HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Do y'all realize that the...

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 05:32 PM

 

Do y'all realize that the minute the investigation is called an "impeachment," the entire complexion

and narrative will shift, and not in a good way? Among other things, if this is framed now as an "impeachment," many of the people we hope and need to sway will shut down, seeing this as a purely political exercise intended to get a president out of office rather than actually uphold the Constitution. We may not see it that way, but a large proportion of the public will.

On the other hand, if the respective committees investigate and hold hearings outside of the impeachment process, as part of their regular oversight, they will have a better opportunity to produce and present the volume of evidence needed to convince the public that Trump must go than if the Judiciary Committee alone starts doing this now within the guise of an impeachment.

Let the Committees do its work, gather the evidence many incorrectly think only an impeachment inquiry can obtain and, use the evidence-gathering and information obtained and revealed to build a strong public case for impeachment and even removal.

94 replies, 5496 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 94 replies Author Time Post
Reply Do y'all realize that the minute the investigation is called an "impeachment," the entire complexion (Original post)
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 OP
Blues Heron Apr 2019 #1
Trumpocalypse Apr 2019 #3
Blues Heron Apr 2019 #10
Trumpocalypse Apr 2019 #26
Blues Heron Apr 2019 #34
Nevermypresident Apr 2019 #62
Trumpocalypse Apr 2019 #65
tazkcmo Apr 2019 #75
Trumpocalypse Apr 2019 #78
crazytown Apr 2019 #37
Trumpocalypse Apr 2019 #66
coti Apr 2019 #16
Trumpocalypse Apr 2019 #27
Kurt V. Apr 2019 #30
Trumpocalypse Apr 2019 #64
Fiendish Thingy Apr 2019 #46
Trumpocalypse Apr 2019 #67
Fiendish Thingy Apr 2019 #84
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #86
Fiendish Thingy Apr 2019 #87
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #88
Fiendish Thingy Apr 2019 #92
Trumpocalypse Apr 2019 #90
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #73
Trumpocalypse Apr 2019 #81
Blue_Tires Apr 2019 #79
Trumpocalypse Apr 2019 #82
sharedvalues Apr 2019 #38
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #93
LiberalArkie Apr 2019 #43
Blues Heron Apr 2019 #51
sprinkleeninow Apr 2019 #76
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #57
no2trump Apr 2019 #48
Nevermypresident Apr 2019 #61
notinkansas Apr 2019 #70
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #72
watoos Apr 2019 #2
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #5
no2trump Apr 2019 #50
Va Lefty Apr 2019 #4
empedocles Apr 2019 #6
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #7
BeyondGeography Apr 2019 #12
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #13
coti Apr 2019 #20
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #23
Kurt V. Apr 2019 #32
sprinkleeninow Apr 2019 #77
no2trump Apr 2019 #54
coti Apr 2019 #18
2naSalit Apr 2019 #31
malaise Apr 2019 #8
sinkingfeeling Apr 2019 #9
ProudLib72 Apr 2019 #11
notdarkyet Apr 2019 #74
watoos Apr 2019 #14
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #17
Blues Heron Apr 2019 #36
no2trump Apr 2019 #55
coti Apr 2019 #15
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #21
coti Apr 2019 #22
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #24
BeyondGeography Apr 2019 #29
Generic Brad Apr 2019 #19
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #25
Kurt V. Apr 2019 #28
blueinredohio Apr 2019 #33
2naSalit Apr 2019 #35
NoMoreRepugs Apr 2019 #39
NotHardly Apr 2019 #40
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #59
Bettie Apr 2019 #41
pdsimdars Apr 2019 #42
Kurt V. Apr 2019 #52
Fiendish Thingy Apr 2019 #44
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #60
Fiendish Thingy Apr 2019 #63
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #69
DallasNE Apr 2019 #45
VOX Apr 2019 #47
zentrum Apr 2019 #49
Bettie Apr 2019 #53
zentrum Apr 2019 #80
Bettie Apr 2019 #89
many a good man Apr 2019 #56
backscatter712 Apr 2019 #58
notinkansas Apr 2019 #68
greyl Apr 2019 #71
uponit7771 Apr 2019 #83
StarfishSaver Apr 2019 #85
Trumpocalypse Apr 2019 #91
uponit7771 Apr 2019 #94

Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 05:47 PM

1. No I don't realize that

not impeaching is just giving Trump a win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blues Heron (Reply #1)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 06:00 PM

3. And having him acquitted in the Senate

 

gives him an even bigger win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #3)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 06:51 PM

10. not really, no

you could spin out these gamesmanship scenarios till the cows come home. Enough is enough, impeach ASAP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blues Heron (Reply #10)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:37 PM

26. Yes really

 

especially since the people are against it. Continue to investigate like they did during Watergate and turn public opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #26)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:55 PM

34. That's how quitters think

"Oh well might lose, better not try woe is me." Time to grow up and step up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blues Heron (Reply #34)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 12:26 AM

62. So true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blues Heron (Reply #34)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 12:38 AM

65. Worked during Watergate

 

Being smart about how to proceed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #65)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 04:56 AM

75. They held impeachment hearings.

It did work in Watergate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tazkcmo (Reply #75)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 06:53 AM

78. No the Senate Watergate committee

 

just investigated. They werenít impeachment hearings. And it was those hearings that turned public opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #26)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:03 PM

37. The tide is turning.

Wonder what the next Poll will bring?

ďI took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, and so did everybody else in the Senate and in the House. And I believe that every person in the Senate and the House ought to have to vote and to say either, yeah, that's OK with me, yeah, let a president just step in the way he did when he told the White House counsel to go fire Mueller, and then told the White House counsel to go lie about having told the White House counsel to go fire Mueller, and then told the White House counsel to write a letter saying that Donald Trump had not told him to go fire Mueller, and then to say, why on Earth would you take notes about what I said to you? The lawyers I deal with never put anything in writing.

If there are people in the House or the Senate who want to say that's what a president can do when the president is being investigated for his own wrongdoings or when a foreign government attacks our country, then they should have to take that vote and live with it for the rest of their lives.Ē

Elizabeth Warren

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazytown (Reply #37)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 12:41 AM

66. Let's see the next poll

 

But until a majority of the people support it impeachment will be seen as illegitimate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #3)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:16 PM

16. Make part of the message that Senate Republicans won't convict under any set of facts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coti (Reply #16)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:37 PM

27. Yeah that will work

 

with Dems only.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #27)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:44 PM

30. there are more independents than dems or rethugs

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kurt V. (Reply #30)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 12:36 AM

64. Exactly

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #3)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:41 PM

46. No evidence to support your assertion

Just fear based defeatism.

Impeachment hearings would rivet the media's and,the public's attention, and let Congress control the narrative. Of course, Trump would react with daily tweets and meltdowns, reacting to relentless examinations of the truth around his crimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #46)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 12:44 AM

67. What evidence supports your assertion

 

The history of Watergate and the Clinton impeachment supports mine. You have any historical examples to support yours?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #67)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 10:27 AM

84. The same history

Democrats won big in 1976, and Republicans (just barely) gained the WH while retaining the senate and house in 2000.

If people have died protecting the Constitution, why can't Democrats risk an election? As Elizabeth Warren says, there is no "political inconvenience" exception to the oath to defend the Constitution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #84)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 10:35 AM

86. "Why can't Democrats risk an election?"

 

Maybe because there are people who don't enjoy the privilege of waiting around until 2024 to stop having their lives destroyed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #86)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 10:39 AM

87. If we can't wait until 2024, then why the hell can we wait until 2020? Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #87)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 10:42 AM

88. Seriously?

 

Thank God, the leaders of the civil rights movement didn't think like this.

"Why should we spend the next eight months planning a March on Washington to call for the passage of a Civil Rights Bill? Let's just all show up at the Capitol tomorrow and demand that Congress pass the bill immediately? We won't get it, but at least we'll have made a statement!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #88)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 02:06 PM

92. I'm not saying that, and you know it

Iím saying open an inquiry, with itís expanded powers and legal standing, now.

How fast to proceed with using these expanded powers can be determined by leadership in response to stonewalling and obstruction.

Remember, when MLKís movement couldnít get results quickly enough, Malcom X and the Black Panthers emerged.

Incrementalism and timidity has its risks too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #84)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 11:11 AM

90. Actually

 

the Dems only gained 1 seat in the House and none in the Senate in 76.

But the point is that the Senate spent a year investigating Watergate before the House started impeachment proceedings.

In the case of Clinton, impeachment began in the fall of 98 and the GOP lost seats in the 98 midterms when they should have gained seats.

Also in 2007, everyone here was making the same arguments for impeachment. Pelosi took impeachment off the table and the Dems won very big in 08.

But all that aside. Let the House investigate before jumping straight into impeachment. No need to be impatient.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #46)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 01:05 AM

73. During Watergate, the Judiciary Committee held no public impeachment hearings until July 1974

 

It was the Senate Watergate hearings the year before that "riveted the media's and public's attention" and built public support for impeachment. By the time the House opened its impeachment inquiry in May 1974, close to a majority of the public wanted Nixon to go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #73)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 09:58 AM

81. Exactly

 

It was the Senate committee investigation that turned the tide of public opinion. House investigations now can do the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 08:29 AM

79. Only for those missing the bigger picture...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_Tires (Reply #79)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 09:59 AM

82. Which is most people

 

Everyone is not as focused on the details as we are. Let the house investigate and turn public opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blues Heron (Reply #1)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:16 PM

38. Welcome to DU, OP (StarfishSaver)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharedvalues (Reply #38)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 02:19 PM

93. Thanks!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blues Heron (Reply #1)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:35 PM

43. might I recommend looking up the Watergate investigation.

The scandal grew to involve a slew of additional allegations against the President, ranging from the improper use of government agencies to accepting gifts in office and his personal finances and taxes; Nixon repeatedly stated his willingness to pay any outstanding taxes due, and paid $465,000 (equivalent to $2.4 million in 2018) in back taxes in 1974.

Even with support diminished by the continuing series of revelations, Nixon hoped to fight the charges. But one of the new tapes, recorded soon after the break-in, demonstrated that Nixon had been told of the White House connection to the Watergate burglaries soon after they took place, and had approved plans to thwart the investigation. In a statement accompanying the release of what became known as the "Smoking Gun Tape" on August 5, 1974, Nixon accepted blame for misleading the country about when he had been told of White House involvement, stating that he had had a lapse of memory. Senate Minority Leader Hugh Scott, Senator Barry Goldwater, and House Minority Leader John Jacob Rhodes met with Nixon soon after. Rhodes told Nixon that he faced certain impeachment in the House. Scott and Goldwater told the president that he had, at most, only 15 votes in his favor in the Senate, far fewer than the 34 needed to avoid removal from office.


About the same deal as today. Just start the damn hearings and see what happens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalArkie (Reply #43)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:56 PM

51. not everything follows the same script

we're not bound by watergate to do exactly the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blues Heron (Reply #51)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 05:02 AM

76. No, we are not, is correct in my view also.

This travesty and all it encompasses is much more dangerously severe.

Just sayin'....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalArkie (Reply #43)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 10:37 PM

57. The impeachment hearings didn't start until May 1974

 

But the impeachment of inquiry relied heavily on and benefitted greatly from the hearings conducted previously by a different committee.

The impeachment inquiry involved scant investigation and uncovered little new information. It focused primarily on whether the evidence produced in other investigations and hearings was sufficient to support impeachment and removal.

Had the House started impeachment hearings a year earlier, instead of waiting for the Senate Select Committee did its work, Nixon could very likely have served out his term.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blues Heron (Reply #1)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:44 PM

48. Do not play Trump's game

 

Why the hell do you think he wants something called impeachment. In a whole lot of independents minds it is political. We must frame this correctly or he will win in 2020, we already know the Senate will not convict. 52% of the public is against impeachment. Why take a chance, investing not impeaching is the way to go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blues Heron (Reply #1)


Response to Blues Heron (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 12:56 AM

70. Also - he loses pardon power

if under impeachment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notinkansas (Reply #70)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 01:02 AM

72. No, he doesn't

 

He has full powers to pardon federal crimes as long as he's president. He just can't use his pardon power to prevent himself or anyone else from being impeached.

FYI - Bill Clinton pardoned numerous people in December 1998 when he was "under impeachment." Impeachment has no effect on a president's ability to pardon federal crimes. The Constitution simply makes clear that the pardon power doesn't extend to the ability to stop an impeachment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 05:58 PM

2. Do you think that Trump and Barr

 

Are going to play defense. Want to know what the headlines will be in the MSM if Dems fail to hold impeachment hearings?
Barr investigating the crooked FBI and Democrats and Hillary who carried out a witch hunt against Trump. Without impeachment we will never see the grand jury testimony, will never see the entire Mueller report.
How are those hearings working out? They are releasing no documents, they are ignoring subpoenas, what have we learned by waiting?
Drastic times call for drastic measures.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to watoos (Reply #2)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 06:07 PM

5. I didn't say that they shouldn't hold impeachment hearings.

 

They just don't need to do them right this very minute.

And if you think THESE hearings aren't "working out," just wait to see cooperative they'll be when the hearings are about impeachment, instead of oversight.

This is not a binary choice. It's not impeachment hearings now or nothing ever. People need to calm down, slow their roll and stop demanding that impeachment hearings start this week.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to watoos (Reply #2)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:55 PM

50. Investagate but do not call it impeachment

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 06:06 PM

4. I think it's worse if Democrats put political considerations above upholding the constitution

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Va Lefty (Reply #4)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 06:11 PM

6. Impeachment is a political process. It was designed that way

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Va Lefty (Reply #4)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 06:15 PM

7. This isn't a "political consideration"

 

It's a strategy to ensure that impeachment actually ACCOMPLISHES something and isn't just some kind of feel good but empty red meat gesture to the base.

As a lawyer, I've sometimes had clients who insisted on suing even though I told them they were unlikely to win and, even if they did, they'd recover no money. Oh, I don't care, they said. "It's not the money. It's the PRINCIPLE!"

And then we'd sue, either lose or win but not get any money and they were tee-totally pissed at me because they didn't get their money.

I learned that even when a client said, "It's not the money, it's the principle," it almost always was really the money.

In this case, people keep saying, "We must make a STATEMENT!" and "It's the PRINCIPLE!" But in the end, just making a statement that doesn't help us get this man from office - either through removal or election defeat"- doesn't really get us very far beyond making us feel good in the immediate aftermath. But once we finish high-fiving each other and look around to find him still standing there, not caring that he was impeached (in fact, probably reveling in it) and then going right on about his business and very possibly using our failure to remove him as rocket fuel toward reelection, I don't think we're going to feel all that great about our "statement."

This has to be done right. And right takes time and thought and strategy. I'm glad the people in charge of the carrying this out know that and aren't allowing themselves to be goaded into doing anything stupid that will result in plenty of sound and fury but signify nothing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #7)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:04 PM

12. You're telling us 10 documented cases of obstruction aren't enough

140 contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia and Wikileaks arenít enough.

Documented violations of campaign finance law by the President arenít enough.

And then you tell us your opposition to impeachment isnít political.

Sure it isnít.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #12)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:06 PM

13. No. It's obviously not for most Americans

 

If it were, there would be more public support for impeachment right now.

The case must be built.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #13)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:22 PM

20. The case is already there, it just hasn't been publicized enough

and the Democrats themselves haven't actually come out and forcefully made an argument that Trump should be impeached. If they won't do it, why should anyone else consider it?

If, as a lawyer, you throw out an argument for your own side as unsupported, how seriously do you think a judge will take it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coti (Reply #20)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:31 PM

23. You aren't understanding my point

 

But I'm not going to argue any further because I don't think there's anything I can say to change your mind and you're not going to change mine, so I'll just move on.

Have a nice evening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coti (Reply #20)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:48 PM

32. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coti (Reply #20)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 05:06 AM

77. Yes. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #12)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 09:19 PM

54. We are different from the general public

 

We care about this, the GP does not. There were more people who watched the NFL draft than watched all the hearings combined. How many people talk about this on the street. Remember, Watergate was before cable news, people had to watch the hearings because it was the only thing on TV.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #7)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:20 PM

18. That's just a really poor analogy, especially for a lawyer.

Your clients weren't dealing in national politics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #7)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:46 PM

31. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 06:18 PM

8. Whatever and the Committees

will do their work

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 06:39 PM

9. No, I view the Democratic Party as wimps for not immediately beginning

impeachment. And I've been a member since 1968.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sinkingfeeling (Reply #9)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 06:59 PM

11. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sinkingfeeling (Reply #9)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 01:11 AM

74. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:09 PM

14. Not impeaching will kill voter turnout

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to watoos (Reply #14)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:18 PM

17. Not impeaching this week doesn't mean they won't impeach

 

But timing is everything and it's critical that they move forward with the right strategy and tools.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #17)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:00 PM

36. you're over thinking this.

do the right thing, let the chips fall where they may. impeach the monster - I'm sorry you disagree with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blues Heron (Reply #36)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 09:42 PM

55. I am sorry but what will that accomplish

 

If the Senate will not convict. You can bet your last dollar Trump will come out and say he was found completely innocent, complete exoneration, no collusion, no obstruction. Damn Dems were more interested in a witch-hunt and wasting the taxpayer's money then taking care of the nation's business.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:15 PM

15. Dems need to state flat-out when they start the process that they don't expect the Senate

will convict, that the facts won't matter to the Republicans. Dare the Republicans to do anything other than cover for Trump, and set expectations low.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coti (Reply #15)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:23 PM

21. That's what they're doing

 

They have to shape the narrative before they launch impeachment so that it becomes clear that failure to remove is solely on the Republicans. Right now, the narrative is that failure to remove would be a Democratic failure.

That will take a little time to accomplish. They also have to build up enough evidence to make Trump's removal the only rational and just outcome so that if Republicans don't remove him, it's clear that they are thwarting justice and the Constitution.

The House Dems are savvy enough to know we're not there yet and they have to pave the way skillfully and carefully, which is exactly what they're doing.

Unfortunately, some Democrats in our base aren't making it easier for them - instead, they're attacking Dems instead of Trump and the Republicans, calling them "wimps," weak, and worse. But fortunately, they can handle the attacks and keep their eyes on the prize without being tripped up by people on their own side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #21)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:25 PM

22. Currently, they're not attacking the Republicans as blindly partisan, they're merely showing

no confidence in their own argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coti (Reply #22)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:35 PM

24. Apparently, you haven't been paying attention

 

That's fine. Neither one of us is dictating how the Democrats will proceed. They are doing what they think is right, plenty of people support their approach and it will be what it will be.

But, in the meantime, maybe instead of arguing with me and leaving it solely up to the Democrats to educate the public about Republican corruption, you can help the Democrats by doing something locally to educate your fellow constituents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #21)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:40 PM

29. There was very little in the Mueller Report that hadn't already been publicly reported

over the last two years. Weíve had forever to build the narrative and the mantra has been, wait for the Mueller Report, wait for the Mueller Report. Then comes the Mueller Report, and the mantra is wait for the case to be built, wait for the case to be built. Meantime, Trump stonewalls and where be The Narrative? So I hope you can excuse some of us for finding your counsel to lack the necessary fiber for proper digestion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:21 PM

19. Getting him out of office is upholding the Constitution

Thanks for your concern.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Generic Brad (Reply #19)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:35 PM

25. You're welcome!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:39 PM

28. one- that's a ton of conjecture. two-the WH is ignoring legitimate oversight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:55 PM

33. How can they do any work when republicans refuse to testify and

don't care if they get subpoeuaed because they know nothing is going to happen. Life will go on as normal. The clock is ticking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 07:56 PM

35. A gold star for trying to quell the tide!

I agree that committees must be allowed to due their duty, which prior to going full scream ahead on impeachment, is hold hearings to gain the information they need to impeach if they choose to. I heard Chairman Nadler say that the hearings will be ongoing and should they find that impeachment is the way to go, they can rename what they are already doing and just carry on from wherever they are in the process as impeachment. He was definitely watching his language because of the process and not tainting it in a statement on teevee.

These hearing will be held in public and we will get to see the evidence which will show the public what they need to realize that they need to tell Congress to get rid of this guy. But then we only have him out of office, we need to get rid of all of them and the most expedient way to accomplish that is to vote them out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:28 PM

39. Multiple Committee investigations can build the public

support that's necessary to impeach. I just dont think that many voters are as knowledgeable about what's inside the Mueller report as many here think.

Just my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:28 PM

40. I remember Nixon Impeachment.. right now, such suggestion is still Dems dithering ...

I know how the whole Nixon thing went down, how long it took, the proceedings... I also know that, according to that history, we didn't need committees doing what the Special Counsel was 'too weak willy to do'; all this hand wringing is, in my opinion, Democrats willing to watch it all go down the tubes and waste their opportunity to Impeach the fool on the hill

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NotHardly (Reply #40)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 11:24 PM

59. It sounds like you don't remember a lot about what happened then

 

Among other things, you seem unaware of or to have forgotten all about the Senate Select Committee on Watergate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:30 PM

41. And if it is not called an impeachment

the narrative is: Trump is innocent, the Democrats didn't have enough to impeach him!

See how that works?

Oh, and unless and until it is called impeachment, no one will testify, subpoenas will be ignored, and they will continue to thumb their noses at the idea of oversight.

How will committees do their work if they have zero access to witnesses, documentation, or anything else?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:32 PM

42. You see, the left uses fear to try to motivate people just like the right does.

 

Be afraid, don't call it impeachment or else . . . . .
Leaders can make their case and bring people to their way of thinking rather than FOLLOWING uneducated public opinion. If they make their case, people will be educated and understand the right way. Without educating them as to WHY you need to impeach it is the blind leading the blind.
Our whole system is in peril. We are being taken down the path, and quite a long way down that path, to authoritarianism. Do people want to stand up and fight for the country or just hide behind their fear? That is how countries lose their freedom, by cowardly fear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #42)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:59 PM

52. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:36 PM

44. No evidence to support your assertion

Just fear based defeatism.

Actually the opposite happened with Nixon- support for impeachment grew as the hearings progressed.

Opening an impeachment inquiry is the only legally certain way to obtain the unredacted Meuller report, as it suspends the Rule 6e restrictions re: disclosure of Grand Jury testimony.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #44)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 11:30 PM

60. Support increased as the Senate Select Committee hearings - not impeachment - proceeded.

 

The impeachment proceedings didn't begin until a year after the Senate Watergate hearings began. It was THOSE hearings - outside of the impeachment process - that built public support for impeachment. Only THEN, after the Senate hearings helped boost support for impeachment from 19% in the Spring of 1973 to nearly 50% in May of 1974 did the House open an impeachment inquiry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #60)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 12:33 AM

63. You are incorrect

The foundations for impeachment were laid as early as fall 1973, and a bill to open impeachment inquiry was passed in February 1974, not May- why do you keep repeating this falsehood? The impeachment process, including both Watergate hearings and the formal inquiry- drove public opinion against Nixon, not the other way around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #63)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 12:55 AM

69. My facts are solid

 

You are correct that the House passed a resolution in February 1974 to authorize the opening of an impeachment inquiry. But the impeachment inquiry wasn't actually opened until May 9, 1974.

The foundations for impeachment were laid in the summer of 1973 with the televised hearings by the Senate Select Committee on Watergate and the testimony of John Dean, Alexander Butterfield, revelation of the existence of the Oval Office recording system, and key moments such as "What did the President know and when did he know it?" The impeachment inquiry, as I've correctly noted, began in May 1974.

The first 20 minutes of the impeachment proceedings were televised. The Judiciary Committee then went into closed session and conducted its business in private with no cameras, audience or public access for the next two months.

It was not the impeachment inquiry that drove public opinion toward impeachment. It was the information exposed by the Watergate hearings, along with other factors, such as Nixon's ongoing and escalating criminality, including the Saturday Night Massacre, and Spiro Agnew's guilty plea, conviction and resignation) that built the public support that led to the opening of the inquiry, which was conducted out of public view until July 1974.

Source: http://watergate.info/impeachment/judiciary-committee-hearings

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:38 PM

45. In other words

Follow the lead of Speaker Pelosi and think strategically.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:43 PM

47. Have you noticed that 45 & Republicans aren't playing ball?

Theyíre just ignoring/stonewalling on producing documents, etc. And they will continue to do so, unconcerned about any narrative, for or against.

As for impeachment, the case to not go forward rests on some unsteady footing:
1) It presupposes that 45 will not completely destroy the country over the next two years, or involve us in a war with Iran, etc.
2) It presupposes that the 2020 election will be free and fair, and that 45 will not be re-elected, all with no action taken to quell Russian interference, or any other potential malefactors.
3) It allows 45 to avoid further accountability for malfeasance.

All of which underscores the need to save democracy NOW. If that means taking a risk, Iím of the ďso be itĒ frame of mindó Iíve seen enough to recognize a serious internal existential threat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:45 PM

49. Agree. Investigate

.....and use that word only, for now

Impeachment is dangerous for the Dems and We. Must. Not. Risk. Losing. In 2020.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zentrum (Reply #49)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 09:09 PM

53. So, the only way we avoid risk

is to let him get away with everything, to give the impression that he is utterly innocent of everything.

I disagree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bettie (Reply #53)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 09:51 AM

80. Impeachment will fail.

Because the Repugs will oppose. You need a set number of Repugs to support it and they will not. Rather it will unify them.

When impeachment fails, the Dems have spent millions and all their time on a failed effort.

We can achieve the same thing without failing. Investigations will damage him, by exposing him, as much as impeachment. The news daily will be filled with more and more details of his putridness.

Investigation is a win-win for Dems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zentrum (Reply #80)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 11:06 AM

89. Investigation is only a win

if actual investigation can take place.

At this point, it looks as though the king has declared that it won't. No one will testify, No documents will be released.

Make no mistake, he thinks he's a king and with the current makeup of the courts, there is an even up chance that they will agree.

And the media will paint this as a win for him. They already are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 09:59 PM

56. Give Trump ultimatum

Cooperate with investigations or start impeachment immediately. Up to him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Sun Apr 28, 2019, 10:52 PM

58. The key is to be strategic.

We can't just impeach right now and expect good results - the corrupt scumfuck Republicans in the Senate will vote to acquit, and they'll just consolidate their power.

It IS an appropriate time to hold major hearings, and sooner or later, whether it's popular or not, use the I-word in those hearings.

For one thing, that'll ease people into the idea of impeachment. It'll also show that Democrats are doing this reluctantly, because honor and the good of the country demand it, not because it's popular. It'll also drag things out a little - the ideal time IMHO for things to get real, the I-word to be dropped, and a new wave of evidence produced, is about 6 months before the election. Yes, I'm being a Machiavellian bastard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 12:53 AM

68. Do y'all not realize the harm being done

The evidence for impeachment is already out there in plain sight. Much of it was already there before Mueller released his report.

Refusal to act to contain the damage 45 is doing to the constitution and the country is - and I truly hate to say it - dereliction of duty.

And please don't even try to equate this situation with the blue dress. That was indiscretion. This is actual harm to the country and criminal activity.

Geesh! What will it take?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 01:00 AM

71. Yes. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 10:00 AM

83. ******THIS IS FALSE, THE POLLING LEAN TOWARDS IMPEACHMENT SIMILAR TO NIXON!!****

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #83)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 10:33 AM

85. "Similar" isn't "is"

 

And this isn't 1973, Trump isn't Nixon and the 2019 Republican-controlled Senate bears no relationship to the Democratic-controlled Senate of the 1970s.

The Watergate hearings and other circumstance can provide some helpful history and guidance, but they must be seen in context.

The bottom line - at least for me and, apparently, many other people - is that, while a core of the Democratic base is well aware of Trump's criminality and unfitness for office and are convinced he must be removed (we thought that from his first day in office), most of the country is not there yet. It will take strategy and time to get them there and that's what the House is doing. The House Democrats have the same goal that we do - holding that man accountable and getting him out of office as soon as possible. And they are working toward that goal with a clear-minded approach - an approach based on knowledge and experience and savvy that most of us don't have It's amusing to see Nancy Pelosi being lectured here about the Constitution and Congressional procedure by certain people who clearly don't have even the most rudimentary clue about how either work. (For example, how many times to I and others have to explain that impeachment doesn't take away a president's power to pardon federal crimes?) Insisting that the only way to achieve that goal is to do it the way we want on the timeline that we want is short-sighted and counter-productive.

As I've said several times, instead of beating up on the Democrats, trying to get in their way, calling them weak, undermining them at every turn because they aren't doing this in a certain way, why not HELP them? Why not work to change public opinion, even if it's one or two people at a time? Instead of feeding into the "The Democrats are in disarray" narrative, why not help them shift the focus away from them and onto the Republican obstructionists?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #85)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 11:16 AM

91. Well said nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #85)

Mon Apr 29, 2019, 06:52 PM

94. That's a lot of words to just say "you're right". Similar is adequate and you're right Trump isn't

... Nixon he's worse off and less popular than Nixon.

The reasons against impeachment are falling apart day by day, on the political end of the spectrum we're relatively few points away from Nixon impeachment numbers

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread