day one. "Integrity" DEMANDS consequences for actions. Sometimes those may be harsh but I truly believe in what my signature says.

[ProudLib72]

19. Ok, ok, I may be trying to cobble together an excuse for Carter

I don't think Carter hates tRump like we do. I think he is from the old school that placed a lot of trust in the government. FWIW, I choose to believe Carter is not defending tRump, but taking up for the government as a whole. You also have to take his statement about the Mueller investigation into consideration. It sounds like he is as tired of waiting for something as everyone else. That is where I got the "integrity" of government notion. It seemed to me he wanted to get on with the business of governance and have more transparency.

[pnwmom]

24. I think people are reading more into what Carter said than he actually said.

And part of that is because of MSNBC's framing.

Carter said: "And I think he will serve a full term unless the special investigator, Mr. Mueller, brings some criminal charges against him."

That's a very big unless. I think Carter is saying that he hopes DT isn't impeached, because he hopes DT hasn't committed criminal acts that would lead to impeachment.

"What do you think the odds of that are?" asked Pauley.

"I don't have any idea," Mr. Carter replied. "I think Mueller's been very successful in keeping his cards close to his vest and not revealing any plans. But my wish is that Mr. Mueller would go ahead and make a decision, even if it's not anything personally that President Trump has done to violate the law; then I think he ought to make that obvious. And if he has violated the law, that ought to be revealed as well.

"But my own preference would be that he not be impeached, but that he be able to serve out his term, because I think he wants to do a good job. And I'm willing to help him, if I can help him, and give him the benefit of the doubt."

I don't read that as Carter saying he wishes Mueller would hurry things along -- just that when the investigation is complete, Mueller shouldn't make it clear whether DT has violated the law -- or not.

Which doesn't seem very controversial.

[ProudLib72]

36. Yes, MSNBC's framing is problematic

It might have been better for him to deflect on that question by just telling them he didn't want to comment.

[grantcart]

42. Agree, only "benefit of the doubt " is a problem

[pnwmom]

44. That's just Jimmy Carter being his usual kind self. n/t

[Old Vet]

13. This is the same problem Pres. Carter had while in office, He was to good and kind of a man......

He actually lived the life of a spiritual person, That's why he was walked over and dissed while in office.

[Tarc]

15. Impeachment doesn't fix anything, unless we have the House AND nail Pence concurrently

Sorry, I'm not pinning my hopes on fixing this trainwreck on impeachment. Take the House, hopefully the Senate too, in 2018, stymie every bill that Cheetos-tinted fascist wants to pass, and vote him out in 2020.

[standingtall]

17. Does not matter if Pence relaces him once we have the house

When Democrats take back the house they must impeach Trump and if the Senate fails to convict then vote him out. If Democrats don't have the courage to pursue justice via the impeachment process than the investigation would be a complete waste of time. What happened was a crime against our Democracy and it must be punished. Politicians lose election all the time. That would not be punishment. That would be letting them get away with it.

[Demsrule86]

25. I don't think you should impeach without conviction...it could turn out voters who sympathize with

him and he could win another four years. Look what happened to the GOP when they impeached Clinton. And look more recently at Wisconsin. People there resented the attempted impeachment and we lost.

[standingtall]

43. Wisconsin was a recall not an impeachment

and Clinton's approval rating was in the 60's while Trumps is in the 30's. Trumps issue are far more serious than Clinton's. That's comparing apples to oranges.

[Demsrule86]

57. There is no difference for voters...and yes Trump is in the 30's...but impeachment might generate

sympathy and raise that approval rating...last thing we want...explain how impeachment without conviction helps us? I don't see it.

[standingtall]

74. No President who has been impeached has ever been

been reelected nor has the incumbent party of an impeached President ever won the following election. The only impeached President to seek re-election was Andrew Johnson and he lost in the primary. Yes there is a difference between the Wisconsin recall and impeachment. Scott Walker was being recalled for the normal dirty repuke tactics on steroids and Trump will be impeached for actually breaking the law.

The last thing Democrats need is to explain to voters that they were afraid to pursue justice because repukes would not help them.

[Demsrule86]

83. There were only two president's impeached ...and Trump could win if you make him sympathetic...what

is the point of impeachment without conviction?

[standingtall]

96. Trump will not find much smypathy once it is announced that he his campaign

and or both committed serious crimes to get elected. Besides that Trump is an asshole it will be very hard to make him sympathetic to anyone outside of his hardcore base especially if the economy slows down by then and it probably will. Asking what is the point of impeachment without conviction is like asking what is the point in prosecuting OJ. If no one is truly is not above the law than justice must be pursued via impeach otherwise it's just lip service. We are the majority in this country and we should act like it. We shouldn't let down are base by refusing to impeach Trump because we are afraid of republicans showing up at the polls in 2020 again there is more of us.

[Demsrule86]

101. I just don't see the point without conviction. Prosecutors won't prosecute people if they

know they can't get a conviction also.

[Demsrule86]

30. And what if we lose the next election because of this? Americans don't like impeachement without

conviction. You could get him for four more years. Let' be smart about this.

[standingtall]

46. How do you know Americans dont like impeachments wthout convictions not a very big sample

Only been 2 impeachments 1 Clinton who was not up for reelection, but what happened? Did republicans pay a price for failing to convict? Nope? Bush got in the White House and by 2002 the repukes had the congress and the Senate as well.The other impeached President was Andrew Johnson and he only had one term. Nixon was in his second term when he resigned rather than face impeachment.

If we lose 2020 it will not be because we failed to impeach and convict Trump rather it will be because we threw cold water on the energy of our base by refusing to try.

[Demsrule86]

55. History...the Republicans lost big after Bill Clinton...Scott Walker became more popular

after his attempted impeachment. It is seen by some as overturning an election...and a waste of taxpayer money if you impeach with no chance of conviction. It is a waste. What is the point?

[standingtall]

75. Republicans won the following Presidential election

after the Clinton impeachment. Clinton was not impeached until his second term. Repukes may have lost some seats in the house, but they retained the majority. Repukes had a wave election in their favor in the 94 midterms they were bound to lose seats with or without impeachment. By your logic it's waste of tax payer money to bother investigating Trump if congress isn't going to do anything about it.If Democrats are not going to have the courage to impeach Trump after they take back the house. Then they might as well go ahead and clear him with repukes and bow down and kiss his ring.

[Demsrule86]

82. Republicans lost seats in the House. First time the party not of the president's party had failed to

win seats in a midterm since 1934 The polls showed people were furious with the GOP and considered their behavior a waste of money and had sympathy for Clinton...the question was why waste all this money and tie the country up for months where there was no change of conviction? Good Question...Gingrich was forced to resign They GOP lost seats in the House during a midterm with a Democratic president. And we can't afford to risk this for essentially nothing as Trump remains in office.

[standingtall]

110. The impeachment process for Clinton was iniated in December of 98

Which was after the midterms and repukes only lost 5 seats in the 98 midterms. Yes the public was furious with the behavior of the GOP, but not because republicans were going to impeach Clinton with no chance to convict him, but because the public did not believe repukes had a legit reason to impeach him to begin with. The Trump thing is a whole different animal and not really comparable to the Clinton years.

[Demsrule86]

111. Nope...that is when it became official they voted for it in October.

House votes to impeach Clinton , Oct. 8, 1998
By ANDREW GLASS 10/08/2017 06:53 AM EDT
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
On the day in 1998, the Republican-led House voted to proceed with impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton on charges of lying under oath and obstruction of justice.

In sending the case forward, the House Judiciary Committee had relied heavily on a four-year investigation into several alleged scandals—including improper Arkansas real estate deals, suspected fundraising violations, claims of sexual harassment and accusations of cronyism involving the firing of White House travel agents—involving Clinton and his wife, Hillary.

They voted for impeachment just before the election, and it had an impact on the election.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/08/house-votes-to-impeach-clinton-oct-8-1998-243550

[UTUSN]

18. Jimmy has been a burr under every saddle

And had a nest of wipers at his breast: Tweety, Caddell, more. That said, I've had his back more times remembered

[NCTraveler]

20. There are few Carter wont help.

It’s a know part of his character.

[HopeAgain]

77. Exactly

President Carter thinks differently than the average politico. It is what it is, it's certainly not a huge deal in the big scheme of things.

[EffieBlack]

94. We trash Democrats for being too "Establishment" and then we bash them when they go against the grai

Democratic circular firing squad.

[Demsrule86]

22. Carter has little love for the Democratic Party as he felt he was mistreated. This is not the first

time he has made questionable statements

[dembotoz]

27. So we throw Bernie and Jimmy under the bus?

[Demsrule86]

31. Neither of them like the Democratic Party...but I merely noted that Carter is not always on our side

[dembotoz]

37. Hmmmm so a former dem POTUS is not on the Dems side?

God to know that

[Demsrule86]

58. No, he has been a thorn in the side of every Democratic president...he interferes in

foreign policy particularly. Carter was involved in the 94 North Korean treaty which was completely useless and Clinton did not want him involved. Now, I have no doubt, he is a good person...although I don't think he ever forgave the Democratic Party for what he considered unfair treatment at their hands. Now consider what he said about Trump, that hurts us...and the right wing will have a field day with it. He basically agreed that the Russian investigation was a witch hunt and Trump should finish his term...if any other Democrat said that, everyone would condemn it. I don't admire Carter as a politician. I do admire his work for habitat for humanity and the charity work he has done. No man is perfect.

[dembotoz]

65. well i guess i will take the word of jimmy over yours

nothing personal...just damn

you are throwing james earl carter jr under the bus....

shame on you

we are not supposed to attack other dems but here you are attacking a former dem president.....

[Demsrule86]

71. I don't care. I can read and I was alive for some of it. I don't think he is that great myself.

Everyone is welcome to their opinion. And I still say if you look into the Korea thing during Clinton's time, Carter was unfair to Pres. Clinton. He does not hold office and has no business going overseas and trying to make policy. The remarks he made about trump should not have been made with mid-terms upon us.

[dembotoz]

72. To take this further might prompt an alert

So believe what ever silly damn thing u want

[Demsrule86]

85. I have no hard feelings about our conversation and I admire his work with habitat...but politics

was never his strong suit. I also think he tied Clinton's hands with the Koreans. I don't think praising Trump and hoping he 'serves' out his term was a good statement for a former Democratic President to make at this moment. Now if you want to alert as you threatened to, you can. That is your right. I do not believe though that I violated TOS.

[dembotoz]

99. It would be my response to your post that would not be pleasant

Enjoy your version of history
As we rate presidents I suspect u rate Carter lower than I would. And I rate the Clinton's much lower than u would.

[Demsrule86]

100. Oh...haha I don't alert for that stuff. I enjoy a free exchange...but I suppose someone else could

see it... we can agree to disagree.

[dembotoz]

109. i have been alerted on things that were like really?

perhaps over a beer some time
i have learned the hard way to be more careful here

[Demsrule86]

112. Have you ever tried to appeal? I have seen nothing in your posts worthy of an alert.

Anyway I wouldn't do it...but someone else could....you never know. I get it...as you probably noticed I can make people mad at times, I don't want to ...just like a good discussion.

[mountain grammy]

23. Carter is Carter

He loves America and I love him and always will.

[Raine]

50. Me too

I love him, I wish we had more people in this world like him.

[LovingA2andMI]

26. He's Old...

And likely losing his mind, sadly...

[Tipperary]

53. Old age does not mean loss of mind.

Ageist comment there.

[LovingA2andMI]

66. In This Case...

It Does. Trump can never be "Forgiven" or Should The Public "Shut Up" and Allow Him To Stay In Office -- which is what Carter was saying. Get It?

[samnsara]

28. he never sees the evil in men.. that was his downfall..but why I love him

[Blue_true]

84. He never has, IMO.

Always seemed to look for the good in the shitpile.

[Adrahil]

29. He's a good man.... but this is why he wasn't a great President.

Trump has had the benefit of the doubt his whole fucking life. Wake up, Jimmy!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. Did I read it correctly ?

Is he saying that if evidence is found that David Dennison committed impeachable acts he shouldn't be impeached ?

That makes no sense at all.

[stevenleser]

33. Carter is a Gandhi-esque type of person as far as peace and diplomacy are concerned. If you recall,

Gandhi reached out to Hitler twice in an attempt to prevent and then stop war and addressed the letter "Dear Friend" https://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/2015/0405/Dear-Friend-Gandhi-s-letters-to-Hitler



In both instances, I think they are one of the few instances of taking working for peace a few ticks too far.

[Hoyt]

34. I think the bar to impeach or ruin an administration should be very high, but trump crossed

it a long time ago.

[poboy2]

35. No way. There is a treasonous criminal giving away national secrets in the WH. NO. -nt

[Snackshack]

38. I gotta...

Respectfully disagree with President Carter on this one. I do not want to see trump serve out his term.

I do agree with President Carter that it would be preferable to avoid impeachment and all that comes with that option. Preferably trump exists one of two ways. Either trump resigns as Nixon did because Mueller boxes him in such a way that if he does not resign he will be impeached or the VP and a majority of the cabinet submit notification to congress that trump is unable to perform his duties and they remove trump via the 25th amendment.

Having said all that one cannot ignore the fact that in either scenario Pence becomes president...when one takes a minute to think about what a Mike Pence presidency looks like...maybe keeping trump (chaos and all) is the lesser of two evils.

[GulfCoast66]

39. Man, this whole thread is like a Fantisy Island episode.

We do not control the house or Senate and are fighting about impeachment!!

Have the members of DU gone batshit crazy??!!

If we win the House, and that is a big fucking IF due to gerrymandering, we have no real chance of winning the Senate.

All this delusional carrying on about impeachment accomplishes is to encourage discouraged republicans to come out and vote.

We will not win enough Representatives to impeach and convict. It is not happening. Ever.

And if we push our house members to impeach with no chance of conviction it will be a Trump win.

This is not rocket science people...

[stevenleser]

47. That's "Fantasy" island. And most of what you wrote is wrong.

We do have a chance of winning the senate. This lays it out: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/07/us/politics/senate-midterm-elections.html note that if we win all five toss ups and everything else goes as expected we have 51 seats. The fact is that all of the elections that have happened in the last six months have greatly favored Democrats over what has historically happened in those districts. Anything that would have historically been considered a tossup has to be considered as a seat we have a great chance of winning.

To impeach, all we need to do is win the House. To convict requires 68 votes, that is correct, but if we take the senate, we control the investigation that then occurs. Putting all the crimes Mueller will uncover, plus the illegal in-kind contribution that we now know has happened in the Stormy Daniel's situation, front and center in front of the American people for several weeks may make it imperative that Republican members of the senate vote to convict. The senate was controlled by Republicans during the Nixon crisis, and they indicated they would have voted to convict if an impeachment process had come to the senate.

If impeachment is brought and we don't have a conviction, it still would not be a Trump win if the evidence presented to the American people was convincing and contained enough serious crimes that in the eyes of the public everyone believed he was guilty and should have been removed.

[treestar]

59. Very similar to the demand for single payer

Or the demand that Obama should have demanded it.

[Blue_true]

87. I get some of your point.

Instead of worrying about stuff like this, all of us should have our noses buried in the task of taking back the House. If we do that, we control how House Comittees handle information or indictments that Mueller give them. Even if we don't win the Senate (I see potential pickups in Tenn and Nevada, Manchin look like he can hold his seat, that leaves Tester, Hiedkamp, Nelson and Missouri in the air. I feel Nelson will pull through, he is blanketing Florida, also think Tester and Heitkamp may squeak through, have Missouri at toss up, but the Dem there is a tough campaigner).

But just having the House means that we can out plenty of honest investigation findings before the American people, if we don't control the House, that information likely gets buried.

[GulfCoast66]

88. I was not going to respond to anything about this thread.

But you almost caught my meaning.

There are so many people here on DU not only counting their chickens before they hatch, but have them roasted up and on the table.

And when their Pollyanna view of this fall meets the gerrymandering and political reality they will lose all hope.

We may win the house. We just are not getting the Senate. But even if we do, 51 votes does not equal an impeachment conviction.

I guess I have been a realist for too many years.

I hope I am wrong!

[Blue_true]

89. Controlling the House and Senate, even with small majorities

means that our politicians control how thorough investigations of Mueller's findings are. I don't expect a Benghazi fiasco from democrats, but I don't expect a Nunes type coverup either.

[GulfCoast66]

90. I agree

But you know as well as I, many here are expecting impeachment within the first 90 days and will see anything less as a ‘sellout’ by ‘establishment democrats’.

[Blue_true]

92. That is my fear also. I feel some are already practicing that line.

It gets back to the old debate about trying for the possible versus trying for the achievable. I honestly think a starting point should be to aim above the achievable, win, then keep pushing the target up and winning until no only do we have the possible, we also have the thought impossible - but stuff like that takes methodical didcipline, a quality that some call selling out or not trying hard enough.

[EffieBlack]

95. Exactly. We're letting a thirst for revenge overcome political reality

Even if Trump were impeached and removed, we'd get Pence. And because he doesn't come across to most people as batshit crazy, he'll be "a breath of fresh air," likely win in 2020 and, under the 22nd Amendment, he could run again - and possibly be in the White House for almost 10 years.

But as long as we felt good about an impeachment ...

[shanny]

45. Fwiw, "President Carter".

But yes, this is too forgiving...or multi-dimensional chess playing: if Cheeto's base abandons him over this or the spending bill he will need a safe space and friends to guide him.

Unfortunately my money's in the former scenario.

[greymattermom]

51. Please don't joke like that

He has melanoma mets in his brain. They have been treated, but medical information should be private.

[Vinca]

54. Somehow he sees the goodness in everyone . . . but this is a bridge too far.

Not only should Trump be impeached, he should end up in jail.

[Ferrets are Cool]

60. "he wants to do a good job"

I've held great respect for President Carter for more years than I care to count. All that respect just went out the window. Although it might not be the "best" thing to impeach this PGIC sitting behind the desk in the oval office, the ONLY job he wants to do is line his pockets with $$ and bask in the praise his diseased mind thinks it is getting.
You DON'T support a White Supremacist Mr Carter. You just don't.

[Cha]

102. omg.. how could Jimmy Carter know

what's in trump's mind.. if he had one.

I don't necessarily want him impeached.. but this quote..

"..he wants to do a good job".. uh no.

How can he say that after all the evidence to the contrary? Like all the incompetent people he appointed to the various agencies that want to kill them off.. like HUD, betsy devos-education.. an oxymoron, etc etc etc

[Ferrets are Cool]

113. +1

[Ron Green]

68. Jimmy Carter is a thoughtful man. DU stopped being a thoughtful place

many months ago.

[loyalsister]

97. He's a true statesman

A goal of impeachment as a starting point was a perversion of a serious process in the 90s. Mueller isn't finished. To talk about impeachment now has a ring of the pettiness that motivated the GOP in the 90s. The fact that they made no bones about their endgame diminished their credibility.
This investigation has revealed a lot, but has not convinced anyone other than Trump's opposition that he and his campaign were/are not just unethical, but corrupt. Criminality is still further down the road.

President Carter is a voice of reason. It makes no sense to abandon a sober approach to something they have to get right. The national drama of impeachment is damaging to civic morale. A failed impeachment would be much devastating. Disillusion suppresses votes. We are in a position of having to work hard to maximize turnout already.

[stranger81]

73. I think that Trump certainly deserves to be impeached, but

if if he is, then we get President Pence.

And you have to go down about 17 levels of succession before you reach anyone who's arguably not a fanatical right-wing nut.

In addition to that, impeachment of Trump before the next Presidential election means that all of his misdeeds can be swept out as yesterday's news, and his replacement will have a much easier time distancing himself from Trump's misconduct.

So what does impeachment really get us?

[Lisa0825]

76. I don't want him impeached either. If we kick him out, we get Pence.

I'd rather he serve his miserable term and continue to corrode what's left of the GOP brand, so that we can beat the hell out of them this year and in 2020.

If he DOES get impeached, I would rather it happen as close as possible to the end of his term.

[rzemanfl]

79. I just barfed in my heart. Again. n/t

[marybourg]

81. Not the first time in his post-presidency

that I thought he was on the wrong side. 'nuff said.

[EffieBlack]

91. He's more than earned his right to speak his mind and have an opinion we may not agree with

[oberliner]

98. Or maybe even worth considering his point

He is a wise Democrat.

[EffieBlack]

103. Hello ...

[BigOleDummy]

107. Sure, I would rather...

... have our chump in chief resign, along with his cabal of rwnj's but he won't and they won't. We MUST impeach when the fact's demand it. No, it won't be pretty but is the way we are being "governed" NOW pretty? I've read talk here about "political realities" and the need to not impeach because of them. My take on that is .... if we DO NOTHING when called for the political reality will be such as to turn off many of the newer voters we have already gained because of MFOL and the Women's marches. We cannot afford that! These young people and the newly energized Woman's movement want and demand change and accountability! If we appear to be just "another party" playing the Washington game we will lose them and the promise of real change they bring to us. We cannot appear to be complicit , (yes there's that word), in letting chump get away with his treason and sedition. So, as much as I have admired Mr. Carter over the years I STILL think he's wrong about this, even if he surely have the right to express himself. Good decent men can still be wrong.

[Orsino]

108. It should always be preferable that a malign incompetent straighten up...

...and that impeachment proceed in an orderly fashion, if it's going to proceed at all. I will not hate on Jimmeh for wishing out loud.