Impeachment proceedings? Not yet.

[onenote]

There is a growing clamor, not just here on DU, for the Democrats to immediately start an impeachment proceeding when they assume control of the House in January. However, I continue to think that the smarter course is to wait until after the Mueller report is complete before commencing impeachment proceedings in the House.

The reasons for waiting, in my view, are simple: after the Mueller report is out the issues will be more sharply focused and more specific evidence will be available. The worst thing that could happen in my opinion is for the House to start an impeachment proceeding and then have the legs cut out from under it on one or more issues by the Mueller report.

If Mueller concludes that Trump has committed indictable offenses (whether or not Mueller himself seeks to indict a sitting president), the pressure on Republicans, both in the House and then in the Senate, will be that much greater. So it makes sense to me to wait.

Finally, while I know a lot of folks think that the statements in the Cohen sentencing memo about Trump's direct involvement in the pay off of Stormy Daniels etc and the related campaign finance law violations provide a sufficient basis to seek impeachment, I would advise against making those the centerpiece charges. Just as I didn't think Clinton should be the subject of impeachment for having perjured himself to cover up his affair with Lewinsky, I don't think Trump should be impeached over his involvement with the campaign finance violations committed in an attempt to cover up his extramarital affairs. The public already knows and has come to grips with the fact that Trump had affairs and paid off the women involved to keep them quiet. The fact that he used the mechanism of an illegal campaign contribution to do so, rather than perjury under oath, doesn't strike me as a significant enough distinction to warrant going after Trump and I fear that there would be little consequences for the Republicans if they refused to remove Trump from office over the pay offs. (If however there are other impeachable activities outlined in the Mueller report, I have no problem including the illegal campaign contribution issue as one more charge -- just not the central one).

[mcar]

1. I want House investigations of all the conspirators

Immediate impeachment proceedings would forestall all that. Let's keep the investigations going and publicly air out all the Rs dirty laundry.

[calguy]

2. Agree 100%

Dems must not appear to have impeachment as their first priority. They need to work on legislation to help the American people while committee investigations proceed. This is why Nancy Pelosi is the best person to lead the House thru these troubled waters. She's seen it all before and knows how to best handle it. Who knows? By the time this all plays out she may find herself sitting behind the desk in the Oval office.

[mr_lebowski]

3. I think you meant to say 'must NOT' ... and I agree with OP and you ... not yet! (nt)

Lol, you fixed it

[Quixote1818]

4. Yes, slowly ramp things up from a simmer to the boiling point. Nothing too fast or hasty. nt

[Blue_true]

5. I agree with you.

We need evidence that nails that bastard's feet to the floor. Evidence so strong that NO sane person would even try to dispute it. To go off half cocked on impeachment only hurts our party.

[Claritie Pixie]

6. ALL evidence before impeachment.

Yes I want justice and yes I want Individual-1 to be held accountable for his treachery (the extent of which will be shocking).

But we have to wait for this we've-never-been-here-before story to be told in completion. Once it's told, Rs will no longer protect him. House Dems will impeach and Senate will convict. That's the necessary outcome.

So I don't agree with Impeachment now. It's too soon.

[Pachamama]

7. +1000

Agreed - same here

[ooky]

9. How do we explain the felony he is already accused of being ignored

in the meantime? The same felony which his co-conspirator is going to be sentenced next week to ~ 3-4 years in prison, which would be the same fate for president Lard Ass, right now, except for him being president.

[Claritie Pixie]

10. Has there been a criminal case naming him as a defendant? No.

Rule of law must proceed and we're not there yet. If Dems don't adhere to the process who will?

[ooky]

11. But the only reason he isn't named as a defendant is because he is the president.

That's what the impeachment process is for. In effect the House must first indict (impeach) him and then the Senate tries him.

Its not going to be any different with any other crimes Mueller thinks he's guilty of. He still won't be named as a defendent until he is impeached.

The House has a duty to impeach him now for the felony he has already been implicated in. We can't just have him keep being president with a felony hanging over his head and nothing gets done about it.

[Paladin]

8. Let's not pretend there isn't more-than-adequate evidence of impeachable offenses, right now.

I see no reason whatsoever to spare trump and his goons---as well as McConnell and his fellow Republican Senate shitheads--- the pressure and anxiety of setting up the preliminaries of impeachment hearings, right now. We are dealing with a dangerous, raving lunatic in the White House, somebody who needs to be removed from office at the earliest possible time. What's the point of our scoring historically high House victories in the mid-terms, if all we're going to do is revert to the same old hyper-cautious, play-by-nonexistent-rules behavior that has kneecapped Democrats for decades? How about showing a little spine for a change?

[M_Demo_M]

12. It's smart to wait for more evidence to be released ...

In order to convict Trump, 20 Republican Senators would need to join all 47 Dem/Independent Senators for the 2/3 majority required.

Given the amount of information known to the public, and current Republican support for the President there wouldn't be more than one or two R votes for conviction, if that.

Why not wait until more information is out there to build public support and put pressure on Senators to vote for conviction.

A little more patience could make a big difference.

[Joe941]

13. Thank you.

[kentuck]

14. I think the official Democratic response should be:

"We believe we have enough evidence to impeach already, but we are committed to letting Mr Mueller finish his investigation.

The question about Russian interference in our elections is too important to ignore or to simply sweep under the rug.

We are committed to finding the truth."