Pelosi: "Trump is goading us to impeach him. Every single day, he's just like taunting, taunting..."

[Miles Archer]

Kyle Griffin
@kylegriffin1

Nancy Pelosi: "Trump — I use his name — Trump is goading us to impeach him ... That's what he's doing. Every single day, he's just like taunting, taunting, taunting."

Link to tweet

[ProudMNDemocrat]

1. Vote this fucker out of office insread.....see then if Republicans come to his aid..

Most will remain silent on the sidelines because most of them will be up for re-election again in 2022 in the House and Senate. It will be easier for Democrats to hold onto seats because they upheld the Rule of Law.

[wryter2000]

3. Agreed

Multiple investigations going full speed up to the election. Make him a millstone around every Republican's neck.

[manor321]

6. What if he wins?

Either way you are telling all future presidents this behavior is OK.

[wryter2000]

7. An acquittal is a win

That reinforces the behavior. The only thing that will punish him is jail time for him or his kids.

[uponit7771]

29. This is false historically

[ehrnst]

59. Not it's not. (nt)

[uponit7771]

62. It 100% is, I'm not going to argue over reality ... oh wait, its you ... lol ... sup ehrnst !!!

[ehrnst]

64. No it's not

[uponit7771]

66. Sigh ... please point to the political party that won any control in next election post impeachment

thx in advance...

Hint: there isn't one, you just want to argue...

[ehrnst]

68. You first. Show me your research. Gore did win. It was stolen.

And you know as well as anyone that keeping the WH in one party after two terms is next to impossible - and yet Gore actually got the votes.

But continue moving the goalposts.

[uponit7771]

72. Gore didn't win congress :rolleyes: and you're avoiding my question that I asked in turn.

[ehrnst]

74. No, I answered. :rolleyes:

[uponit7771]

83. No you didn't :rolleyesTheOtherWay:

[ehrnst]

85. I answered. You didn't like it. You didn't answer tho. :rollseyesinfinity:

[uponit7771]

89. Post #68, you said "You first" ... that's not an answer to my question.

[ehrnst]

106. You didn't provide any back up for your claim. So I said, You first. Is that clearer?

[Nuggets]

67. History makes no difference

How does history of previous outcomes affect today’s crisis?


Saying something never happened before doesn’t mean anything.

[uponit7771]

70. It has happened 3 times already throughout the history of the US so yes it ... DOES ... make a d

... difference but just for the sake of argument lets entertain the current situation.

The UE rate is close to the growth rate ... and the president sits at high 30s low 40s

Red Don is ... VERY ... unpopular now ... even more unpopular than JOHNSON !!!

The Republicans got mud stomped in 18, people aren't going to just change their minds about being a whore to Red Don

[ehrnst]

75. Was Russia involved in stealing or disrupting elections for one candidate in any of those?

Spoiler: No.

Things are different now than decades and centuries ago, and nuance is more effective than a sledgehammer.

You're welcome.

[uponit7771]

82. So how is Red Don and Russia a positive?! That goes TOWARDS impeachment not away. Either way...

... we're still dealing with humans and a historical precedent.

The party of the impeached has never fared well in elections post impeachment

[ehrnst]

86. You are missing the point. Things are different now than they were decades and centuries ago

including what we face in elections.

The party of the impeached has never fared well in elections post impeachment

Another thing you don't seem to get: The party that has the White House for two terms has never fared well keeping it for a third, which would include Nixon and Clinton. Look it up if you don't believe me. And Johnson was a VP of a second term POTUS who was assassinated.

Getting clearer on the point you're missing about what else might have already been working against the party of those three presidents keeping the WH after impeachment?

You're making a conclusion about what will happen to this POTUS after impeachment, based on three very different POTUS' and different eras and trying to paste that on to this one, in this era, with very different circumstances, including how long the current POTUS party has held the WH.

Those examples just don't support your opinion.

[uponit7771]

88. No they're not that different and RayGun and Gore and HRC belie your 3rd term accounts

... even recently seeing 2016 was 3 years ago.

You can't have it both ways and say Gore was cheated then say it was cause Gore was a 3rd term ... Clinton was no doubt cheated and would've no doubt gotten a 3rd term of some of Obama.. PERIOD.

American's historically don't mind 3 terms ... plenty of examples of it ... if there's no cheating.

Getting clearer on the point of the party of the impeached not faring well post impeachment?

It was... NOT ... 3 very different situations, that's you wanting reality both ways.

QUESTION (you'll avoid): Do you believe 2020 will be more free and fair than 2016?

thx in advance (for avoiding another question)

[Nuggets]

76. So what?

Each situation is mutually exclusive. As I explained previously, there are millions of things that have never happened before that then happened.

[LanternWaste]

25. No accurate. At all.

"Either way you are telling all future presidents this behavior is OK..."

What is implied and what is inferred are often two separate constructs. The Democratic leadership has spelled out its agenda in small words and so simplistic in nature so that even the alt-right can understand them.

However, if someone is determined to pretend that message is something other than what it in fact, is... well, that inaccuracy is on them alone and no one else.

[Act_of_Reparation]

73. "If someone is determined to pretend that message is something that what it in fact is..."

That will come as small consolation when the building comes down on top of us.

[fescuerescue]

58. That's a risk every 4 years

Every 4 years a republican might win. That's just what we have to live with.

And it's a certainty that whoever follows Trump. Will be worse. They always are.

[ehrnst]

80. Nope. You seem to be ignoring what is going on right now

between Democrats and McConnell obstructing... Not seeing where Democrats are saying this president's behavior is "OK."

Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Leader Chuck Schumer issued this joint statement after Senator McConnell’s declaration on the Senate Floor that the Mueller Report is “case closed”:

“Senator McConnell’s declaration of ‘case closed’ is a stunning act of political cynicism and a brazen violation of the oath we all take. The Special Counsel report laid out eleven instances of the President’s obstruction, and left a raft of unanswered questions about coordination between the President’s campaign and Russia. These are not trivial or political questions – they go to the wellspring of our democracy. When a President is allowed to violate the law with impunity, and when a foreign power is allowed to interfere in our elections, it gnaws at the roots of the great oak that is our democracy, and could very well topple it.

“On every issue that matters in people’s lives, the Administration and a complicit Republican Senate are waging an unprecedented, unwarranted, unconstitutional and utterly dangerous campaign of stonewalling. Senator McConnell continues to brag about being the ‘grim reaper,’ sending bipartisan House legislation to a Senate legislative graveyard, as the Administration refuses to respect Congress’s constitutional oversight role and provide Congress and the American people with the truth.

“There is a dark connection in Washington between Senator McConnell, Attorney General Barr and President Trump: each preventing progress for the people, acting as handmaidens to a special interest agenda that is anti-government, anti-science and against meeting the needs of hard-working families.”

https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/5719-2/

[uponit7771]

28. 2020 will be more free and fair than 2016? tia

[Rambling Man]

30. What has been or is being done about

electoral "irregularities" in 2016?

What is being done to ensure we have free and fair elections in 2020?

[uponit7771]

33. Nothing that's why we shouldn't count on elections

[Rambling Man]

34. is this what a foregone conclusion feels like?

[uponit7771]

35. No not at all we just should look at probabilities

[ehrnst]

60. Why do you think that Pelosi isn't?

[uponit7771]

61. Because they consummate repetition of "beat him at the ballot box". Kinda like saying ...

... trust ebola wont make us sick

[ehrnst]

63. So you don't think they have any other plans to do anything with

the documents or tax returns they've supoenaed... they're doing this for fun, maybe?

How about those talks Democrats are having with Mueller - are those lunch plans?

[uponit7771]

65. More probable they'll run out the clock and what does that have to do with 2020 elections :rolleyes

... cause you rolledeyes (not cause I needed to)

[ehrnst]

69. Shut down your argument, didn't I?

No response....

[uponit7771]

71. No you didn't, answered your question and asked mine ... your answer? tia

[ehrnst]

77. Already there :rollseyes: ywia

[uponit7771]

81. OK, now you're just avoiding questions ...

[ehrnst]

107. Ditto.....

[wryter2000]

2. Yup

The way he sees it, the House impeaches, the Senate acquits, and it's over.

I'm not saying he's right. He's thought it was over several times already.

[manor321]

4. LOL. And we're going to outsmart him by NOT impeaching!

This is backbreaking to morale.

[Grasswire2]

13. Does Pelosi want to be the one who loses the Republic to tyranny?

The jury will only be out for a brief time.

[LanternWaste]

26. I think you're simply projecting your own sentiments onto everyone else.

"This is backbreaking to morale..."

I think you're simply projecting your own sentiments onto everyone else, else you'd support that premise with objective and measurable evidence instead of a bumper-sticker.

[bluestarone]

5. The senate will absolutely protect him!

They know this for sure! DEAL has been made!

[Rambling Man]

8. So get the hints that are being dropped Speaker Pelosi

Country is already divided, that ship already sailed.

[BeyondGeography]

9. 1, 2, 3, what are we not fighting for?

Her “analysis” is wrong. Trump’s base is already solid and has been so for two years. The only base that would be shored up by impeachment is ours.

And obstruction of justice is "goading"?

[berni_mccoy]

10. Trump encourages the opposite of what he wants... until it happens

Consider Mueller Testifying... at first Trump really wanted Mueller to testify. Now that Meuller really will, he doesn’t want him to testify.

Trump said he would interview with Special Counsel. When it came time for him to do it, he didn’t want it.

Now if he is goading Democrats to impeach him... do you think he really wants it?

[NewJeffCT]

11. I don't see a lot of downside to impeachment

The hearings will take time to put together but will get a lot of people glued to their TVs

1) People that have read the Mueller report heavily support impeachment
2) People that have not read it, are strongly against impeachment

What better way to get the non readers to hear the Mueller report in bits and pieces rolled out over months of hearings?

Every week, a new witness testifies:
Mueller
Comey
Mueller's top lieutenants
McGahn
Trump Jr
Kushner
Preibus
Hicks

Democrats were damaged after the Clinton impeachment so they had to distance themselves from the otherwise successful Clinton presidency in 2000 and incompetent boob George W Bush was close enough that Republicans stole Florida and the presidency.

If the House impeaches Trump on several counts of Obstruction, Witness Tampering, Suborning Perjury, Aiding and Abetting a foreign adversary, etc, it will end up hurting Trump and put the Senate on record as being for or against the Trump felonies.

Pence does not scare me because he won't be able to completely dominate the news cycle like Trump.

[Apple Fritter]

14. YES!

It's basically try and if it fails so what? At least your tried...I mean everyone else wants checks and balances?!

[ehrnst]

17. How much do you know about impeachment?

If there was nothing to lose, why wouldn't Democrats have done it on day one?

[NewJeffCT]

36. They're too cautious

Think it might be too divisive?

Meanwhile, Trump is enabling and emboldening white supremacists and already dividing the nation.

[ehrnst]

37. Why do you think they're "too cautious" rather than just knowing more than you do about

the consequences?

You say that there wouldn't be any negative consequences. How do you know this?

[NewJeffCT]

40. History

Tip O'Neill refused to impeach Reagan despite acknowledging that he deserved it. George HW Bush then won election in 1988 and pardoned a bunch of IranContra figures in 1992 and tanked the investigation. Two years later, the GOP took over the House for the first time since the 1950s.

Pelosi took impeachment off the table in 2006 after Democrats took over the House. Yes, Obama won in 2008 because of the economic downtown and being able to drive the media coverage, but Republicans made huge gains in 2010 and 2014.

Republicans impeached Clinton for flimsy reasons in 1999 and managed to damage him enough that Gore ran away from Clinton in 2000 and a strong economy and allowed idiot Bush to be close enough to steal Florida and the election.

[ehrnst]

41. What does this have to do with this POTUS, this House, this Senate and this point in history?

When people point out that Clinton came out of impeachment looking like a victim, other people say THIS IS DIFFERENT!!

Pelosi's the one best equipped to deal with this, and has the most intel. I also think she has better insight into history than either you or me.

Link to tweet

[NewJeffCT]

43. Clinton looked like a victim?

So what, the results are what matter - he was damaged good so much so that Al Gore ran away from Clinton's successes only a year later (the economy, fighting terrorism, relative peace) and Gore picked boring straight arrow Joe Lieberman to be his running mate to try to counter-act the Fox News/Limbaugh generated moral outrage over Clinton.

[ehrnst]

46. Yep. His approval rating went up. (nt)

[NewJeffCT]

48. Not exactly

Clinton was at 73% approval at the end of 1998 when the impeachment process started in the Lame Duck session.

The senate trial started on January 7 and Gallup had his ratings down to 67% approval already

At the beginning of February, when the House managers took over before the final votes, he was down to 65% approval

The final vote was the next week and his approval went back up to 68%, but still 5% below when the process started

A month later, March, his approval had dropped down to 62%

The rest of 1999 had Clinton hovering in the high 50s to around 60. A far cry from the 73% approval in place when the impeachment process started.

Gore was so frightened by Clinton's impeachment that he distanced himself from Clinton for the entire 2000 campaign.

Clinton approval ratings:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/116584/presidential-approval-ratings-bill-clinton.aspx


it wasn't until December of 2000 that Clinton went back up into the 60s - and by then it was too late.

[ehrnst]

50. His approval rating did go up, and that isn't what we want with DT.

Like I said, Pelosi has the chops on this, and she's calling the shots.

I don't armchair quarterback where smart experienced people are concerned.

I would do no good, and it would make me look foolish.

[NewJeffCT]

56. It went from 73%

down to 68% - 68 is lower than 73.


And, a month later was down to 62%

That doesn't sound like it went up to me?

[ehrnst]

57. He finished with a Gallup poll approval rating of 65%, higher than that of every other departing

president measured since Harry Truman.

[riversedge]

101. Trump will claim executive privilage to many of those listed.

[Grasswire2]

12. It's a double trap, Pelosi.

And you have fallen for it.

[StarfishSaver]

15. Nancy Pelosi is much savvier than you or I

She hasn't "fallen for" anything. She knows what she's doing.

But it is amusing (and also a little annoying) to watch people who don't have a fraction of her knowledge, information, or experience lecture her from safety of their keyboards about how clueless and gullible she is.

[Grasswire2]

19. Didn't you ever learn that a democracy depends on the citizens questioning authority??

It is the right and duty of each of us.

Question authority!

Or be a lemming. And a snooty one, too.

[StarfishSaver]

20. Yes. And I also know there' a difference between questioning authority

and assuming that people in authority are clueless idiots.

Proclaiming that a brilliant, accomplished political leader is stupid and or gullible simply because she isn't doing what you think she should be doing in the time frame you think she should be doing it is not "questioning authority." It's just uninformed sniping.

and while it's important to question authority, along with that goes the responsibility to be informed about what we're questioning.

[ehrnst]

23. Nice strawman... equating trusting a politician is doing their job

Last edited Tue May 7, 2019, 02:06 PM - Edit history (1)

with being "lemmings."



And if you give everyone on the bus a handle for the brake, you never get anywhere.

[LanternWaste]

32. You keep choosing the bumper stickers.

You have a choice between rational thought or simplistic, unsupported memes.

Why not choose the rational thought? I get that it doesn't fit on a t-shirt or look clever pasted on a meme, but the Age of Reason has spoken... it's your choice alone to ignore it (John Locke ain't just a tv character).

[ehrnst]

47. +1000.

[uponit7771]

95. ... and the people who wont proffer a cogent fact based position on why wait keep choosing snark ...

... which leads one to think they don't have a cogent fact based position.

Fuck "trust them" ... we did that and got a trillion dollars worth of war from it.

Our representatives should lay out clear reasoning and a plan ... not consummate calls for trust and ... snark.

[ehrnst]

39. This might make you feel foolish, but you should know.

Link to tweet

[ehrnst]

42. "She" lost the house to Republicans in 2010?

[G_j]

49. I get your point

that Pelosi is so much smarter than any of us could possibly be. Ok we’re ignorant, and I suppose we shouldn’t even bother discussing it.

[ehrnst]

79. False dillema fallacy:

Fallacy Name:
False Dilemma

Alternative Names:
Excluded Middle
False Dichotomy
Bifurcation

Fallacy Category:
Fallacies of Presumption > Suppressed Evidence

Explanation

The False Dilemma fallacy occurs when an argument offers a false range of choices and requires that you pick one of them. The range is false because there may be other, unstated choices which would only serve to undermine the original argument. If you concede to pick one of those choices, you accept the premise that those choices are indeed the only ones possible. Usually, only two choices are presented, thus the term "False Dilemma"; however, sometimes there are three (trilemma) or more choices offered.

This is sometimes referred to as the "Fallacy of the Excluded Middle" because it can occur as a misapplication of the Law of the Excluded Middle. This "law of logic" stipulates that with any proposition, it must be either true or false; a "middle" option is "excluded". When there are two propositions, and you can demonstrate that either one or the other must logically be true, then it is possible to argue that the falsehood of one logically entails the truth of the other.

https://www.thoughtco.com/false-dilemma-fallacy-250338

Such as: You either agree with me that Pelosi is wrong, and I know better than Pelosi or you are saying that "Pelosi is so much smarter than any of us could possibly be. Ok we’re ignorant, and I suppose we shouldn’t even bother discussing it." No other options. Nada.

[G_j]

91. and

what is this “middle” we are missing?

[ehrnst]

96. The fact that you don't see a middle

perfectly illustrates my point, doesn't it?

Maybe someone disagrees with you and they aren't taking the extreme, ridiculous POV that you claim they are.

Binary thinking is always putting things in terms of two options that are usually mutually exclusive. That is all the possibilities are either option A or option B and not both. Sometimes this is valid, but often it is a mistaken simplification.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-binary-thinking

[ehrnst]

18. Because you say so?

Do you have secret sources of information that Pelosi doesn't?

[LanternWaste]

27. Yours does seem to be the trendy bumper-sticker meme unsupported any any evidence.

Fallen for it, indeed.

[shanti]

16. Then do it

[Cold War Spook]

21. Impeach, get the truth out there.

If you don't impeach then you are telling the country he is innocent. Yes, the Republicans in the Senate will vote to acquit, then that is what you use against them. Without impeachment, you will not have any witnesses. I would rather we go down fighting than just lying down in the fetal position sucking our thumbs.

[ehrnst]

44. So all the subpoena's, and the calls for testimony are "telling the country he's innocent?"

and all the statements that have been made - none of that convinces anyone that they think he's guilty?

Not to mention that he's fighting them tooth and nail, saying that they are coming after him?

You think that this will not convince anyone that they believe he's guilty?

Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Leader Chuck Schumer issued this joint statement after Senator McConnell’s declaration on the Senate Floor that the Mueller Report is “case closed”:

“Senator McConnell’s declaration of ‘case closed’ is a stunning act of political cynicism and a brazen violation of the oath we all take. The Special Counsel report laid out eleven instances of the President’s obstruction, and left a raft of unanswered questions about coordination between the President’s campaign and Russia. These are not trivial or political questions – they go to the wellspring of our democracy. When a President is allowed to violate the law with impunity, and when a foreign power is allowed to interfere in our elections, it gnaws at the roots of the great oak that is our democracy, and could very well topple it.

“On every issue that matters in people’s lives, the Administration and a complicit Republican Senate are waging an unprecedented, unwarranted, unconstitutional and utterly dangerous campaign of stonewalling. Senator McConnell continues to brag about being the ‘grim reaper,’ sending bipartisan House legislation to a Senate legislative graveyard, as the Administration refuses to respect Congress’s constitutional oversight role and provide Congress and the American people with the truth.

“There is a dark connection in Washington between Senator McConnell, Attorney General Barr and President Trump: each preventing progress for the people, acting as handmaidens to a special interest agenda that is anti-government, anti-science and against meeting the needs of hard-working families.”

https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/5719-2/

[Cold War Spook]

93. The only voters who will say that the way they are acting proves they are guilty,

are those who already think they are guilty and I am one of those. We are talking about the president of the U.S. The voters, I will call them the middle group, want hard facts. What facts have they heard that Trump is guilty? I am talking about solid facts that will stand up in court. No, he is the president, they want facts that are more than solid. They want documents. They want to hear people grilled by the House. Nothing less will convince them. This isn't a boxing match, this is a street fight. If in the end, Trump doesn't have 2 black eyes, a broken nose and pissing blood, he will win.

[ehrnst]

94. You mean like someone that is shown they're wrong, but refuses

to acknowldege it, and changes the goalposts?

You mean like those who will believe what they want to believe, no matter the facts?

[Fullduplexxx]

22. And yet every day you dont ... at what point do you become an enabler

[ehrnst]

45. Why don't you tell us? Since you seem to know more than Pelosi

What exactly is making her "an enabler" to Trump?

[Fullduplexxx]

92. Im sure you can figure it out if not look up the definition of "an enabler"

[ehrnst]

97. Still no answer then.

It would be refreshing to see someone back up their complaints.

Not happening here, no surprise.

[Fullduplexxx]

103. I dont think it's that hard . Do you KNOW what a enabling means? If not look it up your answer is

There

[Baitball Blogger]

24. Take the bait, already.

If he is escalating his bad behavior, at some point impeachment becomes compulsory.

[OnDoutside]

38. Political death by as thousand investigations is better. As Kevin

McCarthy said, it'll bring the numbers down.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

51. Time to call his fucking bluff!

[Firestorm49]

52. So?.......................................DO SOMETHING!!!

[ehrnst]

100. Perhaps you haven't been reading the news?

Waters: Deutsche Bank providing Trump financial records for House probe
https://thehill.com/policy/finance/435901-waters-deutsche-bank-providing-trump-financial-records-for-house-probe

House Democrats Subpoena Full Mueller Report, and the Underlying Evidence
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/19/us/politics/Mueller-subpoena.html

US attorney general faces contempt vote over Mueller report
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48175289

House Democrat Demands Six Years of Trump Tax Returns From I.R.S.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/us/politics/mueller-report-subpoena-house.html

House Dems in direct talks with Mueller about his testimony
https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/441915-house-dems-in-direct-talks-with-mueller-about-his-testimony-reports

You're welcome.

[uponit7771]

53. Not just Trump, 500 prosecutors are goading too ... We'll see. I trust Pelosi enough to give this...

... time but the political and legal logic ... against ... impeachment doesn't have strong footing right now.

[Tom Rinaldo]

54. Trump is becoming the Autocrat he always wanted to be. He literally is seizing more power

He can not be viewed through a conventional political lens. He is pushing the envelope because he does not want to be constrained by the envelope. And like any true bully he is relishing the sight of opponents relinquishing ground when he strides forward filling all the voids left to him.

[BlueJac]

55. Fast track all subpoenas ...

then sue! Get this show on the road!

[ehrnst]

78. How does one "fast track" a subpoena? (nt)

[GoCubsGo]

84. Is it really "taunting"?

Or, is what we're seeing sheer panic?

[ehrnst]

99. Have you ever seen Pelosi panic?

[GoCubsGo]

104. I'm not talking about Pelosi.

She's not the one doing the alleged taunting.

[ehrnst]

108. My mistake.

[GoCubsGo]

109. No big deal.

It's all good.

[spanone]

87. I'm goading us too. Isn't this shit divisive???????

We will get nothing from them...N O T H I N G.

[ehrnst]

98. Subpoenas have to have reasonable deadlines. The deadlines have to pass

before the next step.

I think we'll get the taxes and the full Mueller report.

[Xolodno]

90. Of course he is...

...being forced out from office means he wasn't voted out. So he can capitalize on that. Plus he'll get the pardons he wants and claim he was persecuted. I know some will say "but he can't avoid state charges!"....yes he can.

His organization will probably take the brunt of the charges...which he will then send into bankruptcy....and they were probably heading that way in the first place. But he'll play that up as being "targeted". Let's face it, the Fox News propaganda channel is supporting him to their detriment. The asshole got into this because he wanted to start his own TV Channel....and I believe he still wants to do that.

Win and election. Get forced out. He can claim he did "great things" on his ego filled channel...and his followers will eat it up.

But even then, he gets voted out, he'll claim it was the "fake news" that ruined him.

Either way, we lost in a way and he won. But getting him out of there is a necessity, not an option.

[Kid Berwyn]

102. Impeachment airs out the case for Treason.

At worst, We the People get the story firsthand from the players involved.

Also, Prime Time coverage means an end run around Rupert Murderous and Rush Limpparts, getting the stories directly into the MAGA brained.

Win Win Constitution USA!

[ecstatic]

105. Or it could be reverse psychology.

That's why you should do your job regardless of what trump thinks or does. He's gonna talk shit regardless.

[SlogginThroughIt]

110. You investigate to get to impeachment if it is applicable

You don’t impeach in order to investigate.