I guess I'd better "fess up". Unlike many posters, l do not KNOW what would happen

[Atticus]

if our Democratic House were to impeach Trump.

Some here know that the Senate would not convict under any circumstances and that the "acquittal" would doom us in 2020.

Others know that, even if the GOP Senate refuses to do their duty, the voters would be galvanized by Trump's acquittal and we would retake the White House and the Senate in '20.

Me? I'm just a guy who thinks that once you've figured out what is the right and just thing to do, you ought to do that thing. "Let the chips fall where they may" is an American tradition.

But, I don't "know" jack, so maybe you should read on if you seek certainty.

[redstatebluegirl]

1. I side with Speaker Pelosi, she is on the ground and knows what is going on.

You always side with the troops on the ground.

[Atticus]

2. I don't "always" do anything. "Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." nt

[redstatebluegirl]

4. Well I don't have a little mind, what I have is a one that can reason.

To go after him now, when we know we can't win and without doing what we need to do first is a losing proposition. They have polling we don't have as well.

[Atticus]

10. I did not mean to imply you had a little mind. The quote is, I believe, somewhat

well known and is sort of a tongue in cheek excuse for "swimming against the tide.

No offense intended.

[centrarchus]

13. Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little mind. nt

[LanternWaste]

21. Not the full quote... the necessary qualifier you avoided adds additional context you ignore.

Or maybe that's something you "always" do...

[Atticus]

24. I quoted from memory---something I do perhaps too often, but not "always"---and,

as you point out, did omit part of the quotation. So, let's read the entire passage:

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. — 'Ah, so you shall A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. — 'Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.' — Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

Hopefully, that provides enough context. It certainly does no violence to my abbreviated usage.

[stopdiggin]

28. foolish consistency does alright on its own

Actually, I don't see that the full quote adds a lot of "additional context." The original quote pretty much encapsulizes ...

[old guy]

3. Now there are two of us.

Is this a wave?

[redstatebluegirl]

5. There are three of us.

[Bettie]

6. Three

letting them get away with criminal acts in other administrations has taught them that our side will probably not act.

[defacto7]

14. 5 now and I'm drowning.

[Kid Berwyn]

17. Six.

Do the right thing and let the chips fall where they may.

[think4yourself]

27. There are tens of millions of us.

Just waiting for our elected officials to do the right thing.

[TwilightZone]

7. "Some here know that the Senate would not convict under any circumstances"

Well, that part is almost assuredly true. There isn't a single Republican senator who has publicly asserted that the Trump administration has done *anything* wrong, much less done something that rises to the level of removal in the Senate.

If we pursue impeachment, we do so knowing that it will fail in the Senate. The debate then becomes whether it should be done anyway. A debate that is quite likely going on now among Democratic leadership and has been for some time.

[uponit7771]

9. Yes, it should be done anyway to expose those who wont convict the criminal trump. Let them justify

... their actions in front of the people

[uponit7771]

8. The **party** of the impeached has never fared well in elections post impeachment. Even Clinton's

... numbers fell among republicans, where he was unusually high, post impeachment.

Impeachment, historically, hasn't helped those in charge.

Republicans knew the consummate investigations would kill Clinton's numbers among republicans and on the line democrats.

[brooklynite]

11. Where did any advocate of either approach claim knowledge?

Now, as for me, my assessment, based on 40+ years of engagement in politics, is that the risk isn't worth taking.

[Rambling Man]

41. Maybe your 40+ years of engagement

is an actual liability.

[FakeNoose]

12. I believe Speaker Pelosi does want to impeach Chump, or indict him

... but she recognizes that timing is everything. We can't get distracted from winning the 2020 election. It's the single most important thing the Democrats need to focus on.

If we don't win in 2020 then we can kiss all of it - ALL OF IT - goodbye.

After the election, when hopefully we'll have more blue seats in the Senate or maybe even a majority, then she can focus on getting Chump impeached and/or indicted.

Have patience, my friend.

[Hoyt]

15. Maybe Pelosi is not so sure she has the votes in House. Don't know "jack," either.

[jalan48]

16. I've had the same thought. It's as if we assume all Democrats will vote to impeach, that may not

be the case and Pelosi knows it.

[matt819]

18. None of us knows

Here's a tinfoil hat thought, though.

Maybe the Amash pro-impeachment stance is deliberate, and directed - designed to open, slowly, the floodgate of eventual support of the idea of impeachment/conviction. As in so much of life, it's the first step that counts - journey of a 1000 miles, etc. And, to continue the use of lazy cliches, he's the sacrificial goat (or lamb, or cow). Everyone calls him a traitor - at first. Then slowly, another says, hold on a sec, maybe Amash has something there. Maybe the people signing on do not plan to run for reelection. Whatever. I mean, after all, you can't see 20 Republicans signing on en masse to a conviction, out of the blue. Now, it's no longer out of the blue. One Republican says, hey, why not? The guy's a crook. It's time to say yes to impeachment.

Tinfoil hat off. Back to the reality-based universe.

[defacto7]

19. Opinions are well and fine and probably helpful, but

I'll have to leave the impeachment argument to our Dems in congress who are better suited to make that decision while I work on the things I can change like GtingOTV.

What a crazy time we live in.

[Skittles]

20. we are WAY past the point when impeachment proceedings should have started

way, WAY past

[meadowlander]

22. Yep.

When you reach the point where you're damned if you do and damned if you don't, you might as well be damned for doing the right thing.

[mitch96]

23. Will the start of an impeachment proceeding open more avenues for information about

tRumps dealings with the Russians? What I'm asking is, can you start impeachment proceedings but not impeach just to get more info out there? If so, when would the best time to start this show on the road? 6 months before the election? 9 months ???
As said before, timing is everything
m

[StarfishSaver]

34. No

It won't necessarily make any difference . The process is the same

[VOX]

25. I fear that the 2020 election will be a chaotic, multidimensional shit-fest.

With Russian interference again (no steps taken by the White House to prevent it), fights at polling places, Trump-cultists doing **everything** possible to suppress Democratic voters, etc. And based on what we know about 45 and his rabid followers, no tactic is too low for them. Their Russian comrades have already hacked voter registration databases in Florida. Electronic voting machines are vulnerable at this point.

Trump has given Republicans a taste of blood; at first, they were put off, but in time, they returned to the fold (see: Sen. Lindsey Graham) to support and repeatedly excuse their boor of a “leader.” They aren’t so much a political party as they are a hostile occupying force, apparently quite comfortable with fascist leanings. American democracy is on life support.

All of which informs me that moving toward impeachment, and swiftly, is the right thing to do.

[Honeycombe8]

33. There is that view. If the Democratic leaders decide on that, I'll support them.

But I wonder if everyone understands that impeachment won't remove Trump. It's a pretty sure thing that the Senate won't vote to impeach, so the impeachment will be on paper, for historical purposes. Like Bill Clinton's was.

That doesn't mean the impeachment shouldn't be done. It's a tough decision. I'm glad the decision is not mine.

I'll support whatever the leaders decide. They'll have many meetings, discuss the various outcomes there could be, the differences between a regular investigation hearing vs an impeachment hearing, etc. They have years of political and legal experience. Whatever they decide is okay with me.

[guillaumeb]

26. Allow me to introduce you to Jack.

Atticus, meet Jack.

Recommended. What we claim to know often limits what we feel can be done.

[stopdiggin]

29. "chips fall where they may"

It's that "chips fall where they may" thing that is the sticky part. If I have an inkling that "doing the right thing" is going to have nasty consequences ... Then NO! Deliver me from moral absolutes!

[Atticus]

30. By all means, let's play it safe! To hell with "doing the right thing". What are laws, anyway?

And, that Constitution thing? Just a quaint old piece of paper, am I right?

[Chin music]

31. +1

[stopdiggin]

36. the Constitution? I didn't realize!

So now the course that the House is on (setting aside the Senate for the moment) is "against the law" and "unconstitutional." OK. Got it now. Playing it safe is unpatriotic. I thought we were debating differences of opinion on the wisdom of chips fall where they may. My mistake.

[Atticus]

37. Of course, that's not what I said. Have a good one. nt

[Honeycombe8]

32. I agree. I keep changing my mind, which means I don't know what the House should do.

I don't envy them having to make this decision.

It's a pretty sure bet the Senate won't impeach. They wouldn't even speak to the Democratic Supreme Court nominee or put forth any Democratic proposed bills for a vote. So we have to recognize the extremism that's going on there.

The impeachment would be on paper, for historical reasons.

I don't know if the impeachment would help or hurt our chances in 2020. I also don't know if it would help or hurt Trump in 2020.

None of has a crystal ball. Whatever the Democratic leaders decide, I'll support them in that.

[Vinca]

35. AOC made the comment that not impeaching can be just as political as impeaching and

we should do what is right without worrying about winning or losing elections. I agree.

[GeorgeGist]

38. Read the Constitution ...

it's what they took an OATH to support and defend!

[Turin_C3PO]

39. I have no idea what the best course of action is.

For now, I’m trusting our Dem leadership to figure it out.

[HAB911]

40. Always do the right thing

just do it

[Rambling Man]

42. That mindset is just for the powerless

[HAB911]

43. Thanks for sharing your opinion