Pelosi "negligent at best" -- Charlie Pierce

[Grasswire2]

[link:https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a27376761/nancy-pelosi-donald-trump-impeachment-2020-congress/?fbclid=IwAR3K_3x0OjpCH1bgBuWSNAUSngWPUv_FGfuB6eA1qk24JE42okb8WChLHZg|

It seems to me that if Pelosi believes that the president* is venal and power-mad enough to discredit, if not defy, the results of a national election, she must realize that the crisis already is upon us. ... If that is the case, waiting for 2020 and hoping that cooler heads prevail at the ballot box strikes me as negligent at best.

[shanny]

1. Amen.

[BeyondGeography]

2. Nancy Pelosi Still Does Not Fully Grasp That the Trump Crisis Is Here and Now

Nice title.

[StarfishSaver]

10. Nancy Pelosi has a far better grasp on all of this than you do.

But maybe you can get a job on Capitol Hill so that you can move into a position where you can clue the Speaker of the House of Representatives in to all that she doesn't know, but you surely do.

[BeyondGeography]

12. You're obviously running low on ammo

[Grasswire2]

18. heheh nt

[ehrnst]

30. +1000. (nt)

[uponit7771]

24. +1, 2020 elections won't be more free or Fair than 2016

[BeyondGeography]

33. Yes, somehow, by not putting a spotlight on Russian interference via impeachment hearings now

we'll get a more unimpeachable result in 2020.

[uponit7771]

35. +1,

[ehrnst]

47. Oh, look.

I hope you don't feel foolish:

Link to tweet

[BeyondGeography]

48. Right, obstruction of justice is "goading"

and I'm the one who is supposed to feel foolish.

[ehrnst]

49. Stung did it? (nt)

[BeyondGeography]

50. Lol

Thanks for the laugh.

[ehrnst]

57. Lol

You "laughed?"

That's the lol....

[Raster]

3. Double Amen!

[lunatica]

5. Pelosi and Schumer assuming Trump will lose in 2020 is dangerous.

Putin is prepared and will act to keep destroying this country and Democracy. He seems to know Americans better than we do.

[uponit7771]

25. +1, Putin is not going to drop his whore

[Fullduplexxx]

6. She is becoming an enabler

[saidsimplesimon]

7. I'm not waiting for 2020.

No one convinced me to start and it will end when it is over. I believe everyone posting here is looking for ways to achieve the best outcome for everyone, here and around the world. We do what we can, when we can.

With that, I've taken far to much space and time. Thank you for indulging me and let's all have the best day we can.

[Nuggets]

8. Well

Impeachment from the house throws it to the Senate which complicit Republicans control.

Regardless of the GOPs political move after impeachment, trump and the GOP win.

If the Senate votes and clears him because that’s politically beneficial at the time of the vote, they win. Trump and GOP walk away scott free.

If the GOP in the Senate feel Trump should fall because it will drum up more votes in 2020, they will convict and Pence will pardon and will still have the power to pardon any Republican they choose the until Dems regain control of all branches.
That means votes in 2020 are all that matters now.

[wryter2000]

14. Thanks you

A voice of reason

[uponit7771]

26. The party is the impeached has never fared well post impeachment process

[Nuggets]

43. I don't think it makes a difference.

Nothing has ever happened before it happens.

The T totalers swore prohibition could never be overturned.
“ No amendment in history has ever been repealed!”

It was repealed.



Trump will never be elected.

And so on.

[Tom Rinaldo]

53. Really? How often has that happened in the last 150 years?

I think the answer is once. Once hardly a pattern makes. And Republicans essentially impeached Clinton over lying about a sexual act between two consenting adults. Is anyone surprised that they got singed over that?

[dixiegrrrrl]

36. exactly.

I am so tired of seeing people bitch and moan that House leadership has "failed" to impeach trump, with no understanding of how the process works.

Meanwhile, the House IS moving against Barr, which is pretty fast considering that Barr contempted last thursday.

[Hortensis]

9. Many experts see Trump & co trying to push Democrats to impeachment.

After all, after the senate refused to convict Trump would continue on as before, as Clinton did, putting this all behind him.

Oh, we could just try, try again?

In the real world, how many times could an opposing party try, try again? Two times? Three? Once?

Zero? One impeachment and one trial, and if you blow it it's effectively all over?

[StarfishSaver]

11. It's weird seeing so many people here playing right along

Thank God Speaker Pelosi and Sen. Schumer are more knowledgeable and sophisticated than many of the people screaming at them from home and know to look further beyond this afternoon.

[Hortensis]

17. Playing right along like Pierce, yes. Clueless targets are

are the ball being kicked down the field by people like him.

Bipartisanship Is Useless in a Political Age Where Donald Trump Can Prosper. A letter from hundreds of ex-prosecutors saying the president would be charged with obstruction if he weren't president is just the latest example. And good for you all. But so what? ~ Pierce

He forgot to add the part about grabbing our knees and kissing our Democratic asses goodbye along with our vanished democracy. Maybe that's in tomorrow's essay, or whenever it's due.

[Tom Rinaldo]

16. "Could we impeach, try, and reimpeach and retry two times?" No, the only impeachment window is NOW

If Trump still wins reelection after the Mueller Report has (in redacted form) been released, no Congress will take up impeachment proceedings against him if the public gives him a new electoral mandate.

It is now or never. And if impeachment proceedings don't begin by late Summer if will be Never, because once we enter deeper into the 2020 election cycle, once debates and primaries and various other 2020 congressional election cycles begin in earnest, there will be neither will nor bandwidth for starting up an impeachment trial in Congress.

My prediction. If Democrats don't fill up the airways with a meaningful investigation of Trump's impeachable offenses, Republicans will fill up the airways with investigations into the "Deep State coup attempt" against Trump. And it is beginning to look like Democrats will need to invoke the constitutional remedy of impeachment hearings to force witnesses to testify without having subpoenas tied up in court past the 2020 elections.

[Hortensis]

21. Yes, I want him gone too, but let's be smart.

The Republicans want it OVER WITH. Period. AND they want it OVER WITH so they can style their victory as proof of our perfidiousness to both hold the senate and reelect Trump. Oh, and of course, style us as the losers we would be because.. Well, just imagine how you'd be feeling.

So, that should be at least a little sobering... Trump and McConnell WANT impeachment and trial presided over by Justice Roberts?! As soon as possible? Really...?

[watoos]

39. Did you read what Tom posted?

Without impeachment hearings Trump will control the narrative. The narrative won't be about evil Trump, it will be about the Mueller investigation being over and Mueller found no collusion and no obstruction, it's time to move on to investigating the FBI and Democrats who carried on a witch hunt against Trump. One of those Democrats that Barr is going after is Hillary. Yes, that's right, Trump is going to put Hillary on the 2020 ballot.

Democrats carry more clout under impeachment hearings, they can have the courts expedite rulings on subpoenas and documents. Holding impeachment hearings isn't just about impeaching Trump, it's about exposing all of Trump's crime family criminality.

How are those non-impeachment hearings going? What have we learned lately?

[Hortensis]

44. CERTAIN, GUARANTEED Republican victory.

[watoos]

63. Put Auntie Maxine in charge of the impeachment committee

and give her 12 freshmen Congresspersons. Guaranteed to bring out the millennial and younger vote.

If Trump brings out his base and we bring out our base, WE WIN.

[Tom Rinaldo]

42. I think they are positioned in their sweet spot now

I'm not convinced that they are pushing for impeachment. I think they are pushing for maximum coverup. I suspect they believe they can play the clock out on Democrats with continuing obstruction and lack of cooperation. I don't think they are defying House Democrats in order to goad us into impeachment, I think they are literally obstructing House Democrats to prevent the public from seeing the full extent of the evidence against Trump for as long as possible. I think that is their electoral calculations, to enter the 2020 election cycle with the full implications of Mueller's investigation never fully aired or litigated, and with it safely seen only in the rear view mirror.

But it is more nefarious than just that in my opinion. Republicans want Democrats to conduct hearings on Trump, but they want those hearings to lack teeth and credible witnesses. They want to run against Democrats conducting witch hunts, they want us to keep threatening to investigate, they want us to fight over subpoenas and Contempt of Congress. They want us to hold "empty chair" inquiries with key witnesses failing to show up. They want Democratic sound and fury, but they do not want the full case against Trump laid out in detail on TV for the American public to absorb. And I am increasingly coming to believe that the only way Democrats can force a full examination of Trump' conduct without being tied up in court for years is through real impeachment hearing with the Constitutional imperatives that go with it.

Republicans want to run against Democrats tilting at windmills and they are, in my opinion, operating on the assumption that they can gum up Democratic oversight hearings sufficiently to make the public tire on the whole matter, and make Democrats in Congress seem out of touch with real concerns without having literally explosive hearings that can hurt the president. Right now, I think, they have us where they want us.

[LibFarmer]

13. I don't think impeachment is the right strategy

at this point.

I think the house needs to form a special committee to investigate the Russia matters and obstruction matters and get Mueller in to testify. Then keep the hearings going till next year.

Actually impeaching Trump will make him stronger because he will be acquitted by the senate and he will tout his "exoneration"

Just let sun shine on the facts through the special committee (which will be major news) and Trump will not get reelected.

[wryter2000]

15. Yes!

So many investigations their heads spin. No let up.

[standingtall]

31. He will tout being exonerated if he is not impeached like he is already doing

and it will be more effective if he is not impeached. Without impeachment all of the houses investigations will have no teeth and will begin to make them look very weak. The fact is the house already has enough evidence to impeach Trump. Yes they can have an impeachment inquiry to find additional wrong doings, but at this point impeachment should be a formality.

[elleng]

58. and what will he tout after he's impeached by the House and the repug senate lets him off???

[redstateblues]

60. Boom. He claims victory. Four more years

[robbedvoter]

19. Pierce supported Burnie. Sometimes misses nuance

like what she ays here

Link to tweet

[Hortensis]

28. When the time comes, "whatever it is, we'll be ready."

Yes. And in the meantime, he's committing multiple additional crimes that should make it difficult for Justice Roberts to guide the case in Trump's favor should he be looking for a way.

[robbedvoter]

32. process is ongoing. House investigations is how an impeachment allways starts

Sorry Charles didn't read history.

[Baitball Blogger]

38. Thank you for posting this.

+1

[Jarqui]

20. I do not think today's GOP would impeach Nixon

(saw that in a headline and I agree).

I think there was more public support for Nixon's impeachment than Trump at the moment.
Pelosi et al have to elevate public support for impeachment beyond Nixon levels to have a chance and even then, I still strongly suspect (without knowing all the real circumstances) that the GOP Senate would not go along.

Public support would have to be so strong, it threatens GOP politicians. We are not even close to that at this point in time. Let's see what Mueller does to the polls. He'll move the needle but I really doubt it will be enough.

In the interim, they need to keep bashing away. That may be all they can do until 2020.

[kentuck]

22. I think Pierce makes a very strong argument but...

I don't think Nancy has taken impeachment off the table. There is a process she is following, along with Nadler, to cross all the "T's" and dot all "i's" that she feels necessary for the strongest case.

But, the pressure will continue to grow on Pelosi and I think she understands that?

[uponit7771]

23. I don't see Pelosi recent comments helping the situation any

[athena]

34. I'm hoping it's part of a strategy.

Maybe she wants to appear as if she really doesn't want to impeach Trump.

Pelosi is smart. Surely she knows that not impeaching Trump at this point could suppress Democratic turnout in 2020.

I used to be against impeachment because conviction is impossible in the Senate. But the whole Barr debacle has made me change my mind. I agree with Elizabeth Warren that it's the duty of the House to impeach Trump.

[Honeycombe8]

27. Ummmm...she never said that's the game plan. ??? nt

[treestar]

29. Getting rid of him is the goal

How best to accomplish that? They have the senate to start with and it takes a supermajority.

[standingtall]

40. The best way to get rid is to impeach him and then beat him in the 2020 election

It is a myth that if the Senate fails to convict Trump it will hurt Democrats and help Trump and republicans. The opposite will happen Trumps impeachment followed by his acquittal by Senate republicans will hurt Trump and republicans in 2020.

[srobertss]

55. I think it's worth the risk

1. You can spin out the hearings in an impeachment inquiry to last a long time. In Watergate, the full House never voted on all of the articles of impeachment before Nixon resigned. That was a long set of hearings.

2. It will give Democrats a sense that maybe we can hold Trump to account, even if turns out not to be the case. Time it so that Republicans fail to uphold the law just before the election. Make the Democrats really mad at them. I don’t know how easy it is to control the timing of this, but if there’s any chance, that’s the way to go. It’s possible this is Pelosi’s plan. She may have seen the infrastructure thing as a chance to fool and lull, knowing there’s no way Republicans would ever get on board with it anyway.

3. Don’t know if this is true, I read somewhere that impeachment inquiry would give us more weight to counter the stonewalling in court. But now I can’t find where I read that.

4. It’s the law. People really want to see someone follow the law right now. It’s too scary otherwise.

[stonecutter357]

37. " he's just not worth it" , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi .

[ehrnst]

45. You know she does that to troll him...

Well, this might make you feel foolish, but you should know:

Link to tweet

[Trumpocalypse]

41. I trust Pelosi

She has been right far more than she’s been wrong. When Mr. Pierce is elected Speaker twice I’ll trust his judgment more.

[ehrnst]

46. Seems to be old news...

Link to tweet

[Firestorm49]

51. Absolutely

[Iliyah]

52. Instead of going after the Repubilcans . . .

go after Democrats. Shakes head.

First investigate. Gather evidence. Mueller is one of the keys.

And yes, I trust NP.

[alwaysinasnit]

54. Whatever strategy Pelosi is contemplating, which seems to be "wait and see," she risks demoralizing

a lot of Democrats and never-tRumpers. The perception seems to be that the Democratic leadership is too busy trying to keep their jobs and not doing their jobs. I believe that the televised Watergate hearings were instrumental in shoving the wrong-doing by the Nixon administration into the faces of even the most apathetic of voters such that it could not be ignored. I believe it wouldn't be a bad idea for Pelosi to follow that roadmap.

[Kurt V.]

56. K&R

[crazytown]

59. YAIP

[Texin]

61. Pelosi has stated that impeachment is NOT off the table. She said that yesterday.

Last night on Lawrence, there was a lengthy discussion about the process by which the Dems on the Judiciary and the Finance Committees are methodically going through their paces to obtain the documentation and testimonies they need for oversight and they are meeting one stone wall after another. But this is not an empty exercise in any way. Taken together with what is already known, those stone walls are yet more proof in plain sight that the (mal) administration is obstructing justice and thwarting the constitutionally-mandated congressional oversight.

On a daily basis now, we are beginning to see a wave of former jurists and law enforcement officials stepping forward publicly proclaiming that the administration - tRump, Mnuchin et al, are openly obstructing justice We're seeing even Fux Spews talking heads say it on air. There seems to be an increasingly growing number of people to publicly accuse the tRump government of obstruction and coverup. With Schumer and Pelosi taking on McConnell's admonition that the Dems need to "move on 'cause there's nothing to see here", they are (it seems to me) ratcheting up the rhetoric. This type of approach takes time, but it can be more effective because it emboldens more and more people of respectability to begin repeating the message and demanding that the rethugs do THEIR jobs and protect the laws of the land.

What I'm saying here is that this seems to be a step by step building the foundation for bringing impeachment forward to proceed. With more and more pressure, there may be fewer rethugs to be willing to allow tRump to undermine the laws and institutions and who are not happy about trying to burnish their reputations for this execrable cretin and his swamp dwellers.

[RandySF]

62. Total misrepresentation