General Discussion

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)

166. No, it's called informed.

Reply to somaticexperiencing (Reply #165)

Wed Jan 15, 2020, 07:58 AM

Jan 2020

Last edited Wed Jan 15, 2020, 09:13 AM - Edit history (1)

I think that once you have put in some time on DU, you too will be more informed.

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