# The House Judiciary Impeachment Case discussion thread. **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [July 27, 2019, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697 "2019-07-27T00:58:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Walken\_After\_Midnight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b487fb/32.png) [@Walken\_After\_Midnight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walken_After_Midnight)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2019, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/21 "2019-07-27T18:30:41Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > A vote was held in the house a couple of short weeks ago on impeachment proceedings. 90 Democrats voted to impeach. The resolution was tabled (failed). Cut to the Mueller testimony and a dozen Democrats joined the pro-impeachment side and numbers appear to be growing. My questions is this: Did these new dozen Democrats not bother reading the report? Did they learn something they didn’t know before? What about Mueller’s testimony compelled them to switch? Rep. Al Green’s impeachment vote was on the grounds of Trump’s bigotry/racism and attacks on the Democratic congresswomen. Green specifically said it was separate from any impeachment that might arise from the Mueller report. ---
**Author:** ![E-DUB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/e-dub/32/403_2.png) [@E-DUB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-DUB)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2019, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/22 "2019-07-27T18:42:01Z")
Up until now, at least, trump’s had it both ways. He’s been able to gin up his base by pissing and moaning about impeachment without having to face the actual reality of it. Why should he get to have all the fun? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2019, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/23 "2019-07-27T18:54:11Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > A vote was held in the house a couple of short weeks ago on impeachment proceedings. 90 Democrats voted to impeach. The resolution was tabled (failed). Cut to the Mueller testimony and a dozen Democrats joined the pro-impeachment side and numbers appear to be growing. My questions is this: Did these new dozen Democrats not bother reading the report? Did they learn something they didn’t know before? What about Mueller’s testimony compelled them to switch? > > My point is this: Every Republican, with the exception of one or two, are lined up and bent over in front of Trump regardless of what he says or does. There is virtually zero dissent in the ranks. Democrats, for all their justified outrage, and preponderance of evidence, can’t seem to all get on the same page and present a united front. It’s fucking amateur hour. That’s why Republicans and Trump get their way every fucking time. Because Democrats are a useless bunch of prevaricating, hand wringing, mealy-mouthed (with a few exceptions), ineffectual fucking wankers. That’s the problem with a so-called “big tent” party. It’s not really a cohesive group. It’s an alliance of factions united to profit from being in political control. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2019, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/24 "2019-07-27T19:22:13Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > That’s the problem with a so-called “big tent” party. It’s not really a cohesive group. It’s an alliance of factions united to profit from being in political control. Imperfect and frustrating as that is, it beats being a party united by hypocrisy and bigotry. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2019, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/25 "2019-07-27T19:25:12Z")
> [@Walken\_After\_Midnight](#): > > Rep. Al Green’s impeachment vote was on the grounds of Trump’s bigotry/racism and attacks on the Democratic congresswomen. Green specifically said it was separate from any impeachment that might arise from the Mueller report. Fair enough. That aside, the numbers of Dems in favor of impeachment proceedings has risen since the Mueller testimony. I’m puzzled about what they learned that they did not know earlier. The rest of my criticism stands. ---
**Author:** ![Walken\_After\_Midnight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b487fb/32.png) [@Walken\_After\_Midnight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walken_After_Midnight)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2019, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/26 "2019-07-27T20:14:50Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > Fair enough. That aside, the numbers of Dems in favor of impeachment proceedings has risen since the Mueller testimony. I’m puzzled about what they learned that they did not know earlier. The rest of my criticism stands. The number of House Democrats in favor of opening an impeachment inquiry has been steadily rising over past weeks, irrespective of Mueller’s testimonial appearance. The conclusion of Mueller’s testimony may have been a good symbolic time to “come out”, but I don’t think it necessarily follows that Mueller’s testimony was what persuaded them to do so. I have doubts that there are many, if any, House Democrats that think Trump does not deserve impeachment, so I think any reluctance is mostly about the idea that Republicans acquitting Trump in the Senate would be construed as a political defeat. I think the main reason that the number of House Democrats favoring impeachment is rising is probably because of the White House’s stonewalling of all congressional oversight, which is an untenable situation from Congress’ point of view. Other ongoing debates on the subjects of upholding the rule of law, and the actual political consequences of a Senate acquittal, may also be factors. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2019, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/27 "2019-07-27T21:04:47Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > Fair enough. That aside, the numbers of Dems in favor of impeachment proceedings has risen since the Mueller testimony. I’m puzzled about what they learned that they did not know earlier. The rest of my criticism stands. Their constituents think it’s a great idea. However, likely most of the _hoi polloi_ dont know that “Impeachment” won’t actually remove trump\*, and most of the rest dont realize that since Mitch wont allow a real trial, it will likely help trump get elected. So, this is yet another time where Pelosi knows best. \*Because it’s confusing, see in English “Impeachment” means to remove from office, but in the Constitution it’s on the first step. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2019, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/28 "2019-07-27T21:05:04Z")
My very experienced HOR person, Peter DeFazio, wrote the following to me as one of his supporters on July 12th. I think it’s a fairly comprehensive explanation of what Pelosi’s game plan is and why. > [@](#): > > I am deeply troubled about the actions of this president, his administration, the erosion of our country’s democratic institutions, and the spineless Republicans that turn a blind eye. The Constitution clearly lays out the checks and balances among the three co-equal branches of government, yet the Trump administration acts as if it is above the law. > > Let me be clear: If the House Judiciary Committee moves forward with an impeachment inquiry, you can be sure I will support it. > > I believe Donald Trump is a threat to our democracy, national security, economic stability and American values. He needs to go. > > However, the impeachment process is not the most certain or strongest tool to hold the president accountable. The ballot box is. > > There is extreme and significant risk that, without taking the time to thoroughly investigate and build a case, a rush to impeachment could end up benefiting President Trump and ensure his re-election in 2020. > > We cannot lose the presidency in 2020. A second Trump term threatens our national security, election integrity, the health of our environment, freedoms, and the foundations of our democracy. If Trump wins a second term our democracy may not survive. > > For the impeachment process to successfully result in his removal, Congress must build a nonpartisan case with the American people, a large majority of whom still do not support impeachment. > > A successful impeachment process requires substantive and thorough investigations. It also requires that each chamber of Congress put country before political party. Senate Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell, will do everything in their power to delay impeachment past November 2020 or even more alarming, acquit President Trump of all charges. There is no doubt that Trump would use this to prove he was “exonerated” once again. > > Much like its approach to the Watergate scandal, Congress must conduct deliberative investigations, hold hearings, enforce oversight of President Trump’s actions, and use the courts when the Trump administration stonewalls investigations. The Watergate hearings led to the discovery of unequivocal evidence to open impeachment proceedings against Nixon and forced his resignation. > > It’s critical to build an effective case for impeachment before opening an inquiry and while I believe that there are grounds for impeachment and support an inquiry, I strongly believe that the most effective way to accomplish the goal of removing Trump from office is through our electoral process. > > The surest way to end the Trump administration is for the American people to unite behind a presidential candidate to take on Trump and restore our country’s values. > > I recognize that many of you seek justice and a swift restoration of the checks and balances that have made our federal government strong. I share your desire for justice and accountability. > > That’s why I am using the powers granted by the Constitution, as Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, to conduct oversight and investigate this administration. I have oversight of the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), which manages federal buildings, including the building that houses the infamous Trump Hotel. > > My committee is also investigating the Trump administration’s sudden decision to abandon plans to move the Federal Bureau of Investigation from their decrepit building in downtown D.C. to a larger, newer suburban facility. > > The FBI had been working with Congress on this bipartisan plan for nearly a decade but it was suspiciously derailed by the GSA, Trump White House, and Department of Justice. The Trump administration directed the GSA to undertake a more expensive plan to temporarily move the FBI, tear down their current building and rebuild in a footprint that can only house half of the agency. These nonsensical and abrupt changes raise serious ethical and legal questions. > > The GSA’s own Inspector General found that the head of the GSA misled Congress about White House involvement in the decision-making process. The Inspector General also found that Trump’s plan to stop the move would cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars more and accommodate 2,300 fewer employees. > > It just so happens that the Trump Hotel is only a few blocks away from the FBI building; moving the FBI and redeveloping the property for the commercial market could produce new hotel competition and impact business for the Trump Organization. > > I’m also investigating other significant conflicts of interests surrounding the Trump Hotel. There is a myriad of constitutional, legal, and ethical issues raised by President Trump serving as both landlord and tenant of a U.S. government building. > > The Emoluments Clause of the Constitution prevents elected officials from accepting gifts or payments from foreign governments and leaders. The lease itself expressly states that elected officials cannot benefit. Yet, foreign governments, like Saudi Arabia and others, are regularly booking large blocks of rooms at prices far above market rates. The financial revenue flowing from foreign governments to President Trump is of serious concern and should trouble every American. > > I’ve demanded GSA respond to my inquiries surrounding the Trump Hotel and I will not rest until I have all of the documents that I’ve requested. If needed, I will issue subpoenas. > > I take my constitutional duty very seriously and I will pursue these investigations to completion. The American people will know the truth about the Trump administration’s self-dealing and unethical behavior. My committee will turn over any and all evidence of wrongdoing committed by the president to the House Committee on the Judiciary who would initiate an impeachment inquiry. > > We’re living in a difficult and dark time in American history, and I want you to know that I too fear for our country and for our children’s future. I am deeply disturbed by the Trump administration’s subversion of our democracy and the actions of this president. > > The decisions that elected leaders and voters make over the next 17 months could determine if our democracy survives. We must set our sights on the ultimate goal and the long-term health of our democratic republic. > > Stay strong, stay in the fight, and know that I’m fighting for you in Washington D.C. > > In unity, > > Peter He then sent a note on the 19th after Al Green’s impeachment resolution: > [@](#): > > Without a doubt, President Trump’s recent remarks about four duly-elected Members of Congress were racist and xenophobic, Aspenglow. > > From the early days of his campaign, he’s frequently used hate speech tropes and dog-whistles but, as President of the United States, he’s moved to full-throated racist attacks. His words and actions are unacceptable. > > However, racism and bigotry, while incredibly abhorrent, are not impeachable offenses. Impeachment is one of the most serious actions that Congress can take, and it must be based on a solid, factual record of high crimes and misdemeanors. > > Rather than being tabled, I believe that this week’s resolution on impeachment should have been referred to the House Judiciary Committee, where these critical matters are currently being investigated. > > As I have said, should the Judiciary Committee move forward with an impeachment inquiry, I will offer my full support. > > Next week, former special counsel Robert Mueller will publicly testify before the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees which will finally allow for a high profile, public accounting of the findings detailed in the Mueller report. > > Six House committees are currently investigating serious allegations against President Trump. We should use the evidence from those investigations to compile a comprehensive list of potentially impeachable offenses to build a strong case to form the basis for an impeachment inquiry. > > The long-term health of our democratic republic depends on it. > > Peter Mr. DeFazio was one of the 5 who came out in favor of impeachment after Mueller’s testimony. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2019, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/29 "2019-07-27T21:06:57Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > My very experienced HOR person, Peter DeFazio, wrote the following to me as one of his supporters on July 12th. I think it’s a fairly comprehensive explanation of what Pelosi’s game plan is and why. > > He then sent a note on the 19th after Al Green’s impeachment resolution: > > Mr. DeFazio was one of the 5 who came out in favor of impeachment after Mueller’s testimony. What a great letter! He is to be congratulated! ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2019, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/30 "2019-07-27T21:10:41Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > What a great letter! He is to be congratulated! He’s a fabulous representative. We’re lucky to have him. Smart as hell, very experienced, in touch with his constituency. I trust him. ETA: I’m extremely impressed with our Senators, too. Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden. Both very activist and leaders against this corrupt mess of an “administration.” ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2019, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/31 "2019-07-27T21:21:28Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > Fair enough. That aside, the numbers of Dems in favor of impeachment proceedings has risen since the Mueller testimony. I’m puzzled about what they learned that they did not know earlier. The rest of my criticism stands. I have a guess about that. I think it happened in the second meeting, the intelligence committee. They get to see stuff the rest of us don’t see. Seems to me, they were noticeably more sombre. As for the loyalty of Republicans, they have a higher loyalty, their incumbency. If the people lead, the leaders will follow. ---
**Author:** ![HelenGawn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a88e4f/32.png) [@HelenGawn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HelenGawn)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2019, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/32 "2019-07-27T23:38:37Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > A vote was held in the house a couple of short weeks ago on impeachment proceedings. 90 Democrats voted to impeach. The resolution was tabled (failed). Cut to the Mueller testimony and a dozen Democrats joined the pro-impeachment side and numbers appear to be growing. My questions is this: Did these new dozen Democrats not bother reading the report? Did they learn something they didn’t know before? What about Mueller’s testimony compelled them to switch It’s more a matter of what their constituents - at least the Democratic ones - learned, or learned that there was strong evidence for, even if little evidence was revealed. The folks back home are more likely to support an impeachment inquiry now. That theory at last gives me some insight to Pelosi’s possible plan (the PPP). Building on Mueller and examining supporting documents\* while in recess gives vulnerable Dems, especially those who turned their districts last year, an opportunity to go home, make the case for action, and pay attention to feedback. If they can balance that with the kitchen table issues both impeachment and maintaining the House majority move forward. \*Of course, Barr, is as usual, the big slobbery dog in the manger. He’ll fight in court with the same executive-privilege/no-legislative-purpose gun he always uses. Without a formal impeachment inquiry - and maybe with one - unitary executive is the hill he’s chosen to die on. My biggest fear is that he’ll take that all the way to the Supreme Court and win. I hope Pelosi’s keeping that in mind… ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2019, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/33 "2019-07-27T23:53:54Z")
I think what the Democrats need is something like their own version of the Contract With America, which is what Newt Gingrich’s GOP came to town with in 1995. They need a marketing and sales pitch. I hope I’m way wrong on this and wouldn’t having other posters dig this post up months from now and saying “We told you so!” But my fear is that impeachment will become the Democratic party’s picture frame, whether they intend it to or not. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2019, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/34 "2019-07-28T00:21:41Z")
No need to feel alone as I was already telling Representative Castro the same thing a year ago. Glad you caught up. 🙂 [https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=856350](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=856350) ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2019, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/35 "2019-07-28T00:22:12Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > …The House Judiciary officially opened up the impeachment probe today arguing in a new filing that future requests for information, including Mueller grand jury information, falls under the disclosure exception for a “judicial proceeding” because the committee is officially probing whether to proceed with impeachment. > > … It has started. Nancy signed off on the language, and all future requests by the JC can now be directed as part of their Constitutional duty of checks, balances, and impeachments. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > If they do it, this is the right way to do it, IMO. Don’t make it a big spectacle – make it much more about paperwork and court filings than televised hearings. I agree. Not only should the Democrats refrain from making chest-thumping speeches or tweets about how Now We Are Impeaching, they should quietly approve a definite schedule for hearings and court filings that stretches out a year, at least. They can schedule Mueller’s lieutenants for the weeks beginning after they come back from August recess. None of those people will need to be subpoenaed. Of course Barr will attempt to muzzle each and every one of them—but making public Barr’s attempts to keep Trump’s secrets secret, will be part of the process. And they should start and/or continue with the subpoena process for the reluctant witnesses from Trump’s inner circle, so that the courts will have ruled by the time the testimony from Mueller’s people has run its course. There are other witnesses who can speak to wrongdoing by Trump. Have a week or two of testimony devoted to violations committed during the Inauguration; another week or two for irregularities with staffing at Trump properties; more for the issues with Chinese spies at Mar-a-Lago; more for security clearance shenanigans; and more for profiteering at the Mexico border. And on and on. Put it all on a schedule. The schedule might have to change, but at least map out the coming year for all to see. The hearings should not be ballyhooed as “this is the thing that will change minds”—instead the focus should be on “this is the case that is being built against Trump, one day of testimony after another after another after another.” Just keep a steady drumbeat of revelations coming, day after day, month after month. > [@asahi](#): > > I’m guessing Trump will quickly take that option away from the Democrats and go out of his way to make it a big spectacle. Yes, he will. But he will be hampered if there aren’t any Democrats making “look at us, we’re impeaching!” statements anywhere, whether on camera or on social media. He’ll have nothing to react to; nothing to play off. It will take incredible discipline. But the Democrats can do it if they try. ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2019, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/36 "2019-07-28T00:55:40Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > … > Yes, he will. But he will be hampered if there aren’t any Democrats making “look at us, we’re impeaching!” statements anywhere, whether on camera or on social media. **He’ll have nothing to react to; nothing to play off.** > > It will take incredible discipline. But the Democrats can do it if they try. Exactly this. (My emphasis.) Give him nothing to react to. And if he starts a fight out of nothing, ignore it! Don’t let him dictate the terms. Keep control of your own side. Let his insults and rants go in one ear and out the other. When you ignore him, it doesn’t mean he’s “getting away with something.” Insults and challenges do not have to be responded to (contrary to what some have suggested here). And it will \*\*absolutely \*\*take incredible discipline! Nancy can do it. I hope there are other Dems who can, too. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2019, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/37 "2019-07-28T22:25:55Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > Exactly this. (My emphasis.) Give him nothing to react to. And if he starts a fight out of nothing, ignore it! Don’t let him dictate the terms. Keep control of your own side. Let his insults and rants go in one ear and out the other. \*\*When you ignore him, it doesn’t mean he’s “getting away with something.” Insults and challenges do not have to be responded to (contrary to what some have suggested here). \*\* > > And it will \*\*absolutely \*\*take incredible discipline! Nancy can do it. I hope there are other Dems who can, too. Absolutely: **DO NOT FEED THE TROLL** must be the Democratic slogan (even if only internally). (my emphasis in your quote) ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2019, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/38 "2019-07-29T00:36:28Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > So, he’d rather have the publicity and something to make a movie about, rather than actually getting trump out of office. He’d rather see another four years of trump, then? I don’t know what he’d rather have happen and neither to do you. But since what he said obviously suggests that he would rather a Democrat be elected, I’ll go with that. There are plenty of things he can make a movie about already. He doesn’t need to go manufacture them. And I have nothing to “remember” about Mitch stopping the trial. You know, since we haven’t even gotten there yet. ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2019, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/39 "2019-07-29T00:40:43Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > Because Democrats are a useless bunch of prevaricating, hand wringing, mealy-mouthed (with a few exceptions), ineffectual fucking wankers. I never do this, but: This! ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2019, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697/40 "2019-07-29T02:59:25Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > . > > My point is this: Every Republican, with the exception of one or two, are lined up and bent over in front of Trump regardless of what he says or does. There is virtually zero dissent in the ranks. Democrats, for all their justified outrage, and preponderance of evidence, can’t seem to all get on the same page and present a united front. It’s fucking amateur hour. That’s why Republicans and Trump get their way every fucking time. Because Democrats are a useless bunch of prevaricating, hand wringing, mealy-mouthed (with a few exceptions), ineffectual fucking wankers. And, you think that is a good thing? That no matter what Mitch or trump does, not matter how many crimes, how deep the racism, how clear the acts of treason, they just go along with it? I’d rather have the non-United front, showing that the Dems can think for themselves that they are allowed to disagree. Rather than than than a bunch of racist, nazi, mindless yes men who cant think for themselves. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-house-judiciary-impeachment-case-discussion-thread/837697.md?page=3)