Pelosi: "We have our options. We have arrows in our quiver that I'm not about to discuss right now"

[triron]

Link to tweet

[C_U_L8R]

1. Big bazooka-looking arrows

[Harker]

11. We're gonna need a bigger bow. n/t

[C_U_L8R]

21. A big baddah bow.

[cayugafalls]

53. big baddah boom...

[DownriverDem]

41. 6 weeks

is all we need. There is a lesson here and it's Vote Biden/Harris!

[Raven123]

2. Don't think Stephanopoulos suggestion would have any effect. Hope Pelosi is correct

[grumpyduck]

3. Well, I hope she's ready and willing to use them.

[ehrnst]

35. Why do you think that she wouldn't be?

[beachbumbob]

4. the hOuse no power in any the stuff concerning a supreme court nomination or approval

the house does have the power to defund the federal court system

[leftieNanner]

33. But any impeachment goes to the top of the Senate calendar

So Mitch would be required to take it up instead of jamming through the next Justice.

[MoonlitKnight]

52. This is the strategy

Would be best if used post election.

[aikoaiko]

58. Is impeachment required to come before other business?

Or are we assuming it would?

[grantcart]

50. Impeachment

[Upthevibe]

5. trion.....

I was in an online discussion about this yesterday. We were especially speaking of the possible impeachment of Barr because apparently there's a rule that everything else gets pushed aside if an impeachment is in process. Having said that, one of the posters said that he thought that McConnel could possibly eliminate that rule. I'd love to hear further discussion about this option...

[triron]

7. Me too. I have no idea what McConnell can or can't do.

Hopefully Pelosi is not bluffing.

[Thekaspervote]

17. When have ever...every seen or heard her bluff? Like never!

[CTyankee]

25. I agree. Pelosi doesn't shoot from the hip. EVER. What she has, she thinks will slow this down

if not stop it.

Don't worry too much. Fingers crossed, though...

[ehrnst]

36. When has she ever bluffed? (nt)

[fierywoman]

42. This! Or lied.

[triron]

45. Wasn't trying to imply she has. Sorry if taken that way.

[ehrnst]

48. Saying you're sorry that 'someone else' reacted to something you posted

isn't an apology.

I'm not the only one who got that impression. Perhaps it's worth editing your post to ensure that you're understood clearly.

[Iliyah]

10. Also the bill is up for renewal regarding running the government . . .

I believe on 10/1/2020. I don't think the republicans don't want a shut down, but who knows, they are so power hungry, I would not put it past them. Negotiations for the funding puts all other matters to the side, which includes US SC open seat. My gosh, we were at 4/4 for months at one point in time.

Infections galore and deaths are continuing concerning COVID-19. In other words while focusing on the open seat, republicans don't and never cared about virus and the deaths and illness nor for the Americans suffering from it nor do they care about Americans who are unemployed nor businesses who were affected by it.

fuck them.

[llashram]

18. They republicans are

like trump said, very "disgusting people". Put me in mind of 'A Face in the Crowd'. And the ending when open mic ended his career and exposed him as the conman fraud he always was. Andy Griffith and Patricia Neal-1957 release date.

[robbob]

28. Yeah, but...

tRump has been quoted and caught on recordings saying all kinds of horrible things. Effect on his followers? Zero.

[llashram]

32. yeah I know

his followers are in goose-step behind the lead goose-stepper. Never would have any effect on them. He could say all those lies and horrible things about disrespecting women, minorities, POC, and his base just want white power, aka 10, the '20s '30's '40s and '50, back. Where POC and women will know their place in the pecking order.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

54. Incredible movie.

I watched it recently and was completely blown away. It's Andy Griffith before he became Sheriff Andy Griffith, which was the only way I had known him before.

I'd suggest that everyone who reads this watch "A Face in the Crowd". Right now you can rent or buy it on Amazon. It's not on either Netflix or Hulu right now. If you're lucky your local library might have a copy of it.

But try to see it.

[llashram]

67. youtube has it also

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

68. Good to know.

[moonscape]

56. Griffith was so amazing in that movie! n/t

[vsrazdem]

46. If the government shuts down, the stock market will crash. That is about the only thing

Trump cares about at this point.

[moonscape]

66. But Dems would be blamed - wouldn't this backfire? n/t

[vsrazdem]

71. Pelosi says she won't do it. But it doesn't really matter. She will be blamed if this goes

through without a fight. Twitter world is already talking about supporting her opponent in CA if this ends up going throughout without a fight.

[BainsBane]

14. Impeachment of Trump would be a bad idea

And could turn the election toward Trump.

[Wicked Blue]

24. McConnell has no power over what the House does

The House can hold impeachment hearings whenever they deem it necessary. For as long as they deem it necessary.

I don't believe the Senate comes into play unless, and until, the House votes to convict.

[FBaggins]

59. About as much as the Pelosi has over what the Senate does

I seriously doubt Pelosi has the votes for impeachment now... but even if she did, the most impact it would have would be for the days after she delivered it to the Senate and they took it up. Not much reason to believe that it could keep a nomination from going through if there are 50 republicans in the Senate who want it.

[Srkdqltr]

6. I am very sure that there are plans that have been made for every situation.

She and her people know what is possible and legal. If possible and legal exists.

[Farmgirl1961]

8. We know she's playing a strategic game of stress

I just hope it’s more than the use of a pawn. She’s got to go for checkmate and hope the Rethugs are going to burn the entire board.

[Mrs. Overall]

9. At this point--shoot the arrows, launch the catapult, drop the mother of all bombs...

[Escurumbele]

12. The process to impeach Barr should have began already

He is a very dangerous tool, he must be removed from his post. I am not sure what Nadler and Pelosi are waiting for, the process should have started right after he lied about the Muller report, at least that would have stopped the the plans he is working on.

[Lonestarblue]

13. Barr will never be convicted in the Senate.

Republicans are fine with his shenanigans and efforts to reelect Trump. They don’t care about the rule of law because they know that Barr will protect all of them and help keep Trump in the White House. Impeachment in the House will not stop a Senate cote on a new SC justice.

[iluvtennis]

15. that's okay, just as long as the house proceeds with the charges. nt

[Illumination]

16. Agree! Nancy's got something up her sleeve. They need to go for the jugular vein RIGHT NOW!...

[ehrnst]

37. When the timing is right. If you come for the king, you best not miss. (nt)

[Illumination]

38. Well ehrnst, that's a pretty big target to work with!...

[ehrnst]

40. True, that!

[dalton99a]

19. Republicans are waging an all-out war against Americans and American democracy

Democrats must be just as ferocious.

[FoxNewsSucks]

20. Well, I hope she's planning to USE those arrows,

not just keep them sharpened in the quiver and stored next to Harry Reid's dry powder.

Maybe it's time to get that powder out also.

[Baclava]

22. The Senate confirms justices. The House has no say in this, unless, impeachment again?

[FBaggins]

60. They have no say... period.

If there were 67 votes in the Senate to remove... then there wouldn't be 50 votes to approve a nominee.

The only thing impeachment would do would be to force (under current Senate rules) the Senate to set aside what they're working on and hold a trial... but those rules can be changed and they can vote to dismiss the trial either way.

At most... they could mess with the Senate calendar for a few days... and that doesn't get us to January.

[Iliyah]

23. Before RBG's death republicans had the majority . ..

5-4. They could have overturned Roe vs. Wade at any time. But they did not. Judge Roberts at this point in time has semi protected ACA, not voting rights. Civil rights I don't know his track record.

[FBaggins]

61. There are different majorities on the court on different issues

And even within the same issue depending on the specifics of a given case (as Roberts just proved with the recent abortion ruling)...

... but there's no question that replacing Ginsburg with pretty much anyone Trump would pick - is a huge shift on many critical issues.

[Polybius]

26. If they just impeach for the sole purpose to stall, then Trump wins in November

Perhaps even the House would be in play.

[Hstch05]

27. I'm not saying you are wrong

But, respectfully, how to you figure that exactly? How does the math on that work?

[Polybius]

31. I think we need to get 4 Republican Senators to commit to not voting until after the election

Preferably, the new Senate. Because if people see that Democrats are impeaching this close to the election and it's only to stall, many will blame us. He's only a few points behind, especially in close states. If 5% nation-wide break for him because of this, then Biden loses.

[MoonlitKnight]

55. While better to not have to use this pre election

If we have to we just pound the message that it is not being done for any reason other than to use it as a tool to hold Republicans to the precedent they set.

It also allows the narrative of protecting ACA and pre existing conditions.

It’s not like there are not an abundance of legit causes for impeachment anyway. Just send one at a time to force Senate into trials until the clock runs out.

Polling this week will likely determine the next moves on both sides.

But we are not without ammo.

[grantcart]

51. Nov 4th

[FBaggins]

62. True

BUT it's also true that she needs to look like she's doing everything possible to keep Trump from replacing Ginsburg.

There really isn't anything that she can do. But she can't look like she's accepting the inevitable.

[Bayard]

29. Not a good idea

Trump would get a lot of pity votes--Dems are out to get him.

I trust Nancy, so this makes me feel a bit better.

[wryter2000]

34. Barr, please

He hasn't been impeached yet.

[bucolic_frolic]

39. What can the House do that stops the Senate, forces the Senate to deal with something?

[Blue Owl]

43. Shit-seeking missles

n/t

[OhioTim]

44. Be Careful

All of the talk about increasing the number of justices worries me. If Trump wins, what keeps HIM from increasing the number and appointing a bunch of Republicans.

[Gore1FL]

47. The speculation on this thread largely assumes "We" is the House.

"We" could be Democrats.

[BlueWavePsych]

49. ABC News - Democrats will 'use every arrow in our quiver' to block Trump's Supreme Court nominee

Pelosi says Democrats will 'use every arrow in our quiver' to block Trump's Supreme Court nominee - ABC News

"We have our options. We have arrows in our quiver that I'm not about to discuss right now but the fact is we have a big challenge in our country. This president has threatened to not even accept the results of the election," Pelosi told ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos. "Our main goal would be to protect the integrity of the election as we protect the people from the coronavirus."

Pressed by Stephanopoulos that she's "not ruling anything out," Pelosi emphasized that the Constitution requires Congress "to use every arrow in our quiver."

"We have a responsibility," she said. "We take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. We have a responsibility to meet the needs of the American people."

"None of us has any interest in shutting down government. That has such a harmful and painful impact on so many people in our country. So I would hope that we can just proceed with that," Pelosi said. "We're not going to be shutting down government. I do hope, though, that the focus on health care and what it means in terms of the courts will have public opinion be of such magnitude that the Republicans will finally, finally address the coronavirus crisis."

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pelosi-democrats-arrow-quiver-block-trumps-supreme-court/story?id=73121750

[roamer65]

57. The arrow is the House Ways and Means Committee.

...and all the other committees that budget money.

[FBaggins]

64. Not much of an arrow

The committees that budget money don't have the power to take money away that is already out there. Even if they could it wouldn't impact a Senate confirmation. It doesn't cost anything for the president to send over a piece of paper saying he nominates someone... and the House can't strip the Senate of the funds to hold a hearing. And even if they could do that... the Senate doesn't have to hold a hearing if they want to just vote up/down on a nominee.

People overstate the "power of the purse" all the time. But this could be a new extreme.

[TheProle]

63. Absolutely the right thing.

Antagonism and bluster has its place. This is not it.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

65. Hope she's right

I can't thinke there's much since the House is not directly involved in the process.

[Cha]

69. Rt.. TY triron & Nancy!

[peacebuzzard]

70. I am going to trust the Madame Speaker on this.

rather than hope for a republican senator to join our ranks, tired of that route.