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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.”
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.
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…
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.
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
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.
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.
Absolutely: DO NOT FEED THE TROLL must be the Democratic slogan (even if only internally). (my emphasis in your quote)
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.
I never do this, but:
This!
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.