General Discussion

ancianita

(43,311 posts)

122. Oh well ...

Sat Jan 11, 2020, 04:03 PM

Jan 2020

This March 2019 DU thread link was posted way too early for anyone in DU to know if impeachment would work, so the disagreements with Pelosi were just the start of whether, when, who and how impeachment should work.

Those DU discussions -- which were fair, given the rarity of impeachment -- rightly took months to reach the public's awareness in this third largest country on the planet. Passionate as some of the threads were proves that media didn't even work as hard as DU did to understand the impeachment process, who would be instrumental in that process, and how instrumental Speaker Pelosi and her judgment would be in building a solid impeachment case.

The Mueller Report hadn't happened. 45's July 25th call hadn't happened. The whistleblower hadn't happened.

Do you really want me to use this link to agree with you, ten months later, when you say today, that those who disagreed with the Speaker are still around, still unreasonable and unfair? Only a few DU'ers have been, and they've admitted publicly that her supporters have been proven right about her. And they've publicly apologized. That's what Democrats do. And right now, yes, there can be a zillion things going on behind the scenes -- but only now that her wisdom has gotten this vile scofflaw impeached.

But thanks for the one link.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

166 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

WHY does Speaker Pelosi say she will send the Articles of Impeachment next week? Has she said why? [View all] ancianita Jan 2020 OP

I'm trying to have faith in her..😳 dewsgirl Jan 2020 #1

This is about preserving and DEFENDING the Constitution. It's not about her. ancianita Jan 2020 #2

I mean that she knows what she is doing, she is being advised dewsgirl Jan 2020 #8

Then she should say that, AND give SOME REASON for her decision. ancianita Jan 2020 #9

Perhaps she doesn't want those reasons known to Republicans. ehrnst Jan 2020 #46

Of course she wouldn't want that. Of course we shouldn't lead her by poll. Yet there is a void. ancianita Jan 2020 #65

A void in her communicating what is going on that we don't see? ehrnst Jan 2020 #124

I get that. And that confidence has come from her usually giving clear reasons. I think I now have ancianita Jan 2020 #127

Consider yourself "laid off of." ehrnst Jan 2020 #130

Why would she share her game-plan with Republicans? TidalWave46 Jan 2020 #107

She shouldn't, of course. I don't know why she's doing what she's doing, which I don't consider a ancianita Jan 2020 #112

We don't KNOW what has changed, elleng Jan 2020 #3

They're saying "blinked" on MSNBC. That we don't KNOW is why I'm asking. ancianita Jan 2020 #5

I don't care what 'they're saying.' elleng Jan 2020 #7

I like that, elleng! PJMcK Jan 2020 #18

Dunno, part of the reason I don't care, PJ! elleng Jan 2020 #19

'They' need to get over themselves. Talitha Jan 2020 #22

Thats unfortunate. Millions of voters DO. Cetacea Jan 2020 #111

You don't agree with her, so you feel she owes you and the public ehrnst Jan 2020 #63

You know me SO well, don't you, that you must tell ME exactly what I mean to say. Don't hold back. ancianita Jan 2020 #66

LOL, been there... for some, it's become an art form!! InAbLuEsTaTe Jan 2020 #152

the media llashram Jan 2020 #81

WTF?! Why now?! InAbLuEsTaTe Jan 2020 #153

timing is everything ... dweller Jan 2020 #4

This is about DEFENDING the Constitution, which says nothing about timing. It does say something ancianita Jan 2020 #6

did you read Speaker Pelosi statement ? dweller Jan 2020 #10

I looked for her letter. Nowhere on the Internet. I saw quotes from it in news reports. That's all. ancianita Jan 2020 #11

Here you go: ehrnst Jan 2020 #48

Thank you. I found it, too, and posted it below before I saw your post. ancianita Jan 2020 #102

The debate is next week, maybe she wants those questions JDC Jan 2020 #12

Speculation. Priority No.1 is to DEFEND the Constitution, not subordinate it to political debate ancianita Jan 2020 #13

The op title feels call to action for some speculation JDC Jan 2020 #14

I just want to know if there's a reason from Pelosi, and if not, why not. Why now. The Constitution ancianita Jan 2020 #15

I'm with you on this, ancianita. nt Sogo Jan 2020 #16

Me and kentuck. ancianita Jan 2020 #17

So you think that Pelosi is refusing to defend the constitution? ehrnst Jan 2020 #49

Do not put words in my mouth. ancianita Jan 2020 #64

Your words: ehrnst Jan 2020 #129

I remind the poster -- not you, not DU, not Pelosi -- that the reason s/he offers couldn't be ancianita Jan 2020 #135

So, yes, I was right... ehrnst Jan 2020 #144

Speaker Pelosi's Letter: ancianita Jan 2020 #20

Would be great if she's moving forward to ensnare McConnell. Hoping she has a legal or political JudyM Jan 2020 #21

How does ensnaring work? How do the charges you mention work? Can the House impeach a senator? ancianita Jan 2020 #27

She wrote a great letter. I hope the other Democratic reps encourage her to stay the course coti Jan 2020 #30

Perhaps it's something that she doesn't want the GOP or the WH to know. ehrnst Jan 2020 #50

Perhaps. ancianita Jan 2020 #68

If you don't like the snark, quit the hand-wringing sweetloukillbot Jan 2020 #78

"Blinked"? She is doing the right thing. Odoreida Jan 2020 #23

To get concessions out of Moscow Mitch towards witnesses uponit7771 Jan 2020 #84

Tell that to the media Cetacea Jan 2020 #89

I was hoping she would pull a McConnell and hold the articles until we had a majority in the Senate. aikoaiko Jan 2020 #24

If we can't get a trial, she should. That's a great idea. coti Jan 2020 #26

If Trump is still President in 2021 there's no way we will have won the Senate Recursion Jan 2020 #34

The articles were passed by this Congress Shrek Jan 2020 #53

Speaker Pelosi is far, far more experienced and qualified to make these decisions than you or I. ehrnst Jan 2020 #56

Yes, Pelosi is very good at her job. I forgot to express the proper worship in my post. Sorry aikoaiko Jan 2020 #60

+1, I'm so sick of the "trust them" post ... That's not our job uponit7771 Jan 2020 #85

All true. Great post. nt coti Jan 2020 #25

Donald Trump is a racist pig ! stonecutter357 Jan 2020 #28

I agree. But ... HUH? ancianita Jan 2020 #29

You can be as tough as you want as long as standing on high moral ground. somaticexperiencing Jan 2020 #31

+1 all this. nt coti Jan 2020 #32

I agree with all you say. The fight is about making the UNtrustworthy trustworthy, or waiting them ancianita Jan 2020 #33

If we win the Senate in the election we also win the White House Recursion Jan 2020 #36

Polls say we're ahead in at least half the battleground states. My fingers are crossed. ancianita Jan 2020 #38

Perhaps because delaying is not succeeding in getting what we want, and is becoming a liability. ehrnst Jan 2020 #51

How is releasing them going to get us what we want? How is it a liability? Let's start there. somaticexperiencing Jan 2020 #150

That's something that Pelosi has the information and counsel to decide, not me. ehrnst Jan 2020 #156

I'm reasonably happy with Speaker Pelosi and her actions, but certainly have not always been. somaticexperiencing Jan 2020 #157

It's not about "following" a leader, it's about understanding who has the ehrnst Jan 2020 #158

Well, we're not going to agree. Don't trust this move, and other actions have been suggested. somaticexperiencing Jan 2020 #159

Other actions have been suggested.... ehrnst Jan 2020 #161

Not sure why you feel the need to defend Speaker Pelosi and her actions or decisions, somaticexperiencing Jan 2020 #163

Attack? ehrnst Jan 2020 #164

Hopeless somaticexperiencing Jan 2020 #165

No, it's called informed. ehrnst Jan 2020 #166

bookmarking n/t rzemanfl Jan 2020 #58

I still don't understand what this delay is supposed to accomplish Recursion Jan 2020 #35

It's worse because it disallows the emergence of an "impartial arena." A month from now is still ancianita Jan 2020 #37

Talk about moving the goalposts StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #40

People were demanding impeachment because it historically, for the record, indicts a criminal leader ancianita Jan 2020 #47

Why do you feel entitled to be consulted or kept in the loop about what Speaker ehrnst Jan 2020 #55

Concessions on witnesses and awareness Moscow Mitch isn't garuntee them uponit7771 Jan 2020 #86

I recall a few months ago, some people here were trashing Pelosi StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #39

I agreed with Pelosi then and I agree with her now. I just want to know why. There is no squaring ancianita Jan 2020 #41

You accused her of "blinking." StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #42

Indeed. (nt) ehrnst Jan 2020 #44

I did NOT accuse; I asked why. I do agree with her. What changed my mind is not her doing. ancianita Jan 2020 #114

"Why has Speaker Pelosi blinked?" is an accusation that she blinked. Period. StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #116

Don't tell me what I meant. I know what I meant. Believe what you want to believe. ancianita Jan 2020 #118

I have no idea what you meant. But I do know what you said. StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #120

I said what I said. I explained what I meant. You can't force your interpretation to overrule mine. ancianita Jan 2020 #125

Your OP doesn't sound like you agree with her until she gives an explanation of why ehrnst Jan 2020 #59

I hear you. I just ask why she's decided when nothing has apparently changed. ancianita Jan 2020 #73

The thing is, we don't know everything that she would know. ehrnst Jan 2020 #123

You seem to have decided that she doesn't know what she's doing. ehrnst Jan 2020 #43

Why do you not trust my questioning? Why do you claim that I don't trust her? ancianita Jan 2020 #62

I've explained it several times. (nt) ehrnst Jan 2020 #131

She hasn't blinked at all. Her eyes are wide open. MineralMan Jan 2020 #45

This StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #52

+1000. ehrnst Jan 2020 #54

There is no "need" and this is not about a move in a game. It is for US that this process exists and ancianita Jan 2020 #57

There will never be an "impartial arena." MineralMan Jan 2020 #61

There can be an impartial arena. ancianita Jan 2020 #71

The next Senate will either be like the current one, or it will MineralMan Jan 2020 #74

I appreciate your fair analysis. I know it's your opinion. I hope you're right. ancianita Jan 2020 #90

I hope I'm right too. It's impossible to know in advance. MineralMan Jan 2020 #92

We haven't had a Pelosi bashing thread in a while nini Jan 2020 #67

+100 MineralMan Jan 2020 #70

I agree with the following points you make 100%: ancianita Jan 2020 #95

You said she blinked nini Jan 2020 #103

I hear you. I took it that way when Chuck Todd used it, and wanted to know if I'd missed something. ancianita Jan 2020 #105

This is a fair question, we are to trust and verify. We're not MAGA uponit7771 Jan 2020 #121

+1 ancianita Jan 2020 #146

Wondering why she is doing what she is - is one thing. nini Jan 2020 #149

The Constitution says nothing about "sending the articles" Azathoth Jan 2020 #69

Maybe she knows things we don't. The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2020 #72

I want to believe that. I was so struck by the announcement, I couldn't think on the possibilities ancianita Jan 2020 #76

You're having trouble believing the Speaker of the House knows things you don't? StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #82

Because I can't think of what that might be. There've only been 2-3 posters here who've offered that ancianita Jan 2020 #87

You probably would get less criticism StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #94

I explained the "blink" word use above, and I can take the criticism even if it's not constructive. ancianita Jan 2020 #99

Asking why she's doing something is different than accusing her of "blinking" StarfishSaver Jan 2020 #96

Yes.I regret using "blinking," and for all the criticism, still got good thinking on the situation ancianita Jan 2020 #100

I trust Speaker Pelosi dlk Jan 2020 #75

I get your immensely fair points about trust when it comes to women leaders. I don't want to ancianita Jan 2020 #77

I understand where you're coming from dlk Jan 2020 #79

Apparently just to give some folks another opportunity to take a whack at her. MrsCoffee Jan 2020 #80

I'll take the whacks on "blinked," my poorly chosen echo of what I heard on MSNBC, a word that ancianita Jan 2020 #83

Thinking is not allowed Cetacea Jan 2020 #88

I reject your claim that my question is code for bashing. I never bash any Democratic leader. Ever. ancianita Jan 2020 #93

um.. Cetacea Jan 2020 #97

I hoped you were, and I was. Perhaps I misunderstood your second sentence. I was feeling defensive, ancianita Jan 2020 #101

I've been there... Cetacea Jan 2020 #109

In every drama there is a cast of characters Nature Man Jan 2020 #154

I don't have to do anything. Most people have seen it for themselves. MrsCoffee Jan 2020 #133

I suspect there is a backdoor deal going on that neither side wants exposed librechik Jan 2020 #91

Ditto n/t Cetacea Jan 2020 #98

I hope you're right. ancianita Jan 2020 #104

I suspect you're right. ancianita Jan 2020 #141

The Speaker can do no right... stillcool Jan 2020 #106

I've not ever heard any one in her party say that. ancianita Jan 2020 #108

seeing as how this is DU... stillcool Jan 2020 #113

Nope. Haven't seen them, and I've been here 8 years. Please link a few. Seeing as how this is DU, ancianita Jan 2020 #115

oh god... stillcool Jan 2020 #117

Oh well ... ancianita Jan 2020 #122

You're right... stillcool Jan 2020 #142

You see what you want to see apparently. MrsCoffee Jan 2020 #134

Parse what she said. She instructed them to be PREPARED next week. Grasswire2 Jan 2020 #110

Good parsing. Good point. Thank you. ancianita Jan 2020 #119

Maybe she knows something you do not. we can do it Jan 2020 #126

I hope she does. ancianita Jan 2020 #128

"Hope?" ehrnst Jan 2020 #132

+1 MrsCoffee Jan 2020 #137

"Hope"? implies that you doubt that I hope, implies that you want to project doubt into me, ancianita Jan 2020 #138

Apparently, I'm hitting the nail on the head. ehrnst Jan 2020 #145

I'm just giving you the respect of responses. More than I'm getting from you. ancianita Jan 2020 #147

Here's a response. ehrnst Jan 2020 #148

I guarantee it. MrsCoffee Jan 2020 #136

think it's simply a matter of politics and perception stopdiggin Jan 2020 #139

I hear you. ancianita Jan 2020 #140

There has been no data starting that holding was negative uponit7771 Jan 2020 #155

She has now. GemDigger Jan 2020 #143

My best guess is that Speaker Pelosi and her Democratic allies in the Senate have found 4 GOP votes The Valley Below Jan 2020 #151

"Ahh..but you said she 'blinked"!! - "You (&*(*@ said she "blinked"!! elevnty!! Fix The Stupid Jan 2020 #160

I hear you. The spirit of the question is lost with one word, isn't it. ancianita Jan 2020 #162