I admire her for getting the World’s Best Landlord to let her live in his head, rent-free.
Look at what she did during the shutdown. She didn’t want the shutdown, but she quickly figured out that Trump was not above using 800,000 people as bargaining chips. She could have done that by going on Sunday talk shows and sitting in the chamber of the House whining about how callous Trump is, but she also figured out how to exploit another one of Trump’s flaws: his love for the camera and attention. So what does she do? She agrees to go over to the White House, on camera, and let the president explain in front of hundreds of million people that he’s going to do exactly what she thought he might do, which was brag about shutting the government down and causing 800,000 people to lose paychecks and grind local economies to a halt.
She burned him with the same exact tactic yet again this past week. She and Chuck went over to the White House. I don’t think her little comment about the cover-up just prior to going over there was an accident or a coincidence; I think she knew that it would rile his ass up, and that he would probably throw a tantrum on live TV. And that’s exactly what he did. Nancy Pelosi has this guy pegged, and the interesting thing about it is that I’m not sure he can keep from doing it again, because he is addicted to seeing himself on TV and he is convinced that he can eventually win. He’s probably convinced that he’s ‘won’ both times - until people around him watch in horror at how the spectacle played out on TV and how it’s being spread across cable networks and digital media platforms.
Pelosi knows how to squeeze Trump’s nutsack.
Can you clarify what you mean by pegged?
Because I don’t want to make any assumptions, even with this remark farther down:
Heh. I think the same thought crossed my mind.
Pelosi to Trump: “Who’s your Daddy, bitch!”
It’s the hardest any woman has fucked Trump without first signing a prenup.
A fairly frequent question on the commentary shows these days appears to be “who wants impeachment more?” (or put another way, “who’s goading whom?”). MHO, Il Douche would like little more than a premature impeachment, one that would come out of the House as obviously partisan and fail miserably in the Senate. This would allow him to claim victimization and vindication — or to misquote Orwell,The colossus that bestrode the world! The rock against which the hordes of [DEL]Asia[/DEL] Demonrats dashed themselves in vain!just in time for the 2020 election.
As for the Democrats, it occurred to me that they are playing the situation somewhat like a bullfight. On the one hand, you have a powerful contestant who is governed mostly by instinct; on the other, seemingly weaker contestants who can nevertheless conceive (and adapt) a plan of attack. Using this analogy — and I am well aware that analogy can only be stretched so far — Pelosi et. al. are serving as picadores, weakening their opponent and enraging it to the point where it’s even less capable of thought than usual; then at the proper time they will turn it over to the matador (the House Judiciary Committee) for the coup de grace (impeachment).
One further advantage of this approach is that even if impeachment does not occur, it builds up a rich trove of video clips and sound bites for 2020. And who knows, it may result in an action so obviously impeachable that a significant number of Republicans would be forced to break ranks in order to save their miserable political skins.
Yeah, just a few short months ago many posters were saying here that Pelosi needs to step down and let a younger, more progressive Congressman take over. So, very very wrong.
The Democrats can at least say that they showed some restraint for the good of the country. If they impeach before the country is ready for it, then they’ve lost the plot, and Trump goes into gladiator mode, which is what he wants. He wants to create a crisis so that he can fight ‘the enemy of the people’.
If the House votes to start impeachment hearings, then he and the GOP would insist on voting ASAP. And we all know it’s dead the moment it goes to the Senate. It’s better to investigate and use the power you have in the House to do to him what Trey Gowdy did to Obama and Clinton: investigate, investigate, investigate.
I certainly was one of those. I’ll admit, i was wrong. It’s not that I wanted someone more progressive, but I did thing we needed new blood and a new approach.
Let me join others in strong appreciation of Nancy Pelosi. (Why is thread in Pit?)
Was she hinting that would be likely? Or simply trying to awaken Reps to the dangers of the Trumpian rule-by-decree style.
Here’s another opinion piece that supports the approach Pelosi is taking. Rick Wilson is a Republican and a conservative, but he’s also a #never Trumper and he, along with Bill Kristol and Mike Murphy, has been pretty credibly anti-Trump from the beginning. He doesn’t want Trumpism to win, and he believes that Pelosi’s taking the right approach:
(may be a pay wall, sorry)
Better you should have saved the rimshot for some time in August.
Yes, why is this thread in the Pit? It didnt start that way, did it?
It’s the one place where it would be “safe”. Okay?
You’ve got to understand that there’s at least one mod here who lies in wait for me to commit infractions so he can ban me.
Trump and Giuliani spreading doctored video of Pelosi is absolutely disgraceful, even by the lower bar Trump has wrought. We have a 4chan president. :mad:
“Like”
Thanks for mentioning this. I get my news from SDMB and this is the first I’ve heard of it. CNN mentions the (more famous?) slurring doctoring and a 2nd, even more despicable, video that the President retweeted. Facebook is refusing to take them down. (Is Zsuckerturd a Trump snuggler?)
The question “Will Trump retain the W.H. due to cheating?” can be answered already. IF Trump is re-elected it WILL be because of cheating.
As I said in another thread somewhere:
Obama: “When they go low, we go high!”
GOP: “We can always go lower.”
Hate to go against the grain of this thread, but it’s true. An impeachment inquiry should have been initiated as soon as the Mueller Report was made public. The redactions may matter, but not enough to change that.
There’s no doubt that Trump has committed - and continues to commit - impeachable offenses. This business where he’s giving AG Barr authority to selectively declassify any materials he chooses from the Trump/Russia investigations is bad, really bad.
“But think of what Trump will do after the Senate exonerates him!” He’s already doing it.
What the public knows about the Mueller Report:
- Trump and the GOP say no collusion, no obstruction, and therefore exoneration.
- The Dems are collectively shrugging.
Public’s conclusion: it didn’t really have anything.
That’s how you lose a major PR battle. Pelosi getting inside his head over infrastructure will be a big deal for a couple days, if we’re lucky. How the public sees the Mueller Report is a whole 'nother thing.
What else are the House Dems going to do? Pass bills that won’t get brought up in the Senate. Conduct investigations where they’re lucky to be able to get any evidence to investigate, because Trump - again committing impeachable offenses - is saying ‘NO’ wholesale to responding to House requests for documents and testimony.
Trump still has another 20 months in office, even if the voters evict him next November. We just had an election 6 months ago. We elected people to Congress to take care of the public’s business, not to punt it back to us.
The notion that Trump wants the Dems to impeach him is absurd. He’s the prototypical playground bully, and he’ll push people around unless they push back. Other means of pushing back have pretty much been exhausted. It’s impeachment or nothing.
And they really need to start the impeachment inquiry. It really would be better if this doesn’t run too far into next year (not at all would be ideal), and the longer they wait, the more their choices will be between rushing the inquiry, or running it through most of the primaries. Neither of those is a good choice: the inquiry itself should be conducted as deliberately as they need to. And they have to leave time for writing articles of impeachment, and debating and voting on them, first in committee and then in the full House.
They probably don’t need to allow time for a trial - Mitch is likely to do the same thing with impeachment as he does with anything he doesn’t like: simply not take it up in the Senate. Nothing in the Constitution obligates the Senate to have a trial, no matter how many articles of impeachment the House passes. Because no matter how much Mitch tries to monkey with the rules for the trial, Roberts will be presiding, and at a minimum, he will let the House impeachment managers make their case.
Much of the inquiry will be televised. The Committee and full House debates will not only be televised, but will be watched. The Senate trial, if there is one, even more so. This would be a months-long summarization of all the evidence against Trump re Russia and other matters. It would provide the sort of steady drumbeat of bad news that is one of the few things that can change public opinion. (There’s 40% of the population that isn’t winnable, 52% that we’ve already got. Time to nail down that last 8%.)
The Dems also need to win the Senate, and this would put vulnerable GOP Senators on the spot. They’d have to explain either (a) their votes, or more likely (b) why they didn’t do their jobs and have a trial.
Impeachment would be terrible for Trump, and pretty bad for the GOP generally. The worse he looks, the more that people will turn out to vote against him.
OMG, this Giuliani tweet might be the most hilarious self-own in the history of the Internet:
He belongs in a home.