Why impeach in the middle of the ongoing investigations?

[TwilightZone]

Many seem to be saying - or demanding - that we should start impeachment proceedings immediately, without regard to the ongoing investigations being undertaken by the House and by Mueller.

That line of thinking makes no sense to me.

Pelosi clearly qualified her statement, but many, many people are pretending that qualification isn't there.

"unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan"

She is correct. Without compelling, overwhelming evidence and bipartisan support, there will be no conviction. A token effort that fails to remove the president accomplishes nothing. At present, I doubt there's a single Republican that would vote to convict.

That compelling, overwhelming evidence could very well exist and be exposed by the ongoing investigations, including Mueller's. Rushing into it unprepared and before that evidence is gathered is doomed to failure.

For those arguing that the GOP turned on Nixon in the end, it took compelling, overwhelming evidence before they did so.

[TreasonousBastard]

1. Our side is also bedeviled by occasional outbursts of silly ideas...

that they can scream from the rooftops and later claim no responsibility for when they fail completely.

It's not a political problem-- it's a human problem

[Bettie]

2. Why declare that it will not happen

in the middle of investigations.

There is LITERALLY NOTHING that would make Republicans turn on him. SO, there will never be any "bipartisan" agreement.

There is literally nothing that would make Republicans turn on any of their own.

SO, the next guy, if this one doesn't declare himself president for life over a few feeble objections from house leadership, knows for a fact that nothing he does matters. There are no consequences.

[samnsara]

3. ...and it was Nixons people who made it happen..this is so different.

..Nancy just told the world that trump 'isnt worth it'..it was a brilliant troll. Shes not got her eye off him. Im not worried.

[BeyondGeography]

4. Why say you won't impeach in the middle of ongoing investigations?

[TwilightZone]

5. Because a few House members are rumbling about impeachment and she was asked about it.

This isn't complicated.

[BeyondGeography]

6. Neither is saying it's inappropriate to comment until the facts are in

Seems like she’s pre-selling a disappointing Mueller report. No point in doing that either as long as you have subpoena power in the House.

Oh, and call the President a felon while you’re at it. He’s not worth it? GMAFB.

[TwilightZone]

8. She doesn't have the Mueller report.

No one outside of his team does. But, hey, let's speculate anyway.

As far as saying she shouldn't have commented, her answer stops the incessant questions about it and her qualifier clearly leaves the option to change her mind at any time.

It's also a message to the House Dems that it's premature to talk about it, and it's an amusing shot at Trump's ego.

[BeyondGeography]

9. Lol, her answer hasn't stopped a thing

And if you think Trump's ego will be so wounded that he won't seize on the obvious political opening she has given him you will soon see otherwise.

[TwilightZone]

11. You're still ignoring 90% of what she said.

But, hey, you be you. There's no law against intentional ignorance.

[BeyondGeography]

15. Ok, Pollyanna

Have a nice night.

[UniteFightBack]

7. Well one reason is so they can subpoena and also indict the corrupt asshole. But I agree we can't

do it if the votes aren't there and the votes aren't there because the American people aren't screaming impeachment every day. At some point the damn will burst or we will vote him out of office. That is what MUST happen.

[Rizen]

10. How will Dems look if they don't impeach and Trump is found guilty after leaving office?

I agree we need to let investigations conclude but we will NEVER get bipartisan support. Republicans will always go with tribalism. Impeachment is the process of opening investigations into wrongdoing. If there is wrongdoing it's our constitutional duty to impeach regardless of what the senate does. Democrats need to project strength. This is why we lose votes; Republican project strength better than Dems get facts across.

[TwilightZone]

12. "Impeachment is the process of opening investigations into wrongdoing."

It's not the only method. Obviously, we've already started multiple investigations into Trump's wrongdoing.

"Democrats need to project strength."

Already doing so. Passing legislation to show voters what we stand for. Opening multiple investigations into Trump, his administration, and his organization.

An impeachment with a failed conviction isn't going to reflect as a strength for Democrats. It's just a failure.

[Rizen]

16. The consequences of not impeaching are worse

The failure is letting a criminal get away without taking the proper actions. Republicans not convicting Trump will make them look bad when Trump is later found guilty. Dems will look bad for not impeaching him when crimes are found. We can't let Republicans bully us into not fulfilling our constitutional obligations.

[lancelyons]

13. Why come out and show your hand in the middle of an investigation

You end up pissing off an number of your voters when you do this.


STUPID move by Pelosi. She sounds scared of the republican voters.

[beachbum bob]

14. nothing to impeach on today, Pelosi knows this...now in a week or a month or 6 months

we will see

democratic supporters got to back off and let Pelosi do her thing

[cbdo2007]

17. Yep exactly...she isn't saying never impeach...just not now

They need overwhelming concrete evidence from an actual investigation to impeach, not just based on rumors on CNN.

Pelosi knows how to play this game like an expert. Just trust her.