General Discussion

Laura PourMeADrink

(42,770 posts)

90. So no con to impeachment. Good. Scariest idea

Fri Apr 19, 2019, 09:17 AM

Apr 2019

impeach in SECOND term??

Pro's to impeachment:
1) constitutional duty
2) forces GOPers to say they don't think asking people to commit crimes, what, a dozen times is ok.
3) makes Dems look stronger and not people who just look the other way.
4) takes away the GOP argument that even the Dems didn't think there was anything bad enough to impeach.
5) impeachment legitmizes the crimes.
6) impeachment provides a concise list of crimes for all the world to see and hear. Not lost in the noise of everyday instant news.

Cons:

Only one there WAS was that Dems are overreaching. This has been mitigated by the information Mueller collected. Trump asking a dozen times for people to break the law is not something that people will say, geesh, no biggie. It is simple to understand. And getting each of the repukes involved to admit it under oath in public would be very effective.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

188 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I have been against impeachment due to the Senate, I no longer am [View all] Celerity Apr 2019 OP

ITA janterry Apr 2019 #1

Yes... sacto95834 Apr 2019 #172

And if we don't, it suggests that Trump's transgressions are less important than Bill Clinton's. flor-de-jasmim Apr 2019 #2

IMO, the Mueller report may open the floodgates. Eyeball_Kid Apr 2019 #133

I agree with most of what you said leftieNanner Apr 2019 #170

I think you're right, and he can't escape. mountain grammy Apr 2019 #174

Let's do it. watoos Apr 2019 #3

No - How it goes DownriverDem Apr 2019 #58

Clinton was impeached in 1998 Blecht Apr 2019 #130

A sham impeachment in Clinton's case Generic Other Apr 2019 #134

The impeachment was two years after Clinton's re-election, beginning in December of 1968. hedda_foil Apr 2019 #146

I stand corrected Generic Other Apr 2019 #163

Abso-effing-lutely!!! hedda_foil Apr 2019 #177

Respectfully, I think this analysis suffers from a few omissions and logical fallacies. better Apr 2019 #153

Additional fact check dpibel Apr 2019 #160

People weren't so enraged. MoonRiver Apr 2019 #188

same here..ive been holding off on sending Tom Steyers 'Need To Impeach' postcards... samnsara Apr 2019 #4

"KING" is wrong........ MyOwnPeace Apr 2019 #5

I mean king (or Queen) in the political power sense, a monarch not bound by law or custom. Celerity Apr 2019 #10

imperator crazytown Apr 2019 #46

works for me, I like the Roman allusion as well Celerity Apr 2019 #111

And, another king, Angus was just on CNN, saying Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #47

I think your reference to king was very appropriate mtnsnake Apr 2019 #181

I've change my mind as well. Vinca Apr 2019 #6

Why can't Congress hold hearings but not call them impeachment? Funtatlaguy Apr 2019 #7

There is no reason at all that they can't. That's what I think they should be doing now. ehrnst Apr 2019 #8

They need all the underlying evidence including grand jury testimony in order boston bean Apr 2019 #66

Is someone finally acknowledging that these things take time? ehrnst Apr 2019 #68

It's not just the Mueller scope; Trump's crimes are far more widespread. lagomorph777 Apr 2019 #127

+1 Make it all public (and go to subjects way beyond the Mueller scope). lagomorph777 Apr 2019 #126

Investigations DownriverDem Apr 2019 #64

Indeed. (nt) ehrnst Apr 2019 #70

It's not a binary choice (Impeach/Don't Impeach) Either way, FIRST INVESTIGATE. lagomorph777 Apr 2019 #122

Research isn't part of the impeachment reasoning process, which appears to be straightforward: Pope George Ringo II Apr 2019 #131

Every minute we wait, the affect is diminished. Nothing Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #138

Yes, that's pretty much the problem with impeachment in a nutshell. Pope George Ringo II Apr 2019 #141

What? Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #142

You want to forego the exposure of investigation. Pope George Ringo II Apr 2019 #161

Head count time. Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #136

Sounds like you are expecting the very, worst of our Democratic leaders. ehrnst Apr 2019 #9

and your lack of concern is duly noted Celerity Apr 2019 #11

+1, Some posters are making it their duty to be concerned with as much condescension as possible uponit7771 Apr 2019 #14

... ehrnst Apr 2019 #20

Something very fishy about the "never impeachment" mantras. Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #51

Because the Senate! BeyondGeography Apr 2019 #60

Yes. To every one of the 22 pose: "so you think Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #71

Let the people see Moscow Mitch work for Putin's whore !! uponit7771 Apr 2019 #81

It doesn't take a lot of imagination, does it? BeyondGeography Apr 2019 #86

+1 uponit7771 Apr 2019 #95

+1,000,000 Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #150

THIS !!! I've already thrown a red flag about the amount of FUD pettifogging impeachment. uponit7771 Apr 2019 #67

What would take so long? Like realistically, say we Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #76

I am 100% with you !!! It would NOT take long at all if you went the simple seemingly slam dunk uponit7771 Apr 2019 #79

Well, alrighty then. You say it's that simple and quick, so clearly it must be. ehrnst Apr 2019 #91

Why do people say it would take so long? Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #92

+1, this poster has no proof that it would take long uponit7771 Apr 2019 #97

Didn't the GOP bring impeachment to a vote in the Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #106

+1 uponit7771 Apr 2019 #113

Hoyer said no yesterday. CNN saying left in our party Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #135

Ugh...CNN just said Hoyer said impeachment wouldn't be worth it. Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #107

Cummings said on MJ we can look at impeachment. I know he's not the leader but there's uponit7771 Apr 2019 #151

There's gotta be some end to this. If not just drop Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #154

Yep, drop the whole damn thing if it's going nowhere. I think Pelosi is going to look at the polls uponit7771 Apr 2019 #158

A false dillema for the win... ehrnst Apr 2019 #17

there is nothing subtle about the menace we face, in both the short and long term event horizons Celerity Apr 2019 #24

And now we have a red herring. ehrnst Apr 2019 #28

I profoundly disagree with your stance and your mischaracterisation of both my intent Celerity Apr 2019 #36

You are, of course, entitled to those sesquipedalian expressions of your pique. ehrnst Apr 2019 #48

Ah, the things I see from many of a certain stripe. Celerity Apr 2019 #56

I call em as I see em. ehrnst Apr 2019 #65

'I call em as I see em.' Celerity Apr 2019 #73

Nah, you sly one you ... no you don't. The sophistry on this issue is oozing those are ... uponit7771 Apr 2019 #80

Nailed it, didn't I? ehrnst Apr 2019 #85

lol ... you nailed a FUD tag, that's about it. uponit7771 Apr 2019 #96

Tag, you're it. ehrnst Apr 2019 #121

Your post is still 100% spot on. Just ignore the shade! Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #55

Because It Is The Right Thing To Do! McKim Apr 2019 #98

If Dems are a "battered wife" they kicked the abusers ass last November... ehrnst Apr 2019 #124

Impeachment would at least gimp him uponit7771 Apr 2019 #12

At this point, more likely Democrats. (nt) ehrnst Apr 2019 #22

Will impeachment proceedings cause you to not vote in 2020? watoos Apr 2019 #32

Where to start.... ehrnst Apr 2019 #53

No it's not a rhetorical question, you can't guarantee Red Don wont win so it's irresponsible ... uponit7771 Apr 2019 #77

That's the definition of 'rhetorical question,' - one that you already have your answer for... ehrnst Apr 2019 #83

You claimed Red Don can be impeached in a second term. Keep up with your own words uponit7771 Apr 2019 #100

No... *Watoos* said that DT *couldn't* be impeached in a second term. ehrnst Apr 2019 #108

This is false, now you're just making crap up uponit7771 Apr 2019 #112

No, I clarifying what has been said. ehrnst Apr 2019 #120

You wont even quote what you're "clarifying", you made it up uponit7771 Apr 2019 #152

So no con to impeachment. Good. Scariest idea Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #90

What does "no con to impeachment" mean? ehrnst Apr 2019 #110

Blind faith. It's not like something's gonna change. I mean Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #149

Not applicable to my post... ehrnst Apr 2019 #165

Impeaching Barr on the other hand crazytown Apr 2019 #49

That is indeed another matter. And perhaps a better strategy.(nt) ehrnst Apr 2019 #74

This is false and you know it, stop with the FUD ehrnst others have already noticed your pettifoggin uponit7771 Apr 2019 #69

Like that! At the very least, who in the world, even Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2019 #59

Agreed. I see it like this: Girard442 Apr 2019 #13

+1, its hard for the cops to say "they got away with it" when they did nothing to stop them uponit7771 Apr 2019 #15

And we have the false dilema of "if we don't impeach, we are doing NOTHING!!" ehrnst Apr 2019 #23

You are pettifogging a foundational moral, legal holding to account and erecting an Celerity Apr 2019 #26

********** THIS !!!! *********** (New word for the day "Pettifogging" :-) ) uponit7771 Apr 2019 #31

A pettifog is a smaller version of a bigamist. Girard442 Apr 2019 #184

Hit the nail on the head, didn't I? ehrnst Apr 2019 #33

I am NOT a sir, and I do NOT need a thesaurus to express myself in a varied, substantial way Celerity Apr 2019 #42

When you know the "nothing" is relative. I already expect sophistry from some :rolleyes: uponit7771 Apr 2019 #27

Tbh BigOleDummy Apr 2019 #30

I'm calling out the bashing of Democrats that isn't valid. ehrnst Apr 2019 #34

No one is bashing Pelosi, watoos Apr 2019 #38

I didn't say that you were bashing Pelosi. ehrnst Apr 2019 #45

At least one has been an accomplice to this very same thing with another criminal president FiveGoodMen Apr 2019 #167

VERY well stated Celerity. FailureToCommunicate Apr 2019 #16

I have been in favor of impeachment mnhtnbb Apr 2019 #18

Well said mainstreetonce Apr 2019 #19

You're absolutely correct..."use it or lose it forever." ElementaryPenguin Apr 2019 #21

Tie impeachment around the necks of Republicans who shielded The MFer-#45. NCjack Apr 2019 #25

I'm now thinking we should use impeachment as the warm-up act..... lastlib Apr 2019 #29

+1, we don't have to move for conviction or even removal just get the information out there to uponit7771 Apr 2019 #35

Agreed BigOleDummy Apr 2019 #37

Also, remember that Barr promised to release watoos Apr 2019 #41

GOTV for a Congress that shirked its duty is a losing slogan Ponietz Apr 2019 #39

Do these assholes samplegirl Apr 2019 #40

Yes watoos Apr 2019 #43

They think they do. Reality bites. SammyWinstonJack Apr 2019 #54

Totally durablend Apr 2019 #57

No, they think Red Don was elected fair and square until yesterday uponit7771 Apr 2019 #82

Where did you hear that his fans changed their mind about him 'yesterday?' ehrnst Apr 2019 #89

I know some of his fans that changed their mind yesterday. uponit7771 Apr 2019 #94

So by "they" you mean "a few fans that you know," not "they" as in any more than that. ehrnst Apr 2019 #115

Yes. They want an authoritarian alpha male who will banish all ehrnst Apr 2019 #87

Sure, as long as it's THEIR dictator. They all seem to think this will last forever. catbyte Apr 2019 #102

Impeachment proceedings now would hurt our 2020 chances. thesquanderer Apr 2019 #44

impeachment only takes a simple House majority, conviction and removal is where the 67 vote Senate Celerity Apr 2019 #50

I don't understand this logic durablend Apr 2019 #61

Yes, his argument either way is "the Dems are just out to get me" but... thesquanderer Apr 2019 #75

That narrative you posted has been out there for some time. watoos Apr 2019 #62

please see post #75 thesquanderer Apr 2019 #78

There's no evidence of this, were do you get this from? uponit7771 Apr 2019 #84

Remember, Clinton's impeachment backfired on the Republicans. thesquanderer Apr 2019 #101

Because Clinton was relatively popular with republicans. It was republicans who didn't uponit7771 Apr 2019 #114

The public wasn't in favor then, and they're not in favor now. thesquanderer Apr 2019 #132

How so? watoos Apr 2019 #118

Look at 1998. thesquanderer Apr 2019 #139

But wait, there might still be a "good Republican" who can help us! doompatrol39 Apr 2019 #52

Without "Good Republicans" in the Senate ehrnst Apr 2019 #128

He's going to say that no matter what doompatrol39 Apr 2019 #155

Again... I will defer to those Democratic leaders with decades of experience ehrnst Apr 2019 #159

Lawrence O'Donnell said about the "politics" pdsimdars Apr 2019 #63

For the "never-impeachers", it is incredibly dangerous to assume bullwinkle428 Apr 2019 #72

Tom Cotton perhaps, he is one smart and evil fuck, plus a vet and a fundie radical Celerity Apr 2019 #117

Welcome to the club! InAbLuEsTaTe Apr 2019 #88

I'm on the fence but from a pragmatic standpoint look at this excerpt from nate silver's 538 chat jcgoldie Apr 2019 #93

This is a HARD PASS from me. For those of us who lived through Clinton's acquittal Baltimike Apr 2019 #99

Its false equivalency to compare Red Don to Clinton on POLLING alone. Clinton was relatively uponit7771 Apr 2019 #103

It's false equivalency to compare impeachment w popularity on the other side Baltimike Apr 2019 #105

The House should not even consider what the Senate will or will not do. honest.abe Apr 2019 #140

Yes they should. Baltimike Apr 2019 #143

Nope... if impeachment fails once, they can re-impeach.. honest.abe Apr 2019 #144

Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure...that'll happen Baltimike Apr 2019 #145

We shall see... I think Nancy is coming around to my thinking. honest.abe Apr 2019 #147

Oh we will ALL be coming around to your way of thinking... Baltimike Apr 2019 #157

The Republicans are blowing up their own party. Trump, via Mitch, is packing the court with ultra in2herbs Apr 2019 #104

Illiberal democracy (Orban, Trump,Matteo Salvini, etc. and their ilk/minions are the new template) Celerity Apr 2019 #109

Congressional Democrats have several jobs to do...one of those jobs is. Checks and balances. world wide wally Apr 2019 #116

Investigate... expose his criminality radical noodle Apr 2019 #119

Why should we care about his base? watoos Apr 2019 #125

Exactly. honest.abe Apr 2019 #148

I never said that he isn't worse than Nixon radical noodle Apr 2019 #156

I couldn't... myohmy2 Apr 2019 #123

Yes, let the Rs who vote to acquit after all the evidence has been presented treestar Apr 2019 #129

Well said. honest.abe Apr 2019 #137

Well said, well written The Liberal Lion Apr 2019 #162

Yes, we should. But so tired of dems having to be the adults in the room and battle for wiggs Apr 2019 #164

The House has a duty to impeach; if it doesn't, it will suppress the Dem vote in 2020. SunSeeker Apr 2019 #166

I wholeheartedly agree. In addition I think it's a winning strategy. Pobeka Apr 2019 #168

Impeach even if it causes us to lose the White House & Senate in 2020? CaptainTruth Apr 2019 #169

Kick orangecrush Apr 2019 #171

Well said proud patriot Apr 2019 #173

I wholeheartedly agree aintitfunny Apr 2019 #175

If Hillary Clinton had been sworn in as President Mr.Bill Apr 2019 #176

"Impeachable" versus necessity. TryLogic Apr 2019 #178

Or the Speaker of the House FiveGoodMen Apr 2019 #183

Pardon my Latin, but. . ."GOPus Delendus Est" DinahMoeHum Apr 2019 #179

Starting to agree Pepsidog Apr 2019 #180

Eloquent. BlancheSplanchnik Apr 2019 #182

same here..i was always wanting to wait til we got all the facts but hell we have them NOW samnsara Apr 2019 #185

Putin's puppet is a national security threat suegeo Apr 2019 #186

It's got to be done. argyl Apr 2019 #187