Dare I say we refer to President Clinton's famous "definition of is" when it comes to impeachment?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

Big Dog got mocked for it lots back then for legal parsing and still gets mocked to this very day about it, but in fact he was raising a very legitimate point.

Just for context:

Q: That statement is a completely false statement. Whether or not Mr. Bennett knew of your relationship with Ms. Lewinsky, the statement that there was "no sex of any kind in any manner, shape or form, with President Clinton," was an utterly false statement. Is that correct?

A: It depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is. If the – if he – if "is" means is and never has been that is not – that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....

You can make the argument that without the completion of the Mueller investigation and the release of a report, there is (presently) no basis for impeachment on the Trussia matter....at this time. (You can also make the argument that there might be matters outside of Trussia that could be argued as impeachable offenses...things like emoluments and what not, but they're not getting the attention that Trussia is here.)

Of course, Mueller could wrap up, release his report, and it contains extremely damning offenses by Trump and those around him.

And in that case, there still is an impeachable matter to consider. It just hasn't ripened yet.

I think that's what we need to keep in mind.

[TwilightZone]

1. At this moment, it would be a token gesture. It has zero chance of a conviction.

I'm not sure why that's so hard for many to understand.

Pelosi was right - we need something that is compelling, overwhelming, and bipartisan. Otherwise, it's a waste of time and resources. Continue the investigations. Await the Mueller report. If necessary, bring him in to testify.

The GOP turned on Nixon in the end but it took a remarkable amount of evidence to convince them to do so.

[mindem]

5. I agree,

it makes sense to keep digging and bringing to light how corrupt the drumph administration truly is. Along with that, make the repukes complicit at every turn.

[Me.]

2. No Conclusions From Mueller Or SDNY

and the House is just getting started. It is all way too soon. I think she is saying this now as a way of reeling in those new House members who want to file articles of impeachment prematurely.

[TwilightZone]

3. Agreed.

On all counts. Starting it now would make zero sense with all of the investigations in progress, including Mueller's.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

4. Exactly

People are either, "We need to impeach right this isntance" or "We need to forget any prospect of impeachment ever and just hope Trump is voted out in November 2020," but the fact of the matter is that neither of those positions are right to take at this current moment.

There's still a lot of time in the game before we weigh the option to push the impeachment switch or not. Not pulling it now shouldn't preclude us for pulling it ever.

It's like landing the Space Shuttle. There is one legitimate shot at it, so we want to make sure we are in order before we do it. And we should still do it.