I believe it is time to begin impeachment investigations.

[Control-Z]

On Nichole Wallace's show today they talked about the daily show Democrats would be putting on with impeachment hearings - PUBLIC HEARINGS!! It would be riviting, must-see TV.

The American public would be glued to their TVs. They would be watching every day and recording any hearings they might miss. It will be the talk around the water cooler at work. And the public will learn everything we already know and more.

Best of all, the maggot won't be able to upstage us. Even his deplorables will watch. And once the American public knows what happened - has heard the entire story from beginning to end with legal documentation and subpoenaed witnesses it's going to be damned hard for the Senate to get away without full impeachment.

[egduj]

1. Bravely said! You won't find many friends on this board, but I'll be one of them.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

7. That makes two of us.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!

[Control-Z]

11. Thank you, egduj.

I've always been supportive of Madam Speaker. I still am. I just believe that we, and she, may have finally crossed the invisible line.

I'll see what's happening tomorrow and write an email or text to her. I think we should all let her know how we feel. She's a brilliant politician. I think she's been waiting to be able to say she has no choice. And to be able to keep politics out of it as much ss possible.

Thank you for being my friend on this!

[TwilightZone]

12. Well, other than the dozens of posters who've posted similar thoughts...

just today.

If you think no one on DU is calling for impeachment, you might want to look around. The people calling for patience are much more in the minority.

[gldstwmn]

2. I agree. It's time.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

3. So.Do.I.

He's a fucking criminal.

[GeniusJoy]

4. I agree with you.

I defend and love Pelosi but my patients is wearing thin here. He needs to be impeached. We need the public hearings so people who do not read documents can know what is going on.

[onetexan]

5. Bring it on- we've been ready

For a couple years now

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

6. Isn't that what they really are trying to do by calling witnesses

like McGahn? They aren't calling it that, but isn't that what's really happening? The first Watergate hearings, from May-August of 1974, were intended to investigate whether and to what extent White House officials were involved in the break-in. By that time some people had already been indicted and were cooperating with prosecutors. It was during these hearings that John Dean testified and the existence of the secret tapes was disclosed. The special prosecutor demanded the tapes and Nixon refused to turn them over. This led to the Saturday Night Massacre, but the Judiciary Committee was still reluctant to begin impeachment proceedings. After a new special prosecutor was appointed, he sued to obtain the tapes. In early 1974 a grand jury indicted the "Watergate 7" - Haldeman, Ehrlichman, Mitchell and others - and named Nixon as an unindicted co-conspirator. At about the same time the House began hearings on the impeachment of Nixon, which, except for an initial televised session, were not public. In July, after the Supreme Court ordered Nixon to turn over all of the tapes, the committee voted to send articles of impeachment to the full House, and soon afterward Nixon resigned.

So, there were really two sets of hearings - one was to investigate who was behind the Watergate break-in, and a later one to address the impeachment of Nixon. What the House seems to be doing now seems parallel to the first Watergate investigation, which turned up more evidence implicating Nixon. It wasn't until after the Saturday Night Massacre and the indictments of the Watergate 7 that they got really serious about impeachment, and authorized additional hearings specifically related to impeachment. The House is now leading up to impeachment by collecting evidence, but would have to authorize separate proceedings to initiate the impeachment process. But it's in the works.

[TreasonousBastard]

10. Yes, it appears to be going according to plan...

slowly but inexorably leading to impeachment and removal. But, like fly fishing, it is so easy to lose the fish.

As with Nixon, Republicans are lined up to defend the White house, and the people are too involved in their own lives to really care. But, the apparent erasure on the tapes finally got everyone's attention, and Republican defiance was cut short.

Some parts of the law and the situation have changed, but the essentials are still there-- in the entire history of the nation we have only impeached two Presidents, and both attempts ended badly. (Or well, perhaps, depending on your point of view...)

Around here we are political junkies and we live and breathe this stuff. The rest of the country won't get up to speed until the dam breaks.

And, btw, I lived through the 60's and seventies-- I doubt I'm the only one here who thinks the politics now is child's play compared to back then. We now have threats that didn't exist back then, but our own divisions now seem almost trivial compared to then.

[TwilightZone]

13. Yes.

But good luck convincing anyone of that. It's much easier just to assume nothing is happening because it's not under the guise of impeachment.

[Steven Maurer]

8. Do you think these House investigations AREN'T?!?

There is no need to attach the word "impeachment" to investigations. And if (and when) they discover evidence that Trump has committed impeachable offenses to the point that even Republican Senators start to abandon him, then impeachment can start.

That's exactly how Watergate went about. The Cox hearings weren't called "Impeachment Hearings". They were just investigations into Nixon.


If it walks like an impeachment hearing, swims like an impeachment hearing, and quacks like an impeachment hearing, it's an impeachment hearing.

[SunSeeker]

9. Just in time for summer, when all our shows are on hiatus and people need something to watch.

The timing is perfect.

[spanone]

14. K&R...

[Bonx]

15. Agreed with this thread every single time it's been posted since 2017

[jalan48]

16. Time to quit playing defense and go on the offense.

[Poiuyt]

17. I can't imagine a president more suited to impeachment

If not now, when?

[gldstwmn]

21. Howard Dean called him the worst president we have ever had

tonight on Chris Cuomo.

[Jakes Progress]

18. Even though it will boost trump's reelection chances?

Three points.

You put too much faith in the patriotism of republican senators.

Those republicans would be denouncing the hearings non stop - - to the joy of their constituencies.

Why do you think that anyone subpoenaed to an impeachment or records demanded would be any more forthcoming than they are now?

I want him in jail too. But when you are dealing with a rigged court, it takes some finesse. Impeachment might feel good, but not if it ends up with trump back in office. Not to mention the republican senators that would skate to reelection on the "virtue" of their indignant rantings during the proceedings.

[mountain grammy]

19. I believe that's the general consensus around here

I think Nancy will go forward with it..

[JeaneRaye]

20. The Senate doesn't impeach.

I agree with your sentiment and comments but I have a small correction. Impeachment is merely an indictment and it is voted on in the House. If the vote passes to impeach, which it will, the case goes on the Senate, whose responsibility it is to hold a trial and find him guilty or not on the charges brought by the House. The Senate, under Mitch McConnell, will probably not even hold a trial. Thus, the House will impeach but Trump will remain in office; exactly what happened to President Clinton.

[pecosbob]

22. I feel kinetic energy and momentum

It will take on a life of it's own very soon I think.