Look. Impeachment has no chance of succeeding if it looks like “Both sides do it, see?”. Doing it based on what we have strong evidence of right now would be just that. Even talking about it feeds the narrative of it being just partisan spite, and that narrative is especially strong among those who know no higher principle than partisan spite.
But when Mueller reports out, which may be in only a month or so, we’ll *all *know, even the Spite Party. It may be that we’ll know there just isn’t enough there to justify it, or it may be that there’s so much there that it can’t be avoided. While the spiters know partisanship, they also know collusion with the Russians and the former KGB head who is now their President. They also know bribery and corruption, and whatever else is going to be in there. If that’s the case, then all of them, even the Republicans, will be in favor of it, and it will happen.
So talking about it *now *only hamstrings the Democrats in case there isn’t enough there. It doesn’t help anyone at any time.
For the benefit of blindboyard and others who apparently like to form an opinion by pulling nonsense out of their asses, here is a summary courtesy of business insider:
December 11: Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer meet with President Donald Trump to discuss the funding deadline. Trump demands $5 billion in border-wall funding, Democrats counter with an offer of $1.6 billion in general border-security funding. Trump rejects the idea and offers to take the blame for the shutdown. The president says he would be “proud” to shut down the government.
December 19: The Senate** passes a clean short-term funding bill,** called a continuing resolution (CR), that does not include border-wall funding but will keep the government open until February 8. Trump supported the bill at the time, Senate GOP leaders said.
December 20: Trump flip-flops on the clean CR after listening to attacks from conservative TV pundits and the hardline House Freedom Caucus, and he announces that he will not sign a bill with no wall funding. House Republicans then pass a CR that includes $5.7 billion in wall funds.
December 21: The Senate votes down the House version of the bill, and the government moves closer to a shutdown at the midnight deadline.
Bottom line: Trying to blame the shutdown on the Democrats, who took power in the house on January 3, and do not control the Senate is an exercise in extreme stupidity.
Since you must have the conviction in the Senate, and since the last example of the partisan impeachement without the votes in the Senate in fact bounced back in the face of the House and helped the sitting President then, Mr Clinton - the logic of that argument seems to be 100 percent residing in the wishful and the magical thinking that also motivated the opposition of that time.
It is very bad parliamentary politics usually to bring any action that you know will fail and that will not serve as the club against the opponent. That is the politics of the activists, who rarely succeed in the operational politics of the parliaments…
It seems to me Madame Pelosi is playing a very wiley game of waiving the red flag in front of the poor impulse control bull and letting him damage himself, rather than playing excitable activist politics (which would serve what practical purpose? how can the already convinced opposition in the USA become more motivated?)
Impeachment, however much I want it, isn’t necessarily the best plan long-term for the party either. Ugh, I can’t believe I’m going to be this cynical, but here goes:
If Trump is still in office in 2020 and the nominee, it probably means the Dems keep the house AND win the Senate… not to mention the WH itself. A forty seat swing just two months ago based on what he’s done in two years. A better Senate map than 2018 AND he didn’t win the popular vote in 2016. He’s just now slowly starting to erode his base. It won’t take much to make up that 100k votes in those three states. More people don’t have to vote D. Just more right-leaning people need to be exasperated and unenthusiastic and not show up.
Keeping him as the face of all things GOP has a ripple effect all the way down to local dogcatchers.
So if we can keep him from starting war with Iran and destroying things, if Nancy can keep him mostly in line, if we can minimize the damage… is it worth it to let him sulk alone with “Acting Secretary of ____” for two years? I mean, even if he has terrible plans, how is he literally going to implement some of them without any actual staff to do it?
I would rather have him gone today and worry about later, but if he’s going to be impossible to remove, Nancy’s going to look to make lemonade out of this pile of lemons. I trust her to put the party first and use his ineptitude and corruption to shore up the Dems as a whole, not just her district or the House.
Nancy plays the long game. Does she do everything I want? Nope. Does she get more shit done than anyone else does? Yup.
Oh fer fucks sake…like the Mitch McConnell who denied a vote on Merrick Garland yet allowed confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh wasn’t partisan.
Dude, you’re part of the problem. I know you think that your “moderation,” “centrism,” “independence” or whatever the fuck you want to call it is helping, but it’s not. Your ignorance of how politics works, how the system works is what Russian troll farmers dream of.
What the hell are you talking about? Trump’s approval/disapproval ratings have been cratering for the past month straight:
Hs disapproval rate is two percentage points and a bit off his all-time worst rating (Dec. 15-18, 2017). What rabbit do you think he’s going to pull out of his ass that will reverse this trend in a week?
One of my relatives recently posted something on Facebook purportedly showing how hypocritical and anti-American Pelosi and other Democrats are. Maybe some of you have seen it. It really doesn’t show that at all.
The damn thing is from the FB homepage for TrumPotus. The whole page is rife with misogyny, blatant lies, outright racism, etc., a veritable Pandora’s box.