Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

pnwmom

(110,296 posts)
47. We look realistic and strategic, instead of like the boy who cried wolf.
Sun Nov 12, 2017, 07:50 PM
Nov 2017

We won't gain anything if we repeatedly call for impeachment and our calls go nowhere. Or if we get him impeached by a 51% vote -- and then failto convict him by 2/3 in the Senate.

We need to wait till Mueller has linked DT to Russia and other crimes -- which he will.

Then we should go after him full force. We will only get one shot at this. We shouldn't waste it.

Recommendations

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

They are right. We will only get one shot at him. It's important that we wait pnwmom Nov 2017 #1
I've came to this conclusion also SHRED Nov 2017 #2
He's doing a heckuva job! forgotmylogin Nov 2017 #54
this is the best reason vlyons Nov 2017 #55
I don't understand why people just don't get this. nt 7962 Nov 2017 #14
+1. This is NOT a Dem. witch hunt, like Trump portrays it. It needs to remain.... Honeycombe8 Nov 2017 #23
+1 Exactly. n/t FSogol Nov 2017 #15
I agree totally. "Please proceed Governor." Irish_Dem Nov 2017 #26
That is certainly one opinion, others like Al Green, have a different opinion Not Ruth Nov 2017 #27
Al Green has a motivation I don't have. He will be able to point, in the end, pnwmom Nov 2017 #35
Mueller isn't trying to impeach the president FakeNoose Nov 2017 #50
He's developing evidence that could be used in an impeachment trial -- as opposed to the pnwmom Nov 2017 #56
Yes agreed FakeNoose Nov 2017 #58
Eager as I am to see it happen, we do have to get it right the first time. lagomorph777 Nov 2017 #57
While I would love for them to talk about it, I think they're being strategic. Vinca Nov 2017 #3
Hope you're correct, because if they really mean "no impeachment", than woodsprite Nov 2017 #53
That piece of shit needs to be removed asap! triron Nov 2017 #4
Good to get the idea out there before Mueller finishes. Lucky Luciano Nov 2017 #5
I'm with you! Yes talk IMPEACHMENT LiberalLovinLug Nov 2017 #12
Why? So Dems can be blamed for not being able to get 2/3 of the Senate to convict him? pnwmom Nov 2017 #36
And Nixon was kicked out. We can do this. Lucky Luciano Nov 2017 #37
You're kidding, right? You really don't understand that the Dems were in charge pnwmom Nov 2017 #40
Won't win now, but the process needs to begin. Lucky Luciano Nov 2017 #41
It doesn't need to begin now in the House. Suppose enough blue-district Rethugs there decided pnwmom Nov 2017 #42
The process starts by making it all a normal part of conversation. Lucky Luciano Nov 2017 #44
Fine. But if that raises false expectations and then Democrats are blamed for being "weak," pnwmom Nov 2017 #45
They look weak now LiberalLovinLug Nov 2017 #46
We look realistic and strategic, instead of like the boy who cried wolf. pnwmom Nov 2017 #47
Again LiberalLovinLug Nov 2017 #48
Message all you want. Just don't try to make the Democrats in Congress look bad pnwmom Nov 2017 #49
That's the smart play, as temporarily unsatisfying as it may feel. Gidney N Cloyd Nov 2017 #6
Well, gee... Everybody has said everything I TheDebbieDee Nov 2017 #7
By all means, let us "keep our powder dry"! nt Atticus Nov 2017 #8
Let us hope he doesnt start a war before 2018 spooky3 Nov 2017 #9
Smart. We need to wait until we get some power back and some leverage... vi5 Nov 2017 #10
So is this a "keep our powder dry" situation or a "11 Dimensional chess" situtation? Jake Stern Nov 2017 #11
No one is refusing to consider it WHEN we take power. But till then, and till the investigation pnwmom Nov 2017 #16
There is only one excuse necessary ... we won't have the votes in the Senate to convict, SFnomad Nov 2017 #19
They don't have the votes Retrograde Nov 2017 #20
Even getting control of the Senate isn't enough to be serious about impeachment in the House SFnomad Nov 2017 #22
Sorry, all I read here political cowards and fools angrychair Nov 2017 #13
Believing you could get 67 votes to convict in the Senate IS a fringe concept SFnomad Nov 2017 #29
I made no such conjecture angrychair Nov 2017 #38
Getting impeachment without a conviction would only empower DT -- as it did Clinton. pnwmom Nov 2017 #43
Its a good thing youre not calling the shots. BannonsLiver Nov 2017 #32
Why? angrychair Nov 2017 #39
steyers petitions are data collecting and mining. nt msongs Nov 2017 #17
Win the midterms first, then talk impeachment. Dawson Leery Nov 2017 #18
Because Trump is the gift that keeps on giving. GOP will. mamas Nov 2017 #21
It's better to wait until you have him in flagrante delicto. Turbineguy Nov 2017 #24
No! I demand meaningless, impulsive symbolism! brooklynite Nov 2017 #25
I support Steyer's plan and understand some of the Dem's BigmanPigman Nov 2017 #28
Trump is a gift that keeps giving C_U_L8R Nov 2017 #30
WE need to send a Democratic majority to the House in 2018. Without that, we fail badly... Hekate Nov 2017 #31
I think they'd better have a backup plan waiting SonofDonald Nov 2017 #33
Pence is also dangerou, more deceptive, and... tomp Nov 2017 #34
lets wait til the indictments come out.. he will have to be impeached.. samnsara Nov 2017 #51
It is one thing to talk about strategy DonCoquixote Nov 2017 #52
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»McAuliffe, top Democrats ...»Reply #47