More than half of democratic caucus now openly support impeachment.

[triron]

Link to tweet

[lame54]

37. She's holding back announcing...

Not investigating

Cummings came out in support of her today

[mopinko]

2. i think it moves after recess.

IF people show up at town halls of those still opposed to demand it.

[triron]

3. I say call an emergency session. Don't wait.

[mopinko]

4. i think enough committee members will be around

to take care of any business that comes up.
i think the other thing pelosi is waiting for is for the courts to step up. she isnt gonna pick a fight w 2 branches of the govt at once.
and she knows how many sketchy judges are out there.

it's smart for them to go talk to their constituents first.

[triron]

5. The courts are more (not less) likely to 'step up' if there is an official impeachment inquiry.

[triron]

6. knr

[MineralMan]

7. It will take 218 to start an official impeachment inquiry.

Right now, we don't have that many votes. So, the current inquiries are not official. Do they need to be? I don't know.

[triron]

8. We don't know how many votes there are. I'm sure many Democrats will be aboard once Pelosi

gets behind it. Schiff could give a big boost as well.

[MineralMan]

9. Nancy Pelosi Knows.

Losing such a vote would be a very negative thing. So, such a vote will not be held until it's clear that 218 members will vote for it. Until then, there will be no vote.

[triron]

10. Not really.How can she know? If she doesn't publicly support it, many democrats will just not fall

in line.

[MineralMan]

11. That's her job, and she's very, very good at it.

She knows how each member of the Democratic caucus would vote on such a thing on a day-to-day basis. All she has to do is ask the caucus members. It's part of what the speaker and Democratic whip do.

[triron]

13. She still doesn't know what would happen if she throws her weight behind it.

Anyway neither of us will convince the other.

[StarfishSaver]

20. In the meantime, an impeachment investigation is already underway with her blessing and support

[MineralMan]

21. Exactly.

Some folks act as though nothing is happening at all. Well, right now, of course, Congress has its feet up in their home states or districts, but there are investigations that have already begun, and court actions that are underway.

Paying attention to details is hard, but it's also necessary.

[StarfishSaver]

22. Right now, the House is doing everything it would be doing in a. "official" impeachment inquiry

And what they're doing IS juat as official as it would be if the House had passed a resolution, since there's nothing that limits the Juiciary Committee's ability, power or jurisdiction to open or conduct an impeachment investigation only to instances pursuant to a vote of the full House.

[triron]

23. I am aware of that. But thanks for reminding us.

[StarfishSaver]

25. You're welcome

[ProudLib72]

30. Ok, I understand your point

However, what about the "optics" serving our party as an election year approaches? I know this has been a point of contention for the past few months: impeachment would hurt or help the party. What I'm getting at with the "optics" comment is voters paying attention to "impeachment" versus "impeachment investigation." We want to provide the public with as much information about the dirty dealings as possible. The way to garner attention from the MSM and have them serve as a platform for disseminating that information is to sensationalize it by calling it "impeachment."

I realize mine is a naive understanding of the political strategy involved. I'm putting this out there for your take on the validity of my assumption about voters paying more attention depending on which term is used.

[StarfishSaver]

33. An impeachment investigation IS impeachment

Last edited Sat Aug 3, 2019, 12:20 PM - Edit history (1)

Impeachment in this sense is really a process, not a specific thing. The House doesn't just show up and vote to impeach the president. It starts with an investigation, hearings, then a review of all of the results of the investigation, a determination by the Committee weather to recommend articles of impeachment, then drafting of specific articles of impeachment, a vote in Committee on the articles, then a floor debate and vote. If one or more of the articles of impeachment are past, the president by operation of the vote is immediately impeached.

So, although "impeachment" in the strictest definition is the actual vote to impeach, The term more commonly refers to the overall process - and that process has begun.

During Watergate and the Clinton impeachment, most of that work was done prior to the House authorizing the opening of an impeachment investigation. In those instances, the investigation was really the consideration of the evidence that was gathered by other committees and the special prosecutor and independent counsel. The Judiciary Committee didn't conduct its own indep investigation. Here, there's still a lot of investigation that needs to be done together evidence outside of the Mueller Report. The Judiciary Committee and other relevant committees are doing that and have been doing that for the past few months.

Regarding the optics, I think Pelosi is aware that regardless of what the base of the Democratic party wants to happen, the majority of the country is not on board with impeachment and making too big a deal of moving forward on impeachment right now would probably cement their view that it's all politics and drive them away, making it less likely they would ever be receptive to the evidence being gathered. By making it appear that she's not driving full steam ahead on impeachment, damn the torpedoes, it's much more likely that people will pay more attention to the evidence as it's presented to them.

[ProudLib72]

34. Thank you for the response

I think it's difficult sometimes to accept that the DU microcosm is not representative of America at large. Thus, we get all these angry posts about not impeaching immediately. Your last paragraph makes a good point about the need to keep this low key for now.

[Poiuyt]

27. The impeachment inquiry only needs the majority of the judicial committee to begin

I believe

[triron]

35. Me too.

[triron]

12. So why does MSNBC say 117? Fuckers.

[triron]

26. MSNBC now says 118, but I think other sources have it at 120.

What's the discrepancy?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

14. Dem support for Impeachment was 80% in December 2018

Who do we talk to about that? Inaction equalled steady decline since !!

[triron]

15. Good point. Seems congress may be out of sync with the public.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

31. I think it's curious. Dem support WAS 80% in December

Then has gone down since. In the 60s last month, now 50's?. Why did Dem public support go down? Could it be because they were waiting for us to lead? And they gave up?

Our golden moment came in April when the report first came out. If we had declared immediate outrage and unanamously declared he had committed Impeachment offenses and we were proceeding forward, I doubt public support would have waned. Even when Mueller made his first news conference would have been better than nothing.

Even Republicans at the time thought...well Democrats hate trump so if there was really something bad there, Dems would have impeached.

Moreover, tying the reaction (impeachment intention) to the cause (report) at the soonest possible time, was more non-partisan. Mueller is a republican. Well respected by most accounts. We've lost that advantage with every day we've waited. And, we've delegitimized what he wrote.

[triron]

38. Partly the Barr effect I believe. Too many moderate democrats may have bought into Barr's BS.

Then coupled with some statements by some democratic leaders in the House, this belief could have
been reinforced. Anyway momentum has been lost with the public for sure. Unfortunate timing.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

39. Yes. Good point!

[gratuitous]

16. Make sure your rep knows you support him or her

There are lots of considerations for every Representative, but it always helps when their constituents have their back.

[triron]

18. I am urging her (Deb Haaland) to come out. We are a very blue state so is strange to me

she hasn't yet.

[gratuitous]

19. Contact her office, politely, of course

And remind whoever answers the phone of the litany of wrong-doing Trump has perpetrated, and the loss of American prestige and credibility on the world stage. Thank the phone-answerer for his or her time, and that you will be following the congresswoman's activities during the August recess. (That is, you're gonna hear from me again if she keeps stalling.)

[triron]

17. knr

[kentuck]

24. These numbers are probably as much for the judges and the Courts...

...as they are for Nancy Pelosi. What kind of demands would they make on the Democratic Congress?

[Joe941]

28. But until 1 supports it it wont matter.

[triron]

29. 1 what?

[Joe941]

32. Nancy

[kentuck]

36. But it takes a minimum of 218 to impeach.

Nancy Pelosi will not call a vote unless she knows what the number will be.